The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Member Map
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages:
1
...
61
62
[
63
]
64
65
...
68
Go Down
How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
1346 Replies
357048 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1240 on:
17/10/2014 20:16:17 »
Can you?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1241 on:
17/10/2014 20:33:15 »
Listen good enough, and you will hear the grass grow. Don't know if it is true
But I would like it to be.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1242 on:
17/10/2014 20:37:23 »
Would you agree with me in that the people that means the most to you also are those that listened to you?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1243 on:
17/10/2014 20:38:31 »
And also, they didn't became Einsteins by it, but they meant the world to you, and me.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1244 on:
17/10/2014 20:39:13 »
Love.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1245 on:
17/10/2014 20:45:47 »
This one is to Viola. I think and hope she will know, wherever she is, or was.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1246 on:
17/10/2014 20:56:49 »
Ethics is a place where we are equal.
Where we all are worth something, no one able to look down at you as being inferior,
It's a weird place, assuming us all to be humans.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1247 on:
17/10/2014 20:59:53 »
Reminds me of Goa, where someone told me that there are 'humans' and 'real human beings'.
Don't really believe in that, but I can understand the way they thought.
As if it takes a effort to become human,
Do you think so too?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1248 on:
18/10/2014 09:36:04 »
Ah well, let's get back to container universes "All 'glass bubbles' existing inside it. And also that what each of them see is exactly what they get, in other words being as 'real' as can be for each one. It's a very fluid universe that one."
This time about relative motion. I've argued that even if you can't define any relative motion, you still can prove different relative (uniform) motions. Now, doesn't that idea need some 'universal container' of it? To define those different uniform motions from? Against it we can make any experiments we like, locally, without proving any uniform motion differing from any other. The second one does not speak about it as if something containing us, that we then could measure ones relative motion from.
It's also called a absolute frame that you then can use to measure all motion relative. If the universe now would be a sphere then, a boundary existing, could you now be able to prove absolute motion? That depends doesn't it, but assuming a equivalent inflation in all points possible (of that universe) it might be possible to reduce it to something 'absolute'. On the other hand, any idea of this type of inflation and you lose the boundary, unless you treat it as a emergence possibly.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1249 on:
18/10/2014 09:46:09 »
You might say that the point with different relative motions also is about what type of universe you think should connect them to each other. Different relative motions inside a 'container' will have a absolute frame, of some sort, existing as I see it. A fluid (relativistic) universe on the other tentacle does not have it. There the lever you use will be your local clock and ruler, to prove those (other) differing uniform motions from. As they will do with you, from their clock and ruler.
You can use that to question any idea of a container universe.
So, what we have, without doubt, is causality. Causality and the limit it use which then is 'c'. And 'c' also becomes the best clock you can use, locally measuring, split into Planck scale. Looking at it this way a vacuum becomes very strange.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1250 on:
18/10/2014 09:50:32 »
Because we now (presumably:) agree on that the universe isn't made out of a 'container'. If it was you then could define a absolute frame to it, with that frame also being able to define it all as one 'field', expressing itself differently depending on 'density'. But it would also invalidate relativity, as well as giving us yet another question to answer, what would then be the 'outside'?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1251 on:
18/10/2014 10:00:48 »
Would you want to state that a vacuum can't exist without a 'energy'? Think of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, is that one related to a vacuum on its own, or is it, as 'temperature', related to restmass versus a vacuum? If you think of it the last way, what then about the Casimir effect? Is it about a vacuum, or about a combination of a vacuum and rest mass? How would you go about proving a 'energy' to the vacuum, not using rest mass?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1252 on:
18/10/2014 10:02:38 »
The real point is simple. Do you think there can be a vacuum, without 'intrinsic energy'?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1253 on:
18/10/2014 10:11:03 »
From relativity, presuming Lorentz/Fitzgerald contraction as complementary expressions to the time dilations we observe, whatever distance you locally will measure always is relative 'motion', mass and energy. and the same goes for all other observers existing. Can you split a vacuum into pieces? How?
And if that vacuums 'distance' always is a local relation to your measurement?
What would that 'unified field' we assume look like?
Is there a global description of it, or will there only be local?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1254 on:
18/10/2014 10:13:54 »
Because if you only have local definitions of it, then there is no global, more than causality, which we hopefully agreed on using a locally measurable limit set to 'c', which also contain the clock defining your arrow of time.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1255 on:
18/10/2014 10:15:22 »
So locally you're always moving in one direction, time wise. Called aging
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1256 on:
18/10/2014 10:17:39 »
Locally there are two things that I see, accelerations and a arrow, that defines it.
Can you accelerate a vacuum? Or age it?
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1257 on:
18/10/2014 10:26:29 »
From causality's point of view this universe is whatever can be causally connected through your measurements. If we take a hypothetical case where we have two observers of some third, in where one observe something happening which still haven't happened according to the other observer, do you think there could be a way for the one seeing it communicating this to the observer still not able to observe it.
What would that do to causality? Shouldn't be possible, should it?
So, causality and 'c' defining this universe.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1258 on:
18/10/2014 10:52:05 »
Then again, if it was possible, what would it mean? Would you see it as a proof of a 'container universe', or would you then have to redefine it.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65498
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #1259 on:
18/10/2014 16:22:31 »
Accelerations are indeed weird. Assume 'locality', then treat it as a 'local field', then define what a accelerations is intrinsically. You think you can? I'll give you a Nobel prize if you find a way to do it from locality.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
Print
Pages:
1
...
61
62
[
63
]
64
65
...
68
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...