+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 283 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 17 57 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 5649

Thread: Large Hardon Collider     submit to reddit submit to twitter submit to tumblr

  1. #121
    assburgers
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,999
    BG Level
    9

    Note that I do not ascribe to the idea that spacetime is literally "empty" or "nothing but degrees of freedom".

    I contend that it is the other way around, we are composed of deformations in the very fabric of spacetime, knots.

    Currently with my threaded mesh spacetime model, coupled to the topological interactions which have been shown (thanks to Dr. Schiller) to be viable descriptions of the forces, I've arrived at some interesting ideas.

    A neutrino would be a specific type of distortion along the threads, like the pulse sent down a tapped guitar string, not very energetic, but as it is capable of producing interaction of any sort, it by definition has mass.

    The question is if they have rest mass, I haven't seriously worked on this issue yet, though it has piqued my curiosity now, but an important thing to remember is the flavor changing only requires non-zero rest masses if the standard model proves correct.

    I don't think a neutrino would exist if it stopped moving, as it should just be an excitation across spacetime, very much like a photon.

    The difference is that a photon would be an excitation with a twist, carrying not just motion along it's path, but directional influence across that path.

    If a photon stopped moving, again, I don't think it would BE a photon any longer.

    Absorption and Emission, and ultracold states which "slow" photons or "stop" them are not what I mean by this though.

    I mean if you think about a photon rippling along, and picture that rippling motion coming to a stop, there wouldn't be an object there. The wave-particle duality doesn't require there be physically irreducible components to anything, it just requires the behavior to correspond to observations in the right scenarios.

    "Every Tom, Dick, and Harry these days thinks they know what a photon is, but they're wrong." ~Einstein

  2. #122

    Basically what you are describing is the Higgs model Q.Q.

    Which I hope to not be true. Smells too much of "ether" to me.

  3. #123
    Banned.

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    197
    BG Level
    3

    It went into a black hole.

  4. #124
    Master of blackface Range Rover beer bottle throwing.
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,454
    BG Level
    7

    Oh cool, another post count spammer probably trying to get his way in to advanced

  5. #125
    I'll change yer fuckin rate you derivative piece of shit
    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,335
    BG Level
    10

    Luminiferous ether?

    I totally get the "baseball relay" analogy for how light appears to be traveling slower than c through water, for example.

    In regards to black holes, or anything with massive gravity (the sun for example) - as light generated by the sun gets further from the sun, the sun's gravity affects it less and less, right? From our point of view on the earth, does the light appear to be traveling slower when it's close to origin as opposed to when it's closer to us? If not, why does it not appear to be slower? If so...what reference frame do we need to be in to properly observe the constant speed?

  6. #126

    Quote Originally Posted by archibaldcrane View Post
    Luminiferous ether?

    I totally get the "baseball relay" analogy for how light appears to be traveling slower than c through water, for example.

    In regards to black holes, or anything with massive gravity (the sun for example) - as light generated by the sun gets further from the sun, the sun's gravity affects it less and less, right? From our point of view on the earth, does the light appear to be traveling slower when it's close to origin as opposed to when it's closer to us? If not, why does it not appear to be slower? If so...what reference frame do we need to be in to properly observe the constant speed?
    Light has no mass and isnt effected by the sun's gravity. Black holes dont pull light back in, they bend the geometry of space back onto itself so that light cant escape (theoretically).

    And light always appears (i.e. is measured) to be traveling at c, no matter what perspective.

    If you were on a space ship traveling at .99 c and turned on a flash light, you would still measure the light as going c, and not .99 +c.

    That is the key to relativity really, light is constant in ALL refrence frames. (Mostly because it is the absolute velocity as I was stating earlier, that all massless interactions travel at).

  7. #127

    All the images of our galaxy, solar system etc. is making me regret again I didn't choose physics/astronomy as a studies major

    Always loved to learn about all this stuff, just don't have the work ethic required to apply myself in the fields. Absolutely love the theories and I (usually) get the math behind them.

