Jump to content

geordief

Senior Members
  • Posts

    3235
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by geordief

  1. 1 hour ago, TheVat said:

    When in France, I greatly amused some locals by referring to the cruise liner company as Conard, instead of Cunard.  This was how I learned that connard is French for asshole.  I wasn't too embarassed, thanks to the friendly company and my already earned status as something of a clown.  

    When I was in Paris ,aged 15 my host family took me out for the day to look at the Arc de Triomphe.

    As we looked at Napoleon's different victorious battles and dates that were inscribed on the monument  I asked out loud and in complete naiveté "Where is Waterloo?"

    To  complete silence .

    I was completely unembarassed .I think I was put right when we got home.

    Later I amused my friends by describing bad things as "terrible" when that actually means "really good"( a mistake categorised as  a "false friend")

     

    Ps "espèce de con " or "espèce de conard" is a fine insult and "Le Canard enchainé" was the main satirical weekly magazine back then.

  2. 3 minutes ago, Mordred said:

    There was an older multiverse model that has matter in one universe with antimatter and time reversal in the other universe. It long ago fell out of any research interest. ( due to better understanding of anti-matter in that the time reversal is a mathematical treatment for symmetry purposes and not actuality)

    1s it considered at all plausible that two ( more?) universes could be created from a shared event?

    Or is that just "intellectual incontinence" :)

  3. 55 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

    Probably the wrong word to choose. 

    'Pointlike' may be better. Suggesting that an instantaneous 'now' of zero duration doesn't exist. So a unit of Planck time, say, wouldn't have any clearly definable start or endpoint.

    I wonder ,does the Planck unit of time  also dilate along with spacetime curvature(under extreme conditions, of course)?

  4. 1 hour ago, sethoflagos said:

    erhaps one way out of the t=0 conundrum is to drop the idea of absolute time at these scales

    I didn't know there was absolute time at any scale.

    For a t=0 in the context of the earliest part of the universe what reference frame is chosen for t to apply to?

    Any frame that is not actually specified as "the beginning"?(and as close as possible  to it for "simplicity's" sake?)

  5. 29 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

    How would we know? From what I understand of CPT symmetry (not much), an antimatter biased big bang expanding in the reverse time direction (from our perspective) would behave no differently to the universe we're in now, I think.

    Would that be into multiverse theories?

    I think there are ideas(or one that I have heard of) about looking for physical evidence for them.

    As for behaving differently might it increase the himan self satisfaction quotient if we developed a model that went back to the origin and out the other side?

     

  6. 9 hours ago, MigL said:

    At 10-43 sec. or Planck scale, geometry ceases to have meaning.
    Since time is part of the geometry of space-time, it also ceases to have meaning.
    People should stop asking "What happened before 10-43 sec."
    There was no 'before' as we know it.
    The compact hot dense universe of that 'time' could have existed forever or for an instant; there would have been no difference.

    I didn't realize that t+10{-43} secs was  really as far as the model went.

    What happens if we plug t-10{-43}secs into the equations?

    Do we come out the "other side"?

    Is the  "dead end" in the equations  because of quantum effects?

  7. 13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

    Roughly 10^90 particles all in a state of thermal equilibrium so indistinguishable from one another. The initial volume if you extrapolate back corresponds to roughly 1 planck length in volume for a temperature of 10^19 GeV which if you convert corresponds to Planck temperature. Any math prior to 10^{-43} seconds will give a singularity condition.

    The universe is described by thermodynamics as using a homogeneous and isotropic system. Where expansion is an adiabatic and isentropic system so yes a closed system 

     

     

    How many fields are there supposed to be at 10^{-43}secs.

    Are the 10^90 particles  all from the one field?

    If all the particles are identicle ,what is exciting the field?

    (doubtless  very naive and wrong headed questions)

     

  8. 3 hours ago, Mordred said:

    More accurately 10^{-43} seconds and yes it does have a volume but as mentioned the entire observable universe is contained in that volume that expanded. In other words you can't point anywhere and state the BB happened in that direction or in that location as every location was part of the initial volume.

    Do we have any idea of what was in that volume?

    Was whatever it was differentiated  in some sense or was it simply  composed of  densities of the same thing?

