| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Crackpot" |
| Date: |
21 Jan 2005 02:29:13 AM |
| Object: |
Survey of Minds |
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
1. What is the best atomic model?
2. What is gravity?
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
6. What is the ether?
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
10. How many dimensions are there?
11. What is absolute truth?
12. Uncle Al should:
13. Are most geniuses insane?
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
18. What is a magnetic field?
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
21. Do people listen to you enough?
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
28. What is nothingness made of?
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
32. How should a person learn physics?
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
35. How can something come from nothing?
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
*-----------------------*
Posted at:
www.GroupSrv.com
*-----------------------*
.
|
|
| User: "John Zinni" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 07:49:21 AM |
|
|
"Crackpot" <crackpot@crackpot-dot-central.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:41f0bd59$1_1@Usenet.com...
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
[snip]
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
Poke them in the eye with a sharp stick.
[snip]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 07:08:53 AM |
|
|
"Crackpot" <crackpot@crackpot-dot-central.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message news:41f0bd59$1_1@Usenet.com...
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
[Skipping silly, meaningless, unanswerable, don't-know,
sigh, and obvious-answer questions]
2. What is gravity?
We don't know.
For some problems we model it as a force, for other
problems we model it as spacetime curvature.
We might never know.
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
We can't, so we shouldn't even *want* to find out.
We want our theories to be usable and as coherent
as possible.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
For some problems light can be modeled as waves
and for some problems it can be modeled as particles.
Waves and particles are abstract concepts.
A particle is not a little ball, it is an entity with certain
properties. If they had been called zwaps, no one
would have asked the question.
Zwaps have probabilistic wavelike properties. As far
as we know the zwap-model seems to be more
fundamental than the classical wave model, although
the latter is easier to use in many situations, just like
classical mechanics w.r.t. relativistic.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Most people (except perhaps in crackpot groups like these)
would say Einstein.
6. What is the ether?
Something that according to all current theories that match
all observations, cannot be detected. I.o.w. something
useless.
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
Most religions conceive their god as something of which the
existence must be *believed*, and therefore cannot be
proven or disproven - by definition.
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
We don't know.
We call it gravity or spacetime curvature but we don't know
what it is.
10. How many dimensions are there?
Depends on what you are describing.
The taste of red wine has 3 dimensions: sourness, sweetness
and bitterness. Points on a globe can be described with a
2-dim space. Events in classical spacetime need 4 dimensions,
real power series need an infinite number of dimensions.
32. How should a person learn physics?
In a classroom with a competent teacher, and in books.
Not exclusively on the Internet and certainly not on Usenet.
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
By looking at each other and knowing each other's real
name.
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Buck Mulligan" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 06:06:00 AM |
|
|
1. What is the best atomic model?
yet to come
2. What is gravity?
spacetime curvature
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
test them. but can never be sure
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
because it is so
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
S. Bose
6. What is the ether?
nonsence
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
neither
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
the actors
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
very
10. How many dimensions are there?
n
11. What is absolute truth?
nothing
12. Uncle Al should:
brush
13. Are most geniuses insane?
no
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
go back to sleep
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
because 2 is a prime number & 4 is a perfect square
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
to exist is to look at absurdity in its face.
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
lead it
18. What is a magnetic field?
a field of magnet
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
no
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
certainly not back to where it was before 100 years.
21. Do people listen to you enough?
I care not a fig for that
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
it open eyes to reality
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
"reality is an illusion created by alcoholic deficiency"
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
light
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
to no extent
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
only change endures
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
Never
28. What is nothingness made of?
absurdity
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
by strings
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
beliefs
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
you guess
32. How should a person learn physics?
contemplation
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
of course
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
a mixture of both
35. How can something come from nothing?
magic
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
by talking less
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Van" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 10:25:37 AM |
|
|
1. What is the best atomic model?
the real one
2. What is gravity?
curvature that pulls. women.
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
you bet you can't
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
my dad
6. What is the ether?
(CH3CH2)2O
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
what is existence?
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
the distance
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
least
10. How many dimensions are there?
where?
11. What is absolute truth?
that there is nothing as absolute truth
12. Uncle Al should:
sag
13. Are most geniuses insane?
who is sane?
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
fart
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
because four is not odd but three is
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
nothingness
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
follow
18. What is a magnetic field?
women.
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
no
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
up
21. Do people listen to you enough?
not if deaf
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
reality? ?! I wonder, what is that?
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
yes. but memory prevails
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
mass
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
none
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
till this moment
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
in future.
28. What is nothingness made of?
matter
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
try strings
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
what is creation?
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
try next door
32. How should a person learn physics?
sceptically
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
I doubt.
