The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: An essay in futility, too long to read :)  (Read 278939 times)

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1725 on: 29/02/2016 10:39:13 »
Has a constant a 'size'? Can you use quantum mechanics to define it? Is it instead a scale, as if you first have constants, then scale it all up, into a universe.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1726 on: 29/02/2016 10:49:46 »
There's a lot of things in physics, and quantum mechanics, that we deem to exist, without having a 'size', 'point particles' for example. And if you find this questionable, what about thoughts? Shouldn't they too then have a 'size'? Shouldn't everything be measurable? Well, it seems to be measurable, all of it, but not in terms of 'size'. We use forces and fields instead. And if you like, 'virtual particles' and probability.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1727 on: 29/02/2016 10:57:45 »
So yes, we definitely live in a information universe. A universe defined by constants, forces, possibly field(s), 'virtuality' and probabilities. And not to forget, uncertainty. It's information that keeps this universe together. And it needs time to communicate, which becomes 'c'. It's the 'light' you see that tells you that it exist.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1728 on: 29/02/2016 11:08:10 »
So, from 'nothing', a universe. Then life using 'thoughts' to create even more complicated mental structures, both for explaining as well as for just being able to get along with each other, as ethics. Which is more 'real'? Where does this universal buildup of structures end? Maybe it doesn't, maybe that too becomes a infinity of expressions?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1729 on: 29/02/2016 11:09:07 »
A information universe with something more added to it, a little spice called free will.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1730 on: 04/03/2016 22:56:48 »
And then, you live, and then you die? Is that all there is :)
Not from where I look at it. You're the one that will make a change, yourself. I do trust you. And I expect you to do the best you can.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1731 on: 04/03/2016 23:01:39 »
Don't fall for the idea of perfection. That's Bs**
Do the best you can, accept you're human, but still, try.

Perfection is only accessible when you have a crowd, telling each other that they must be the pinnacle of perfection. Well, they're not. Neither will you be, how much you ever strive for it, in a crowd or alone. Accepting ones limits is not accepting defeat, it's just where you start. And it's not greed.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1732 on: 04/03/2016 23:02:19 »
Be a human being.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1733 on: 04/03/2016 23:31:13 »
I'm not sure if it was Tolkien creating it? But I seem to remember the word 'wellrounded', possibly relating to hobittians? I do think that covers it though. Go for a well rounded life :) One where you actually can live, and die, with yourself. Just try, and f* perfect.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1734 on: 07/03/2016 16:35:40 »
Allow me to digress somewhat. Tolkien.

I love his prose, or verse :) Depending. Seen a lot of SF and fantasy buffs telling each other how their respective genres have developed into something more, but for me there are only a few authors that really touch a bards mastery, and there Tolkien is probably the foremost. You have Stapeldons 'last and first men' naturally, it's a epic travel through 'history', as modern today as when it was written, although you better consider it somewhat of a parallel to our own history. Jack Vance is a underestimated author that I find extremely good too, in the way he smith his words, and considering those, Ray Bradbury naturally although that comes closer to Edgar Allan Poe in my taste, not just SF in other words. I think we have a lot of really good wordsmiths those days, that can stand for themselves. But, people like Tolkien comes few in between to me, could be advanced age naturally :) me feeling that I already read it once as soon as I've opened it and started reading, but I don't think so.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1735 on: 07/03/2016 16:43:02 »
And in some ways he was as me, believing in good and bad. He had this to say about the 'one ring', if it now had existed under world war two. That it really wouldn't have mattered who got it, as neither side would have avoided using it. As I remember it, that is. That's about 'forcing' each other into outcomes. Being a individual is harder, and takes so much more courage.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1736 on: 07/03/2016 16:56:06 »
So, what might be a synonym for the 'one ring' today.
Nuclear.

It's what the Russians have, and use, as a 'credible threat' now as their buffer zones and conventional forces are found lacking. It's what NATO recently would have liked to introduce in their military doctrines as being 'limited warfare'. It's what North Korea wave around, threatening us all. Then of course, we have China, Israel, UK, France, etc etc.

I find myself agreeing with Tolkien there.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1737 on: 07/03/2016 17:57:09 »
Maybe the question should be.