    Is it believed it was a closed system?

    Does the small volume as compared to the volume that we see now mean it was "actually" small-or does it just indicate that it was highly ordered and the volume is only of any consideration  in relation  to what we see now?

    Are the indications that the volume at T+10^-43secs  was bigger that  the volume as one tties to model  further back in time?

  9. 1 hour ago, MigL said:

    To elaborate ...

    The Big Bang was everywhere.

    Is it plausible to view the BB (if we are all talking about  the same thing**) as an "implosion"?

    Intuitively (to me) that MIGHT better help me visualize a process where all subsequent points  pointed everywhere and anywhere  when looking for the "source"?

     

    Like someone at the centre of a bicycle wheel looking towards the perimeter(that perimeter having been at one point -or as good as -initially)..

     

    **Maybe I am thinking of an event before the BIg Bang?...

  10. 30 minutes ago, Mordred said:

    One of the biggest problems I see with those that try to suggest Galaxy or BHs causing things like expansion etc. Is that they really do not truly understand the sheer volume of our Observable universe.

    Watch this video at the start it's only showing 42 to 43 Mpc watch as it zooms in. You cannot even discern a galaxy until your less than 1 Mpc.

    Our Observable universe is 28820 Mpc in diameter. 93 billion light years. 

    Our entire Milky way is 0.01620 Mpc. In radius.

    There is literally no way no SMBH can possibly affect expansion once you crunch some numbers it's literally impossible.

    That doesn't even take into consideration that gravity travels at c. You can convert the Mpc into light years to see what I mean by impossible.

     

     

    I think you forgot  the link to the video....?

     

  11. On 5/8/2024 at 8:43 AM, cpu68 said:

     

    Outline of new religion. I assume that God exists. He resides over space where there would be a higher vacuum (vacuum above the cosmic vacuum), which can be treated as nothingness. Some form of God includes the planetary system, above all the Earth and the Sun. Christ was one of his incarnations. There were more such incarnations-avatars than accepted in the Vishnu religion, which mentions only ten avatars. There were probably several dozen of them. It dates back to the appearance of Cro-Magnon Man, approximately 40,000 years ago. Of course, we can assume that there were also incarnations in earlier hominid forms, and there were many of them. Christ is an incarnation of a spiritual being (solar idealith) of the solar system, primarily the Sun, and can also be called the Sun God (let us recall the Egyptian religion). Although Christ was only one of the incarnations of a certain form of God, he is the last, tenth avatar of Vishnu, but I believe that he was not the last avatar and that there will be more.
    Over the being of the Son Jesus extends the much greater and more powerful being of the Father. The Father covers the entire universe with his power. He is also the creator of the universe. Above I presented the order of cosmic structures.
    As for the cult of the Virgin Mary, it is false. Mary actually migrated after Christ in subsequent human incarnations and will continue to migrate. Therefore, among other things, Marian sanctuaries are unnecessary. I will also add that the concept of the Apocalypse presented in the New Testament is fiction. Instead of Marian sanctuaries, sanctuaries of God the Father should be built. About ultramodern architecture. You can also simply build churches in honor of the Father, although currently there are Fatherly temples, namely synagogues and mosques. However, the portrayal of the Father as strict and threatening, as in Judaism and Islam, is not correct. The father is actually friendly and gentle.
    Above the being of the Father resides the highest and most heavenly non-existence of Nothingness. Nothingness is actually the supreme God, or rather the Mother-Goddess, and creates everything. The Gorgias theory can be recalled here, but this would be its new and more interesting version.
    Why you sleep at night. Because darkness is inactivity, also passivity, femininity. Darkness and Nothingness is passive, which is why it can take the form as if of a woman. For us humans, Nothingness takes the form as if of a goddess, a woman-mother, but this image should not be taken too literally. In fact, the statement that Nothingness is a woman should be treated as a pictorial metaphor. Nothingness also means freedom and liberty. Mystery is darkness. Nothingness is darkness. Nothingness is the deepest mystery. The doctrine and religion I have presented may seem beautiful because Nothingness and Darkness are beautiful. I would propose creating a new religion of Nothingness and building temples and sanctuaries of Nothingness, about ultramodern architecture. The religion of Nothingness should be considered the most important of all, the temples and sanctuaries of Nothingness the most important. Nothingness is the supreme God, the Mother-Goddess.
    The condensation theory of Nothingness assumes that everything is just a condensed form of Nothingness and Darkness. Nothingness and Darkness as the Mother of all gives birth to the cosmos from the seed of the primeval singularity. This singularity was created by God the Father (cosmic idealith). The Father himself probably emerged from Nothingness and Darkness.

    ggZN9s1w_o.png

    diagram 4. Nothingness is darkness. Symbol of new religion of Nothingness.

