IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 28th March 2022, 11:43 AM   #161
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,185
To do what I said. Like all programming. ???
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2022, 02:06 PM   #162
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 16,735
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
Wut? No.

This isn't my idea.

I just said I didn't understand how the OP's idea would work.

Ya'll acting like the Fresh Prince.
What idea of the OP?

The OP asked someone else "How would you expect quantized space to fit together?"

To which you responded, again in your first post here, "There's really no way it can.” With a bunch of other ideas of yours. Again, no questions just assertions of your ideas as to why there’s “really no way it can”. Nowhere in that post did you even attempt to express any lack of understanding. Now you have more recently attributed those claims to “personal ignorance”. So just stick with, or even try to correct, that, instead of trying to pawn your ideas off onto others.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 28th March 2022 at 02:07 PM. Reason: typos
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2022, 02:15 PM   #163
Mike Helland
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,818
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
What idea of the OP?
From post #1:

"I'm proposing that the Aether is quantified space. It is pieces of the smallest space, which make all this possible.

Quote:
Nowhere in that post did you even attempt to express any lack of understanding. Now you have more recently attributed those claims to “personal ignorance”. So just stick with, or even try to correct, that, instead of trying to pawn your ideas off onto others.
From post #53:

"If you're imagining three dimensions of quantized space, like lego bricks, and the laws of physics acting on those chunks of space, there seems to be no mathematical way I can think of where the orientation of those discrete chunks can be continuous (as we observe in nature) and the results of the function applied are equal."

I don't know of any way. If there is a way, no one has shown an actual way. A bit of handwaving, and "make it bigger" aren't sufficient demonstrations.
Mike Helland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2022, 02:44 PM   #164
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 16,735
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
From post #1:

"I'm proposing that the Aether is quantified space. It is pieces of the smallest space, which make all this possible.



From post #53:

"If you're imagining three dimensions of quantized space, like lego bricks, and the laws of physics acting on those chunks of space, there seems to be no mathematical way I can think of where the orientation of those discrete chunks can be continuous (as we observe in nature) and the results of the function applied are equal."

I don't know of any way. If there is a way, no one has shown an actual way. A bit of handwaving, and "make it bigger" aren't sufficient demonstrations.
Highlight added.

What you were "mathematically" unable to think of is that "discrete chunks" aren't continuous nor are what we "observe in nature". Again we can only observe something here now and then perhaps there later. Trying to make, "mathematically" or otherwise, the discrete continuous is your idea and hence your problem, just as the rotational limit thing is.

ETA: I've already linked a modern theory of quantitiezed space-time and directly addressed you angle concerns by two different means.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 28th March 2022 at 02:50 PM.
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2022, 03:23 PM   #165
Mike Helland
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 2,818
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Trying to make, "mathematically" or otherwise, the discrete continuous is your idea and hence your problem
Ok, buddy.
Mike Helland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th June 2022, 11:13 AM   #166
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by Mike Helland View Post
I was asking OP how their quantized space would work.

If they care to follow up, ask them.
Hello Mike, you are debunking the wrong thing. The model you are working with is the first theory I presented here. I thought maybe there was an underlying matrix of waves which formed a stacked cube structure.

I surmised the atom was made of three connected vibrations, two running down the sides and one diagonally (Imagine my delight when I learned what Quarks were). I thought as the atom spins the waves changed position and the shifting lengths was what might be perpetuating the energy.

This model though has many holes, I couldn't account for mass or gravity, and every other thing.

Plus the universe sized elephant taking up all the room, what is this vibration made of?

The spaces are fluid, think, frog eggs. Imagine flailing around in a seemingly endless mass of frictionless tetrahedron shaped frog eggs.



I appreciate all of the responses I have received from everyone, I am still sorting through all the posts and will respond when I am able.

Ps. I in no way think the universe is made of actual frog eggs.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th June 2022, 03:26 PM   #167
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
"Nothing and a ball of concentrated cosmos" is just, well, "a ball of concentrated cosmos".
Did you just do math with my words? Either way it is still illogical.

