MJ kihara
-
Posts
245 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MJ kihara
-
-
8 hours ago, martillo said:
"I don't know exactly how the brain is capable to do all that. May be is all "chemo-electrical", I don't know. As I said some time ago the process of thinking is still a mystery for me. But I know I made some purely rational choices/decisions in that process BEFORE the final decision to post it."
Would you like the mystery to be broken down into parts that can be solved or trying to solve the mystery it's a mystery on itself?
54 minutes ago, martillo said:I would suggest you to continue this your subject on your own or with other ones, not with me.
The wonderfulness of the brain is a mystery that should not be looked at,is what you are implying?
0 -
On 10/4/2023 at 3:07 AM, swansont said:
Gravitons would be virtual particles, not limited by the same restrictions as real particles under classical rules of physics
On 10/4/2023 at 5:34 AM, Genady said:AFAIK, gravitons would be real particles in gravitational radiation, i.e., gravitational waves. But gravitational waves originate outside of the black hole's horizons, so the OP question does not apply.
Why can't the impasse be solved by a having a chimeric particle that transition either way...hhhh kinda of gatekeeper....anyway I know it sounds unconventional and belongs to speculation section,apologies for that.
0 -
5 hours ago, iNow said:
consciousness and awareness come AFTER the "choice" or "decision" is made.
Offer some clarification about that pliz? In the above case where does the choice or decision comes from?
I think the act of deciding is by its self part of consciousness...we should not treat consciousness based on our human capacity as the final definition...I think there are various levels of consciousness depending on the amount of awareness and the extent of deciding(how far you can make unrestricted decision).
0 -
9 hours ago, MigL said:
This article provides a simple explanation ...
"An important property of gravity in Einstein’s theory is that it can create more gravity. The result is “non-linearity” – the gravitational influence of two bodies isn’t just the sum of their separate influences!"
Thanks for the article,however,am still not getting the way gravitational field is source of gravity....I don't know how to put it....what am trying to say is gravitational field is gravity,i think talking of gravity and gravitational field is the same thing.
0 -
4 hours ago, MigL said:
The gravitational field itself is a source of gravity.
IE Gravity gravitates or is self coupling.I think self coupling and generating itself are two different issues, anyway,am struggling to understand how gravitational field is a source of gravity...Are there examples supported by observation?
0 -
1 hour ago, MigL said:
These same infinities appear again when trying to quantize the gravitational field, mostly as a result of gravity itself gravitating,
The issue of gravity itself gravitating what is it?
0 -
15 hours ago, martillo said:
Nothing force me to do that. I am free to do many other things, may be more productive ones indeed but not, I'm freely preferring to discuss this subject
Are you sure its not the urge of your brain to exchange and process information that leads you to discuss?
1 hour ago, martillo said:If you don't have the possibility to make choices/decisions then "will", "free will" or whatever you call it does not exist.
You make 'will' appear as if it's some immaterial matter that can be accessed remotely,so that you can have it or not,is that the case?
0 -
19 hours ago, MigL said:
We don't have a quantized field theory of gravity
Where and when should we ever expect to have one or we just wait for the AI to generate one?
19 hours ago, MigL said:The gravitational field we 'see' as distant observers is nothing more than the relic gravitational field of the collapsing mass-energy that formed the Black Hole, and is now 'frozen' at the event horizon for eternity ( yes, in classic GR there is no Hawking radiation, Black Holes do not evaporate but are eternal ).
Frozen...As in time or as stored memory?
Should we go with what classic or quantum theories say or with observation made?
Recent observations..JWST..is that there might be older galaxies than our current models predict... supposing they had a blackhole then going by your argument that it's eternal we should be expecting observation of super super supermassive blackhole that could have sucked all of us.....I doubt blackhole don't transition back to normal spacetime (average curvature).
0 -
22 hours ago, hoola said:
since pi appears in many formulae and seemingly random physical events, could it prevalence be derived as it is the endless number generator that describes the circle, and so a fundamental property of the spherical singularity at the birth of the universe? This would infer pi as a major building block of the geometric universe, hence it's prominent position.
Stay tuned.
0 -
On 10/28/2023 at 1:13 PM, Killtech said:
But does gravity actually slow down gravity? Let's consider the very old gedankenexperiment: what would happen is a black hole suddenly disappeared, how long would it take for different observers around it to notice it? In particular, if we say gravity travels at c and for the outside observer clocks within a gravity field are massively slowed, then the speed measured in term of the outside observers clock should appear much slower.
You cannot create nor destroy energy...I think blackhole is more of energy,that is, enormously packed energy, whose impact induces the gravity that we detect from blackhole. Therefore,blackhole cannot suddenly disappear maybe transition to other energy forms i.e evaporate through Hawking radiation...the distance as experienced by the photon or observer near a black is highly warped.. therefore, photons moves at speed of light near the blackhole,for outside observer the clock appear slower to compensate for invariance of speed of light.
0 -
On 10/27/2023 at 9:41 PM, Carrock said:
Oppositely electrically charged particles experience a net attraction by exchanging virtual photons
There is a need for a better model/ theory that clarify how and why there is the exchange of 'virtual photon' I think there might be two issues of 'virtual photons' and attraction of oppositely charged particles that are displayed in electromagnetism that makes the definition of virtual particles from Wikipedia,which is somehow valid,seem ambiguous.
