All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Hello, I need a material for my project

    Thanks, I'll see if I can use them.
  3. Today
  4. Consciousness and Evolution

    Tar; Yes. Pattern recognition is important in philosophy, and a repetition of patterns is a sign that something is true. I remember taking the children to a Science Institute years ago. There was a picture of some part of space, maybe a galaxy, that was taken with a high powered telescope, and there was a picture of some matter, maybe cells, that was taken with a high powered microscope. The pictures looked the same. Nature repeats what works. Yes. When we define what a word is (want), we also define what it isn't. By setting parameters around the word we limit it. Cladking could probably explain this, but hopefully would give a brief explanation. Unfortunately, we have defined 'want' to be something that is consciously wanted, so it looks like you are saying that planets and electrons are conscious -- this is not necessarily true. If you show a child some magnets, the child will say that the magnets 'want' to be together, then flipping one around, the child will say they 'want' to be apart. The child is anthropomorphizing the magnets, giving them a human consciousness, in order to understand the 'want'. This is really just attraction and repulsion, which like want, are just forces and motion between things. Yes, complex and interrelated, but not a straight path. This is one of the bigger problems that I have with the "God" idea or the Intelligent Designer theory. Why start with a human-like mind, then reduce it to microbes, then let it develop into dinosaurs, then wipe out most life, then rebuild it to humans? This makes no sense and looks nothing like a plan -- but neither is it random. I suspect that evolution is reactionary, and when the reaction is successful, it is repeated. This repetition then appears to be purposeful, although I doubt that it was originally "designed" to be purposeful. It is the nature of Nature to be assertive; to assert itself into an available void, so when I translate this into ideas of consciousness, I find that it is the nature of Nature to learn. Yes, if it is reactionary, it would also be interrelated. It is also the nature of Nature to self-balance, as we have learned while studying ecosystems. So any lack of balance would tempt Nature to try to fill the void and rebalance itself, which is where the reaction comes from. Agreed. My studies indicate that temperature and density affect consciousness, and water seriously changes up the rules. This information came mostly from studies of ecosystems where temperature, mountains, lakes, rivers, and oceans limit the interrelated self-balancing of Nature. It is also why island life is so interesting because it can evolve in totally unique ways because of the water that surrounds it and isolates it from many influences. There are also electro-magnetic fields, and probably other things, that influence consciousness. I have no idea not being a scientist. I don't know much about DNA, but am wondering if it is Nature's memory bank. Gee Cladking; It is good to hear from you again. Welcome to what appears to now be my thread. (chuckle) Gee
  5. Length Contraction

    I don't think it "becomes" shorter though. Its measurement is simply different depending on the FOR. It is not as if an object is constantly changing size depending on who is looking at it. It is more akin to describing an object's color as gray when viewed under fluorescent light but brown when viewed under incandescent light. Both descriptions are accurate depending on the circumstances when you measure it. I'm happy to hear rebuttals if I did not accurately describe the situation.
  6. Length Contraction

    Thank you. I guess Sparknotes could argue that if it is shorter then it also appears shorter as well, and so they are not wrong. But it is definitely misleading.
  7. Can you expand on what you saying a bit? You mean a Hilbert space in which [math]\mathcal{H} = \mathcal{H}^0 + \mathcal{H}^1[/math] In which you have a 1 particle system in L^2 space, right? Right, I am catching on a bit now... there are ways to do this. I remember reading about bounds in the equations. It's all theoretical of course. Even renormalization, though infinities I usually take as a breakdown in the theory.
  8. Yes I understand your under L^2 Euclidean norm by the p=2 Cauchy inequality value. Which if memory serves satisfies the inner space products, have you worked out the Minkowskii inequality? I'm a bit rusty on Young's I see from the last established a boundary cutoff except to the operator functions themselves fair enough. Going through your metrics atm I take it you never looked ar at the Functions for the Feyman S-matrix diagrams? Your verbal descriptive above tells me no. VP are described under propogators for intent and purpose (internal legs) external legs are operators... Real particle or states ie observable. minimal 1 quanta of action is required. So once again where iz your effective Hilbert boundaries to address VP? You have your observable operators but no boundaries to distinquish an excitation from a fluctuation expect via Hamiltonian action under R^n
  9. Length Contraction