Quote:
Matter (atoms) didn't form until about 380,000 years after the big bang, Quarks formed about 10-12 seconds after the big bang.
Do we know this other than math?

Quote:
"Nothing and space" is just space and space has properties including a zero point energy and quantum fluctuations.
Why wouldn't an 'empty' space, made of tiny tetrahedron shaped spaces have a zero point energy? Could the tetrahedrons inability to tile 3D space account for quantum fluctuations?

Quote:
To my understanding the big bang singularity is considered outdated due to modern observations indicating inflation.
Good to know, Ill check that out.

Quote:
Wouldn't it be the Planck volume or Planck area in a membrane or a holographic principle consideration?
I see why they call you The Man. Nice one.

Quote:
No it isn't, if the Planck scale is defined to be the minimum limit then minimum time would have to be the Planck time
Numbers start with zero.

Quote:
But "All" isn't constant, things change. So "All" can only be a universal designation as opposed to a particular one.
I was trying to allow a glimpse of the paradox
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th June 2022, 03:49 PM   #168
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Do we know this other than math?
We predict it, with the same math that predicts everything we do know. The same math that predicted things we didn't know, but know now, because we looked where the math predicted.

You want to beat that, where's your math? Where's your math that predicts everything we know, and also predicts matter where your fantasy calls for matter? I call it a fantasy, because it does not rise to the level of a theory, or even a hypothesis.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 09:17 AM   #169
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
We predict it, with the same math that predicts everything we do know. The same math that predicted things we didn't know, but know now, because we looked where the math predicted.
I was wondering if this was a predicted fact, or proven. I thought there might have been some kind of experiment which supported the numbers.

Quote:
You want to beat that, where's your math? Where's your math that predicts everything we know, and also predicts matter where your fantasy calls for matter? I call it a fantasy, because it does not rise to the level of a theory, or even a hypothesis.
Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going, what shape and color I am, the sound I make, the smell, lots of solid data. Do you think any of them understands the combustion engine? Do they even know my truck is not an animal?

To be honest I hope the math is already done, I'm just trying to look under the hood to see what is making all the dust.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 09:26 AM   #170
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 16,735
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Did you just do math with my words? Either way it is still illogical.
Nope, I did logic with them. Illogical compared to what, "Nothing and space"? Which of course would just be "space". Nothing and something is just as illogical as nothing and something else.


Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Do we know this other than math?
While math is certainly involved, theories are based on math and experimental observation. The cosmic background radiation (observation) represents when the universe became transparent to electromagnetic radiation. Hydrogen formed from electrons and protons that were too energetic before and thus not transparent to EM radiation (observation and math). So yes this is evidenced by direct observation, in the CBR you see the light given off from when matter (hydrogen atoms) first formed. How old that light is of course the math part.


Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Why wouldn't an 'empty' space, made of tiny tetrahedron shaped spaces have a zero point energy? Could the tetrahedrons inability to tile 3D space account for quantum fluctuations?
No one claimed what shape space could or couldn't have. However, as an experimental observation what ever shape space has or one considers it to have, that it has, at least, those properties as mentioned still remains.

As far as quantum fluctuations go, an "inability to tile 3D space" simple means that inability. No other intrinsic properties inherently result.


Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Good to know, Ill check that out.
No problem.



Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I see why they call you The Man. Nice one.
Again, no problem.


Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Numbers start with zero.
Line segments, areas, volumes or higher dimensional spatial constructs as well as time intervals don't. Points, or zero dimensional elements serve merely as a terminus or references in such actual dimensional elements

Heck just numbers themselves representing such natural quantiles don't start with zero. Even for decimal notation, zero is just a place holder to note that decimal progression before the first digit of a number or after.

See Benford's lawWP the first digit of any real life number will tend to be "1" by about 30% then about 18% for "2" and reducing in tendency as one approaches 9 with that being about just under 5%

Further you just said "Small as can be, is the Planck length." so clearly even for you that number doesn't start at zero. As such and with the measured EM properties of space giving the constant of the speed of light that means if the Planck length is your smallest length then your smallest time is the Planck length over the speed of light or the Planck time.

Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was trying to allow a glimpse of the paradox
What paradox? If almost nothing is constant then "All" simply isn't a constant. Not that it couldn't be, or that it would be "impossible", it just isn't what we find. Heck, just the number of particles need not be constant and has to be taken into consideration when dealing issues concerning the number of particles in quantum mechanical considerations.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 10:14 AM   #171
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 21,336
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was wondering if this was a predicted fact, or proven. I thought there might have been some kind of experiment which supported the numbers.
Sort of. Actually, the relevant prediction there is when did the universe become transparent. That's where those 380,000 years come from.

Essentially it's like this: free charged particles are very good at absorbing (and re-emitting) photons. That's why there's the double flash in a nuclear blast. As long as the air around it is fully ionized plasma, it is opaque to light, so what you're seeing isn't the light of the actual explosion, but the black body radiation of the fireball. I.e., of that mass of ionized air. When it cools down to the point where electrons go back around atoms, you see the brighter light of the actual explosion in the middle.

So far it's quite easy to experimentally reproduce. We even did it with actual nukes a couple of times. It's also why the sun is opaque.

Essentially that's the same thing that happened to the universe. As long as it was a mass of free protons and electrons, it was opaque. When most of that combined into hydrogen, it starts being transparent.

Now personally I'd say it's rather inexact to say no atoms formed before that 380,000 years threshold. Some may have existed before, some even in the first year... for picoseconds, until another photon knocked the electron clean off. It's more like the the threshold for when most of them were formed and stable.

Anyway, how long ago that happened, well, we know that from the CMB among other things. That's the red-shifted photons from the last moment the universe was an opaque ball of plasma.

But let's return to that idea that atoms did form, but not for long. The problem that kept the universe opaque wasn't that atoms didn't form, it was that they didn't last. When a proton captures an electron, an ultraviolet photon is emitted... which incidentally also has the exact energy needed to knock the electron right off another such atom that just formed.

Essentially each time an atom formed, another atom was broken up, keeping things ionized and opaque. The universe cannot cool down and become transparent that way, since it's zero sum.

It also doesn't help that there are literally about a billion other photons around for each atom in the early universe.

However about 1 in every 100 billion such transitions, instead of one massively energetic photon, two lower energy ones are emitted. Each of these isn't energetic enough to knock the electron clean off another atom.

Which gives us one piece of data in calculating how long that recombination must have taken.

And so on. It's really complicated, but yes, basically it boils down to we do some maths and see if it checks out for the universe we can actually observe.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 11:18 AM   #172
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,528
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was wondering if this was a predicted fact, or proven. I thought there might have been some kind of experiment which supported the numbers.

Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going, what shape and color I am, the sound I make, the smell, lots of solid data. Do you think any of them understands the combustion engine? Do they even know my truck is not an animal?

And they haven’t done any maths either?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 11:43 AM   #173
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was wondering if this was a predicted fact, or proven. I thought there might have been some kind of experiment which supported the numbers.



Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going, what shape and color I am, the sound I make, the smell, lots of solid data. Do you think any of them understands the combustion engine? Do they even know my truck is not an animal?

To be honest I hope the math is already done, I'm just trying to look under the hood to see what is making all the dust.
So what exactly are you proposing?

A "theory of everything" has to close the gap between our two theories of almost everything. We have a theory that is really good at describing and predicting at large scales where gravity dominates.

We have another theory that is really good at describing what happens at small scales where subatomic forces dominate.

What we don't have is a theory that is any good at all at describing what happens at scales where both subatomic forces and gravity are both dominating. I.e., the "hot dense state" from which our current observed phenomena appear to have emerged.

Dial up mass, energy, and density far enough, and we can't really say what will happen. That's the part we're missing. That's the part your theory of everything has to fill in. Your metaphor of frog's eggs doesn't get you any closer to filling that in.

What does your "aether" actually do, in terms of predicting anything? I'm not even asking if it predicts stuff our current theories don't predict. Let's just start with whether it predicts anything at all that our current theories predict. Can it do that?

