Some Physics Mistakes:
Why string theory is mostly a dead end: Basically physicists have lost sight of the prize, which is understanding of the world via experimentation, which is part of the feedback process of experimentation and mathematical theorization. They are too busy trying to guess at some unseen unobservable reality, and to be honest, if it is possible to win, to know without first seeing, it is going to be a long battle. That said string theory is an interesting mathematical game and a beautiful collection of mathematics, but nothing will come of it till experimentation is done.
Why gravitons don't exist or will never be found: The speculated energy/mass amount proposed for the graviton is too high. Graviton is of higher mass than the particles it is acting as a carrier to, so first it cannot be created. Secondly even if it could, it would result in great variations/fluctuations in the gravitational field, which aren't seen, i.e. there would be a high level of discreteness with areas of super high gravity and areas of no gravity. We don't see this, therefore graviton will never be found. Besides gravity is due solely to mass causing a curvature in space; see general relativity.
Multiverse of the gaps: multiverse as explanation for quantum randomness. Multiverse as result of quantum events is a kinda attempted determinism saving idea without evidential support. Multiverses cannot exist in sense due to energy conservation issues. In one version, each quantum event gives birth to a whole new universe parallel to ours, a great number of them in fact. Conservation of energy violation. Another version, our universe loses energy, divides its energy among the newly created universe, but this would lead to irregular particle decays due to quantum events, and as such, this couldn't happen. Plus the force of creating whole universe would be immense, and if we can effect another universe, why can't it effect ours. Another version, an infinite number of multiverse exist parallel to our universe as exact replicas to our universe, each quantum event results in a branching off of a a subset of the multiverses. You basically have an infinite branching. Once a multiverse group branches off from our own multiverse group, our universe can longer effect that set. First if this it is true, it is too strange and complex for me to accept. Plus the mechanics of such don't make sure from an total energy perspective or rather it violates conversation laws. Anything you can effect can effect you back. However to conclude, this does not rule out other kinds of multiverses which aren't replicas or partial replicas of our own universe, which could partially explain quantum events, if only as weak forces between two verses or amongst many verses.
Photon identity error: Photons are not electromagnetic particles, nor are they carriers of the electrical force, despite what physics classes teaches, this simply is not true. They are simply a particle that moves at speed c that is both massless and chargeless that carries momentum or KE, however momentum and KE are outdated concepts, but the best commonly in use. Photons as EM particles is one of those errors that later justified the graviton. Photons can be created under a variety of conditions not related to the electric force. The only reason this error exists was due to a misplaced attempt at physics unification, which invariably results in more confusion. Sometimes laypeople reference photons in the radio wave region as electromagnetic waves. I wish they wouldn't.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
Mind Benders-re SageBodisattva
Mind Benders-re SageBodisattva
http://www.youtube.com/user/SageBodisattva
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_9PGLlBZtE
1. Is the purpose of purposeless purpose to have no purpose, on purpose?unanswerable, unsolvable paradox,wordgame
2. Does the meaning of meaningless meaning, that creates meaning in the meaningless, have meaning?unanswerable, unsolvable paradox,wordgame
3. What is a reflection of a reflection a reflection of?an image or another reflection
4. Can you remember to forget not to remember not to forget to remember a memory that you memorized but then forgot?no, too complex, and meaningless after a few iterations.actually you can forgot on purpose, I've read studies in such regards.
5. If one says they are speechless, does this constitute speechless speech?no, still speech.
6. Does ever changing change ever change into anything other then ever changing change?yes and no, the qualities of the changing change evolve, but they still remain of similar nature, i.e. changing
7. If an immortal traveler is traveling in infinity, can there ever be such a thing called a destination?yes, a destination is wherever you define it to be regardless if you keep moving.
8. Where is a circle within a circle within a circle within a circle within a circle, located?somewhere within the next to last circle. the circles don't necessarily have to be concentric.
9. If you are on the outside looking in, what is on the outside looking in at you?either something inbetween or on the same level or something more outside than you are.