    It is shorter in any inertial reference frame that it is moving, along the direction of travel. In it's own reference frame it's not contracted.
  10. Length Contraction

    Briefly every frame of reference is as valid as any other, so yes length contraction does take place.. http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/01/q-why-does-relativistic-length-contraction-lorentz-contraction-happen/
  11. Shoemaker Levy comet explosion

    I was reading about the meteor that exploded over Russia in 2013. It's composition was only 10% iron..so it seems that meteors composed of mostly dust and ice will either burn up in the atmosphere or explode. Higher compositions of iron (guess...> 50%) may make it to the surface.
  12. So, I have had some time to think about it. So you have given me a bit of time to think about it, and I have come to see it ultimately depends on the convergence implied from the collapse of the system. I'm dealing in [math]L^2[/math] space and the Hilbert space is [math]\mathcal{H} = L^2(\mathcal{R})[/math]. In [math]L^2[/math] space, you can have many seqences but converges on [math]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |a_i|^2 < \infty[/math] The collapse of the system depends on the collapse time. It has been suggested that Penroses collapse time is too long! A quicker collapse time model is needed, so why not things happening at plank time? Wheeler suggested quantum foam would occur at a very tiny distance of the Planck scale [math]10^{-33} cm[/math], so it wouldn't actually be implausibe to assume any zero point fluctuations must have a cutoff corresponding to the Planck frequency [math]10^{43} Hz[/math]. Neverthless, the collapse shows you get a finite number, so this is key to the renormalization of this specific theory. That does imply large densities - you might ask why we can't see those large densities and the truth be told, it may all boil down to the lifetime of the fluctuation itself - the short time implies it has only moved a vanishingly small amount and so never becomes anything that is generally visible, at least not with current technology - though, if my spacetime theory of the vacuum is true, that is, that there is an intrinsic spacetime uncertainty that gives rise to particles, it should be possible to create a device to probe and observe spacetime to create those fluctuations. But then you would come to the chicken and egg question - are you creating those fluctuations by looking into the small regions of spacetime, or are they already there?
  13. You always come through. Thanks for confirming. I appreciate you.
  14. solubility question

    Sorry, just saw your reply. Why Henderson-Hasselbalch? This isn't a buffer question. I don't really follow what you are saying, anyway. The pKa of cyclohexanol is 17. This means that below a pH of 17, it remains mostly in the acid form (HA). Above pH 17, the majority of it will be deprotonated to the conjugate base (A-). Valproic acid has a pKa of 4.8. Similarly, this means that below pH 4.8 the compound remains mostly intact as HA, and above that pH it is mostly deprotonated to the conjugate base. From this we would say that valproic acid is vastly more acidic (i.e. More willing to give up H+) than cyclohexanol is. Why this is comes down to the conjugate bases and their relative stabilities. Do you think the conjugate base of valproic acid is more stable or less stable than the one you drew for cyclohexanol? Why? What is different about their structures that would lead to this?
  15. Smuggling Nuclear Weapons

    There are radiation detectors out there. Think major cities and ports. Here's the EPA's RadNet: https://www.epa.gov/radnet/near-real-time-and-laboratory-data-state I'm sure there is more out there that isn't being disclosed. Kind of defeats the purpose if bad guys know where to avoid. Kind of wondering how well shielding would work. Lead or water. Even spreading radioactive material alone requires an expensive cleanup.
  16. Rank the following molecules from most to least acidic?