  8. #128
    I'll change yer fuckin rate you derivative piece of shit
    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,335
    BG Level
    10

    Quote Originally Posted by Neosutra View Post
    Light has no mass and isnt effected by the sun's gravity. Black holes dont pull light back in, they bend the geometry of space back onto itself so that light cant escape (theoretically).
    Ah ok. I always envisioned it like the speed of an iron ball being blown away from a powerful magnet.

    Apparently that's completely wrong. (now I don't get how light bends around stellar bodies if it's not directly affected by gravity, but ok)

  9. #129

    Know what, why not. My interest has been re-peaked.

    Miz/Max/Neo... could you give some recommendations on books/sources on where to start learning this stuff again?

  10. #130
    Change this later.
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    723
    BG Level
    5

    Quote Originally Posted by archibaldcrane View Post
    Ah ok. I always envisioned it like the speed of an iron ball being blown away from a powerful magnet.

    Apparently that's completely wrong. (now I don't get how light bends around stellar bodies if it's not directly affected by gravity, but ok)
    Well, a star's mass will bend space, too, just not to the extent a black hole does.

  11. #131
    I'll change yer fuckin rate you derivative piece of shit
    Sweaty Dick Punching Enthusiast

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    33,335
    BG Level
    10

    Quote Originally Posted by Eratosthenes View Post
    bend space
    That's an easy thing to say, and I understand it on the flaky "yeah, but, like, the space bends, man" level, I just don't have a deeper understanding of it.

    Time dilation, event horizons, "space-bending", things like these I "get" on a spaced-out hippy fake understanding level.

    I just hate that level, because I know it's not even close to a true understanding.

    Sometimes I hate choosing an arts path. I look back at the information sponge I once was and miss that part of myself.

  12. #132
    Title: "HUBBLE GOTCHU!" (without the quotes, of course [and without "(without the quotes, of course)", of course], etc)
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,141
    BG Level
    7

    Quote Originally Posted by archibaldcrane View Post
    That's an easy thing to say, and I understand it on the flaky "yeah, but, like, the space bends, man" level, I just don't have a deeper understanding of it.

    Time dilation, event horizons, "space-bending", things like these I "get" on a spaced-out hippy fake understanding level.

    I just hate that level, because I know it's not even close to a true understanding.

    Sometimes I hate choosing an arts path. I look back at the information sponge I once was and miss that part of myself.
    Space is bent, so light traveling through it is bent, just as a straight line is no longer straight when you bend the piece of paper it's drawn on. You can't really understand it deeper without actually studying the mathematics behind it. This is why I usually suggest people who are really interested in physics to study actual math and physics textbooks. There are extreme limitations on how deep you can understand anything in physics without doing this. Almost everything you read in non-technical books or the explanations we give here on the forums are oversimplifications.

    This is even more true in QM. QM is so far removed from intuition that we can't really come up with a very accurate non-mathematical way to describe it. In practice, it's almost a purely mathematical theory. When doing experiments, we don't care whether or not a wave function is collapsing, decohering, or splitting into parallel universes. We set up experiment, do the math, and get results. We'd get the same results regardless of which of the explanations is best.

    As a result of this, there are many different explanations for QM phenomenon. Most of them contradict each other, but each of them is just as correct as the other as long as they are consistent with the math. And even then, there are three different mathematical formulations of quantum theory (all three are exactly consistent with each other so there's no contradiction whatsoever. There's a fourth called Bohemian mechanics but it's not well accepted an I think it's BS [Max and I disagree about this]). A few months ago someone asked about the double slit experiment on these forums and like three different perfectly valid explanations were posted. I posted one based on Feynman's sum over histories formulation because it seems easier to explain and understand (and because Feynman is my hero), but someone else posted a perfectly valid explanation relying on wave mechanics, the math of which is based on Schrodinger's formulation instead of Feynman's.

  13. #133
    assburgers
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,999
    BG Level
    9

    Quote Originally Posted by Neosutra
    Basically what you are describing is the Higgs model Q.Q.