Last edited by theprestige; 26th June 2022 at 01:36 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 11:56 AM   #174
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 21,336
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Why wouldn't an 'empty' space, made of tiny tetrahedron shaped spaces have a zero point energy? Could the tetrahedrons inability to tile 3D space account for quantum fluctuations?
Cue the meme...
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


No, actually quantum fluctuations -- depending on what you mean by that -- are just a result of Heisenberg. There's no need for navel gazing and speculating about tetrahedrons once you understand what it means. Specifically that it's a fundamental mathematical property of the universe, not just a limitation of measuring it.

Like, it's why the Zener diode in your computer's power supply works: if you know with exact accuracy that an electron is on this side of the potential barrier, you don't know if it has enough energy to go over it, and if you know it doesn't have enough energy, you don't know its position well enough so it could already be on the other side. But it's not just that "you" can't know that so accurately. The very universe doesn't. Fundamentally, whatever constraints act upon that electron, can't force both values to be precise enough.

That's my standard example, because, well, if you can read this, that's your proof that yes, Heisenberg works.

Anyway, back to those fluctuations: fundamentally ΔtΔE >= h/4π. (Where E is energy, t is time, h is Planck's constant, and pi is exactly what it sounds like.) But what matters here isn't as much the exact value on the right side, as the fact that there's a fundamental minimum error bar of the universe. For the purpose of this message, don't focus on the exact value (even though I just gave it to you) but just that it exists. The universe fundamentally can't be more accurate than that.

Which literally means that for any given ΔE, the universe can essentially pull it out of its ass, if it exists for shorter than a maximum Δt. The universe can and does pull particle pairs, or individual particles out of its ass, but then they disappear before it could break Heisenberg.

It's for example why the weak force even exists (i.e., why neutrinos do interact with matter), and why it has such a short range (hence why it happens so insanely rarely): a particle much more massive than the one that created it can just appear, if it only lives an extremely short time. The latter gives you the range. If a nucleus exists within that range, that massive particle will smash it. Otherwise it'll disappear right back.

NOWHERE in that does any tetrahedron play any role whatsoever.

But anyway, that's your answer. It just has to do with actually understanding physics and doing the maths, rather than navel gazing and pulling BS about tetrahedrons out of the ass. (Well, unless you delete said BS before it violates Heisenberg)
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 26th June 2022 at 11:59 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 01:49 PM   #175
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Why wouldn't an 'empty' space, made of tiny tetrahedron shaped spaces have a zero point energy?
Probably because you've not defined zero point energy, or your tetrahedrons, or space, or how they "make" space.

The conventional definition for zero point energy has to do with quantum mechanical systems. But you are explicitly not doing quantum mechanics here. You're doing aether mechanics, or trying to. So you should probably (a) not use terms already in use in other, well-established theories of physics, and (b) actually define your terms in quantitative, measurable ways.

Quote:
Could the tetrahedrons inability to tile 3D space account for quantum fluctuations?
You tell us. It's your idea. You're the one who knows the physical nature of these tetrahedrons, how they tile, and what happens in between them.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2022, 02:53 PM   #176
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going, what shape and color I am, the sound I make, the smell, lots of solid data. Do you think any of them understands the combustion engine? Do they even know my truck is not an animal?

To be honest I hope the math is already done, I'm just trying to look under the hood to see what is making all the dust.
I'm sorry, but in this metaphor, who is the big dumb brute, completely lacking in the mental equipment to study combustion engines, or even reason abstractly about the world around them, but who nevertheless imagines they are capable of studying engines and figuring out how they work, supposed to be?

Is the buffalo you? Is the buffalo actual physicists? Do you like this metaphor because you imagine it puts you on par with actual physicists, and gives you standing to second-guess their work? Do you like to pretend you're the one buffalo actually leaving the herd and trying to get real answers about physics?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2022, 04:52 PM   #177
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Cue the meme...
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
I'm not done.

Quote:
No, actually quantum fluctuations -- depending on what you mean by that -- are just a result of Heisenberg. There's no need for navel gazing and speculating about tetrahedrons once you understand what it means. Specifically that it's a fundamental mathematical property of the universe, not just a limitation of measuring it.