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
"anything that does not kill me makes me stronger"
35. How can something come from nothing?
and of what comes nothing?
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
by flirting
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Buck Mulligan" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 06:13:46 AM |
|
|
1. What is the best atomic model?
yet to come
2. What is gravity?
spacetime curvature
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
test them. but can never be sure
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
because it is so
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
S. Bose
6. What is the ether?
nonsence
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
neither
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
the actors
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
very
10. How many dimensions are there?
n
11. What is absolute truth?
nothing
12. Uncle Al should:
brush
13. Are most geniuses insane?
no
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
go back to sleep
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
because 2 is a prime number & 4 is a perfect square
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
to exist is to look at absurdity in its face.
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
lead it
18. What is a magnetic field?
a field of magnet
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
no
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
certainly not back to where it was before 100 years.
21. Do people listen to you enough?
I care not a fig for that
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
it open eyes to reality
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
"reality is an illusion created by alcoholic deficiency"
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
light
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
to no extent
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
only change endures
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
Never
28. What is nothingness made of?
absurdity
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
by strings
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
beliefs
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
you guess
32. How should a person learn physics?
contemplation
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
of course
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
a mixture of both
35. How can something come from nothing?
magic
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
by talking less
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tralfaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 08:07:35 AM |
|
|
Crackpot wrote:
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
1. What is the best atomic model?
#79378901
2. What is gravity?
My mother-in-law.
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Eat them. If you puke and die they're no good.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Why not ?
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
The one who invented 2-ply toilet paper.
6. What is the ether?
An anesthetic.
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
It's easy to convince someone that God exists by
first convincing them that Satan exists. You can
do that, right ?
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
Pinnochio.
10. How many dimensions are there?
Which kind ?
11. What is absolute truth?
A complement of relative truth.
12. Uncle Al should:
Use nvidia's SDK.
13. Are most geniuses insane?
Only for a few minutes.
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
Ask a question.
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
Because they can't do the math.
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Not walking in front of a moving bus.
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
Delegate.
18. What is a magnetic field?
Victoria's Secret.
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
Only about sailing.
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
2105.
21. Do people listen to you enough?
Huh, what were you saying ?
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
What reality ?
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
What room ?
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
The universe.
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
Ask a cave man.
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
Yesterday.
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
Thursday.
28. What is nothingness made of?
Vector potentials.
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
Diplomacy.
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
The birds and the bees.
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
The newspaper.
32. How should a person learn physics?
Willingly.
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
Thursdays are shorter than Mondays.
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
The good ones lachrymiform. The evil ones are ubiquitarian.
35. How can something come from nothing?
Pressure, and lots of it.
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
Experimentally.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 03:56:54 AM |
|
|
Just for fun...
Crackpot wrote:
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
1. What is the best atomic model?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "best" here.
The best atomic model at all? Then we don't know.
The best among all the models we know? Then from
the viewpoint of accuracy, it is the model provided
by electrodynamics; from the viewpoint of practical
work, it is the one provided by standard QM (Schroedinger
equation for light atoms, Dirac equation for the heavy
ones).
2. What is gravity?
As far as we know, curvature of spacetime.
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
Depends on if and how you define "God".
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "mechanisms". I
strongly suspect that what is considered to be a mechanism
in physics today, you would not accept as one.
10. How many dimensions are there?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "dimension" here.
If you mean the most often used meaning, then there are
probably 9 or 10 spatial dimensions, most of them "curled
up", and one temporal dimension.
11. What is absolute truth?
Something that probably does not exist.
12. Uncle Al should:
Be more polite.
13. Are most geniuses insane?
No.
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what would
you do to revolutionize science?
Not answerable, since the question is self-contradictory:
if I wake up, at least one thing is *not* different -
since I wake up everyday!
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
Because upright walking is still a "recent" adaption, which still does
not work perfectly and hence has to be learned slowly.
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
Resign.
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
No.
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
I don't know. And making guesses on this is not very wise.
21. Do people listen to you enough?
In real world, yes. Crackpots on usenet, no. ;-)
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
I don't know. Ask someone who has experienced that.
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
No.
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's resources?
To none.
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
Since human civilization changes all the time, and hence is
not "as we know it" for even one day, quite short.
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
Has not happened so far.
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
When did you stop beating your wife?
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
Probably at LHC.
32. How should a person learn physics?
Patiently and thoroughly.
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
Quite a lot. As do all specialists. The reason is simple:
you would need to learn a lot in order to understand
what we (or any other specialists) tell you.
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or evil?
Depends on the country and a lot of other things.
35. How can something come from nothing?
If there are no conservation laws forbidding this, where
is the problem?
