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
...
16
17
[
18
]
19
20
...
68
Go Down
How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
1346 Replies
357301 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #340 on:
09/01/2014 13:07:34 »
But it assume constants, properties and principles existing as a 'origin'. And it assumes those to be existent even when a clock stops 'ticking'. The 'direction' of your local clock is then defined by 'c', and to get to a distance you need a asymmetrical definition, although you after defining that 'speed' theoretically may define it as working both directions.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #341 on:
09/01/2014 13:09:33 »
You could possibly describe it as something constantly evolving from simplicity into complexity?
=
Assuming a 'heat bath' this one is questionable though, then again if I think of it as a fractal behavior? I don't know.
«
Last Edit: 09/01/2014 13:13:48 by yor_on
»
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #342 on:
09/01/2014 13:16:50 »
Why I like the idea of a fractal is because I think you can in cooperate 'arrows' in it. As a figure evolving on your 'flat screen'. And the figure being a local representation defined by 'c', as measured by you.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #343 on:
09/01/2014 13:31:30 »
Expressed another way. You being the observer of frames of reference interacting in a oscillation are actually the observer of a fractal evolving, in 'time or a arrow', as defined by you locally. But the figure evolving does not need you to interact, assuming all frames being 'observers'. Or if you like
You are the 'clock', defining this figure evolving.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #344 on:
09/01/2014 13:36:53 »
Now use a sheet, place that fractal on it, and see it rush into a future.
Or, evolve.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #345 on:
09/01/2014 14:03:29 »
You could either think of it as one fractal, representing a universe, or as fractals interacting, as it seems to me. It's new territory to me this one, and it depends on if I use the 'eye of a God', or define it locally. One way to test such an idea might then be, assuming a 'eye of a God' being possible, to define how several fractal, locally defined, behaviors merge into one 'commonly same' fractal behavior. Alternatively this assumption is wrong, (but I don't think it is, now at least:) and you can ignore it for a definition in where you define this evolving pattern as a strict local, defined by your clock and ruler.
But as we can agree on a universe there should be a possibility of describing it mathematically as one thing, 'evolving'.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #346 on:
09/01/2014 14:06:17 »
What I mean using a fractal is that locally, 'inside it', the arrow becomes a pattern evolving, like rings on the water. Although as defined by you, observing it, having a defined arrow, a past, a 'now', and a future.
=
You might consider yourself the stone, thrown into the pond, measuring rings. Although that is a weak comparison, as it assumes you having a arrow in where to move. On the other tentacle, you have, don't you?
«
Last Edit: 09/01/2014 14:12:03 by yor_on
»
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #347 on:
09/01/2014 14:24:16 »
But it's nice anyway as you need the stone to define the rings here. No stone, no rings.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #348 on:
09/01/2014 14:27:53 »
And that is also the 'observer problem'. I like to define interactions as possible because they all represent 'observers', observing each other. But you could, if you like, define it such as without consciousness there can be no observers. We need consciousness to 'observe'. Why I don't like that definition is because we then need to define what a consciousness should be, and how it can exist at all, if a arrow needs it. We can agree on that we need 'outcomes' to define a past, a 'now' and a future though.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #349 on:
09/01/2014 14:30:54 »
Using a definition in where consciousness needs to be there as a catalyst, you also need to assume something 'timelessly' existing, put into 'motion' by you observing.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #350 on:
09/01/2014 14:32:15 »
And then the fractal becomes you.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #351 on:
09/01/2014 14:34:36 »
Don't like that one. I prefer one in where we can explain things, both as a pattern and from an idea of a 'linear' arrow including interactions. And I would prefer everything to be able to 'observe', as in interact, with or without me.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #352 on:
09/01/2014 14:36:39 »
The difference being that patterns really evolve in the later approach. You have something with a direction defined by its evolving.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #353 on:
09/01/2014 14:41:39 »
In the first approach this becomes a illusion. You being the definer of a arrow there, and that makes it truly irritating to me
It's not what I call a happily accessible definition, more of a mystical one. Everything can be a illusion naturally, from both definitions, but evolving seems to be a aspect this universe needs, and if it needs it then I won't accept it as a illusion. Everything evolves inside this arrow, you and me too.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #354 on:
09/01/2014 14:46:42 »
And we do it individually, we have patterns defining differences even though we can track them genetically to 'origins'.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #355 on:
09/01/2014 14:48:18 »
So from some undefined idea of simplicity, to complexity.
=
Assume that there is a fractal describing it all. Then that fractal evolves, using a arrow. More interactions coming to be, with indeterminacy and probability (statistics) defining rules, and to that add relativity and constants, properties, and so principles .
«
Last Edit: 09/01/2014 14:53:17 by yor_on
»
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #356 on:
09/01/2014 15:04:20 »
A fractal is a pattern evolving in time, coming from simplicity into complexity. It fits the way I look at it. Even if assuming those fractals to be locally defined it doesn't state that there can't be a equation, able to describe them all. It should be possible.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #357 on:
09/01/2014 15:13:24 »
And I prefer mathematics before entropy for describing it. Entropy is more of a theory of temperatures to me. Fractals is just a way to describe something mathematically. A temperature is a relation between frames of reference. Fractals is just a pattern, evolving, when using a arrow.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #358 on:
09/01/2014 15:19:43 »
Now think of the ability of tracking all seven billions of humans to some common origin. That is one fractal to me, you individually another, nested into the first. You belong to this fractal of origin too, but you're a individual.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
yor_on
(OP)
Naked Science Forum GOD!
65501
Activity:
100%
Thanked: 177 times
(Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
«
Reply #359 on:
09/01/2014 15:29:36 »
To get from a fractal, to interactions, we need to assume that it 'laid out' on a sheet, have a way of allowing interactions between all points representing its pattern. How does it do that? It uses a locally defined arrow, equivalent to 'c'.
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
Print
Pages:
1
...
16
17
[
18
]
19
20
...
68
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...