10. If one says, "I think, therefor I am." What are they if they stop thinking?I am. They exist regardless of whether they think, they just don't necessarily know they exist.
11. If the senses can sense the senseless, what sense does the senseless make to the senses? they make sense only as senses, registered as senses, if the senseless if incapable of registering as a sense, then they have no meaning.
12. If one can accomplish the impossible, is it possible to make impossible possibilities, possible?It wouldn't be impossible if they accomplished it, now would it!
13. What is the feeling of painless pain?numbness
14. What is the description of the transparent?clearness, invisible,clarity. describe by qualities other than how light interacts with them.
15. If our future past is our present future, is our past future our future present?maybe, too vague to tell without giving specifics, and it is all relative
16. If we can learn, and learn how to unlearn, can we learn how to unlearn the unlearning of the learning to unlearn?yes
17. What is the answer to answering a question with no answer?silence
18. What is the question of questioning an answer with no question?meaningless noise or sentence
19. Can you take your own place?if you lose your original place
20. What is the opposite of the universe?nullverse,void,nothing
http://www.youtube.com/user/SageBodisattva
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_9PGLlBZtE
1. Is the purpose of purposeless purpose to have no purpose, on purpose?unanswerable, unsolvable paradox,wordgame
2. Does the meaning of meaningless meaning, that creates meaning in the meaningless, have meaning?unanswerable, unsolvable paradox,wordgame
3. What is a reflection of a reflection a reflection of?an image or another reflection
4. Can you remember to forget not to remember not to forget to remember a memory that you memorized but then forgot?no, too complex, and meaningless after a few iterations.actually you can forgot on purpose, I've read studies in such regards.
5. If one says they are speechless, does this constitute speechless speech?no, still speech.
6. Does ever changing change ever change into anything other then ever changing change?yes and no, the qualities of the changing change evolve, but they still remain of similar nature, i.e. changing
7. If an immortal traveler is traveling in infinity, can there ever be such a thing called a destination?yes, a destination is wherever you define it to be regardless if you keep moving.
8. Where is a circle within a circle within a circle within a circle within a circle, located?somewhere within the next to last circle. the circles don't necessarily have to be concentric.
9. If you are on the outside looking in, what is on the outside looking in at you?either something inbetween or on the same level or something more outside than you are.
10. If one says, "I think, therefor I am." What are they if they stop thinking?I am. They exist regardless of whether they think, they just don't necessarily know they exist.
11. If the senses can sense the senseless, what sense does the senseless make to the senses? they make sense only as senses, registered as senses, if the senseless if incapable of registering as a sense, then they have no meaning.
12. If one can accomplish the impossible, is it possible to make impossible possibilities, possible?It wouldn't be impossible if they accomplished it, now would it!
13. What is the feeling of painless pain?numbness
14. What is the description of the transparent?clearness, invisible,clarity. describe by qualities other than how light interacts with them.
15. If our future past is our present future, is our past future our future present?maybe, too vague to tell without giving specifics, and it is all relative
16. If we can learn, and learn how to unlearn, can we learn how to unlearn the unlearning of the learning to unlearn?yes
17. What is the answer to answering a question with no answer?silence
18. What is the question of questioning an answer with no question?meaningless noise or sentence
19. Can you take your own place?if you lose your original place
20. What is the opposite of the universe?nullverse,void,nothing
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Perceptions
Perceptions. What are they? Anyone? From a mathematical, purely physics standpoint should they be there? Does all matter experience perceptions or only some kinds of matter? Is the matter what experiences perceptions or is matter just a mathematical device to communicate what eventually will become a perception? What is the difference between matter and our perception of that matter? The atheist or neurologist might say, well they come from the brain. The theist or someone with general spiritual inclinations might say, well there is this thing called the mind, which isn't the brain, and the perceptions come from there. But honestly I don't think there is an accepted casual explanation for perceptions. The mind as something apart from the brain is unstudiable, and the brain if it is purely a mathematical substance, operating similar to a computer, then where do perceptions come from? Or to put it another way does a robot given optical sensors actually see or does it merely consist of a series of physical reactions, mathematically describable, and believing a robot has senses is humans anthropomorphizing our human-centered viewpoint onto a non-living thing?