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
By learning about the stuff which one wants to talk
about first.
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 03:57:35 PM |
|
|
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csqjl7$1es$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Just for fun...
[snip]
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
How does Compton scattering fit that brief answer?
The only virtual paticle in that case is a electron.
And how would you describe pi + p -> Baryon resonance -> pi + p?
If you had just said "by the exchange of virtual particles", you would
have coped with these s-channel processes as well.
Franz
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 06:44:05 AM |
|
|
Franz Heymann wrote:
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csqjl7$1es$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Just for fun...
[snip]
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
How does Compton scattering fit that brief answer?
The only virtual paticle in that case is a electron.
Well, I'm not sure if I would call Compton scattering
"action at a distance".
And how would you describe pi + p -> Baryon resonance -> pi + p?
Again, is it justified calling that "action at a distance"?
If you had just said "by the exchange of virtual particles", you would
have coped with these s-channel processes as well.
Well, with "action at a distance", I meant t- und u-channel
processes, not s-channel processes.
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 04:58:28 PM |
|
|
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csthql$qmj$2@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Franz Heymann wrote:
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csqjl7$1es$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Just for fun...
[snip]
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
How does Compton scattering fit that brief answer?
The only virtual paticle in that case is a electron.
Well, I'm not sure if I would call Compton scattering
"action at a distance".
And how would you describe pi + p -> Baryon resonance -> pi + p?
Again, is it justified calling that "action at a distance"?
Perhaps my definition is a bit too wide in allowing channels other
than the t-channel interactions to count as action at a distance. But
I will have a last fling before caving in: The background to
resonance scattering in the case of
pion-proton scattering consists of the exchange of baryon resonances
in the t-channel. Are these cases of action at a distance or not?
[snip]
Franz
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
25 Jan 2005 05:02:43 AM |
|
|
Franz Heymann wrote:
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csthql$qmj$2@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Franz Heymann wrote:
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:csqjl7$1es$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Just for fun...
[snip]
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
How does Compton scattering fit that brief answer?
The only virtual paticle in that case is a electron.
Well, I'm not sure if I would call Compton scattering
"action at a distance".
And how would you describe pi + p -> Baryon resonance -> pi + p?
Again, is it justified calling that "action at a distance"?
Perhaps my definition is a bit too wide in allowing channels other
than the t-channel interactions to count as action at a distance. But
I will have a last fling before caving in: The background to
resonance scattering in the case of
pion-proton scattering consists of the exchange of baryon resonances
in the t-channel.
Interesting. That was news to me.
Are these cases of action at a distance or not?
Yes.
I admit defeat. ;-)
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 08:46:46 PM |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Just for fun...
Crackpot wrote:
Please tell us your opinions on the following matter!!!
Hoping for many concise answers,
1. What is the best atomic model?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "best" here.
The best atomic model at all? Then we don't know.
The best among all the models we know? Then from
the viewpoint of accuracy, it is the model provided
by electrodynamics; from the viewpoint of practical
work, it is the one provided by standard QM (Schroedinger
equation for light atoms, Dirac equation for the heavy
ones).
2. What is gravity?
As far as we know, curvature of spacetime.
That every Reimannian manifold can be isometrically embedded within a
Euclidean space reveals that "space-time" is not curved, only that
General Relativity models it so. An intrinsic geometry has an extrinisc
equivalent.
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dark%20matter
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
Or because light, wave and particle lack rigour.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
Throw the idolator an idolator.
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
But as magical the matter dark and particle virtual.
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
Depends on if and how you define "God".
God is a monkey (typing).
8. What is the cause of action at a distance?
Exchange of virtual bosons.
9. How important are mechanisms in understanding reality?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "mechanisms". I
strongly suspect that what is considered to be a mechanism
in physics today, you would not accept as one.
There exist more mathematical structures able to predict every possible
sequence of instrument readings than there are rational numbers.
10. How many dimensions are there?
Depends on what exactly you mean with "dimension" here.
If you mean the most often used meaning, then there are
probably 9 or 10 spatial dimensions, most of them "curled
up", and one temporal dimension.
As many as you want.
11. What is absolute truth?
Something that probably does not exist.
Wrong. Existance is a tail event.
12. Uncle Al should:
Be more polite.
13. Are most geniuses insane?
No.
14. If you woke up tomorrow and everything was different, what
would
you do to revolutionize science?
Not answerable, since the question is self-contradictory:
if I wake up, at least one thing is *not* different -
since I wake up everyday!
15. Why do babies crawl on fours?
Because upright walking is still a "recent" adaption, which still
does
not work perfectly and hence has to be learned slowly.
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
To not exist would imply an order, idiot.