    Which I hope to not be true. Smells too much of "ether" to me.
    I feared I wouldn't get this across correctly, and that it would be mistaken as such.

    The Higgs field is an additional postulate on top of spacetime.

    That is not what I am describing.

    I am talking about spacetime itself, that thing against which we orient ourselves, it is not helpful to say it is nothing, or a nonentity, because you possess degrees of freedom decided by it.

    Your path through it is adjusted by changes to it's geometry, and your adjusted path itself adjusts that geometry.

    Relativity is about the way motion through space affects motion through time. The speed of light postulate is used as an example to illustrate this. It is just a yardstick.

    Spacetime is obviously something, it possesses qualities, it can be defined as not being other types of things, but the idea that it should be defined as nothing is strange.


    If spacetime is nothing, then it is a shaped nothing, one which has 3 spatial dimensions in it's structure, and 1 temporal dimension.

    To which one must ask, how can nothing have a shape? How can it possess any qualities at all other than the lack thereof?

    Is not the identity of shape enough distinction to label it as something?

  14. #134
    The Mizzle Fizzle of Nikkei's Haremizzle

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    22,028
    BG Level
    10
    FFXI Server
    Bismarck

    Quote Originally Posted by archibaldcrane View Post
    That's an easy thing to say, and I understand it on the flaky "yeah, but, like, the space bends, man" level, I just don't have a deeper understanding of it.

    Time dilation, event horizons, "space-bending", things like these I "get" on a spaced-out hippy fake understanding level.

    I feel you Archie but its never too late to get back into it, start small and you it will inevitably feel the pull of wanting to know more and more and more and so on. Ill post some suggestions in a bit if you're interested

    But on your question in regards to Time dilation:

    We have done remedial testing in regards to TD and ways to "prove" it's existence. First off, effects of the right magnitude have actually been measured to be consistent with time dilation to within a measurement of uncertainty. The test cases and examples are not definitive proofs of the theory but are very strong indications that the theory is correct in principle.

    One experiment that's been utilized has been to fly atomic clocks in airplanes around the Earth in opposite directions. The difference in time between the two clocks after the flights were done, was consistent with those predicted by time dilation. Furthermore, muons as well as sub atomic particles created in the upper atmosphere by cosmic rays, are unstable and fall apart after a short period of time.

    But because they move close to the speed of light, their lifetimes are longer, at least as seen by us on the Earth's surface (Which Neo touched on earlier). This extended life, is also consistent with the prediction and what we know of time dilation.

    Here is an example that may get you to understand a little bit better, everyone is physics knows of the Twin Paradox:

    "Einstein came up with an example to show the effects of time dilation that he called the "twin paradox." Let's try it out with a pair of pretend twins, Al and Bert, both of whom are 10 years old in their highly futuristic universe.

    Al's parents decide to send him to summer camp in the Alpha-3 star system, which is 25 light-years away (a light-year is the distance light travels in a year). Bert doesn't want to go and stays home on Earth. So Al sets out on his own. Wanting him to get there as quickly as possible, his parents pay extra and send him at 99.99 percent the speed of light.

    The trip to the star and back takes 50 years. What happens when Al returns? His twin brother is now 60 years old, but Al is only 10 and a half. How can this be? Al was away for 50 years but only aged by half a year. Has Al just discovered the fountain of youth?

    Not at all. Al's trip into space lasted only a half year for him, but on Earth 50 years passed. Does this mean that Al can live forever? Nope. He may have aged by only half a year in the time it took 50 years to pass on Earth, but he also only lived half a year. And since time can slow down but never goes backwards, there's no way he could grow younger.
    "


    You can read more about it here Twin Paradox or Google "Twin Paradox". Its a good basic and simple analogy to hopefully flick the light in regards to what Neo was stating earlier. I got kind of off topic here but It's early and I just got to work

  15. #135
    assburgers
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,999
    BG Level
    9

    Perhaps it is nothing other than it's shape?