     

    author of text: Gregory Podgorniak, Poland, 2024

     

    People interested in creating and organizing a new religion of Nothingness, please contact me

    Get in touch with these guys and suggest they add a few blind portals  around the globe?

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2024/05/09/portal-dublin-new-york/73633531007/

     

    "Two massive circular livestream video "portals" now connect New York City and Dublin, Ireland – all part of an artist's plan to bring the world closer togetherQ

     

    Maybe with the odd random side effect generated  by the passers by? (as in "we are all a part of the nothingness")

  12. 46 minutes ago, TheVat said:

    Agree that all such socially structured causes have deeper roots.  If we can't fix dopamine rushes, maybe we could try some form of socialism and combine it with Green ideas.  The Scandinavian Model seems to go that direction.  And consuming less has reached the status of a fad in some wealthy countries, though it's really hard to say how far that will go.  People who embrace Marie Kondo or home minimalism or Tiny Houses may not always stick with that.  A minimalism that made community sharing its focus (as the Japanese fellow spoke of) would probably need a near-miraculous resurgence of the Counterculture in the US.  I.e. Americans would be more motivated by framing it in terms of less housework, more disposable income, fewer time payments...

    Could we not just make the world a little bigger and carry on as normal?

    Dig a hole into the centre of the earth and let off a nuclear bomb ( or an anti gravity device ?) so as to increase the radius of the planet to a suitable degree.

    The surface would expand and there would be endless opportunities for  new resource exploitation  and enough lebensraum   for all.

    Those who don't like the idea could just sign up with Elon Musk.

  13. 17 minutes ago, MigL said:

    No feelings were hurt, and no need for apologies.
    I was in a 'mood' that day, for other reasons.

    Sometimes I get into a funk thinking I've outlived my usefulness in this forum, but I never feel bad about things said on an on-line forum.
    You guys aren't real, just imaginary anyway, right ?

    A friend of mine was scammed by someone pretending to be from Revolut.

    First they sent her a text pretending  to be from her electricity company  with a link  (that she foolishly followed) to  a fake website and how she might avoid being disconnected by updating her account.

    They followed this up with a   call from a man claiming to be from  the online Bank  Revolut  affecting concern that there had been activity on her account and offering his help to recover the cash from the apparent scammers.

    He got her to authorize payments in the supposed aim of  recovering the supposed money that had been withdrawn.

    Half way through she started to wonder "who is real here?"

    She lost some   and saved some.

    A lot of money,people:mellow:

     

  14. 32 minutes ago, Genady said:

    Yes. The time dilation does not happen at some event or events along the ship's worldline, but rather accumulates along the entire worldline.

    You can have a wild worldline with accelerations, decelerations, turning back and forth, etc., like this, for example:

    image.png.f71ec2785c5e9ba998994ce9cab0dafc.png 

    You divide that line into infinitesimal straight segment. On each segment, the proper time of the traveler is

    dτ2=dt2dx2

    . Then you integrate,

    dτ

    to obtain the total time of the travel on the traveler's clock.

     

    Just a matter of calculation, see above.

    If we had a snail's pace (with no extra acceleration or deceleration)  the difference in the clocks would be similar or identical but  ,as an example it could be a billion years as against a billion and one years , depending on a great  distance and a slow speed.Make sense?  

    It only stands out as remarkable when the speeds are relativistic.

  15. 7 hours ago, Genady said:

    It is wrong to assume that physical processes during acceleration are responsible for the time dilation. Time dilation is a geometrical rather than a physical effect. It is caused by the geometry of Minkowski spacetime.

    Let me describe the "twin's paradox" when nothing happens during an "acceleration".