17. If you were leader of the world, what would you do?
Resign.
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
Wrong. A magnetic field is a commutative ring (F, +, *) having unique
central idempotents where all e not 0 in F have multiplicative inverse
in F.
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
No.
Yes.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=crackpot
20. Where will physics go in the next 100 years?
I don't know. And making guesses on this is not very wise.
21. Do people listen to you enough?
In real world, yes. Crackpots on usenet, no. ;-)
22. How can mathematics blind people from reality?
I don't know. Ask someone who has experienced that.
23. Does the room disappear when I'm not looking at it?
No.
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
Since there exist entity not space, not time, not "consciousness"
indescribible by number your conclusion lacks merit.
25. To what extent is modern physics a waste of mankind's
resources?
To none.
26. How long can we expect human civilization as we know it to
endure?
Since human civilization changes all the time, and hence is
not "as we know it" for even one day, quite short.
27. When did physics grind to a halt?
Has not happened so far.
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
Wrong. It is made of entity indescribable by number.
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
Such an achievement is only of intrinsic value.
30. Who or What created the creator or creation process?
When did you stop beating your wife?
31. Where will the next breakthrough in physics be found?
Probably at LHC.
32. How should a person learn physics?
Patiently and thoroughly.
33. Do physicists know something they're not telling us?
Quite a lot. As do all specialists. The reason is simple:
you would need to learn a lot in order to understand
what we (or any other specialists) tell you.
34. Are the educational institutions of today basically good or
evil?
Depends on the country and a lot of other things.
35. How can something come from nothing?
If there are no conservation laws forbidding this, where
is the problem?
36. How can discussion of physics be improved?
By learning about the stuff which one wants to talk
about first.
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
21 Jan 2005 11:22:37 PM |
|
|
A curve in space is an energy gradiant .
a push to less energy .
as the universe is 99 % of its energy expanding taking up more space ,
a low forms around mass.
.
|
|
|
| User: "robert j. kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 04:26:30 AM |
|
|
tj Frazir wrote:
A curve in space is an energy gradiant .
a push to less energy .
as the universe is 99 % of its energy expanding taking up more space ,
a low forms around mass.
Curvature is a tensor, not a gradient.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 08:13:17 PM |
|
|
Point out where gravity is not an energy slope.
Re: Survey of Minds
Group: sci.physics Date: Sat, Jan 22, 2005, 5:26am From:
nowhere@nowhere.net (robert=A0j.=A0kolker)
tj Frazir wrote:
A curve in space is an energy gradiant . a push to less energy .
=A0=A0as the universe is 99 % of its energy expanding taking up more
space , a low forms around mass.
Curvature is a tensor, not a gradient.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ken S. Tucker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 08:46:05 PM |
|
|
Hi tj
* gravity is an energy slope. *
sounds good to me.
Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "robert j. kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 09:20:28 PM |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Hi tj
* gravity is an energy slope. *
sounds good to me.
Newtonian gravitation is the gradient of a scalar potential.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
23 Jan 2005 10:23:42 AM |
|
|
Let use just energy and conservation and discribe it .
Gravity is a push to less energy and idnentical to conservation.
Thats where all the people get lost trying to devide forces .
They think gravity is thrust or gravity is exceleration .
There can't be a graviton or a anything but an energy slope .
The mass of body is never constant but vieries at C with the
energy of the mass.
(( no partical can affect the same gravity on a changing mass ))
Its not enouph to say all masses fall at the same speed.
Evry atom is displaced equal .
AN ENERGY GRADIANT SLOPE
1/2 of evry atom has more mass on one side of it.<<<<<
NOTE TO wise (( a rise is a gain in mass ))
The speed of falling is the same because EVER ATOM CHANGES ITS MASS AT
THE SAME RATE .
""Im redefining gravity by eliminateing all but one quality at a time
""
To help you seperate what fall is ..let me show that an atom raised
gains mass.
The top 1/2 of evry atom gained more mass than the botom as evry atom
changes mass at C ..
The mass of evry atom is the energy it displaces.
A push to less energy is a push to less mass.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
more or less gravity wount change the speed of fall and more or less
mass wount change the speed of fall.
How fast an atom can change its mass is the speed of fall.
as the universe expands a low forms around mass .
<<>>less energy displaced is less mass.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Its so hard to grasp Nasa thinks you fall 1/6 the speed on the moon .
But thats not true.
You weigh 1/6 on the moon but fall strait down at the same speed. 1
pound falls the same speed 6 falls . The moon falls the same speed the
1 pound does.
Combining the earth G with moon G wount make you fall any faster or
slower you will just wiegh more or less < tide >
We do combine earth and moon gravity and the speed of fall is the same.