Like, it's why the Zener diode in your computer's power supply works: if you know with exact accuracy that an electron is on this side of the potential barrier, you don't know if it has enough energy to go over it, and if you know it doesn't have enough energy, you don't know its position well enough so it could already be on the other side. But it's not just that "you" can't know that so accurately. The very universe doesn't. Fundamentally, whatever constraints act upon that electron, can't force both values to be precise enough.

That's my standard example, because, well, if you can read this, that's your proof that yes, Heisenberg works.

Anyway, back to those fluctuations: fundamentally ΔtΔE >= h/4π. (Where E is energy, t is time, h is Planck's constant, and pi is exactly what it sounds like.) But what matters here isn't as much the exact value on the right side, as the fact that there's a fundamental minimum error bar of the universe. For the purpose of this message, don't focus on the exact value (even though I just gave it to you) but just that it exists. The universe fundamentally can't be more accurate than that.

Which literally means that for any given ΔE, the universe can essentially pull it out of its ass, if it exists for shorter than a maximum Δt. The universe can and does pull particle pairs, or individual particles out of its ass, but then they disappear before it could break Heisenberg.
I think that equation is used to describe the difficulties of measurement. On the left side are representations of uncertainty, not an amount of energy or length of time. Also, it would have to be written <= instead of >= to limit a time variable in the way you describe.

Quote:
It's for example why the weak force even exists (i.e., why neutrinos do interact with matter), and why it has such a short range (hence why it happens so insanely rarely): a particle much more massive than the one that created it can just appear, if it only lives an extremely short time. The latter gives you the range. If a nucleus exists within that range, that massive particle will smash it. Otherwise it'll disappear right back.

NOWHERE in that does any tetrahedron play any role whatsoever.

But anyway, that's your answer. It just has to do with actually understanding physics and doing the maths, rather than navel gazing and pulling BS about tetrahedrons out of the ass. (Well, unless you delete said BS before it violates Heisenberg)

I wasn't sure what was meant by Quantum fluctuations, I thought we were talking about heat.

Looking into it, this 'Ass' theory is a gaping mess.

Math equations, equate quantum mechanics, they do not explain or cause it. These virtual(near) particles are something, coming from something. If space were a vast singular expanse of empty, what could they be? Before you say fields, I will ask what a field would be made of? A Gods feelings perhaps.

Tetrahedron tiling 3D space leave gaps. Space made with tetrahedron shaped spaces contains a bigger space instead of a smaller gap. The slightly larger spaces pull on the neighboring spaces as they shrink to the smallest size. Where opposing pulls meet, the space is momentarily stretched.

This constant back and forth adjusting, is what we call heat. These movements on a larger scale, shove these partial particle pairs into existence. These range from swirls of space, to proper particles.

Electrons are loops. Embedded within the tetrahedral matrix are shapes. With certain numbers of pieces, circular loops can be made. A loop is isolated with first, a rotational(like a tire) spin, then a back and forth oscillation as the one large space shifts from one side to the other. This oscillation causes the loop to twist(roll).

The rotational spin and the twisting spin combine to give an orientation(s). A directional (j)oscillation of the surrounding spaces is caused by the movement of the loop.

As the loop travels, spaces are funneled through the circle, spinning into a vortex. The spin creates a slightly larger space at the center. The opening is pulled along, creating a single long thin space in the middle of this vortex. With entangled pairs, particles created together, they are connected by this spindral. Some people think this is spooky but I would say it is pretty normal.

An electron created at low energy does not initially, get a final property, the twirl(name pending). Without the twirl the particles will spin into each other and pop. The twirl begins when the electron encounters its field and starts to follow its own path.

The twirl is not a spin like a coin on a table, the loop travels, aligning with the spaces that match its vibration the most. The already oscillating spaces hold on to the loop with harmony. Because the spaces that went through the center still hold a spin and not a vibration, the loop remains to the side. Bound to a loop held together by a vortex, the electron becomes somewhat erratic.

