Jump to content

Thales

Senior Members
  • Posts

    358
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thales

  1. Thales

    infinity?

    Pulkit you missed my point. I said that the symbols of mathematics are man made but the rules aren't. Please re-read my post above. It makes perfect sense.
  2. I know of several uses for the Laplacian operator Del^2 in physics and the like. Is there a mathematical/physical meaning of Del^3. What would be this operators name? Does this hold for Del^n. Would this have applications in hyperdimmensional geometry?
  3. Does this question include nebula? If so this one is awe inspiring...
  4. But if it doesn't see the other light travel then the speed of light is not the same for all observers? Why would it be instantaneous? If time dilation did apply to photons(which it doesn't) then it would take forever not an instant.
  5. It is a property of the atom. It is information needed to recreate the atom completely. If you don't know what the mass of the original atom is you could easily install the properties on the wrong element.
  6. Properties. Mass, momentum, charge, spin, orientation... If the properties can be recorded and different atoms instilled with these properties could this be considered 'copying' atoms? The reason I ask relates to 'teleportation'. If the ability ever existed to 'teleport' people, wouldn't it also hold you could make an exact copy of yourself, same age, same thoughts etc. Now that would be a head f*#k and a half, more so than cloning.
  7. Let me ask you this then; If time doesn't exist for the photons then how come light takes billions of years to reach us from billions of light years away? It seems as though you are implying that time and distance are illusions created by travelling sub-c. and; What speed would photons see other photons traveling at if the speed of light is constant for their reference frame?
  8. 123Rock, calm down a bit please, this site is supposed to be about science, not vendettas. That aside, yourdadonapogos, I have given a definition of the universe that is not all encompassing several times. We have already discussed that arguing the semantics of its definition does not rule out the possibility of other regions of space time, with differing physical laws, existing. Sure we may never be able to reach them, sure we may never be able to prove their existance, but science is not always about incontravertable proof, it is quite often about faith. Faith in models which make realistic, testable predictions about the world in which we live. Take atomic theory for instance. Can you prove to me atoms exist? No you can provide reasoning and experimental evidence, but what if someone comes up with a different theory that explains it equally well and provides more detailed predictions? That is the premise of scienctific theories. There are a few of you here who need to stop proffessing the non-existance of things you don't really understand. If a TOE is discovered and it yields a result suggesting the existance of other regions of space-time that are independent of ours and indeed have different laws of physics, then that would, in my mind, define another universe. As for the existance/none existance of wormholes, not enough is known about quantum scale gravity to say whether two spartial seperated regions of space-time can indeed be linked by a hyper-dimmensional bridge. It is plausible, so keep an open mind.
  9. I read that article too. Although I remain skeptical about the postulate that sufficient amount of radioactive material could have accreted to form the earth. If there was such an abundance of heavy elements at the earths formation, I conclude it would have graviationally attracted much more matter and thus been much larger(than it is and/or mars/venus). I could be wrong, it has happened before. An interesting idea no less.
  10. In a word, no. You would have to have a black-'torus' not individual holes arranged in a circle. I mentioned in another thread the speculation about rotating black holes having 'ring' singulaties which may create genuine 'holes' in space-time. But seeing as I don't believe in singularities the arguement doesn't hold much sway with me.
  11. The fact that strings exist on a macroscopic scale is not incontrivertible evidence for their existance as fundamental energy fluctuations. Mr MX seemed to be implying that anything that exists outside our realm of existance, doesn't exist. Which may be true on a psychological level but certainly isn't true on a physical one.
  12. I'm sure our friend Sayo is aware of string theory. He was taking the piss out of the lack of relevance of your comment.
  13. I think 123Rock's point was that the mathematics of this universe serve as no justification for ruling out the existance of others. There could be a universe for instance where two plus two equals a banana, we just don't know, but that does not meant that we will never know. If you adopt that attitude we wouldn't progress very far at all, now would we?
  14. A recent study showed that people who are in love exhibt the same symptoms as people with OCD, i'll have a dig around for a link and see if I can find anything(although my source was more tangible, i think it was a book/journal(remember them:-))) Just to clarify though OCD and Panic disorder may both be the result of chemical imalances but they are starkly different mental malfunctions.
  15. Thales