Evry atom is proportional to its self.
evry atom is displaced at the same rate.
1/2 the atom gained mass and the rate it can change mass is the rate it
will fall.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
23 Jan 2005 08:17:09 PM |
|
|
In any energy slope mass will be displaced at the rate it can change
mass.
The rate an atom can change mass is fixed.
as an atom is an energy slope has more mass on 1/2 the atom than the
other.
. >>>> but kenetic energy is mass in motion.
As the atom is in motion it takes up more space per time unit. 1/2 the
atom has a larger LOW as it takes up more space per time unit.
The sum of the low is mass. <<<<
An atom in motion threw energy as it expands
is taking up more space as it moves . Eliminating space ahead and
leaving a low behind.,<<<<<
As an atom moves threw one time frame
the streak it leaves in time will afect how much mass is on each side
of the atom and a gain in mass is pushing te other 1/2 of atom .
the distortion or drag of an atom in motion
is a low and part of the sum of te atoms mass.
kenetic energy is related to gravity as they boath deal with the
rate an atom changes mass. <<<<<<
The speed of fall is fixed.
The reason the rock hits the moon instead of the moon and rock moving
twards each other
is kenetic energy .
The energy slope at the serface of the moon is 90 deg . On the earth
its 90 deg.
a rock falls the same speed on the moon .
It wieghs 1/6 but falls the same speed.
nasa has it wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
24 Jan 2005 11:40:33 AM |
|
|
ALL things fall the same speed.
1 pound falls the same 6 pounds falls on the ame angle of energy slope
..
The stronger slope is not a faster fall.
(( bust a pice of a magnet off and place the 1/6 of a magnet on a
table as a steel plate passes over , the 1/6 magnet jumps up at the same
speed the hole magnet does.
Gravity is not a magnet.
But notice the stronger magnet is just a larger pice of the
same.
Each atom is a pice of the mass and its strenth is the same no
matter what mass its part of...like a pice of a magnet.
The displacment rrate of each pice of the magnet is the same ,, even
if it wieghs less.
((((((Evrything falls the same speed ,,because evry atom changes mass
in the field at the same rate ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
now that statement aplys to gravity and EMF.
Re: Survey of Minds
Group: sci.physics Date: Sun, Jan 23, 2005, 9:17pm From:
GravityPhysics@webtv.net (tj=A0Frazir)
In any energy slope mass will be displaced at the rate it can change
mass.
=A0=A0The rate an atom can change mass is fixed. as an atom is an energy
slope has more mass on 1/2 the atom than the
other.
=A0=A0. >>>> but kenetic energy is mass in motion. As the atom is in
motion it takes up more space per time unit. 1/2 the atom has a larger
LOW as it takes up more space per time unit.
The sum of the low is mass. <<<<
An atom in motion threw energy as it expands is taking up more space as
it moves . Eliminating space ahead and leaving a low behind.,<<<<<
=A0=A0=A0=A0As an atom moves threw one time frame
=A0=A0the streak it leaves in time will afect how much mass is on each
side of the atom and a gain in mass is pushing te other 1/2 of atom .
=A0=A0the distortion or drag of an atom in motion is a low and part of
the sum of te atoms mass.
kenetic energy is related to gravity as they boath deal with the
rate an atom changes mass. <<<<<<
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0The speed of fall is fixed.
The reason the rock hits the moon instead of the moon and rock moving
twards each other
=A0=A0is kenetic energy .
=A0=A0The energy slope at the serface of the moon is 90 deg . On the
earth
its 90 deg.
=A0=A0a rock falls the same speed on the moon . It wieghs 1/6 but falls
the same speed.
=A0=A0nasa has it wrong.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds gravityphysics |
24 Jan 2005 12:02:41 PM |
|
|
I was saying : the rate of evry fall is the rate an atom can change mass
..
To less energy <<<
To less mass <<<<
so evry atom has LESS MASS in 1/2 the atom.
The atom changes mass at C.
1/2 the atom is in higher energy presure .
The SUM of an atoms LOW is its mass.
...................................................................
kenetic is mass taking up more space per time unit.
More low is more mass so theres more mass on 1/2 of evry atom.
...............
Gravity is a push to less energy on an energy slope.
@@@@ 22222222222222222222222 FACTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
##### 1 .
evry atom gains mass going up.
###### 2
evry atom changes it mass at C.
NOW if you dont undestand GRAVITY yer fucking retarted.
This is not refundable data.
ONCE I point the 2 facts out there is no going back. I dout anyone
will respond to any of this..
Im shure it came as a shock.
