ALine

Is there a dynamic model which shows gaps in a society as a wholes general knowledge. Like a overall "fields of study" mapping where people can come together and view exactly what knowledge that they have for the purpose of growing that said knowledge by visually exploring new fields of study connected to what they already know?

Like a visualized encyclopedia organized by the different fields of study.

for better visualization purposes

Is there a visual model which represents all of the different fields of study?

Something kind of like this?

On 2/11/2019 at 5:12 PM, peterwlocke said:

are you the princess bubblegum person

I can neither confirm nor deny this fact. And I got the name from a television show called adventure time with princess bubble gum who is a supposed scientist.

Did not expect the hypothesis to hold at all hence why I placed it into speculation. Only wanted it torn apart so I can see if it is viable in any way.

So like an equipment renting service. Would I need to make sure that each one of those pieces of equipment be insured?

Ok so I started a business a while back however I have not really done anything with it physically. It is based on the idea of giving scientist, engineers, and artists the space and resources they would need in order to fully develop there ideas through fluishion. Like say if someone wanted to build a flying car they could do this here. I feel as if all I am lacking are people who are willing to work from there passions and not from there desires, however I am an extreme novice when it comes to trying to find these types of people along with fully setting up a business from scratch. What advice can you guys give to assist. Thank you.

Could quantum mechanics lead into relativity through string theories holographic field theory by assuming that all systems in the universe, systems being objects that are observable, are themselves independent universes that are mirrored off of itself into separate dimensions? 

If you were to have a universe created which mimics the effects of an electron then that universe is mirrored in some way, shape or form causing all assumed electrons simply be mirrors of the same electron universe? 

On 2/9/2019 at 9:24 PM, StringJunky said:

The idea of something being 'solid' is a property of our macro-world i.e. the big stuff larger than atoms and molecules. It's the repulsive effect between the outer electrons of each atom (like charges repel) that gives us this feeling of something being solid and impenetrable. When we look more microscopically, at the components of atoms, they become composed of fields with various properties that have no sense of substance we can associate in our macro-world; they are, in effect, materially empty space. If you look at it like this, space pervades continuously through all things. You aren't far wrong.

 

this answer both frightens me and excites my curiosity all at the same time.

48 minutes ago, Maryam said:

No, it is not. Actually, I have started my research degree a few months ago and many basic questions strike my mind regularly. That's why I signed up here to ask and let my concept become clearer.

I think it has something to do with the make up of the fluid itself. Being either polar or non-polar. Water, being a polar molecule, would be more attractive to the glass surface. This would produce a concave shape. And because you are looking for the waters volume I believe, do not quote me on this, that due to this affect you would need to measure taking this into account. As for the color liquids I am not sure. An idea would be that most color liquids used in chemistry are usually non-polar. Again I am not sure. 

Hello my name is A Grey Line and I would like to be an inventor/scientist when I finish my schooling

I enjoy coming up with ideas along with watching animations

On 2/8/2019 at 2:06 AM, Gees said:

 

You know, if you cover up the words, imagination vs reality, in the above captioned picture, what is left are two representations of the same person in different moods or states of mind. Emotions or moods are very real. The word "imagination" over one of the pictures, implies that that picture may represent a deception. Was that your intent?

 

Originally I wanted to attempt to prove something with an idea that I had. Now that I look back on it I guess it did not have any real meaning behind it, just an activity with observation of others responses while also being an open ended question to be further explored.

33 minutes ago, nevim said:

A combination of the objects that the individual found pleasing’ 

Seriously? What does this even mean in relation to personality?

I am sorry for not clarifying myself. Object as being any observed thing inside of a person's surroundings. 

Like if I see a cat and I grew very fond of that cat and learned its behaviors from observations. Then I may integrate those behaviors into my psyche as being apart of my personality.

I also just watch some videos on the personality and just from that I can see idea is incorrect and does not line up with other developed theories/hypothesis on the matter of personality growth and development.

Just now, nevim said:

No.

so would it play some factor in the development if an individuals personality, or does it have no connection to it what so ever?

