| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Uncle Clover" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2007 03:49:33 PM |
| Object: |
The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality, including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible? How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
Just querious...
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
___________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beauty is where you see it.
___________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
| User: "ike milligan" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
20 Jan 2007 10:02:33 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:f835r2tv54372hnb5hir10tmi7a2nnh5e2@4ax.com...
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we
live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality,
including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified
wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the
universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck
moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible?
If the universe is analog, then there is no motion. If there is no motion,
then time is an illusion.
How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to
answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the
terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
A vacuum is a pressure differential between gasses. That's why a vacuum
cleaner sucks. Sucking has no effect on the subatomic particles or the space
in between them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Clover" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
20 Jan 2007 10:36:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 04:02:33 GMT, "ike milligan" <accordiondoc@mindspring.com>
wrote:
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:f835r2tv54372hnb5hir10tmi7a2nnh5e2@4ax.com...
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we
live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality,
including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified
wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the
universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck
moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible?
If the universe is analog, then there is no motion.
That's what I would suspect.
If there is no motion,
then time is an illusion.
That's also what I'd expect, at least in a manner of speaking.
How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to
answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the
terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
A vacuum is a pressure differential between gasses. That's why a vacuum
cleaner sucks. Sucking has no effect on the subatomic particles or the space
in between them.
That's one definition. Here is the full listing from MW:
Main Entry: 1vac·u·um
Pronunciation: 'va-(")kyüm, -ky&m also -kyü-&m
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural vac·u·ums or vac·ua /-ky&-w&/
Etymology: Latin, from neuter of vacuus empty, from vacare to be empty
1 : emptiness of space
2 a : a space absolutely devoid of matter b : a space partially exhausted (as to
the highest degree possible) by artificial means (as an air pump) c : a degree
of rarefaction below atmospheric pressure
3 a : a state or condition resembling a vacuum : VOID <the power vacuum in
Indochina after the departure of the French -- Norman Cousins> b : a state of
isolation from outside influences <people who live in a vacuum...so that the
world outside them is of no moment -- W. S. Maugham>
4 : a device creating or utilizing a partial vacuum; especially :
Vacuum as I used it could be either 1 or 2a. What have -you- been calling the
empty space between atoms all these years? Or have you actually been typing out
that entire phrase the whole time? If so, then I've just shown you a shortcut.
You're welcome. ;-)
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
___________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beauty is where you see it.
___________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "ike milligan" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
23 Jan 2007 09:30:16 AM |
|
|
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:b2r5r29t5cc3hocldk34eb9qpen0ihavoa@4ax.com...
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 04:02:33 GMT, "ike milligan"
<accordiondoc@mindspring.com>
wrote:
"Uncle Clover" <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote in message
news:f835r2tv54372hnb5hir10tmi7a2nnh5e2@4ax.com...
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes,
we
live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality,
including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than
unified
wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the
universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck
moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible?
If the universe is analog, then there is no motion.
That's what I would suspect.
If there is no motion,
then time is an illusion.
That's also what I'd expect, at least in a manner of speaking.
How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to
answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of
the
terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
A vacuum is a pressure differential between gasses. That's why a vacuum
cleaner sucks. Sucking has no effect on the subatomic particles or the
space
in between them.
That's one definition. Here is the full listing from MW:
Main Entry: 1vac·u·um
Pronunciation: 'va-(")kyüm, -ky&m also -kyü-&m
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural vac·u·ums or vac·ua /-ky&-w&/
Etymology: Latin, from neuter of vacuus empty, from vacare to be empty
1 : emptiness of space
2 a : a space absolutely devoid of matter b : a space partially exhausted
(as to
the highest degree possible) by artificial means (as an air pump) c : a
degree
of rarefaction below atmospheric pressure
3 a : a state or condition resembling a vacuum : VOID <the power vacuum in
Indochina after the departure of the French -- Norman Cousins> b : a state
of
isolation from outside influences <people who live in a vacuum...so that
the
world outside them is of no moment -- W. S. Maugham>
4 : a device creating or utilizing a partial vacuum; especially :
Vacuum as I used it could be either 1 or 2a. What have -you- been calling
the
empty space between atoms all these years? Or have you actually been
typing out
that entire phrase the whole time? If so, then I've just shown you a
shortcut.
You're welcome. ;-)
Glancing at these definitions, if a vacuum is void and empty, my
interpretation would be void and empty of whole atoms. A subatomic particle
can move in a vacuum, like an electron in a vacuum tube, for instance, and
it would still be in a vacuum. The space between subatomic particles within
an atom is not space in the same sense that so-called outer space is.
Technically it is not part of the same universe in the sense that it obeys
different laws within the geometric convention with which we represent it.
The exact location of the electron(s) moving around an atomic nucleus can
not be known with certainty.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
23 Jan 2007 08:05:19 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:49:33 -0500, Uncle Clover
<UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality, including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible? How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
Well ...
Since time is just a figment of our imagination ...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
24 Jan 2007 04:44:36 AM |
|
|
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality, including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible? How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
Well ...
Since time is just a figment of our imagination ...
What are you guys smoking?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: The possibility of motion in an analog universe |
24 Jan 2007 07:31:10 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:44:36 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Uncle Clover <UncleClover@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
From what I understand of the way the universe operates as time passes, we live
in an essentially "digital" universe (i.e., the elements of reality, including
each moment, are discreet units interacting in series rather than unified wholes
moving as one). This means that as far as the passage of time, the universe
happens kind of like a frame-by-frame movie, "jumping" from one planck moment to
the next. If the universe were analog - i.e. didn't jump/skip like a
frame-by-frame movie - or have any vacuum between its various subatomic
particles, would motion be possible? How about if it were analog with subatomic
vacuums as we have at present? Does anybody have any idea or way to answer the
question, or does the question not even make any sense in the light of the terms
involved when properly understood? :-?
Well ...
Since time is just a figment of our imagination ...
What are you guys smoking?
Wild speculation :)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