The combination of the 2 facts is falling and for the first time you
might understand gravity.
I have an equasion too.
E-MC=B2
eistein wrote it .
He wrote evry word I just wrote.
But I said it and you might have understood it.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ken S. Tucker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 10:00:00 PM |
|
|
robert j. kolker wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Hi tj
* gravity is an energy slope. *
sounds good to me.
Newtonian gravitation is the gradient of a scalar potential.
Bob Kolker
Yes Mr. Kolker, and I may add I enjoyed your essays
on Galileo's experiments on ships and stuff.
I'd like to add that Galileo used *inclined planes*
aka *slopes* to measure attentuated g-accelaration,
damn ingenius.
Even in GR the partial &g_oo/&x^i is a form of grad
aka slope.
In all of these cases, a change in kinetic energy,
like an energy slope, sounds good to me.
Why do people jump on guys like tj just because he
uses slope instead of gradient. This is an NG, and
tj has good commmon sence opinions, are we so
sophisicated that we shun a fellow for phraselogy?
I try to read tj as much as time allows, because
he tries to make a sensible contribution, in
accord with common sense, and is consistently
doing that year after year, and he's not pushing
any nutsy agenda.
From tj's PoV, much of what the so-called smart
fella's look confusing, ok...
In the Year 2005, let's let up a bit, let our
hair down, open our visions, consider more ideas,
and be gentle to all who visit our NG.
Ken S. Tucker
.
|
|
|
| User: "robert j. kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 10:07:27 PM |
|
|
I'd like to add that Galileo used *inclined planes*
aka *slopes* to measure attentuated g-accelaration,
damn ingenius.
Relative to the available technology, Galileo was as good an
experimenter as Faraday, and that is high praise. Galileo was not as
talented a mathematician as Newton, and he never quite got force and
inertia down pat. Galileo believed that the natural motion of bodies in
the heavens was circular, not uniform and linear. This is a residue of
the old Ptolemaic/Aristotelean view, so Galileo never quite purge
Aristotelan tommy rot from his thinking, although he went a long way in
that direction.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ken S. Tucker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
26 Jan 2005 03:29:32 PM |
|
|
I think the greatest of Galileo is...
1)The fusion of experiment and mathematics.
2)The courage to hold an opinion formed from (1),
(the pope recently apolized to Galileo).
3)The ingenuity to do ingenious experiments,
the telescope and pendulum, *relative* to his
heart-beat.
4)Relative to the science of the time, these were
quantums leaps.
Ken S. Tucker
.
|
|
|
| User: "robert j. kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
26 Jan 2005 04:26:32 PM |
|
|
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
I think the greatest of Galileo is...
1)The fusion of experiment and mathematics.
2)The courage to hold an opinion formed from (1),
(the pope recently apolized to Galileo).s
To bad Galileo did not hear the Pope.
Galieo's big mistake was to ignore Kepler's observation that the tides
have a large monthly component indicate a lunar cause or influence.
Galileo sent a letter to Kepler chiding Kepler for believing in
"moonshine". For Galileo the idea of action at a distance was too
mysterious and occult to be taken seriously.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
23 Jan 2005 10:42:48 AM |
|
|
gravity is not kenetic energy and thats a hard one to seperate .
As the universe expands ( kenetic )
so a low forms around mass is gravity .
AS the universe expands and mass moves ,,it takes up more space and the
expansion it displaced .
The more space an atom takes up the more mass it is.
Per time unit mass in motion is eliminating space a head of it AT
the same time there iss MORE mass behind it. Its only resistance to
motion is time ,,time is C the max .
Kenetic dont nead gravity.
TIME is the force here as 1/2 the atom gained mass taking up more space
per time unit.
Again the rate the atom can change mass is C.
Its eliminating mass ahead of it and gaining mass behind it.
its not gravity , its kenetic ,,but causing a displacement of mass in
an atom is a conductive property .
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 06:50:34 AM |
|
|
John Schoenfeld wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Just for fun...
Crackpot wrote:
[snip]
2. What is gravity?
As far as we know, curvature of spacetime.
That every Reimannian manifold can be isometrically embedded within a
Euclidean space reveals that "space-time" is not curved, only that
General Relativity models it so. An intrinsic geometry has an extrinisc
equivalent.
Why does the fact that there are *isometric* embeddings
show that? Shouldn't the embeddings be differentiable?
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dark%20matter
Your point?
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
Or because light, wave and particle lack rigour.
If you have a theory based on this hypothesis which can
explain everything that QFT explains, quantitatively,
feel free to show your work.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
Throw the idolator an idolator.
What has pointing out that Einstein was obviously
the greatest scientist of the 20th century to do with
idolatry?