    There is a clock located at 4 lh (light-hours) from Earth which is synchronized with the clock on Earth. Let's call this point in space, T. A ship moves with the speed 0.8c past the Earth. At the moment when a clock on the ship passes the clock on Earth, it is set to whatever is the time on Earth. Let's say, 10:00. 

    The ship reaches the point T in 4/0.8=5 hours in the Earth time. The clock in T, which is synchronized with the clock on Earth, shows 10:00+5=15:00 when the clock on the ship passes it. However, the clock on the ship shows at this exact point in spacetime, i.e., as the two clocks are side-by-side, 10:00+3=13:00, because the time dilation factor for the speed of 0.8c is 0.6, and thus the trip to the point T takes 5*0.6=3 hours in the ship time.

    At the same exact point in spacetime, another ship passes the point T, going toward the Earth with the speed 0.8c. They grab the ship's clock and take it back to Earth. This trip back takes the same 5 hours in the Earth time and the same 3 hours in the ship time. 

    So, when the clock returns to Earth, the clock on Earth shows 10:00+5+5=20:00, while the returned clock shows 10:00+3+3=16:00. Done.

    I was going to argue my point further  but I now see that the ship could also be traveling at a snail's pace  over a longer time and we would  get the same time dilated result.

    Correct?

    What difference ,I now wonder  if any  would it make if the ship was to add acceleration to its velocity?

    Would that increase  the time dilation?

    I  mean its average velocity was the same  but it kept accelerating and decelerating  linearly all the time..

    Would it  just make the velocity picture more detailed(the ship travels further)?

     

  16. 7 hours ago, Genady said:

    This is how the "twins' paradox" is usually set up.

    Sorry ,didn't see your post.

    Well I had been thinking about the twins but I was interested generally in an accelersted system ,biological or mechanical.

    I was thinking how ,in a rocket that was accelerating a beam of light would ,to a  person on board  to bend.

    And so it seemed to me that ,since all(I think) interactions between objects inside the rocket  would depend upon the em forces then those forces would similarly be bent.

     

    So I was wondering if  the distortion of the em field inside the accelerating rocket might be responsible for time slowing as compared to the unaccelerated frame of reference of the stay at home twin (not on Earth but somewhere really unaccelerated  like ,as per your example  in the ISS as a close approximation)

    If light is curved in an accelerated  frame would that  have a bearing on the way that objects inside that  accelerated frame interact with each other?

    If they interact less  with each other that would mean that they (ie the system as a whole)age less,mightn't  it?

    Am I wrong to see a connection between em radiation and the forces that cause interactions between objects(it would hardly be the first time I have been wrong in  our discussions!)

  17. 1 minute ago, swansont said:

    The twins paradox typically idealizes the accelerations; the clocks are set equal after the space twin is up to speed, and the turnaround takes negligible time. The only importance of the acceleration is that it shifts the space twin into a different inertial frame.

    A rotating system is accelerating, and a clock in that system would tick at a rate depending on the instantaneous speed. The same would apply to a clock under continuous linear acceleration.

    I was interested in a possible mechanism whereby this could be observed(or , rather  modeled in real time.)

    An observer in the  rest frame against which the acceleration takes place only interacts when the accelerated body and it "share the same event" or perhaps is close enough for a signal to be sent and returned.

     

    And any observer in the accelerated frame will see the time involved in any interactions as  the proverbial "one second per second".

    What about my musing in the OP  that the interactions in any system under acceleration  will(unobservably) be altered in regards to the time between them because the em radiation involved in interactions (I think) travels in a curved path and is affected by blue /red shift? 

    I think I am trying to see what actually happens(or should happen)  without it being possible to verify by real time measurements.

    1 hour ago, Genady said:

    As you were writing that post, you were an accelerating observer, according to the equivalence principle. The ISS, for example, is a nonaccelerating one. Here are all your answers.

    When the twins separate ,they could do so from a nonaccelerating point in space and time.

    Have  I replied appropriately to your post?

  18. Full disclaimer :I have be thinking about those twins...

     

    When the accelerated twin speeds off  his internal system must evolve (as does the watch in the cabin)

    When they are actually under acceleration is there (in their own frame of reference) any  change in the perceived passage of time ?