    In which case you are left considering ways you can have something with so clearly embedded a sense of orthogonal directions?

    No matter how I rotate, left is always 90 degrees away from up and forwards, respectively.

    This geometry suggests a structure, a... grain if you will, from which that directionality emerges.

    You can not simply state "there is a large open area upon which things happen and can be oriented against other events".

    You must state the ways in which you can label those orientations, and you do not have to arrive at three plus one as we have. You can consider additional ways to include degrees of freedom which are not the three spatial or one temporal we are familiar with. You can consider fewer ways as well.

    That these are well represented in math speaks simply to the logical truth of math itself.

    That these are representing some actual aspect of reality is obvious due to being unable to falsify observations of them, yet strangely it is treated as if almost unimportant.


    All philosophical discussion aside, if you are stating that nothing has a shape, then does zero have an identity other than the empty position?

    You can't simply label events with an empty set ( ), you have to include the labels designating their location in space and time (x, y, z, t).

    Do those labels not exist other than as bookmarks?

    Am I actually unable to translate about through these three directions or some combination thereof, while plodding ever onward through time?

  16. #136
    assburgers
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,999
    BG Level
    9

    Perhaps you would say "but Max, you asshole, if the directions are defined, then that is now a background upon which you can absolutely orient oneself, you done fucked up and lost relativity!"

    Very good point indeed, quite a conundrum that, how to recover the background independence which GR requires?

    Do the directions have to be oriented in a single way?

    Could the relationships between them change and fluctuate?

    Could their very identity be adjusted... bent... curved perhaps?

    I'll be damned, if they could, wouldn't that sound just like the spacetime produced by General Relativity?

    How do you curve a direction though?

    it's just something you move through, isn't it?

    Well no, surprisingly, it appears that you bend all possible paths in your vicinity by your very presence, as do other massive objects.

    Your paths near the Earth assume a state of least effort when they have you moving inwards towards it's center. This is a geodesic, a straight line on a curved surface is the one which requires the least deviation to traverse.


    How the hell do you curve directions?

    Now, therein lies the trick we're all looking for.

    The Higgs Field is postulated to assume a state where it gloms onto everything, and in particular it sticks to particles in certain ways which causes them to drag against the rest of the Higgs field, acquiring mass due to this interaction.

    All mass is interaction.

  17. #137
    The Mizzle Fizzle of Nikkei's Haremizzle

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    22,028
    BG Level
    10
    FFXI Server
    Bismarck

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhais View Post
    Know what, why not. My interest has been re-peaked.

    Miz/Max/Neo... could you give some recommendations on books/sources on where to start learning this stuff again?

    Sure thing, I will suggest a few books and videos for you online. You want to look for anything Cosmology related. A quote that's stuck with me since I was in College is this, "Astronomy is a wonderful thing but is much akin to the study of trees, Cosmology on the other hand studies the forests in which those afore mentioned trees reside."

    People like to take things at face value and like to believe we have a privileged place here in our minute little corner of space, which is sad. Our Cosmos is a grand and magnificent place to behold if you know what you are looking at. I think it's awesome that you guys want to learn more, I certainly will do all I can to help you do that. PM me anytime if you are too gun shy to post in public. I only bite in spam

    Anyway, for beginners and for something to get yourself reacquainted in a nonthreatening way I would definitely suggest "Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution by the phenomenal Neil deGrasse Tyson. He writes with the same energy and passion he speaks with if you've ever seen him. The book it isn't overbearing whatsoever and is not loaded down with shit tons of formulas and equations that turn more people off. It's easily one of my favorite books in my home library.

    Amazon.com: Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution: Neil Degrasse Tyson, Donald Goldsmith: Books

    You can also try Brian Greene Books; Fabric of the Cosmos and The Elegant Universe. Woozie has read both as well iirc and are easy reads.

    You guys may also want to check out Nova on PBS every Tuesday which is hosted by the afore mentioned Neil deGrasse Tyson which is an awesome show. If you have cable or satellite you can also get and check out the Science channel, they still play alot of Carl Sagan's Cosmos which is easy to understand as well. Check out "Naked Science on Nat. Geo and "The Universe" on the History Channel.