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
But as magical the matter dark and particle virtual.
What is magical about dark matter and virtual particles?
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
Depends on if and how you define "God".
God is a monkey (typing).
I think most religious people will disagree with that. ;-)
[snip]
11. What is absolute truth?
Something that probably does not exist.
Wrong.
How do you know?
Existance is a tail event.
What's that supposed so mean?
[snip]
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
To not exist would imply an order, idiot.
How on earth does that follow?
[snip]
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
Wrong.
Sorry, that's the standard definition used in electrodynamics.
A magnetic field is a commutative ring (F, +, *) having unique
central idempotents where all e not 0 in F have multiplicative inverse
in F.
What on earth has this to do with magnetism?
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
No.
Yes.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=crackpot
Your point?
[snip]
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
Since there exist entity not space, not time, not "consciousness"
indescribible by number your conclusion lacks merit.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
[snip]
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
Wrong. It is made of entity indescribable by number.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
Such an achievement is only of intrinsic value.
And what on earth is this supposed to mean?
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
22 Jan 2005 02:25:07 PM |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
That every Reimannian manifold can be isometrically embedded within
a
Euclidean space reveals that "space-time" is not curved, only that
General Relativity models it so. An intrinsic geometry has an
extrinisc
equivalent.
Why does the fact that there are *isometric* embeddings
show that?
Isometrically isomorphic space-time Euclidean submanifolds imply an
equivalent Euclidean General Relativity.
Shouldn't the embeddings be differentiable?
Yes(0).
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dark%20matter
Your point?
Truth by inference, not abduction.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
Or because light, wave and particle lack rigour.
If you have a theory based on this hypothesis which can
explain everything that QFT explains, quantitatively,
feel free to show your work.
I have such work, you know.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
Throw the idolator an idolator.
What has pointing out that Einstein was obviously
the greatest scientist of the 20th century to do with
idolatry?
As much as Bill Gates was the 20th century's greatest businessman.
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
But as magical the matter dark and particle virtual.
What is magical about dark matter and virtual particles?
Ghost universe.
7. Can the existence of God be proven or disproven?
Depends on if and how you define "God".
God is a monkey (typing).
I think most religious people will disagree with that. ;-)
[snip]
11. What is absolute truth?
Something that probably does not exist.
Wrong.
How do you know?
Axiomized so.
Existance is a tail event.
What's that supposed so mean?
Means you give me a random pixel generator and I will generate you all
the Hollywood movies ever made, and that will ever be made.
[snip]
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
To not exist would imply an order, idiot.
How on earth does that follow?
Because you are withdrawing a state.
[snip]
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
Wrong.
Sorry, that's the standard definition used in electrodynamics.
A magnetic field is a commutative ring (F, +, *) having unique
central idempotents where all e not 0 in F have multiplicative
inverse
in F.
What on earth has this to do with magnetism?
Quite a bit.
19. Was Einstein a crackpot?
No.
Yes.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=crackpot
Your point?
[snip]
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
Since there exist entity not space, not time, not "consciousness"
indescribable by number your conclusion lacks merit.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
[snip]
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
Wrong. It is made of entity indescribable by number.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
Such an achievement is only of intrinsic value.
And what on earth is this supposed to mean?
Means that the prediction set shall be constrained by the axiomatic
rigour.
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
25 Jan 2005 05:10:06 AM |
|
|
John Schoenfeld wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
That every Reimannian manifold can be isometrically embedded within
a
Euclidean space reveals that "space-time" is not curved, only that
General Relativity models it so. An intrinsic geometry has an
extrinsic equivalent.
Why does the fact that there are *isometric* embeddings
show that?
Isometrically isomorphic space-time Euclidean submanifolds imply an
equivalent Euclidean General Relativity.
If the embedding is differentiable, probably yes.
Shouldn't the embeddings be differentiable?
Yes(0).
What does th "(0)" here mean?
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dark%20matter
Your point?
Truth by inference, not abduction.
Sorry, I still do not get your point. I don't even understand
what you mean with "abduction" here.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
Or because light, wave and particle lack rigour.
If you have a theory based on this hypothesis which can
explain everything that QFT explains, quantitatively,
feel free to show your work.
I have such work, you know.
I don't remember having see anything *quantitative* from
you so far.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
Throw the idolator an idolator.
What has pointing out that Einstein was obviously
the greatest scientist of the 20th century to do with
idolatry?
As much as Bill Gates was the 20th century's greatest businessman.
Answer the question.
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
But as magical the matter dark and particle virtual.
What is magical about dark matter and virtual particles?
Ghost universe.
Answer the question.
[snip]
Existance is a tail event.