    Jupiter

    I don't know enough chemistry to confirm/deny that. I would assume though that even the pressures present on the interior of Jupiter are insufficient to overcome the strength of molecular bonds, particlularly the ones carbon forms. Any chemists in the house who can refute this? I like being wrong, it means I've learnt something.
  16. They are just beginning planing for a fusion reactor to be built in either Japan or Europe. It uses superconducting magnets to control the flow of plasma (a teneous mix of superheated charge particles) and force hydrogens heavy cousin deutrium to bind and form helium. Because Helium atoms weigh less than their constituant protons and neutrons weighed seperately the mass lost is converted into energy. Very 'smart' physics thats been keeping earth warm since its inception. As for adding or subtracting subatomic particles at will without complex combinations of enormous pressures and temperatures (needed to overcome the electrostatic repulsion in the nucleus), that technology is still well beyond our grasp. It is an interesting thought though, using the excess heat in the fusion generator to 'destroy' dangerous chemicals. They only problem is it would have to be regulated in such a way the the energy lost in breaking down the elements/molecules didn't bring the temperature down below the level needed to maintain fusion. Assuming that you could do it though, I would imagine the superheated plasma would be a good place to break atoms down to their consituant particles which could maybe be regathered and recombined to create more energy. In a round about way turning junk into power.
  17. Thales

    infinity?

    Maths isn't man made. The specific symbols and the direction we take it are, but maths itself is a function of the universe. If aliens wanted to communicate with us, they would most likely use the universes most fundamental language, mathematics. That said there I believe that only time is truely infinite. Space is not.
  18. Wouldn't it be a result of; A) your natural talent B) your brain being able to symbolise and abstract things more readily as a result of lots of practice (in both maths and music) C) the self discipline needed to learn both things ? Assuming the second point is true I should imagine bi-lingual people are also able to learn music quicker.
  19. Okies, well the first problem I see with your reasoning is you have adopted a relativistic framework for photons, which as someone aptly pointed out to me(can't remember who) is problematic to say the least. A particle with speed c does not see the universe shrink down to a point or see time stop because the laws of special relativity apply only to inertial refernce frames and a photon has zero mass and therefore no inertia and therefore does not adhere to lorentz transforms(time dialation and length contraction). However you are certainly employing an abstract chain of thought to what is the problematic situation of wave/particle duality, which is encouraging. The way I view this conudrum is that it arises from the way it is measured. If you look for a particle you will see a particle, if you look for a wave you see a wave. I think it is a paradox that arises from the lack of understanding of the nature of subatomic particles which we assume to know so much about. For instance, what we consider to be a dimensionless photon may actually be, the peak of a wavelet which is spread over a larger area. In this sense the space-time is much more interconnected (thus my nick) and the interaction of photons over seemingly disconnected distances is an illusion born out of the simplistic quantisation of what we can observe.
  20. Just a quick note, you don't consult a question, you consult about a question. The gases are released by slow geophysical processes, ie tectonic shifts and underwater earthquakes/volcanoes. It has little to do with density, as all gases(i think???) have a lower density than salt water and thus bubble up if they are released from their underground reserves via the proceses mentioned above.
  21. I see there is no environmental science sub forum. I think it would be a good place to discuss our collective future and hopefully inspire some interesting debates on renewables and what to do about CO2 as well as terraforming and geophysics. Just a thought, not sure where it would live though, maybe general science? Also, as a side note (not sure if you guys have the bandwidth to implement it) having the last few posts of a thread displayed in reverse order under the advanced reply box, may help avoid people misrepresenting/misunderstanding things they thought they read.
  22. I used to smoke a fair bit of pot. It might not effect you physiologically but it has one undeniable psychological effect. It makes you ok with being bored. And if your ok with being bored you don't do anything with your life. I don't regret it because I don't believe in regretting things. But I learnt that it is not something you can do(habitually) if you want to make a positive influence in your/everyone's life.
×
×
  • 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.