    Now more than ever there is unrivaled access to Science on television. I don't want to just throw endless links and spam the thread but I will post youtube links you guys can check out here shortly once I gather them all.

  18. #138
    Banned.

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    15,751
    BG Level
    9
    FFXIV Character
    Patricia Lanvaldear
    FFXIV Server
    Sargatanas

    Now that's what I'm talking about, all your graphs and equations and shit were scaring a nigga away.

  19. #139
    assburgers
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,999
    BG Level
    9

    Interaction interaction interaction, that's an interesting word, included activities, inner related acts, interior actions, interactions...


    Where was I, oh yeah, Mass.

    How rude of this Higgs fellow to just slop about and spill his drink all over everyone, getting them all sticky and gunked up, yet when it comes time to have him clean up after himself, he's nowhere to be found. How rude indeed. Oh, sure, everyone has heard of him, they can see this sticky gunk all over the place holding everything down too... right?

    Wait, we can't see that either? It's just a consequence of this Higgs fellow? Who invited him?

    Could you find some way to make things bend the directions they move within, without all this slop and mess?

    Perhaps, I know Dirac was fond of using belts for his demonstrations... and he was a very smart guy, I wonder if I can steal a bit of that smartness for a moment.

    Picture a belt laying on your desk, the side you wrap against you when you wear it is facing upwards, so if it's a good leather belt, it naturally wants to bend up that way.

    Let's use a little bit of crappy ascii while we are at it, referencing Dirac is not nearly nerdy enough.

    _____________________.. <- that's a buckle, bear with me.

    What if you put a twist into the belt at one end, so you were left with a loop of standing belt coiled there.

    _________________O_.. <- that's a belt with a loop in it.

    Now, the part of the belt where it rises up into the loop, and the part where it returns to your desk are offset by the width of the belt of course, and the overall belt is distorted by this affair. In case you're confused, the inside of that O would be the lighter brown inner part, and the top side would be the darker black part which is mostly laying on the desk.

    Assuming this belt behaves like the one I have upstairs, you can make that O do an interesting trick.

    Ok, it isn't really that interesting, but it's still worth doing.

    You can make it roll without moving the rest of the belt except the portion directly near it.

    Nudge the loop from the buckle side and it should propagate down the length some distance before stopping.


    ________________O__..
    _______________O___..
    ______________O____..
    _____________O_____..

    Etc, etc.

    What the hell is my point?

    Belts should always be black and leather...

    Wait, no that wasn't it at all!

    Oh yeah, directions... if some cosmic asshole were to twist up one of these things we're still not sure aren't nothings, but we're pretty sure are spatial in nature, and tie a loop or a knot in it, that structure should be able to propagate along in various interesting ways.

    The portion of the direction looped up by this cosmic numbskull with his stupid belt shenanigans would no longer be in the orientation which the simplest arrangement of the other directions would suggest, so you now get an affair where points along the directions towards this loop are curved inwards, don't you.

    The belt got shorter huh...

    Yet that Higgs fellow, nor his ex-wife the Luminiferous Aether are nowhere to be seen.

    Just us directions here, Massa Geek Sir!


    Just us directions...

  20. #140
    The Mizzle Fizzle of Nikkei's Haremizzle

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    22,028
    BG Level
    10
    FFXI Server
    Bismarck

    Quote Originally Posted by Charismatic View Post
    Now that's what I'm talking about, all your graphs and equations and shit were scaring a nigga away.

    lol



    Is that better? I want you happy dawg.

Similar Threads

  1. Two Nuclear Submarines Collide in Atlantic Ocean
    By Firedemon in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 2009-02-18, 05:38
  2. The Large Hadron Collider goes online tonight...
    By alt in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2008-09-10, 00:50
  3. Large Hadron Collider...
    By Jotaru in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 2007-11-05, 21:42