Speed allows the electron to influence an area of space surrounding a direction. The electron travels, momentarily giving an oscillating vibration to the spaces in its wake. It shifts paths, always ringing a portion of where its been, a constant back and forth maintains the electron's field. This creates the 'cloud' of electron. A cloud of spaces does not travel with the electron, only the impression it makes. Strongest where it is the most, and faded out where it's no longer.

To say the very universe doesn't know where its pieces are, is an assumption. Just because it is beyond calculation, doesn't mean things can disappear into some mathematical bliss. The navel gazing is used to pretend uncertainty is the complete answer.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2022, 05:55 PM   #178
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sorry, but in this metaphor, who is the big dumb brute, completely lacking in the mental equipment to study combustion engines, or even reason abstractly about the world around them, but who nevertheless imagines they are capable of studying engines and figuring out how they work, supposed to be?
Buffalos aren't stupid, they are different than us. Our world is hidden from them. Physicists aren't stupid, quantum mechanics is different from everyday life, in a world hidden from them.

Quote:
Is the buffalo you?
Yes
Quote:
Is the buffalo actual physicists?
Yes, not you though, buffalos have extremely thick skin.
Quote:
Do you like this metaphor because you imagine it puts you on par with actual physicists, and gives you standing to second-guess their work? Do you like to pretend you're the one buffalo actually leaving the herd and trying to get real answers about physics?
You seem to be reading a lot into my metaphor. I wanted to say that, no matter how many measurements I give you for a yaneshe, you won't know what it is for certain until you or someone translates it into something mentally tangible, like a potato.

I am equal and among my peers because we are all human. I have every right to give my opinion.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2022, 07:19 PM   #179
ferd burfle
Graduate Poster
 
ferd burfle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Just short of Zeta II Reticuli
Posts: 1,575
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I have every right to give my opinion.

Yes, you're entitled to your own opinion but, as the saying goes, you aren't entitled to your own facts.
__________________
What are the odds something bad will happen to a submarine in a Godzilla movie?-Brandon
ferd burfle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 04:11 AM   #180
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 21,336
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I am equal and among my peers because we are all human.
Cue the same meme again. Both the village idiot and a professor of oncology are human, but it doesn't mean their opinions are equal when I want to know if I have cancer. The former can jolly well, shall we say, travel and copulate.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 04:20 AM   #181
Carrot Flower King
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 3,094
He's been at the Deepak Chopra generator again, hasn't he?
Carrot Flower King is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2022, 07:00 AM   #182
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Buffalos aren't stupid, they are different than us. Our world is hidden from them. Physicists aren't stupid, quantum mechanics is different from everyday life, in a world hidden from them.
As uncharitable as it sounds, "stupid" is the right word for buffalo in the context of this metaphor.

And quantum mechanics is not analogous to internal combustion engines. Not least because it is accessible to a physicist in a way that internal combustion engines will never be accessible to a buffalo, even if you sat one down with a working example and the relevant Chilton manual.

Quote:
YesYes, not you though, buffalos have extremely thick skin.
It's a terrible metaphor, my dude.

Quote:
You seem to be reading a lot into my metaphor.
It's your metaphor. You chose the elements. You selected the symbols you wanted us to use to infer your true meaning. Maybe you'd be better off leaving poetic flourishes and rhetorical devices to the professional poets and wordsmiths, and just talk about the thing itself in its own terms. If your focus is quantum mechanics and cutting-edge theoretical physics, why waste time talking about buffalo and internal combustion engines?

Quote:
I wanted to say that, no matter how many measurements I give you for a yaneshe, you won't know what it is for certain until you or someone translates it into something mentally tangible, like a potato.
Huh. I did not get that at all from your metaphor.

Quote:
I am equal and among my peers because we are all human. I have every right to give my opinion.
This is about lay opinions now? Wasn't it supposed to be about physics, about uncovering a mystery of the real world, via logical rigor and careful measurement?

According to the title of the thread, you've solved one of the most intractable problems facing theoretical physicists today: What happens in high-energy, high-mass regimes where both extreme macro-level effects are expected to dominate, and extreme micro-level effects are expected to dominate.