    That's a tough one. Without any other information, I would have put them at about the same pKa. Indeed, looking it up, their pKa's are remarkably similar. If I were to guess, I would say that the 2-chloro substituent of compound 1 helps stabilise the conjugate base through inductive effects moreso than the phenyl ring does in compound 3. That is really what it comes down to with acidity. The more stable the conjugate base, the more favoured the dissociation is, meaning more H+ in solution and higher acidity.
  17. Length Contraction

    The reason I ask is that on the back side of my Sparknotes Physics Study Cards, for "length contraction (Lorentz contraction)" it reads: "Predicts that objects appear shorter to an observer moving at a constant speed than to an observer at rest ..." [bold added] I always thought objects became shorter and not just appear as the card suggests. Is my Sparknotes card wrong?
  18. Shoemaker Levy comet explosion

    I remember the Shoemaker-Levy event well. It was very exciting. The predictions started coming in months before the event and as the date approached it was discovered that the impact zone would be turning away from us as the comet collided. Many worried we would miss it but instead we all got a fine show. I never will forget seeing it live on tv. But to answer your question we already know of a asteroid or comet that did explode. The impact happened in 1908 and Russia sent an expedition to the very remote area in 1921.
  19. Terrorism? Or just politics as usual?

    And via what communication channel...
  20. Overhead sensors in freeways...

    Did someone 'pulled my leg' a looong time ago telling me these were to detect 'illegal/undisclosed' transportation of radioactive materials ? Or are those only mass detectors, speed detectors, vehicle counters, toll transponders... ?
  21. Taxation

    In my attempt to explain the idea using everyday relatable terms, I chose a bad example. You're correct. My apologies. The same challenges I highlighted still apply. Flat tax disproportionately hurts the poor and middle class while disproportionately helping the already wealthy.
  22. Terrorism? Or just politics as usual?

    Can you offer some proof that you got these advanced warnings?
  23. Hello, I need a material for my project

    Something like these crucibles ? ----> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ceramic+crucible&t=canonical&iax=1&ia=images
  24. It's a good question. I don't really have an answer (yet). Let me work on it.
  25. Hard to tell, because about any attack can be considered terrorism these days - and if necessary, the author will be described as "radicalised", within days in case he wasn't even religious before. Anyway, before the car crashed in the crowd in Charlottesville, I got advance warning. This happens from time to time when intelligence services organize a terrorist act, especially the French ones, but never before an action by Daesh or some far-right group. Maybe I'm not the only one who understands it that way, because few days later, a car driver crashed willingly in a crowd in Sept-Sorts in France, and I got advance warning for that too. Just like I got advance warning before the train crash in Italy, which was followed by the "terrorist attack by Daesh" with the truck in Nice, France. So while Daesh did carry some attacks, please keep an open mind when you hear about such an event. They often just belong to the relations between governments - not normal, but usual.
  26. Yesterday
  27. So if I'm following correct your in essence breaking the SO(3) group into two unitary Hilbert spaces. You mentioned finite spaces, which is part of the issue with renormalization. How are you setting the effective cutoffs ? ie the UV cutoff? The notations above are all in the realm of operators, but part of the issue directly relating is the propogators. I don't doubt the math above as being correct, LQC does a similar technique in principle but uses a Wicks rotation ( Wilson loop, to quantize units of spacetime) The only cutoffs I see in the above, is the standard QFT operator IR/UV cutoffs.
  28. Without giving you a lecture on the dirac notation, because I am sure you know what that means, in the context we have used it in is [math]<\psi|\psi> = \sum_i |c_i|^2 = 1[/math] where [math]|c_i|^2= c*_ic_i[/math] are composed of probability amplitudes, and so the probability to find something in a particular state is given by the mean of the square of the wave function, also known as a quantum collapse. This above, is also known as an expectation value in Hilbert space when acting on an operator, which is the route I investigated. You ask about repeated indices, the rule is that any repeated indices cancel.
  1. Load more activity