What's that supposed so mean?
Means you give me a random pixel generator and I will generate you all
the Hollywood movies ever made, and that will ever be made.
And what has that to do with "Existance is a tail event."?
[snip]
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
To not exist would imply an order, idiot.
How on earth does that follow?
Because you are withdrawing a state.
Huh???
[snip]
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
Wrong.
Sorry, that's the standard definition used in electrodynamics.
Apparently that does not bother you.
A magnetic field is a commutative ring (F, +, *) having unique
central idempotents where all e not 0 in F have multiplicative
inverse in F.
What on earth has this to do with magnetism?
Quite a bit.
Care to elaborate?
[snip]
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
Since there exist entity not space, not time, not "consciousness"
indescribable by number your conclusion lacks merit.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
I did. Still does not make sense grammatically.
"Since there exist entity"???
[snip]
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
Wrong. It is made of entity indescribable by number.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
I did. Still does not make sense grammatically.
"It is made of entity"???
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
Such an achievement is only of intrinsic value.
And what on earth is this supposed to mean?
Means that the prediction set shall be constrained by the axiomatic
rigour.
Say, do you plan to ever write clearly?
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Schoenfeld" |
|
| Title: Re: Survey of Minds |
25 Jan 2005 06:10:01 PM |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Shouldn't the embeddings be differentiable?
Yes(0).
What does th "(0)" here mean?
What do you think it means?
3. How can we find out whether our theories are true?
Testing them. The more tests agree with the predictions
of the theories, the more sure we can be that they are
right. Obviously, we can't ever be 100% sure.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dark%20matter
Your point?
Truth by inference, not abduction.
Sorry, I still do not get your point. I don't even understand
what you mean with "abduction" here.
A mechanism to reason.
4. How can light seem to be both a wave and a particle?
Because the behaviour of photons is governed by the
electromagnetic waves (crudely speaking).
Or because light, wave and particle lack rigour.
If you have a theory based on this hypothesis which can
explain everything that QFT explains, quantitatively,
feel free to show your work.
I have such work, you know.
I don't remember having see anything *quantitative* from
you so far.
I suspect you neither care to see it.
5. Who was the greatest scientist of the 20th century?
Need I really answer that?
Throw the idolator an idolator.
What has pointing out that Einstein was obviously
the greatest scientist of the 20th century to do with
idolatry?
As much as Bill Gates was the 20th century's greatest businessman.
Answer the question.
As much as Bill Gates was the 20th century's greatest businessman.
6. What is the ether?
A hypothetical, very probably not existent medium with
almost magical properties.
But as magical the matter dark and particle virtual.
What is magical about dark matter and virtual particles?
Ghost universe.
Answer the question.
Celebrated theory requires almost all ghost universe for empirical
consistency.
[snip]
Existance is a tail event.
What's that supposed so mean?
Means you give me a random pixel generator and I will generate you
all
the Hollywood movies ever made, and that will ever be made.
And what has that to do with "Existance is a tail event."?
Energy eigenstate set sequences likewise occur.
[snip]
16. What does it mean to "exist"?
Open a dictionary and read for yourself.
To not exist would imply an order, idiot.
How on earth does that follow?
Because you are withdrawing a state.
Huh???
Read it again.
[snip]
18. What is a magnetic field?
A force field which acts on moving charges, where the
force is perpendicular to the field direction and the
direction of movement, and proportional to the product
of the field magnitude and the speed.
Wrong.
Sorry, that's the standard definition used in electrodynamics.
Apparently that does not bother you.
Why should it?
A magnetic field is a commutative ring (F, +, *) having unique
central idempotents where all e not 0 in F have multiplicative
inverse in F.
What on earth has this to do with magnetism?
Quite a bit.
Care to elaborate?
No.
[snip]
24. What is the most fundamental thing in the universe?
Probably spacetime. We don't know.
Since there exist entity not space, not time, not "consciousness"
indescribable by number your conclusion lacks merit.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
I did. Still does not make sense grammatically.
"Since there exist entity"???
Entities is plural, implying enumerability contradicting "indescribable
by number".
[snip]
28. What is nothingness made of?
Nothing.
Wrong. It is made of entity indescribable by number.
Your sentence does not even make sense grammatically.
Read it again.
I did. Still does not make sense grammatically.
"It is made of entity"???
Entities is plural, implying enumerability contradicting "indescribable
by number".
29. How can the forces of nature be unified?
We don't know. String theory may be a good idea.
Such an achievement is only of intrinsic value.
And what on earth is this supposed to mean?
Means that the prediction set shall be constrained by the axiomatic
rigour.
Say, do you plan to ever write clearly?
Always.
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