Now you're telling us that's just, like, your opinion, man?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2022, 06:32 PM   #183
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
As uncharitable as it sounds, "stupid" is the right word for buffalo in the context of this metaphor.

And quantum mechanics is not analogous to internal combustion engines. Not least because it is accessible to a physicist in a way that internal combustion engines will never be accessible to a buffalo, even if you sat one down with a working example and the relevant Chilton manual.
They probably don't print those in buffalo, that's why.


Quote:
It's your metaphor. You chose the elements. You selected the symbols you wanted us to use to infer your true meaning. Maybe you'd be better off leaving poetic flourishes and rhetorical devices to the professional poets and wordsmiths, and just talk about the thing itself in its own terms. If your focus is quantum mechanics and cutting-edge theoretical physics, why waste time talking about buffalo and internal combustion engines?
I am wasting my time if no one understands, I guess.


Quote:
Huh. I did not get that at all from your metaphor.
I'm not surprised.

Quote:
This is about lay opinions now? Wasn't it supposed to be about physics, about uncovering a mystery of the real world, via logical rigor and careful measurement?

According to the title of the thread, you've solved one of the most intractable problems facing theoretical physicists today: What happens in high-energy, high-mass regimes where both extreme macro-level effects are expected to dominate, and extreme micro-level effects are expected to dominate.

Now you're telling us that's just, like, your opinion, man?
Technically any unproven 'theory' is just an opinion, no where in the thread title does it say, 'amateur physicist proves they are right'. I am pretending I'm right, for the sake of argument but I won't believe it until I see proof.

I was looking forward to the, 'awaits peer review' part but I might be in the wrong place.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 06:44 AM   #184
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,693
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I was looking forward to the, 'awaits peer review' part but I might be in the wrong place.
There's nothing to review. You're still at the "not even wrong" stage, and that's being generous. Your ideas are too vague to even be evaluated in any meaningful way.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 07:08 AM   #185
W.D.Clinger
Illuminator
 
W.D.Clinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,665
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going, what shape and color I am, the sound I make, the smell, lots of solid data. Do you think any of them understands the combustion engine? Do they even know my truck is not an animal?
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sorry, but in this metaphor, who is the big dumb brute, completely lacking in the mental equipment to study combustion engines, or even reason abstractly about the world around them, but who nevertheless imagines they are capable of studying engines and figuring out how they work, supposed to be?
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Buffalos aren't stupid, they are different than us. Our world is hidden from them.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
As uncharitable as it sounds, "stupid" is the right word for buffalo in the context of this metaphor.

And quantum mechanics is not analogous to internal combustion engines. Not least because it is accessible to a physicist in a way that internal combustion engines will never be accessible to a buffalo, even if you sat one down with a working example and the relevant Chilton manual.
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
They probably don't print those in buffalo, that's why.
Amateur zoologist uses semiotics, solves mystery of why buffalo don't understand internal combustion engines, awaits peer review
W.D.Clinger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 07:10 AM   #186
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 21,336
Pretty much.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 07:34 AM   #187
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
They probably don't print those in buffalo, that's why.
But theoretical physics is printed in human, so what's your excuse?

Quote:
I am wasting my time if no one understands, I guess.
If I'd known you were going to try to argue via metaphor, I would have warned you in advance that it wasn't going to work.

Try arguing the thing itself, in its own terms. That's where the truth is going to be found. And if you can't argue the thing itself in its own terms? Well, there's your sign.

Quote:
I'm not surprised.
Neither am I. Metaphors are a terrible way to communicate scientific truths. But if you were expecting this outcome, why waste time on it? It would be less embarrassing for you if you were surprised at the failure of your metaphor.

Quote:
Technically any unproven 'theory' is just an opinion, no where in the thread title does it say, 'amateur physicist proves they are right'. I am pretending I'm right, for the sake of argument but I won't believe it until I see proof.
No, an unproven theory is a fairly rigorous framework of evidence, reasoning, and prediction. It's rather more than a "what if" or "maybe". Hypotheses are more than just ignorant lay opinions.