Monday, June 14, 2010
Gay Marriage
It is a strange idea. When I was younger, the idea never even occurred to me. Of course even the idea of marriage would have never occurred to me, had I not been taught it. When you are younger, you are taught that a man and women who love each other or for political reasons like nobility from two kingdoms or arranged marriage. You read about various fairy tales where a girl mets her prince charming. But when you think about it, marriage is a completely artificial construct mainly for the community and to promote the raising of children. It doesn't have much to do with the actual people getting married. It has mainly been pushed by various religions in the past, but it has recently become increasingly secularized and more allowances for getting divorced have been allowed. Divorce is still expensive business, especially if you have property and children. The United State is predominately made up of citizens with Christian viewpoints with varying stances in regards to gay marriage; some with no problem with it. I honestly don't care if two people want to get married or if gay marriage has to be called domestic partnership to get passed into law. If two men or two women want to get married and it isn't just to get the other citizenship or something similar, then I say we should allow it. If you are Christian see Mark 12:25, basically put according to your bible, marriage is only something for when you are alive and really it has no consequence in the bigger scheme of things. Basically in other words, it is an artificial construct instituted for a specific function and nothing more and Jesus knew it.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Draw Mohammad Day
May 20, 2010
Yeah, Draw Mohammad Day, ermm yeah. It really never should have been a big deal to begin with. The whole do not draw Mohammad started with the whole do not worship false/graven images/idols, which started with Moses, and Mohammad resuscitated the idea for his own purposes; Mohammad is worshiped more than God, but that's how things go. Pakistan bans facebook, youtube, etc. It all started because of a Southpark episode or two, episode 200, 201. Some are worried this will ruin relations with Pakistan, ermm newsflash, we don't really have good relations with Pakistan and they weren't going to let our military into their country regardless. Well for one U.S. uavs on occasion bomb in that area and two the Taliban is the de facto power in Pakistan. Some think diplomacy will solve the Pakistan problem. That will fail. Some would go the invasion route, which will also fail, though we are headed in that direction. The only thing that will work is mass education, propaganda, and nonviolent protests, hopefully lead by Muslim leaders in that region. Some argue over Pakistan's sovereignty; that is debatable in light of them being a military threat to the United States, India, and other countries, and two, their violent succession from India, afterwhich they then proceeded to attack India on multiple occasions. Imagine some of the southern states in the U.S. decided to secede from the U.S. and form their own country and call it the Confederate states; would that be a sovereign country? Hmm, wonder how that went!
Yeah, Draw Mohammad Day, ermm yeah. It really never should have been a big deal to begin with. The whole do not draw Mohammad started with the whole do not worship false/graven images/idols, which started with Moses, and Mohammad resuscitated the idea for his own purposes; Mohammad is worshiped more than God, but that's how things go. Pakistan bans facebook, youtube, etc. It all started because of a Southpark episode or two, episode 200, 201. Some are worried this will ruin relations with Pakistan, ermm newsflash, we don't really have good relations with Pakistan and they weren't going to let our military into their country regardless. Well for one U.S. uavs on occasion bomb in that area and two the Taliban is the de facto power in Pakistan. Some think diplomacy will solve the Pakistan problem. That will fail. Some would go the invasion route, which will also fail, though we are headed in that direction. The only thing that will work is mass education, propaganda, and nonviolent protests, hopefully lead by Muslim leaders in that region. Some argue over Pakistan's sovereignty; that is debatable in light of them being a military threat to the United States, India, and other countries, and two, their violent succession from India, afterwhich they then proceeded to attack India on multiple occasions. Imagine some of the southern states in the U.S. decided to secede from the U.S. and form their own country and call it the Confederate states; would that be a sovereign country? Hmm, wonder how that went!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)