     

    None because the perceiver is accelerating at the same rate as the watch? 

     

    What about the "view" from the the unaccelerated frame of reference of the other twin?

     

    It cannot see but can it deduce that em signals (within the cabin)are being red shifted in one direction and blueshifted in the other?

     

    Would that have the effect of slowing down all  interactions between all parts of the physical system?

     

    If so ,would it be of any consequence that particular interactions were mediated by blueshifted signals  rather than red?

     

    Is the red/blue shift aspect  just part of the overall curvature of the light (and em) signals in the cabin?

  19. 21 minutes ago, MigL said:

     

    And why is it more moral to kill someone( or many ) with guns, or bombs, but not nuclear weapons, @MSC

    Because ,with nuclear weapons you cannot kill your opponent without also killing yourself and anyone you care about first(or in the hours to follow)

    The lucky ones will be those who are killed off most quickly.

    Morality meets expediency

     

     

  20. 44 minutes ago, MSC said:

    Emotional phenomenology is fine. 

    I think that I am feeling and I feel that I am thinking.

    Interesting.Sadly (or maybe fortunately) I no longer have the intellectual capacity to investigate  those  questions.I am more or less just fascinated ,for now  to learn  that that line of enquiry  exists .(and prepared to eavesdrop  on others who can  discuss the subject profitably)

     

     

  21. 2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

    Disgusted angry guilt?

    Actually no.It was  curious abdominal discomfort  with a feeling of loss of autonomy due to semi obsessively following routine behaviour

    I also felt like stopping but that would have meant a bit of extra washing up.

    Kind of a fascistic side to me à table

     

    As a side note ,if there are so many possible emotional  combinations, sophisticated AI robots will soon be making us all  look like emotional retards and sexual infidelity with the mechanical sex will be rampant as who wants to live with a dolt?

     

    1 hour ago, TheVat said:

    I was going to mention this.  I experience schadenfreude more often than I'd care to say.  And sometimes a touch of weltschmertz.  

    Recently, I was feeling a sort of lethargy and sleepiness which I get intermittently in the Spring.  The German word for this is Frühjahrsmüdigkeit.  

    Generally, I can see how Germans have that penchant for fields like philosophy and psychology, because they will develop very precise and specific terms for so many things.  To help out those cunning linguists in Germany, I have coined a term for @geordief s experience with potato eating:

    Notwendigkeitkartoffelnzufertigmachenschmertz.  

     

    Not far off but it could have been any stodgy food.Potatoes would just be an examplar.

    maybe we could refer to it as "the goose's gullet". or "Le chagrin   des oies gavés"

     

    I bet it was those gluttonous Belgians after all.

  22. 3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

    Not bleed so much as shade and commingle. Only the very urgent, overpowering emotions are ever pure and simple - fear, rage, grief. Hate is made of several identifiable emotions, plus some personal over/under tones. 

    That feeling of glut when eating more than you really want is accompanied by other things. Childhood guilt over wasting food [undertone] - yes, even the unenjoyment itself produces some guilt: You should appreciate what you have. Rue: Why did I leave this stupid potato till the end? A tinge of shame: Why did I take more than I needed? and embarrassment: "Is anyone looking?" A touch of anxiety: am I becoming a compulsive eater? Will I put on weight? A little bit of anger at the adult who made you feel guilty and at yourself for being unable to resist their influence. 

    I'm not aware that there is an English word for it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Japanese or Icelanders or somebody had one. For just about everything people can feel, somebody, somewhere has invented an expression. 

    Almost certainly. I know I've had it.

    I'll respect that, but it's a good one! Now I'll go analyze this feeling I have of wishing I could steal it, even though I have nothing to stick the title on, and resisting the temptation to do something that wouldn't benefit me.   

    Don't know why I thought emotions came in packages.Therein lay my confusion.

    Maybe that is related to my self assessment as a literalist -or maybe I just don't have the patience  to think things through.(unlike my dinner plates)

    (I know what you mean about the Icelanders- I wonder what is the culture most centred around gastronomy  and introspection-I don't think the French  would have that  kind of vocabulary-maybe the Belgians? )

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.