Quote:
I was looking forward to the, 'awaits peer review' part but I might be in the wrong place.
I don't even understand what this is supposed to mean, or what sort of sympathy or leeway you expected it to garner.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 12:58 PM   #188
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,528
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
They probably don't print those in buffalo, that's why.

Buffalo what?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 01:01 PM   #189
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,528
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
Almost every day I drive past a herd of buffalo, they study me as I go by. They know how fast I'm going…

How fast do they think you are going?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 01:46 PM   #190
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 15,020
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Buffalo what?
I hope the answer is wings.
__________________
History does not always repeat itself. Sometimes it just yells "Can't you remember anything I told you?" and lets fly with a club. - John w. Campbell
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 03:45 PM   #191
Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
 
Blue Mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Waging war on woo-woo in Winnipeg
Posts: 7,167
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Buffalo what?
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

Makes about as much sense as the rest of this thread.
__________________
The social illusion reigns to-day upon all the heaped-up ruins of the past, and to it belongs the future. The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Gustav Le Bon, The Crowd, 1895 (from the French)
Blue Mountain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 09:23 PM   #192
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger View Post
Amateur zoologist uses semiotics, solves mystery of why buffalo don't understand internal combustion engines, awaits peer review
This is how you make fun of someone people!
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 09:27 PM   #193
theprestige
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 62,475
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
This is how you make fun of someone people!
Was that your real goal? To be made fun of? Were those of us trying to address your clown-ass stylings seriously on the wrong track? Were you only pretending to be retarded all along?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 09:57 PM   #194
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 33,373
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Buffalo what?
The encrypted data on their chips.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 10:28 PM   #195
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
But theoretical physics is printed in human, so what's your excuse?
It is not printed in human.

Quote:
If I'd known you were going to try to argue via metaphor, I would have warned you in advance that it wasn't going to work.

Try arguing the thing itself, in its own terms. That's where the truth is going to be found. And if you can't argue the thing itself in its own terms? Well, there's your sign.
Argue what? I am still trying to explain myself (excuse me for getting creative), I am still waiting for an opposing view, we have made fun of my vocabulary, my improper use of terms, etc.. but still no problems with my ideas.

Other than, they are too ridiculous even to read, let alone consider. For reasons only privy to elite physicists.

Quote:
Neither am I. Metaphors are a terrible way to communicate scientific truths. But if you were expecting this outcome, why waste time on it? It would be less embarrassing for you if you were surprised at the failure of your metaphor.
You are not the only one reading this thread, I don't care If you understand.

Quote:
snipped semantics
Quote:
I don't even understand what this is supposed to mean, or what sort of sympathy or leeway you expected it to garner.
I wanted people interested in Physics to read my post, think about what I mean, question my ideas and point out my mistakes.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 10:47 PM   #196
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Was that your real goal? To be made fun of?
I can appreciate a good joke at my expense, anyone with a giant ego and thin skin wouldn't understand.

Quote:
Were those of us trying to address your clown-ass stylings seriously on the wrong track? Were you only pretending to be retarded all along?
Looking for something to make fun of, is not taking things seriously.


I don't want talk to you anymore, you have left the thread.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 10:54 PM   #197
Nakani
Graduate Poster
 
Nakani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 1,036
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
There's nothing to review. You're still at the "not even wrong" stage, and that's being generous. Your ideas are too vague to even be evaluated in any meaningful way.
Please, ask me to clarify anything.
Nakani is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 10:54 PM   #198
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 15,078
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
I wanted people interested in Physics to read my post, think about what I mean, question my ideas and point out my mistakes.
I'm not a physicist (retired engineer, degree in Mathematics) but I am interested in physics and have read a fair bit on the subject. I'm afraid I also think your main mistake was thinking you knew enough about physics to formulate any meaningful ideas on the subject.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2022, 11:38 PM   #199
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 56,842
If you are buying whan the OP is selling, I have some ocean front property in Iowa you might be interested in.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th September 2022, 01:41 AM   #200
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,528
Originally Posted by Nakani View Post
It is not printed in human.

Who do you think writes it?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.