0 -
1 hour ago, martillo said:
Do you mean that an artificial "neural network" as considered nowadays can really think?
Before we look at artificial neural network thinking...how do you know you are thinking,what makes someone conclude thinking is taking place?
0 -
5 hours ago, Killtech said:
is a gravitational wave subject to gravitational lensing?
I think it will depend on the frequency of gravitational wave and the magnitude of gravitational lensing...since gravitational waves are a result of propagation of spacetime curvature disturbances,it's expected that any warping of spacetime caused by mass inducing gravitational lensing will affect curvature of spacetime that inturn will affect the way disturbances are propagated, assuming gravitational waves propagate radially from mass source and light moves in a straight line propagated by a photon, gravitational lensing in this case will be of different kind...the detector for gravitational lensing will have to work following different principles for light and for gravitational waves.
0 -
19 minutes ago, CharonY said:
we should clarify at this point that we are all swansont (including yourself).
Ha ha..😂 remember matrix(the movy) where everyone becomes agents of the system....do we need a red pill...
0 -
On 10/20/2022 at 5:20 PM, TheVat said:
so tried to find email for them, but found only a PM button for swansont at thenakedscientist website. And his last activity there was 2015.
When I was new to this forum I used to ask myself if Swansont is a person or a group of persons?...anyway,I got stuck to the forum and those questions vanished.
However,those kind of questions start coming back again when the forum becomes offline or when some of residential experts takes a longer period of time without posting.0 -
👀 gravitational waves are spacetime curvature disturbances.
0 -
The issue of superluminal velocities should not be be treated in a manner that its against SR and GR since both are well tested theories...the only possible route is to come with away that they co-exits each(SR/GR and superluminal effects) within their own domain.
0 -
21 hours ago, paulsutton said:
life can probably mean anything from a single cell organism to something far more complex, up to a complex form of life that is intelligent, sentient
Yes of course and it doesn't need to be based on life on Earth biochemistry nor it's DNA/RNA system.
16 hours ago, studiot said:Anything material beyond a certain distance is forever unavailable/inaccessible to us on account of the expansion of the universe.
That's why I like sticking on speculation section.
0 -
6 hours ago, joigus said:
plus a universe out of equilibrium --
Maybe given enough time it's equilibrium... forward arrow of time (Universe expansion) favors matter formation while backward arrow of time( Universe contraction) favors antimatter formation... Probably leading to an aspect of global time and local time hence T asymmetry,which leads to T violation which is difficult to detect experimentary since we are local observers...the mere fact that matter dorminates presently maybe of itself enough to prove T violation.
0 -
Matter and antimatter made up of the same stuff...the stuff is influenced similarly by gravity probably,therefore,matter and anti matter interact in the same manner with gravity..after all, matter-anti matter annihilate to produce energy which is equivalent to mass c^2.
0 -
3 hours ago, AbstractDreamer said:
An excitation propagating through the EM quantum field. Presumably the field is stretched by expansion, but the photon at any moment is a point. So how do the properties of the photon get stretched when it is just a point in the field? Unless the photon isnt a point, and is a line?
?????? We need EM concept reloaded to make wave-particles nature of a photon more clearer.
0 -
4 hours ago, AbstractDreamer said:
You're very wrong. Coordinates are sufficient for comparison. 2<3. Two is less than Three. You don't need any units of meters, seconds, degrees or apples, square roots or coloured pixels.
Wrong again. The number of coloured pixels are the same in both, even if you use a metric of number of coloured pixels. Count them. There are 4 pixels in both.
The difference between the pixels in both vertical and horiztonal direction are also the same. There are two pixels in the vertical direction for both, and 2 pixels in the horizontal directions for both.
Your mistake is assuming the grid lines have significance. They dont. Only the numbers on the axes have meaning.
Labelling with units is irrelevant. Which number is bigger? The number 2 or the number 3?
You have to establish common ground for arguments...i.e which number base are you using when comparing 2 and 3.
0 -
On 8/25/2023 at 6:46 PM, AbstractDreamer said:
Here's a neat trick. Which green polygon has greater volume?
What about the scale factor?
If the green polygon represent the universe,then they are two different universes..with different metrics...meaning you are making wrong volume comparison.
0 -
On 8/12/2023 at 12:53 AM, Genady said:
Here is how the masters explained it, from Misner, Thorne, Wheeler, Gravitation, p. 823.
For clarification, r=0 is the BH center, r=2M is the BH event horizon.
I think we need to re-axamine nature of time...the issue of time reversal should not be completely concluded on observations based on observable universe alone,it's known dark matter and dark energy make the largest part of the universe.
Fundamental understanding of time,what it is and it's origin should be clarified before using time as the reason to claim 'not anything' can escape from a blackhole.
0
Can the existence of the Graviton be discounted ?
in Relativity
Posted
".....just as photon/vitual photon pop out of magnetic fields virtual graviton pops out of gravitational fields....." let me take my pill in the speculation side...red pill is certainly bitter .
Observation reign supreme, but in this case it's virtual ...due to uncertainty principle,no further questions.
It's also good to emphasis that as 'currently/conventionally' known nothing escape from a blackhole to avoid finality and leave room for further research.