Is an individuals personality just a combination of objects that the individual found pleasing?

ah, well that speculatory hypothesis is getting trashed

re-read your posts and say that again, please Theredbarron.

I want to understand what you are saying but I have no knowledge of the subject.  

say it in your own unique words

so had a dream last night about the universe an then in my dream I had an idea.

(* Please note that under no circumstance should this idea be considered real science. Dreams do not compete in the slightest with real science works. It is only an idea from putting puzzle pieces together  thank you*)

what if gravity is impossible to observe because it tunes itself to the observer. Like a string on a guitar which is being played by the observed.

The more you observe something the more in tune it becomes. And vise verse.

So say you have a piece of mass you want to try an observe right? well, you can do that at larger scales, but at smaller scales, it becomes more difficult because you have to balance out the forces. And even at larger scales, it becomes difficult. The smaller or bigger you go the more you have to balance out the forces. And at a certain point on each side you, as an observer, reach a certain limit. 

What if that entire process itself IS(claim) gravity and we are living inside of an "observational sinkhole" where big and small is based upon our biological size limitations.

5 minutes ago, Strange said:

Volume is not mass

My mistake, was attempting to describe surface area or the outshell of the massive object. If this is still incorrect please correct me.

I don't know and I can never say that I will ever know. But I want to know so it gives me something to wake up to in the mourning. A purpose or meaning. Like trying to find the end of the rainbow. I think that I am questioning too much of the reasoning behind science without even doing science. 

Personal side note - I think the magic at the end of the rainbow is from collecting pieces of gold on your way down and up. And once you reach the end you realize that the magic was in the journey all along and now you can go back and look at the beauty of what you have done in order to make something new and unique like exploring the universe in order to make a new one.

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

We must do both, and a better question to you is: Why the hell wouldn't we want to learn more and ensure our models of reality become increasingly accurate with each passing day?

When it comes to physics I do not nor will I ever claim to be an expert. Only a curious explorer of knowledge for the application of developing ideas. My question, as stated in the title, is are we observing down too far. Meaning that why are we attempting to go smaller or bigger scale wise when it comes to understanding physics? By this I mean why are we, by we I mean science in general, trying to find an ultimate answer or a theory of everything? Why try and put puzzle pieces that do not fit together , together? I feel as if I already "know" the answer, however I feel as if I do not "understand" the answer. 

I believe that mass can be classified by two parts, the space a system takes up along with the actual physical system in which takes up space. The former may be classified as volume and the later be classified as the observation of that volume. If you are attempting to observe the smallest mass then this may create a certain paradox or level of uncertainty due to whether or not the observer is affecting that mass due to said observation of that mass. Maybe even the usage of time begins to break down due to time itself being a for, of observation. Therefore in order to begin to classify if there is such a thing as an "absolute mass" one may first need to choose the correct observer medium which in turn is constant inside of all space. My first thought would be using the space of light, however, I am a novice when it comes to physics so I am unsure. Please message me with a response of what you think so that I can correct myself for issues in my understanding of physics.

I apologize for my recent behavior. I do not understand what I am asking in direct relation to the amount of knowledge that I have accumulated along with the amount of knowledge that others have accumulated themselves. I need to go back and learn exactly what it is that I am trying to say.

I apologize for my recent behavior. I did not understand what I was asking in direct relation to the amount of knowledge that I have accumulated along with the amount of knowledge that others have accumulated themselves. I need to go back and learn exactly what it is that I am trying to say. I will come back when I fully understand what exactly it is that I am trying to ask.

I apologize for my recent behavior. I did not understand what I was asking in direct relation to the amount of knowledge that I have accumulated along with the amount of knowledge that others have accumulated themselves. I need to go back and learn exactly what it is that I am trying to say.

ah, ok then. Maybe it is just the excitement from being able to trust the information that my professors have been attempting to give me all of these years along with the fact that there is just so much that I do not know and wish to learn. Thank you for telling me this and helping prevent me from getting of track from truly understanding reality and the external world around me. I will focus on my studies so that I can obtain a better depth of understanding so that I may better my chosen field of research.