Would the one ring be any less if Saruman would have gotten his way? Maybe he wasn't the one 'destined' to use it, but would the ring have wrecked less havoc in his hands than in Saurons? I don't think so myself, it's not who has it, it's who use it. You might think of it, I do at least, as opening Pandoras box.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1738 on: 07/03/2016 18:15:38 »
The ring does not get less, due to a different handler. Neither can it be less because of a changed description. But that's what we see when it comes to nuclear, a change of description. In reality the first one using it will open the lid, and the world you thought you knew will be gone.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1739 on: 09/03/2016 14:41:34 »
When you sit in your car, doing 70 km per hour, do you contain more energy? What happens when you collide with a rock? Will the speed, relative that rock, matter? What is 'energy'? The best explanation I've read is JP:s, calling 'energy' a 'coin of exchange'. But what does it exchange? If you got up close to 'c', coasting along in a uniform motion, would your atoms, molecules etc, 'jiggle' more due to that uniform motion? Where would you place the 'energy'?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1740 on: 09/03/2016 14:43:47 »
Is the universe a container?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1741 on: 09/03/2016 14:50:58 »
Something keeps a measure. Doesn't matter if we call it 'relative', or 'absolute'. The Universe will be able to define the energy content any which way, won't it? The funny thing about a uniform motion through a vacuum (space) is that there is no resistance, there is no 'internal buildup of atoms jiggling' due to a speed, doesn't matter from where, and how, you define it. The only buildup we can define is in a acceleration. There you actually can feel it building up, as when accelerating your car.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1742 on: 09/03/2016 14:56:40 »
But it's not because of your atoms jiggling, well, as far as I know then :)
What you feel we call 'gravity', not atoms jiggling. If I'm wrong there we also can assume that even in a perfect vacuum, anything accelerating close to 'c' should first start glowing, then 'dissolve' more or less, due to that 'energy' building up, 'jiggling' your atoms etc. Same thing as with a stove, you putting a iron on it. Assuming you to have a very hot stove naturally :)
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1743 on: 09/03/2016 15:24:03 »
How do the universe keep count? Assume a universe without accelerations, only uniform motions. A uniform motion is locally measured indistinguishable from being still. A perfect car on a perfect road, 'coasting along' will then need you to look out to prove yourself moving, and the measure you take is one relative something else, the road itself etc. So locally defined you don't move at all measurably, only relative other things.

Now, does a universe only containing relative motion (uniform motion) still have different 'speeds' to it? If it does, how does the universe keep count of the 'energy' released in a thought up collision between two uniformly moving objects? How can it know? Locally measured there is no difference, nothing that tells you how fast you go, and there isn't any way to define some universal gold standard for motion, only for accelerations. And the way we define that 'universal' gold standard is as usual, we do it locally, then communicate our results, and finding them agreeing with each other, we lift it up to a 'universal truth'.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1744 on: 09/03/2016 15:35:24 »
It takes some thinking over to see what I aim for there. After all, most cars have speedometers, and the way we make them agree with each other builds on a similar principle. Us defining 'km' or 'miles' or ... But we do it relative a gold standard, it's called the road, or 'earth', which we then define to be in 'zero motion'. With a acceleration the difference is that you don't really need to define it relative 'something else', you can actually feel it. We use a accelrometer to measure it but it's still very local, acting on each of your atoms as far as I can see.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1745 on: 09/03/2016 15:38:07 »
But it won't make you glow.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1746 on: 09/03/2016 15:48:44 »
One lovely way to describe motion, accelerating or uniform, is called displacements in time. Depending on if they (the displacements) grow and also how they grow we then can define different types of motion. As a uniform motion, relative a constantly uniformly growing (accelerating) motion, relative those accelerations that doesn't fit, becoming 'unevenly accelerating', more or less.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1747 on: 09/03/2016 16:04:48 »
maybe the problem lies in the way I think of 'energy'. The cleanest example I can think of is a light quanta, a concentration of energy' having a place in your room, without actually taking any part of it, But that is what I usually think of as 'energy', maybe that needs to be changed.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1748 on: 09/03/2016 16:20:16 »
Something that creates no resistance, no friction, that allow your perpetual uniform motion, is that 'energy'?
A perfect vacuum.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1749 on: 09/03/2016 16:24:46 »
Is the universe a container? A leaking container? A container that only can get 'filled' into a same equilibrium, as the universe expands? What is a distance, is it 'observer dependent' or not? Depends on your beliefs, doesn't it? In the end the question becomes one in where you either define this universe to be, or not to be. A illusion in some terms, or 'as real as can be'. Most of the really deep questions isn't about facts, it's about ones presumptions. They define the facts.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: An essay in futility, too long to read :)
« Reply #1749 on: 09/03/2016 16:24:46 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums