Occam's Razor, Vacuum and the Scheme of the primary conditions of existence.
Occam's Razor, Vacuum and the Scheme of the primary conditions of existence. ==. Vacuum is a Negative Euclidean space (-2D) so called Pseudo- Euclidean space. It is the simplest reference frame - like the Euclidean space ( 2D). Now I will put a virtual - ideal particle in this -2D. The -2D is a very thin and flat homogeneous space, so my particle also must be thin and flat and symmetrical. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited line- string --particle? No. In my opinion even this very thin and tiny line under good microscope will be looked as a rectangle. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited loop? No. The geometrical form of a loop is too complex, needs supplementary forces to create it. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited circle? Yes. From all geometrical forms the circle is the most symmetrical. The surface of a circle takes up the minimal area it can and I will write it by formula: C/D= pi= 3.14. (!) But I can put many particles there, for example, Avogadro's number of particles: N(a). (!) # What is my next step? If I were a mathematician I would say nothing. But if I were a physicist I would say that 2D must have some physical parameters like: volume (V), temperature (T) and density (P). Yes, it seems the idea is right. Then, volume (V) is zero, temperature (T) is zero but . . but density (P) cannot be zero if 2D is a real space then its density can approximately be zero. # What can I do with these three parameters? I have only one possibility, to write the simplest formula: VP/T=R ( Clausius Clapeyron formula ! ) What is R? R is some kind of physical state of my 2D. And if I divide the whole space R by Avogadro's numbers of particles then I have a formula R/ N(a) = k, then k ( as a Boltzmann constant) is some kind of physical state of one single virtual- ideal particle. (!) # But all creators of Quantum theory said that this space, as a whole, must have some kind of background energy (E). And its value must be enormous. But the background mass of every Avogadro's particles in 2D has approximately zero mass, it is approximately massless (M). Fact. The detected material mass of the matter in the Universe is so small (the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that physicists say: ' More than 90% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.' And nobody knows what this unseen 'dark matter' is. So, if I divide enormous energy (E) by approximately dark massless (M) then the potential energy/ mass of every single virtual- ideal particle ( according to Einstein and Dirac) is E/M=c^2 (potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 ! ) ( I don't know why physicists call E/M= c^2 'rest mass' and never say potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 .) In potential state my particle doesn't move, so its impulse is h = 0. # My conclusion. I have virtual- ideal- massless particle which has geometrical and physical parameters: C/D= pi= 3.14 . . . . , R/ N(a) = k, E/M=c^2, h=0. All my virtual- ideal- massless particles are possible to call ' bosons' or 'antiparticles' . These bosons are approximately massless but have huge potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 . But I have no fermions, no electric charge, no tachyons, no time, no mass, no movement at this picture. # ===.. Now, thinking logically, I must explain all the effects of motions. And. . . and I cannot say it better than Newton: 'For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces.' # How can one single virtual- ideal particle start its movement? At first, it will be right to think about some simple kind of movement, for example: my particle will move in straight line along 2D surface from some point A to the point B. What is possible to say now? According to the Michelson-Morley experiment my particle must move with constant speed: c=1 and its speed is independent. Its speed doesn't depend on any other object or subject, it means the reason of its speed is hidden in itself, it is its inner impulse. This impulse doesn't come from any formulas or equations. And when Planck introduced this inner impulse(h) to physicists, he took it from heaven, from ceiling. Sorry. Sorry. I must write: Planck introduced this inner impulse (h) intuitively. I must write: Planck introduced his unit (h) phenomenologically. At any way, having Planck's inner impulse (unit h=1) my particle flies with speed c=1. We call it photon now. Photon's movement from some point A to the point B doesn't change the flat and homogeneous 2D surface. Of course, my photon must be careful, because in some local place some sun's gravitation can catch and change its trajectory I hope it will be lucky to escape from the sun's gravity love. # My photon can have other possibility to move. This second possibility was discover by Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck in 1925. They said the elementary particle can rotate around its diameter
Re: Occam's Razor, Vacuum and the Scheme of the primary conditions of existence.
By the way: According to Charle’s law and the consequence of the third law of thermodynamics as the thermodynamic temperature of a system approaches absolute zero the volume of particles approaches zero too. It means the particles must have flat forms. They must have geometrical form of a circle: pi= c /d =3,14 . . ( All another geometrical forms : triangle, rectangle . . . etc have angles and to create angles needs a force, without force all geometrical forms must turn into circle.) =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
The unity of geometry and physics. =.. My questions are: Can 'dirac's virtual particles' have geometrical form of circle? Can we use Euler equation to this circle- particle ? Which physical laws can we use to this circle- particle ? How can be tied Euler equation, physical laws and circle- particle into one theory ? ==.. I say that there is circle-particle that can change / transformed into sphere-particle and vice versa and Euler's equationcosx + isinx in = e^ix can explain this transformation / fluctuation of quantum particle I try to understand more details. I have circle- particle with two infinite numbers: (pi) and (e). I say that this circle-particle that can change into sphere-particle and vice versa. Then I need third number for these changes. The third number, in my opinion, is infinite a=1/137 ( the fine structure constant = the limited volume coefficient) This coefficient (a=1/137) is the border between two conditions of quantum particle. This coefficient (a=1/137) is responsible for these changes. This coefficient (a=1/137) unite geometry with the physics ( e^2=ah*c) =.. If physicists use string-particle (particle that has length but hasn't thickness -volume) to understand reality (and have some basic problems to solve this task) then why don't use circle-particle for this aim. It is a pity that I am not physicist or mathematician. If I were mathematician or physicist I wouldn't lost the chance to test this hypothesis. =.. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus ==... On Mar 7, 8:22 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Dear MarkCC. Thank you for paying attention on my crackpottery article. I like your comment. Very like. ==. You say: Create a universe with no matter, a universe with different kinds of matter, a universe with 300 forces instead of the four that we see - and e and π won't change. =.. Now Euler's equation plays a role in quantum theory. In quantum theory there isn't constant firm quant particle. The Pi says that a point-particle or string-particle cannot be a quant particle. The Pi says that that quant particle can be a circle and it cannot be a perfect circle. If e and π belong to quant particle then these numbers can mutually change. Doesn't it mean that Pi ( a circle ) can be changed into sphere? Doesn't Euler's equationcosx + isinx in = e^ix can explain this transformation / fluctuation of quant particle ? You say: What things like e and π, and their relationship via Euler's equation tell us is that there's a fundamental relationship between numbers and shapes on a two-dimensional plane which does not and cannot really exist in the world we live in. =. But this 'a fundamental relationship between numbers and shapes on a two-dimensional plane' can really exist in two-dimensional vacuum. All the best. socratus. ==. On Mar 5, 9:57 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Euler's Equation Crackpottery Feb 18 2013 Published by MarkCC under Bad Math, Bad Physics One of my twitter followers sent me an interesting piece of crackpottery. I debated whether to do anything with it. The thing about crackpottery is that it really needs to have some content. Total incoherence isn't amusing. This bit is, frankly, right on the line. ==. Euler's Equation and the Reality of Nature. a) Euler's Equation as a mathematical reality. Euler's identity is the gold standard for mathematical beauty'. Euler's identity is the most famous formula in all mathematics. ' . . . this equation is the mathematical analogue of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa painting or Michelangelo's statue of David' 'It is God's equation', 'our jewel ', ' It is a mathematical icon'. . . . . etc. b) Euler's Equation as a physical reality. it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, . . . . .' ' Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence' ' Is Euler's Equation about fundamental matters?' 'It would be nice to understand Euler's Identity as a physical process using physics.' ' Is it possible to unite Euler's Identity with physics, quantum physics ?' My aim is to understand the reality of nature. Can Euler's equation explain me something about reality? To give the answer to this. question I need to bind Euler's equation with an object - particle. Can it be math- point or string- particle or triangle-particle? No, Euler's formula has quantity (pi) which says me that the particle must be only a circle . Now I want to understand the behavior of circle - particle and therefore I need to use spatial relativity and quantum theories. These two theories say me that the reason of circle - particle's movement is its own inner impulse (h) or (h*=h/2pi). a) Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves ( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1. We call
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
Dear MarkCC. Thank you for paying attention on my crackpottery article. I like your comment. Very like. ==. You say: Create a universe with no matter, a universe with different kinds of matter, a universe with 300 forces instead of the four that we see - and e and π won't change. =.. Now Euler's equation plays a role in quantum theory. In quantum theory there isn't constant firm quant particle. The Pi says that a point-particle or string-particle cannot be a quant particle. The Pi says that that quant particle can be a circle and it cannot be a perfect circle. If e and π belong to quant particle then these numbers can mutually change. Doesn't it mean that Pi ( a circle ) can be changed into sphere? Doesn't Euler's equationcosx + isinx in = e^ix can explain this transformation / fluctuation of quant particle ? You say: What things like e and π, and their relationship via Euler's equation tell us is that there's a fundamental relationship between numbers and shapes on a two-dimensional plane which does not and cannot really exist in the world we live in. =. But this 'a fundamental relationship between numbers and shapes on a two-dimensional plane' can really exist in two-dimensional vacuum. All the best. socratus. ==. On Mar 5, 9:57 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Euler's Equation Crackpottery Feb 18 2013 Published by MarkCC under Bad Math, Bad Physics One of my twitter followers sent me an interesting piece of crackpottery. I debated whether to do anything with it. The thing about crackpottery is that it really needs to have some content. Total incoherence isn't amusing. This bit is, frankly, right on the line. ==. Euler's Equation and the Reality of Nature. a) Euler's Equation as a mathematical reality. Euler's identity is the gold standard for mathematical beauty'. Euler's identity is the most famous formula in all mathematics. ' . . . this equation is the mathematical analogue of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa painting or Michelangelo's statue of David' 'It is God's equation', 'our jewel ', ' It is a mathematical icon'. . . . . etc. b) Euler's Equation as a physical reality. it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, . . . . .' ' Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence' ' Is Euler's Equation about fundamental matters?' 'It would be nice to understand Euler's Identity as a physical process using physics.' ' Is it possible to unite Euler's Identity with physics, quantum physics ?' My aim is to understand the reality of nature. Can Euler's equation explain me something about reality? To give the answer to this. question I need to bind Euler's equation with an object - particle. Can it be math- point or string- particle or triangle-particle? No, Euler's formula has quantity (pi) which says me that the particle must be only a circle . Now I want to understand the behavior of circle - particle and therefore I need to use spatial relativity and quantum theories. These two theories say me that the reason of circle - particle's movement is its own inner impulse (h) or (h*=h/2pi). a) Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves ( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1. We call such particle - 'photon'. From Earth - gravity point of view this speed is maximally . From Vacuum point of view this speed is minimally. In this movement quantum of light behave as a corpuscular (no charge). b) Using its own inner impulse / intrinsic angular momentum ( h* = h / 2pi ) circle - particle rotates around its axis. In such movement particle has charge, produce electric waves ( waves property of particle) and its speed ( frequency) is : c. 1. We call such particle - ' electron' and its energy is: E=h*f. In this way I can understand the reality of nature. ==. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ==. Euler's equation says that . It's an amazingly profound equation. The way that it draws together fundamental concepts is beautiful and surprising. But it's not nearly as mysterious as our loonie-toon makes it out to be. The natural logarithm-base is deeply embedded in the structure of numbers, and we've known that, and we've known how it works for a long time. What Euler did was show the relationship between e and the fundamental rotation group of the complex numbers. There are a couple of ways of restating the definition of that make the meaning of that relationship clearer. For example: That's an alternative definition of what e is. If we use that, and we plug into it, we get: If you work out that limit, it's -1. Also, if you take values of N, and plot , , , and , ... on the complex plane, as N gets larger, the resulting curve gets closer and closer to a semicircle. An equivalent way of seeing it is that exponents of are rotations in the complex number plane. The reason that is because if you
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Feb 19, 3:51 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: In front of the infinite? To laugh. In front of nothingness? To cry. In between, a bit of both. Bruno - Show quoted text - Nice, thanks. By the way, your photos 'par Lydia Nash' nice too. All the best. = -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Feb 18, 12:19 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Socratus, are you able to doubt that physics is the fundamental science? Bruno = In Physics we trust. / Tarun Biswas / http://www.engr.newpaltz.edu/~biswast/ Of course, it is correct, because only Physics can logically explain us the Existence and the Ultimate Nature of Reality. But . . . but . . . . . . . . ‘ . . .science is not always as objective as we would like to believe.’ / Book: The holographic universe. Page 6. By Michael Talbot. / Why? Because as Einstein said: “ One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike – and yet it is the most precious thing we have.” ==. ‘ . . . all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike’ … -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Feb 18, 5:28 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: Quite wise statements indeed. But is that not a reason to be cautious with general statement like you did above in the Biswas quote ? Bruno == Oh, we are very careful. We do every thing to escape infinity and nothingness. And, indeed, who had no fear of the Infinite, of the nothingness? But what to do if they exist ? To cry or to laugh ? = -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Klein Lachièze-Rey, THE QUEST FOR UNITY – The Adventure of Physics. =. Mathematics is an indispensable and powerful tool where it has been demonstrated that it applies to a real world experience. However, it is inappropriate and, as Dingle points out, potentially dangerous, to give credence to deductions arising purely from the language of mathematics. The problem is that mathematicians now dominate physics and it is fashionable for them to follow Einstein’s example, with fame going to those with the most fantastic notions that defy experience and common sense. So we have the Big Bang, dark matter, black holes, cosmic strings, wormholes in space, time travel, and so on and on. It has driven practically minded students from the subject. There is an old Disney cartoon where the scientist is portrayed with eyes closed, rocking backwards in his chair and sucking on a pipe, which at intervals emits a smoke-cloud of mathematical symbols. Much of modern physics is a smoke-screen of Disneyesque fantasy. Inappropriate mathematical models are routinely used to describe the universe. Yet the physicists hand us the ash from their pipes as if it were gold dust. If only they would use the ashtrays provided. “It seems that every practitioner of physics has had to wonder at some point why mathematics and physics have come to be so closely entwined. Opinions vary on the answer. Bertrand Russell acknowledged “Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little.” … Mathematics may be indispensable to physics, but it obviously does not constitute physics.” Klein Lachièze-Rey, THE QUEST FOR UNITY – The Adventure of Physics. ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Feynman about infinities and renormalization ==. So we really do not know exactly what it is that we are assuming that gives us the difficulty producing infinities. A nice problem ! However, it turns out that it is possible to sweep the infinities under the rug , by a certain crude skill , and temporarily we are able to keep on calculating. / The Character of Physical Law. Lecture 7. Seeking new laws, page 156. By Richard Feynman / = On Feb 16, 11:02 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: socratus Schrodinger's cat ( as a quantum particle) is inseparable from The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass and this unity shows, how QT is right, saying that there is a life after death. Robittybob1 Do you really believe that Socrates? I find you too obscure to understand properly. socratus You are right saying ‘ I find you too obscure to understand properly.’ “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” need's detailed explanation. For example : how to understand the unity between electron and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” during its interaction with vacuum ? . . . . . . . . what was happened with electron during its interaction with vacuum ? Renormalization . . . .? ==. On Feb 15, 10:12 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Comment: according to (a)+(b), when the cat mass change in cat energy, his image change, the cat is already in life, so there is life after death / laurent.damois / ===.. On Feb 15, 12:28 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Schrodinger's cat and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” =. This law consist of two (2) parts: a) according to “ The law of conservation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat cannot die. b) according to “ The law of transformation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat can change its image (geometrical form). c) Of course, it is impossible to separate these two parts of Law, ==. socratus.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
socratus Schrodinger's cat ( as a quantum particle) is inseparable from The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass and this unity shows, how QT is right, saying that there is a life after death. Robittybob1 Do you really believe that Socrates? I find you too obscure to understand properly. socratus You are right saying ‘ I find you too obscure to understand properly.’ “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” need's detailed explanation. For example : how to understand the unity between electron and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” during its interaction with vacuum ? . . . . . . . . what was happened with electron during its interaction with vacuum ? Renormalization . . . .? ==. On Feb 15, 10:12 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Comment: according to (a)+(b), when the cat mass change in cat energy, his image change, the cat is already in life, so there is life after death / laurent.damois / ===.. On Feb 15, 12:28 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Schrodinger's cat and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” =. This law consist of two (2) parts: a) according to “ The law of conservation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat cannot die. b) according to “ The law of transformation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat can change its image (geometrical form). c) Of course, it is impossible to separate these two parts of Law, ==. socratus.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
Schrodinger's cat and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” =. This law consist of two (2) parts: a) according to “ The law of conservation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat cannot die. b) according to “ The law of transformation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat can change its image (geometrical form). c) Of course, it is impossible to separate these two parts of Law, ==. socratus. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Comment: according to (a)+(b), when the cat mass change in cat energy, his image change, the cat is already in life, so there is life after death / laurent.damois / ===.. On Feb 15, 12:28 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Schrodinger's cat and “ The law of conservation and transformation energy/mass” =. This law consist of two (2) parts: a) according to “ The law of conservation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat cannot die. b) according to “ The law of transformation (!) energy/mass” Schroedinger's cat can change its image (geometrical form). c) Of course, it is impossible to separate these two parts of Law, ==. socratus. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
Intuitive Understanding Of Euler’s Formula http://betterexplained.com/articles/intuitive-understanding-of-eulers-formula/#comment-190704 =…. On Feb 14, 8:48 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Euler's Equation and the Reality of Nature. =. Mr. Dexter Sinister wrote: ‘ I understand Euler's Identity, and I know what it means, and I know how to prove it, there's nothing particularly mystical about it, it just demonstrates that exponential, trigonometric, and complex functions are related. Given what we know of mathematics it shouldn't surprise anyone that its various bits are connected. It would be much more surprising if they weren't, that would almost certainly mean something was badly wrong somewhere.’ Mr. Gary wrote: Mathematics is NOT science. Science is knowledge of the REAL world. Mathematics is an invention of the mind. Many aspects of mathematics have found application in the real world, but there is no guarantee. Any correlation must meet the ultimate test: does it explain something about the real world? As an electrical engineer I used the generalized Euler's equation all the time in circuit analysis: exp(j*theta) = cos(theta) + j*sin(theta). So it works at that particular level in electricity. Does it work at other levels, too? Logic cannot prove it. It must be determined by experiment, not by philosophizing. .. Thinking about theirs posts I wrote brief article: Euler's Equation and Reality. =. a) Euler's Equation as a mathematical reality. Euler's identity is the gold standard for mathematical beauty'. Euler's identity is the most famous formula in all mathematics. ‘ . . . this equation is the mathematical analogue of Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa painting or Michelangelo’s statue of David’ ‘It is God’s equation.’, ‘ It is a mathematical icon.’ . . . . etc. b) Euler's Equation as a physical reality. it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, . . . . .’ ‘ Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence’ ‘ Is Euler's Equation about fundamental matters?’ ‘It would be nice to understand Euler's Identity as a physical process using physics.‘ ‘ Is it possible to unite Euler's Identity with physics, quantum physics ?’ ==. My aim is to understand the reality of nature. Can Euler's equation explain me something about reality? To give the answer to this question I need to bind Euler's equation with an object - particle. Can it be math- point or string- particle or triangle-particle? No, Euler's formula has quantity (pi) which says me that the particle must be only a circle . Now I want to understand the behavior of circle - particle and therefore I need to use spatial relativity and quantum theories. These two theories say me that the reason of circle – particle’s movement is its own inner impulse (h) or (h*=h/2pi). a) Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves ( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1. We call such particle - ‘photon’. From Earth – gravity point of view this speed is maximally. From Vacuum point of view this speed is minimally. In this movement quantum of light behave as a corpuscular (no charge). b) Using its own inner impulse / intrinsic angular momentum ( h* = h / 2pi ) circle - particle rotates around its axis. In such movement particle has charge, produce electric waves ( waves property of particle) and its speed ( frequency) is : c1. We call such particle - ‘ electron’ and its energy is: E=h*f. In this way I (as a peasant ) can understand the reality of nature. ==. I reread my post. My God, that is a naïve peasant's explanation. It is absolutely not scientific, not professor's explanation. Would a learned man adopt such simple and naive explanation? Hmm, . . . problem. In any way, even Mr. Dexter Sinister and Mr. Gary wouldn't agree with me, I want to say them ' Thank you for emails and cooperation’ =. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. =. P.S. ' They would play a greater and greater role in mathematics – and then, with the advent of quantum mechanics in the twentieth century, in physics and engineering and any field that deals with cyclical phenomena such as waves that can be represented by complex numbers. For a complex number allows you to represent two processes such as phase and wavelenght simultaneously – and a complex exponential allows you to map a straight line onto a circle in a complex plane.' / Book: The great equations. Chapter four. The gold standard for mathematical beauty. Euler’s equation. Page 104. / # Euler's e-iPi+1=0 is an amazing equation, not in-and-of itself, but because it sharply points to our utter ignorance of the simplest mathematical and scientific fundamentals. The equation means that in flat Euclidean space, e and Pi happen to have their particular
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
The learned men confuse the mathematical tools with the physical reality and therefore we have math-physical fairy-tales. =. On Feb 14, 5:39 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 14 Feb 2013, at 08:48, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Euler's Equation and the Reality of Nature. =. Mr. Dexter Sinister wrote: ‘ I understand Euler's Identity, and I know what it means, and I know how to prove it, there's nothing particularly mystical about it, it just demonstrates that exponential, trigonometric, and complex functions are related. Given what we know of mathematics it shouldn't surprise anyone that its various bits are connected. It would be much more surprising if they weren't, that would almost certainly mean something was badly wrong somewhere.’ Mr. Gary wrote: Mathematics is NOT science. Science is knowledge of the REAL world. Mathematics is an invention of the mind. This is of course false in the comp theory. It is also intuitively false for most mathematicians. It is usually asserted by people confusing the mathematical tools, that we invent indeed, and the mathematical reality, which is really a sequence of surprising facts, that we discover. The use of REAL world is dogmatic physicalism. It proposes as a fact what is a theological or metaphysical hypothesis, and this condemns any attempt to be rigorous on the subject. It is as bad as using God as a gap explanation. It is the same mistake. Bruno Many aspects of mathematics have found application in the real world, but there is no guarantee. Any correlation must meet the ultimate test: does it explain something about the real world? As an electrical engineer I used the generalized Euler's equation all the time in circuit analysis: exp(j*theta) = cos(theta) + j*sin(theta). So it works at that particular level in electricity. Does it work at other levels, too? Logic cannot prove it. It must be determined by experiment, not by philosophizing. .. Thinking about theirs posts I wrote brief article: Euler's Equation and Reality. =. a) Euler's Equation as a mathematical reality. Euler's identity is the gold standard for mathematical beauty'. Euler's identity is the most famous formula in all mathematics. ‘ . . . this equation is the mathematical analogue of Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa painting or Michelangelo’s statue of David’ ‘It is God’s equation.’, ‘ It is a mathematical icon.’ . . . . etc. b) Euler's Equation as a physical reality. it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, . . . . .’ ‘ Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence’ ‘ Is Euler's Equation about fundamental matters?’ ‘It would be nice to understand Euler's Identity as a physical process using physics.‘ ‘ Is it possible to unite Euler's Identity with physics, quantum physics ?’ ==. My aim is to understand the reality of nature. Can Euler's equation explain me something about reality? To give the answer to this question I need to bind Euler's equation with an object - particle. Can it be math- point or string- particle or triangle-particle? No, Euler's formula has quantity (pi) which says me that the particle must be only a circle . Now I want to understand the behavior of circle - particle and therefore I need to use spatial relativity and quantum theories. These two theories say me that the reason of circle – particle’s movement is its own inner impulse (h) or (h*=h/2pi). a) Using its own inner impulse (h) circle - particle moves ( as a wheel) in a straight line with constant speed c = 1. We call such particle - ‘photon’. From Earth – gravity point of view this speed is maximally. From Vacuum point of view this speed is minimally. In this movement quantum of light behave as a corpuscular (no charge). b) Using its own inner impulse / intrinsic angular momentum ( h* = h / 2pi ) circle - particle rotates around its axis. In such movement particle has charge, produce electric waves ( waves property of particle) and its speed ( frequency) is : c1. We call such particle - ‘ electron’ and its energy is: E=h*f. In this way I (as a peasant ) can understand the reality of nature. ==. I reread my post. My God, that is a naïve peasant's explanation. It is absolutely not scientific, not professor's explanation. Would a learned man adopt such simple and naive explanation? Hmm, . . . problem. In any way, even Mr. Dexter Sinister and Mr. Gary wouldn't agree with me, I want to say them ' Thank you for emails and cooperation’ =. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. =. P.S. ' They would play a greater and greater role in mathematics – and then, with the advent of quantum mechanics in the twentieth century, in physics and engineering and any field that deals with cyclical phenomena
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Feb 12, 8:41 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/11/2013 10:15 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: ' global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe ' Brent It means that global conservation of energy is infinite . No, it means it's undefined - there's no unique way to add up the energy from different parts of a curved spacetime without an timelike Killing field - which describes our universe. Brent = The energy from different parts of a curved space and time (!) comes from infinite vacuum spacetime (!). Mr. Brent, do you understand the difference between spacetime and space and time? =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Euler Identity within a new quantum theory. http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1v=_XZGOGvuBlIfeature=endscreen ==. On Feb 12, 7:35 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to understand Vacuum: T=0K ? ==. Physics (classical + quantum) lives under shadow of Vacuum. I want throw light on this Vacuum. Three theories explain the Vacuum T=0K : a) theory of ideal gas because its temperature is T=0K, b) QED theory because this theory explain interaction photon / electron not only with matter but with vacuum too, c) Euler’s equation: e^ i(pi) = - 1, because only in the negative vacuum T=0K can exist ‘ virtual imaginaries particles’ which Euler described by his formula: e^ i(pi) + 1= 0. d) The global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. This physical parameter is the key to understand the essence of Existence. =. Without Vacuum T=0K there isn’t Physics, there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. . Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ==. On Feb 12, 7:15 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: ' global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe ' Brent It means that global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. = On Feb 11, 7:48 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/11/2013 2:51 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: I wrote that Planck gave answer to the questions: How to understand Alice's Quantumland ? How to describe the Universe as it really is ? Does somebody disagree with Planck ? Well for one thing it appears that global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe (no timelike Killing field) - so it can hardly be the foundation of physics. Brent = On Feb 10, 7:46 am, socra...@bezeqint.netsocra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between relativity and absolute Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it. Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation. 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
After proving Euler's identity during a lecture, Benjamin Peirce, a noted American 19th-century philosopher, mathematician, and professor at Harvard University, stated that it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, but we have proved it, and therefore we know it must be the truth. # Stanford University mathematics professor Keith Devlin said, Like a Shakespearean sonnet that captures the very essence of love, or a painting that brings out the beauty of the human form that is far more than just skin deep, Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler's_identity =.. it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means, . . . . .’ . . . but . . . ‘ Euler's Equation reaches down into the very depths of existence. ===.. On Feb 12, 7:35 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to understand Vacuum: T=0K ? ==. Physics (classical + quantum) lives under shadow of Vacuum. I want throw light on this Vacuum. Three theories explain the Vacuum T=0K : a) theory of ideal gas because its temperature is T=0K, b) QED theory because this theory explain interaction photon / electron not only with matter but with vacuum too, c) Euler’s equation: e^ i(pi) = - 1, because only in the negative vacuum T=0K can exist ‘ virtual imaginaries particles’ which Euler described by his formula: e^ i(pi) + 1= 0. d) The global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. This physical parameter is the key to understand the essence of Existence. =. Without Vacuum T=0K there isn’t Physics, there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. . Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ==. On Feb 12, 7:15 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: ' global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe ' Brent It means that global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. = On Feb 11, 7:48 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/11/2013 2:51 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: I wrote that Planck gave answer to the questions: How to understand Alice's Quantumland ? How to describe the Universe as it really is ? Does somebody disagree with Planck ? Well for one thing it appears that global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe (no timelike Killing field) - so it can hardly be the foundation of physics. Brent = On Feb 10, 7:46 am, socra...@bezeqint.netsocra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between relativity and absolute Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it. Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation. 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
I wrote that Planck gave answer to the questions: How to understand Alice's Quantumland ? How to describe the Universe as it really is ? Does somebody disagree with Planck ? = On Feb 10, 7:46 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that “ the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute” Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it.” Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck “to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.” 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
The situation in ' philosophy of physics'. =. ‘ Suddenly I realized that a nagual did have one point to defend - in my opinion, a passionate defense for the 'description of the Eagle', and 'what the Eagle does'. But what kind of a force would the Eagle be? I would not know how to answer that. The Eagle is as real for the seers as gravity and time are for you, and just as abstract and incomprehensible. Those are abstract concepts, but they do refer to real phenomena that can be corroborated. . He said that the Eagle's emanations are an immutable thing-in-itself, which engulfs everything that exists; the knowable and the unknowable. There is no way to describe in words what the Eagle's emanations really are, . . . . . . . . . . . . etc . . . . / The Fire From Within. ©1984 By Carlos Castaneda. Chapter 03 - The Eagle's Emanations. / http://aquakeys.com/toltec/fire-from-within-chapter_03-eagles-emanations ==.. Their dialogue is a good example for description the situation in ' philosophy of physics' when the stupidity has a mandate from the physicists to explain us the ‘philosophy of physics’. ==. Socratus =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
' global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe ' Brent It means that global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. = On Feb 11, 7:48 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/11/2013 2:51 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: I wrote that Planck gave answer to the questions: How to understand Alice's Quantumland ? How to describe the Universe as it really is ? Does somebody disagree with Planck ? Well for one thing it appears that global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe (no timelike Killing field) - so it can hardly be the foundation of physics. Brent = On Feb 10, 7:46 am, socra...@bezeqint.netsocra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between relativity and absolute Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it. Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation. 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
How to understand Vacuum: T=0K ? ==. Physics (classical + quantum) lives under shadow of Vacuum. I want throw light on this Vacuum. Three theories explain the Vacuum T=0K : a) theory of ideal gas because its temperature is T=0K, b) QED theory because this theory explain interaction photon / electron not only with matter but with vacuum too, c) Euler’s equation: e^ i(pi) = - 1, because only in the negative vacuum T=0K can exist ‘ virtual imaginaries particles’ which Euler described by his formula: e^ i(pi) + 1= 0. d) The global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. This physical parameter is the key to understand the essence of Existence. =. Without Vacuum T=0K there isn’t Physics, there isn’t Philosophy of Physics. . Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ==. On Feb 12, 7:15 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: ' global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe ' Brent It means that global conservation of energy is infinite . And this infinite energy belong to the vacuum because that more than 90% of mass ( dark mass/energy ) is hidden in the vacuum How to understand vacuum's infinity ? Vacuum's infinity has only one physical parameter: T=0K. = On Feb 11, 7:48 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 2/11/2013 2:51 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: I wrote that Planck gave answer to the questions: How to understand Alice's Quantumland ? How to describe the Universe as it really is ? Does somebody disagree with Planck ? Well for one thing it appears that global conservation of energy can't even be defined for the universe (no timelike Killing field) - so it can hardly be the foundation of physics. Brent = On Feb 10, 7:46 am, socra...@bezeqint.netsocra...@bezeqint.net wrote: How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between relativity and absolute Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it. Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation. 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Why? And why do you think science has made no progress since 1947? Brent- . Science made great technological ( !) progress since 1947, but not ' philosophical progress ' (!). We still haven't answers to the questiohs: What is the negative 4D Minkowski continuum ?, What is the quantum of light ?, What is an electron?, What is entropy ? . . . . . etc. . . . .etc. To create new abstraction ( quarks, big-bang, method of renormalization . . . etc ) is not a progress. ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
How to describe the Universe as it really is ? =. In his Scientific Autobiography Max Planck wrote : ' The outside world is something independent from man, something absolute, and the quest for the laws which apply to this absolute appeared to me as the most sublime scientific pursuit in life. ' What are these ' laws which apply to this absolute ' world ? ==.. In the beginning Planck wrote, that From young years the search of the laws, concerning to something absolute, seemed to me the most wonderful task in scientist’s life. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that the search for something absolute seemed to me the most wonderful task for a researcher. And after some pages Planck wrote again, that “ the most wonderful scientific task for me was searching of something absolute. ==.. And as for the relation between “relativity and absolute” Planck wrote, that the fact of relativity assumes the existence of something absolute ; the relativity has sense when something absolute resists it.” Planck wrote that the phrase all is relative misleads us, because there is something absolute . And the most attractive thing was for Planck “to find something absolute that was hidden in its foundation.” 3. And Planck explained what there is absolute in the physics: a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy,. b) The negative 4D continuum, c) The speed of light quanta, d) The maximum entropy which is possible at temperature of absolute zero: T=0K. ==. I think that these four Planck's points are foundation of science. =. socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
Alice in Quantumland an allegory of Quantum Physics (Below is a sample from the publisher's blurb) This story is physics told through a fantasy allegory. Alice falls through the screen of her television set and finds herself in Quantumland. This is a place where she encounters unusual characters who demonstrate to her the basics of quantum physics. She meets electrons, whose positions must be uncertain unless they are moving rapidly She visits the Heisenberg Bank and sees particles get short term energy loans She talks to the Uncertain Accountant who cannot make his books balance because of energy fluctuations. She meets the Quantum and Classical Mechanics at the Mechanic's Institute and sees demonstrations of interference in their Gedanken room. At the Fermi Bose Academy she is told how the Pauli Principle deals with hundreds of identical electron students. From the Mendeleev Pier she explores the energy levels within an atom. She visits Castle Rutherford, the home of the nuclear Family. The three Quark Brothers explain the composition of strongly interacting particles. In all of this there is only one equation. http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/allegory/Alice_book.htm The Use of Allegory Modern physics has given rise to some strange and marvelous concepts. They are not only strange, they are difficult to believe. We cannot understand them, in that we cannot make them fit with our previous beliefs. In that sense no one understands quantum mechanics. We are forced to take on board new and initially unbelievable facts. http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/allegory/allegory.htm ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
Does somebody know what Vacuum is ? No, we don’t know what Vacuum is. 1 Paul Dirac wrote: ‘ The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description of something more complex? ‘ 2. The most fundamental question facing 21st century physics will be: What is the vacuum? As quantum mechanics teaches us, with its zero point energy this vacuum is not empty and the word vacuum is a gross misnomer! / Prof. Friedwardt Winterberg / 3. Wikipedia : “ Unfortunately neither the concept of space nor of time is well defined, resulting in a dilemma. If we don't know the character of time nor of space, how can we characterize either? “ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime 4. Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic, said Peter Milonni from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. 5. ‘ All kinds of electromagnetic waves ( including light’s) spread in vacuum . . . . thanks to the vacuum, to the specific ability of empty space these electromagnetic waves can exist.’ / Book : To what physics was come, page 32. R. K. Utiyama. / ==. So, we know that the vacuum is very important conception in physics and nature, but . . . but . . . we don’t know what vacuum is, and therefore is possible to have many speculations including metaphysical too. For example: Danah Zohar wrote: ‘It might even give us some ground to speculate that the vacuum itself (and hence the universe) is ‘conscious’. / Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208. / # ‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive of as God within the universe of the new physics, this ground state, coherent quantum vacuum might be a good place to start.’ / Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208, by Danah Zohar. / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danah_Zohar The question is: How is it possible to prove Zohar’s metaphysical confirmation with physical laws and formulas? ==. Socratus ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
Alice in Quantumland =. The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd. / QED : The Strange Theory of Light and Matter page. 10. by R. Feynman / ‘ Many believe that relative theory tells us that ours is a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland universe; that this revealed by the mathematician Einstein who discovered that there is a fourth dimension, . . . .. . . that, in short, everything is relative and mysterious. ‘ / Book ‘Albert Einstein’ , page 4. By Leopold Infeld ./ We still don't know that negative 4-D is. (!) In the other words: Physicists show us the absurd and mysterious existence of nature as a real fact. I cannot believe that nature is absurd and mysterious. I think that their interpretations in relative and quantum electrodynamics theories were wrong. ==.. ' But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice. 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.' / Lewis Carroll. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. / . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
I think that it is possible to understand the universe using usual common logical thought. We need only understand in which zoo (reference frame ) physicists found higgs-boson and 1000 its elementary brothers. socratus . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How can intelligence be physical ?
It is impossible using particle accelerators to understand god-particles and the ultimate truth of nature as physicists hope. =. To create particle accelerators is needed reference frame of vacuum. (!) It means that physicists take vacuum as a reflector of the real (!) structure of nature: the space between billions and billions galaxies. But on the other hand, today's physicists refuse to take vacuum T=0K as real fundament of Universe. ‘ It is true . . . there is such a thing as absolute zero; we cannot reach temperatures below absolute zero not because we are not sufficiently clever but because temperatures below absolute zero simple have no meaning.’ / Book : ‘Dreams of a final theory’ Page 138. By Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 / =. Question: Does one physicist hand know that the other hand makes? =. ( maybe without vacuum the CERN is good place for formula-I competition . . ? ! ) =. Socratus On Feb 5, 3:43 pm, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: I think that it is possible to understand the universe using usual common logical thought. We need only understand in which zoo (reference frame ) physicists found higgs-boson and 1000 its elementary brothers. socratus . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Brain – Consciousness , Consciousness – Brain. =. Is consciousness a result of evolution or it is its fuel ? # ‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’ / Book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ page 160. by Michael Talbot ./ =. Isn’t it a strange contradiction ? But maybe it means what brain obeys the ‘dualistic law’ : Brain - – Consciousness , Consciousness - – Brain. Who knows ? =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Feb 1, 7:51 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, February 1, 2013 12:26:43 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote: Hi socr...@bezeqint.net javascript: Feynman was wrong. Life isn't physics, it's intelligence or consciousness, free will. If we understand that physics is actually experience, then life, intelligence, consciousness, free will, qualia, etc are all physics. How could it really be otherwise? Craig == In the name of reason and common sense: How could it really be otherwise? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
About Infinity. / My opinion / How could mere man comprehend infinity? ==. Infinity is the cause of the crisis in Physics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity Why is Infinity the cause of the crisis in Physics? Because we don’t know what infinity is. The concept of infinite / eternal means nothing to a scientists. Infinity is no ‘more ‘, ‘ less’, ‘equally’ or ‘similar’. The Infinity is something that could not be compared to anything. Considering so, scientists came to conclusion that the infinity cannot be considered in real processes and they proclaimed unwritten law: ‘ If we want that the theory would be correct, the infinity should be eliminated’ . . . . by the ' method of renormalization ' . . . about which Feynman wrote ' using this method we can these infinities sweep under a carpet ' and then Feynman asked: ‘ Who can confirm that the infinity conforms with reality of nature?’ / Book: The Character of Physical Law. Lecture 7. / ===. I will try to explain ‘infinity’ as brief and simple as is possible. =. There are billions and billions Galaxies in the Universe, each of which has hundreds of billions of stars. All these billions and billions Galaxies are divided by space, which we call ‘ Vacuum’. This Vacuum is an infinite and eternal continuum. Why Vacuum is infinite ? Because the sum of masses of all Galaxies (the cosmological constant / the critical density ) is as small that it cannot ‘ close’ the whole Universe into sphere and therefore Universe as whole must be ‘open’, endless, infinite. Only in some small local parts of this infinite Vacuum continuum some masses can gather together in an enough quantity to create stars, planets . . .etc. Vacuum continuum is not a simple space Physicists say that in vacuum ‘virtual particles’ exist and they can appear as real particles. Nobody knows what they are. Astrophysicists say that ‘dark mass- matter’ in vacuum is hidden. This ‘dark mass- matter’ is not ordinary matter but ‘non normal’. They say that more than 90% of the matter in the Universe is ‘non normal dark mass – matter’. So, from ‘ virtual particles ‘ and ‘non normal dark matter ’ were created all billion and billion Galaxies, including our planet Earth and everything on it, also including you, who reads this email. And because we don’t know what ‘ virtual particles ‘ and ‘dark matter’ are, therefore we don’t have answer to the question: who am I ? .. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus ===.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Quantum biology: Do weird physics effects abound in nature? Disappearing in one place and reappearing in another. Being in two places at once. Communicating information seemingly faster than the speed of light. This kind of weird behaviour is commonplace in dark, still laboratories studying the branch of physics called quantum mechanics, but what might it have to do with fresh flowers, migrating birds, and the smell of rotten eggs? Welcome to the frontier of what is called quantum biology. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21150047 ==.. ' Long time ago, when the life only began generated by the chance a molecule had arisen . . . . . . . . . we are only descendants of these first molecules . . . . . . . . all living beings on the Earth occurred from one and the same ancestors on the molecular level.' / Book: The Character of Physical Law. Lecture 4. By R. Feynman / And somebody said if we give to the simplest molecule hydrogen enough time then it will become a man ( maybe according to the law of evolution ) . ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Biology- - Evolutionary biology - - Physics- - Biophysics - Quantum biology - Evolutionary biophysics on quantomolecular level. ( ! ? ) ==. On Jan 31, 4:06 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Quantum biology: Do weird physics effects abound in nature? Disappearing in one place and reappearing in another. Being in two places at once. Communicating information seemingly faster than the speed of light. This kind of weird behaviour is commonplace in dark, still laboratories studying the branch of physics called quantum mechanics, but what might it have to do with fresh flowers, migrating birds, and the smell of rotten eggs? Welcome to the frontier of what is called quantum biology. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21150047 ==.. ' Long time ago, when the life only began generated by the chance a molecule had arisen . . . . . . . . . we are only descendants of these first molecules . . . . . . . . all living beings on the Earth occurred from one and the same ancestors on the molecular level.' / Book: The Character of Physical Law. Lecture 4. By R. Feynman / And somebody said if we give to the simplest molecule hydrogen enough time then it will become a man ( maybe according to the law of evolution ) . ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible. / Albert Einstein / On Jan 29, 2:49 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:33 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: .Everybody creates his God according to his own image and spirit If triangles made a God they would give him three sides / Charles de Montesquieu . Persian Letters, 1721 / # There were people who said ‘God ‘ and thought about Zeus. There are people who say ‘God ‘ and think about Holly Cow. If physicists made a God they would give Him concrete physical parameters. Can God create a Universe which physicists could not understand ? =. We live in such a universe. At least 96% of which cannot be understood, perhaps 100%. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
.Everybody creates his God according to his own image and spirit If triangles made a God they would give him three sides / Charles de Montesquieu . Persian Letters, 1721 / # There were people who said ‘God ‘ and thought about Zeus. There are people who say ‘God ‘ and think about Holly Cow. If physicists made a God they would give Him concrete physical parameters. Can God create a Universe which physicists could not understand ? =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Science is a religion by itself.
Belief . . . from history of physics. =. Many years Max Planck was attracted with the absolutely black body problem. If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls in the area of absolutely black body and does not radiate back, then “ terminal dead “ will come. In order to save the quantum of light from ‘death ‘ Planck decided that it is possible that quantum of light will radiate back with quantum unit (h ), (h=Et ) This unit does not come on formulas or equations. Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling. Sorry. Sorry. Scientists say: Planck introduced this unit intuitively. They say: Planck introduced unit (h) phenomenologically ===.. Phenomenology. 1. the movement founded by Husserl that concentrates on the detailed description of conscious experience, without recourse to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, and traditional philosophical questions http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/phenomenologically ===… So. Planck discovered the quantum of energy / action ‘without recourse to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, and traditional philosophical questions’. Many years Planck tried to find rational explanation for his unit but without success. We can read that unit (h) is an ’inner’ impulse (spin) of particle. But what ’inner impulse’ means? We have no answer. ==. There are 1000 books and millions articles about ‘philosophy of science’ but how can I believe them if they didn’t explain me ‘what quantum particle is’. Our today’s belief in science is similar to the past belief in religion:‘ I believe because it is absurd.’ / Tertullian. (ca.160 – ca.220 AD) / ( in science – big bang, in religion - God create woman from Adam’s rib.) ==.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
in the regime of metaphysics. Of course, point particles are there as well. Richard On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:37 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Belief . . . from history of physics. =. Many years Max Planck was attracted with the absolutely black body problem. If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls in the area of absolutely black body and does not radiate back, then “ terminal dead “ will come. In order to save the quantum of light from ‘death ‘ Planck decided that it is possible that quantum of light will radiate back with quantum unit (h ), (h=Et ) This unit does not come on formulas or equations. Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling. Sorry. Sorry. Scientists say: Planck introduced this unit intuitively. They say: Planck introduced unit (h) phenomenologically ===.. Phenomenology. 1. the movement founded by Husserl that concentrates on the detailed description of conscious experience, without recourse to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, and traditional philosophical questions http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/phenomenologically ===… So. Planck discovered the quantum of energy / action ‘without recourse to explanation, metaphysical assumptions, and traditional philosophical questions’. Many years Planck tried to find rational explanation for his unit but without success. We can read that unit (h) is an ’inner’ impulse (spin) of particle. But what ’inner impulse’ means? We have no answer. ==. There are 1000 books and millions articles about ‘philosophy of science’ but how can I believe them if they didn’t explain me ‘what quantum particle is’. Our today’s belief in science is similar to the past belief in religion: ‘ I believe because it is absurd.’ / Tertullian. (ca.160 – ca.220 AD) / ( in science – big bang, in religion - God create woman from Adam’s rib.) ==.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: the curse of materialism
Book: What is your dangerous idea? / Edited by John Brockman / Article: Seeing Darwin in the light of Einstein; Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin. / by Lee Smolin. / ===. / Page 115 / Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin suggests that natural selection could act not only on living things but on the properties defining the various species of elementary particles. / Page 117 / We physicists have now to understand Darwin’s lesson: The only way to understand how one out of a vast number of choices was made, which favors improbable structure, is that is the result of evolution by natural selection. / Page 117 / Now the only possible way of accounting for the laws of nature, and for uniformity in general, is to suppose them results of evolution. / Page 118 / And I believe that once this is achieved, Einstein and Darwin will be understood as partners in the greatest revolution yet in science, . . . / Lee Smolin. / http://www.leesmolin.com/ ==. Questions. 1 On which biological level is possible to use phrase: Darwinian natural selection, Darwin’s evolution ? 2 On which biological level does consciousness appear ?. ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
According to Harold Morowitz a structure of single cell has 10^12 bit of information But cells are not in the one and same state, they are different then another cell has another 10^12 bit of information . . . ==. The estimate for human cells in the human body is about 10^14. The number of cells in the body is constantly changing, as cells die or are destroyed and new ones are formed. It means that bits information also constantly changing. Can this unity between information and cells be chaotic ? No, we are called this process: ‘self organizing‘. ==. About ‘self organizing ‘. It is amazing to me, that some can use the term self organizing without shame, to describe mindless objects, in arguments that claim that the universe lacks both mind and self. There just appears to be these massive blank spots in the thinking of those who wish to see this universe as containing nothing but mindless objects, denying the existence of self, while at the same time describing evolution as self. It is an inversion of reality, they describe and not reality. They would contend that the stone blocks of the pyramid, self organized themselves into a complexity that exceeded the complexity of the blocks themselves. I am sorry, reality really does not work upside down and backwards, even imagining it does, requires self-deception. / By Da Blob / ===.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Very nice explanation. Congratulation There is only one small problem: It is too complex. If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough / Albert Einstein. / ==. On Jan 22, 6:28 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: According to Harold Morowitz a structure of single cell has 10^12 bit of information But cells are not in the one and same state, they are different then another cell has another 10^12 bit of information . . . ==. The estimate for human cells in the human body is about 10^14. The number of cells in the body is constantly changing, as cells die or are destroyed and new ones are formed. It means that bits information also constantly changing. Can this unity between information and cells be chaotic ? No, we are called this process: ‘self organizing‘. ==. About ‘self organizing ‘. It is amazing to me, that some can use the term self organizing without shame, to describe mindless objects, in arguments that claim that the universe lacks both mind and self. There just appears to be these massive blank spots in the thinking of those who wish to see this universe as containing nothing but mindless objects, denying the existence of self, while at the same time describing evolution as self. It is an inversion of reality, they describe and not reality. They would contend that the stone blocks of the pyramid, self organized themselves into a complexity that exceeded the complexity of the blocks themselves. I am sorry, reality really does not work upside down and backwards, even imagining it does, requires self-deception. / By Da Blob / Regarding self-organizing, In Bruno's words I postulate a Block Metaverse Quantum Mind that possesses consciousness and contains the forms of Plato from which come the principles and forms of self-organization. There may be as well little quantum minds associated with each 12d universe. But according to string theory, or perhaps my interpretation of it, each universe lacks its own compactification flux or fibrations (whatever) on which MWI type computations can be written. Only the 14d Metaverse has a 4 Dimensional Block Space with such volume-filling fluxes or fibrations for writing both all the quantum state possibilities in the future (so to speak- in the block metaspace the future is a space dimension) as well as all the happenings in the past. This is derived from 26d string theory separated into a 14d Many-World MW Metaverse and 12d MW universes, both containing supersymmetry. Richardhttp://www.math.mcgill.ca/palka/mgr-fiz-w.pdfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compactification_(physics) These manifolds offer several globally defined forms in terms of which vev-derived fluxes could be written that might drive the super-Higgs mechanism. ...page 147 ofhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths/people/staff/thomas_house/the... ===.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
in 1925. They said the elementary particle can rotate around its diameter using its own angular inner impulse: h * = h /2pi. So, when photon rotates around its diameter it looks like a string ( open string) and this string vibrates. My god, that is a strange technical terminology the physicists use: ‘ vibrate, vibration’. If I were a physicist I would say no ‘ vibrate, vibration’ but ‘ frequency’, ‘the particle rotates with high frequency’. The frequency is a key to every particle, by frequency we know the radiation spectrum of various kinds of waves. Now I can say: then my photon starts to curl its rotation goes with enormous frequency, faster than constant speed of photon. Now its speed is c1. We call it ‘tachyon’. The tachyon’s spinning creates electric charge and electrical waves and now we call it ‘electron’ or ‘fermions’. So, in my opinion, virtual- ideal particle, photon, tachyon and electron are only different names of one and the same particle – quantum of light. # My particle is a circle. When this circle started to curl around itself its form changed. Now it has volume and looks like a sphere. What is the law between particle’s volume and energy? I think: big volume – low energy, small volume – high energy. The more speed / impulse the more particle (as a volume) compress the more energy . And when the speed decrease – - the energy decrease too – but the volume of particle will increase. My particle behaves like ‘ a springy circle’ (!) This springy circle can curl into small sphere which must have volume and therefore can be describe as a ‘stringlike particle with vibrations’ only approximately . Springy particle - it means the particle is able to spring back into its former position. In my opinion this is the meaning of ‘ The Law of mass/energy conservation and transformation’ # Once more. Quantum of light has potential energy (- E=Mc^2 ). When it starts to curl around its diameter the potential energy (- E=Mc^2 ) is hidden and we can observe its electronic energy ( E=h*f). But there is situation when this hidden potential energy goes out and we can see its great active power ( + E=Mc^2 ) looking the destroyed cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In my opinion the particle’s transformation from one state into the other was legalized as ‘ The Law of mass/energy conservation and transformation’. # Different conditions of particles are also reason of new situation in 2D. Now the surface of 2D is changed. On the one hand we have the spinning electron ( E=h*f) On the other hand there are masses of Avogadro’s particles. ( kT logW ) The spinning electron changes the temperature of the surface in this local area. Now this local area has Debye temperature: Q(d)= h*f(max) / k. In this space a grain of quantum gravity theory is hidden. The scheme of quantum gravity is: 1. h*f = kT logW. 2. h*f kT logW. 3. h*f kT. At first the temperature is going from T=0K to 2.18 K (−271 °C) ( at first kT logW is Helium II ). Then the temperature is going from T=2.18 K to T= 4.2 K, ( kT logW is Helium I ). And then the protons are created. . . . etc. E=h*f - - - He II - - - He I -- - . . . . - - H . . . – - Plasma reaction... -- Thermonuclear reactions ...--..etc. ( P. Kapitza , L. Landau , E.L. Andronikashvili theories). (Superconductivity, superfluidity.) # Now on the one hand we have quantum of light/ electron. On the other hand we have proton. Their interaction creates atom. This interaction is evolving process. # The conception of Time appears as a period of these two actions. ( star formation and atom creation}. ==.. On Jan 22, 7:45 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: What could be simpler than splitting the 26 dimensions into two groups that are both superstring theories. It certainly is less complicated than General Relativity On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:38 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Very nice explanation. Congratulation There is only one small problem: It is too complex. If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough / Albert Einstein. / ==. On Jan 22, 6:28 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: According to Harold Morowitz a structure of single cell has 10^12 bit of information But cells are not in the one and same state, they are different then another cell has another 10^12 bit of information . . . ==. The estimate for human cells in the human body is about 10^14. The number of cells in the body is constantly changing, as cells die or are destroyed and new ones are formed. It means that bits information also constantly changing. Can this unity between information and cells be chaotic ? No, we are called this process: ‘self organizing‘. ==. About ‘self organizing ‘. It is amazing to me, that some can use the term self
Re: the curse of materialism
Lecture : Scientific heresy. Nov 1, 2011 in Edinburgh. / By Matt Ridley / My topic today is scientific heresy. When are scientific heretics right and when are they mad? How do you tell the difference between science and pseudoscience? # Just this month Daniel Shechtman won the 2011 Nobel Prize in chemistry for quasi crystals, having spent much of his career being vilified and exiled as a crank “I was thrown out of my research group. They said I brought shame on them with what I was saying.” http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/11/1/scientific-heresy.html ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Question. What is DNA ? DNA consist on atoms and electromagnetic fields. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em field without Electron It means the source of this em field must be an Electron Then we need to write : DNA is atoms, electron (s) and electromagnetic fields. The simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas and many theories. In the other words, we don’t know what electron is. In my opinion, if we understand electron we will better understand DNA. ==. On Jan 20, 12:52 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 18 Jan 2013, at 09:32, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Does DNA have consciousness to create the double helix from zygote to child ? Probably not. But the complex DNA+cytoplasm might have some consciousness on vaster scale. very hard to decide this today. Then DNA +cytoplasm might have the universal Turing machine consciousness, which might be trivial tough, and quite disconnected from our computational history. This might be trivial consciousness. I am not sure. Bruno ==. On Jan 18, 1:25 am, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:04 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “ Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ? Are they fool men or maybe they know that there are two methods of cognitions. ===.. Where does the information come from? Information can be transfered only by electromagnetic fields. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron who can transfer information. Can an electron be quant of information? What is an electron ? Now nobody knows. .. Big bang About “ big bang” is written many thick books. But nobody knows the reason of the “Big Bang”. I know. The action, when the God compresses all Universe into his palm, we named ‘ a singular point’. And action, when the God opens his palm, we named the ‘big bang. Actually the name should be Meta-Bang for Metaverse creation and reserve the word Big-Bang for Universe creation. I agree that the Metaverse comes from a primordial 26d singularity. Richard # And the Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII declared this in 1951. http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/ =. Question: Does DNA Know Geometry ? I suspect that DNA came from the geometry of general relativity with torsion. Can you think of any other geometry the double helix could be based on by analogy? ===... ‘ Scientific knowledge is fundamentally paradoxical.’ / someone / ‘. ., and many feel that physics is just the real deal about metaphysics. ‘ Bruno . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com . To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Science is a religion by itself.
I believe . . . . .you believe your opinion . . . my opinion . ... . . your meaning . . . my meaning . .. . . . The opinion of opinion . . . . . The meaning of meaning . . . . . And so is endless. ===. I Believe in Order to Understand. St. Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo, said, “I believe in order to understand” (credo ut intelligam) and centuries later, St. Anselm of Canterbury, echoed his statement in similar fashion: “I do not seek to understand in order that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.” These great Christian thinkers understood the proper use of reason must be preceded by faith in the proper object. Not faith in ourselves or science, but faith in God, specifically in His revelation of Himself in His Son Jesus Christ. Their statements echo the words of the writer of Hebrews when he said “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” (Hebrews 11:3 – NIV) http://carpediemcoramdeo.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/i-believe-in-order-to-understand/ I cannot believe in such method , in such way. I need to understand in order to believe. To believe in God, Souls . . .metaphysics . . .. etc I need proof, scientific proof with physical laws and formulas. =. Einstein said: “ One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike – and yet it is the most precious thing we have.” Why our science ‘is primitive and childlike’ ? Because we don’t know the basic things: what the vacuum is, what the quantum particle is ( they say it is math point), what an electron is (electron has six formulas and many theories) what is the reason of 'dualism of particle' ? . . . . etc . . . etc. =. After 30 years of thinking about that we call ‘philosophy of physics ‘ I wrote my ideas briefly: God is a Scientist and Atheist. Science is a religion by itself. Why? Because the God can create and govern the Universe only using physical laws, formulas, equations. Here is the scheme of His plan. =. God : Ten Scientific Commandments. 1. Vacuum: T=0K, E= , p= 0, t= . 2. Particles: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1. 3. Photon: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb. ... 4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, E=h*f , e^2=ach* . 5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : HeII -- HeI -- H -- . . . 6. Proton: (p). 7. The evolution of interaction between Photon/Electron and Proton: a) electromagnetic, b) nuclear, c) biological. 8. The Physical Laws: a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy / Mass, b) Pauli Exclusion Law, c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law. 9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness. 10. Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation. ===. I am not physicist and not philosopher. I call myself a ‘peasant’. And if a peasant can understand the Scheme (!) of Universe , then everybody, using usual human logic, can understand too. ==. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Does DNA know geometry ? Did DNA create child from zygote by the chance ? =. The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type a given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare. The probability of a monkey exactly typing a complete work such as Shakespeare's Hamlet is so tiny that the chance of it occurring during a period of time of the order of the age of the universe is extremely low, but not zero. . . . . . If there are as many monkeys as there are particles in the observable universe . . . . the probability of the monkeys replicating even a short book is nearly zero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem It means that according to Probability theory it is impossible to create by chance Intellect Existence during 14 billions years after ‘big bang’. Another example. Proteins With Only Left-Handed Components http://creationsafaris.com/epoi_c04.htm The probability that an average-size protein molecule of the smallest theoretically possible living thing would happen to contain only left-handed amino acids is, therefore, 1 in 10123, on the average. That is a rather discouraging chance. To get the feel of that number, let’s look at it with all the 123 zeros: There is, on the average, 1 chance in – 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 that all of the amino acids of a particular protein molecule would be left-handed! Conclusion: No Conceivable Probability We find that there is no lessening of confusion until one accepts the logic that “intelligent” systems could not arise without an intelligent Designer. http://creationsafaris.com/epoi_c04.htm # According to the probability theory to create the origin of life from ' the soup ' of proteins by the chance is 1 from 10^(-255). This quantity is so small that it seems this way of creation is impossible : not by chance the existence began. ==. Question. Does DNA have consciousness to create an intellectual child from zygote? ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Does DNA have consciousness to create the double helix from zygote to child ? ==. On Jan 18, 1:25 am, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:04 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “ Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ? Are they fool men or maybe they know that there are two methods of cognitions. ===.. Where does the information come from? Information can be transfered only by electromagnetic fields. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron who can transfer information. Can an electron be quant of information? What is an electron ? Now nobody knows. .. Big bang About “ big bang” is written many thick books. But nobody knows the reason of the “Big Bang”. I know. The action, when the God compresses all Universe into his palm, we named ‘ a singular point’. And action, when the God opens his palm, we named the ‘big bang. Actually the name should be Meta-Bang for Metaverse creation and reserve the word Big-Bang for Universe creation. I agree that the Metaverse comes from a primordial 26d singularity. Richard # And the Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII declared this in 1951. http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/ =. Question: Does DNA Know Geometry ? I suspect that DNA came from the geometry of general relativity with torsion. Can you think of any other geometry the double helix could be based on by analogy? ===... ‘ Scientific knowledge is fundamentally paradoxical.’ / someone / ‘. ., and many feel that physics is just the real deal about metaphysics. ‘ Bruno . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Did these 'algorithmically forms' by the chance created child from zygote? = On Jan 18, 12:27 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: DNA probably forms algorithmically On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:32 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Does DNA have consciousness to create the double helix from zygote to child ? ==. On Jan 18, 1:25 am, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:04 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “ Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ? Are they fool men or maybe they know that there are two methods of cognitions. ===.. Where does the information come from? Information can be transfered only by electromagnetic fields. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron who can transfer information. Can an electron be quant of information? What is an electron ? Now nobody knows. .. Big bang About “ big bang” is written many thick books. But nobody knows the reason of the “Big Bang”. I know. The action, when the God compresses all Universe into his palm, we named ‘ a singular point’. And action, when the God opens his palm, we named the ‘big bang. Actually the name should be Meta-Bang for Metaverse creation and reserve the word Big-Bang for Universe creation. I agree that the Metaverse comes from a primordial 26d singularity. Richard # And the Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII declared this in 1951. http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/ =. Question: Does DNA Know Geometry ? I suspect that DNA came from the geometry of general relativity with torsion. Can you think of any other geometry the double helix could be based on by analogy? ===... ‘ Scientific knowledge is fundamentally paradoxical.’ / someone / ‘. ., and many feel that physics is just the real deal about metaphysics. ‘ Bruno . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.-Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Idealism, theology, and the world of science Options
Descartes : “ I think, therefore I am “ Zen / Tibetan Buddhist monks : I think not, therefore I am Why they say: ' Mind for others , no mind for me' ? Are they fool men or maybe they know that there are two methods of cognitions. ===.. Where does the information come from? Information can be transfered only by electromagnetic fields. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron who can transfer information. Can an electron be quant of information? What is an electron ? Now nobody knows. .. Big bang About “ big bang” is written many thick books. But nobody knows the reason of the “Big Bang”. I know. The action, when the God compresses all Universe into his palm, we named ‘ a singular point’. And action, when the God opens his palm, we named the ‘big bang. # And the Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII declared this in 1951. http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/ =. Question: Does DNA Know Geometry ? ===... ‘ Scientific knowledge is fundamentally paradoxical.’ / someone / ‘. ., and many feel that physics is just the real deal about metaphysics. ‘ Bruno . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: the curse of materialism
The Newtonian world cannot exist without Quantum world and vice versa. We cannot separate the Quantum theory from Classical theory, the Quantum world from Newtonian material world. The quantum world as real as the physical matter world and we need understand and celebrate their unity. Where is problem ? The problem is, that we don’t know how to unite them together. Why ? Because we don’t know what Quantum world is and it is almost impossible for us to believe that It can be Aristotle’s metaphysical world. Where is the key to solving this problem ? The key has name. Its name is ‘ Quantum of Light’. ==. P.S. ‘ All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?' Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken. ‘ / Einstein / ===.. On Jan 16, 11:01 am, Roger Cloughrclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi socra...@bezeqint.net You want to know why nobody understands QM ? Because QM is nonphysical, but is treated as being physical. This might be called the curse of materialism. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/16/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: socra...@bezeqint.net Receiver: Everything List Time: 2013-01-15, 11:20:20 Subject: Re: Science is a religion by itself. Physics and Metaphysics. John Polkinghorne and his book ? Quantum theory?.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne === . John Polkinghorne took epigraph for his book ? Quantum theory? the Feynman? thought : ? I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. ? Why?Because, he wrote: ? ,we do not understand the theory as fully as we should. We shall see in what follows that important interpretative issues remain unresolved. They will demand for their eventual settlement not only physical insight but also metaphysical decision ?. / preface/ ? Serious interpretative problems remain unresolved, and these are the subject of continuing dispute? / page 40/ ? If the study of quantum physics teaches one anything, it is that the world is full of surprises? / page 87 / ? Metaphysical criteria that the scientific community take very seriously in assessing the weight to put on a theory include: . . . .? / page 88 / ?uantum theory is certainly strange and surprising, . . .? / page92 / ? Wave / particle duality is a highly surprising and instructive phenomenon, . .? / page 92 / ==. In my opinion John Polkinghorne was right writing what to understand and to solve the problems of the Universe: ? They will demand for their eventual settlement not only physical insight but also metaphysical decision ?. / preface / And, maybe, Aristotle was right separating the world and knowledge on two parts: Physics and Metaphysics. === .Somebody wrote: The science will purify the religion of the ?ross?. I agree. ===. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Physics and Metaphysics. John Polkinghorne and his book ‘ Quantum theory’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne === . John Polkinghorne took epigraph for his book ‘ Quantum theory’ the Feynman’s thought : ‘ I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. ‘ Why? Because, he wrote: ‘ ,we do not understand the theory as fully as we should. We shall see in what follows that important interpretative issues remain unresolved. They will demand for their eventual settlement not only physical insight but also metaphysical decision ’. / preface/ ‘ Serious interpretative problems remain unresolved, and these are the subject of continuing dispute’ / page 40/ ‘ If the study of quantum physics teaches one anything, it is that the world is full of surprises’ / page 87 / ‘ Metaphysical criteria that the scientific community take very seriously in assessing the weight to put on a theory include: . . . .’ / page 88 / ‘Quantum theory is certainly strange and surprising, . . .’ / page92 / ‘ Wave / particle duality is a highly surprising and instructive phenomenon, . .’ / page 92 / ==. In my opinion John Polkinghorne was right writing what to understand and to solve the problems of the Universe: ‘ They will demand for their eventual settlement not only physical insight but also metaphysical decision ’. / preface / And, maybe, Aristotle was right separating the world and knowledge on two parts: Physics and Metaphysics. === . Somebody wrote: The science will purify the religion of the “dross”. I agree. ===. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
I will try to understand situation from today fashion physical point of view. =. Let us say that Plato's world of ideas is a dark mass ( because nobody knows that their are). And Leibniz monadas and Kant's things-in- themselves are quantum particles ( because nobody knows their physical parameters). We can suppose that the dark mass (the world of ideas) is consist of quantum particles (monads / things-in-themselves). And then all these monadas / quantum particles were pressed together in . . . . a 'singular point ' . . . by some power. But after some time they felt themselves uncomfortable and . . . . separated as a 'big bang'. In this way we can understand the connection between physics and philosophy of idealism and the existence ( from today point of view) . If somebody didn't understand me I can explain the modern physical point of view on existence in the other words. You was born because your mother was pregnant, and your mother was born because you was pregnant. == socratus On Jan 14, 5:44 pm, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 13 Jan 2013, at 07:22, socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: The Seven Hermetic Principles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTFCpkrM2iI =. 1. The Universe is something Intellectual. 2. As above, so below. 3. From potential to active existence. 4. Everything in the Universe can vibrate. 5. Everything in the Universe has its cause. 6. Everything in the Universe has its opposite. 7. The Universe has its own rhythm. Hmm... This is already too much Aristotelian to fit with computationalism. / Hermes Trismegistus / =. Can these Seven Hermetic Principles be explained by physical laws and formulas ? We have first to explain the physical laws appearances, and formula, in comp, and thus in arithmetic. See (*) for a concise explanation. Bruno (*) http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/publications/SANE2004MARCHALAbstract... http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Thanks. Is it possible to explain ' monads' of Leibniz or Kant's ' thing-in-itself ' from physical point of view ? Is it possible to explain the 'philosophy of Idealism ' using physical laws and formulas ? =. On Jan 13, 2:30 pm, Roger Cloughrclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi socra...@bezeqint.net Not exactly prove but explain: 1. means that there is an intelligence beyond the universe 2. is not true according to Leibniz. Above is perfect, below is contingent. 3. According to Leibniz, all existence is active (because alive) 4. I have linked Leibniz to Sheldrake, and he speaks of morphic resonances. 5. Is the principle of sufficent reason. 6. Can't give a basis for this. 7. same as 4. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 1/13/2013 Forever is a long time, especially near the end. - Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: socra...@bezeqint.net Receiver: Everything List Time: 2013-01-13, 01:22:32 Subject: Science is a religion by itself. The Seven Hermetic Principleshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTFCpkrM2iI =. 1. The Universe is something Intellectual. 2. As above, so below. 3. From potential to active existence. 4. Everything in the Universe can vibrate. 5. Everything in the Universe has its cause. 6. Everything in the Universe has its opposite. 7. The Universe has its own rhythm. / Hermes Trismegistus / =. Can these Seven Hermetic Principles be explained by physical laws and formulas ? ===? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Science is a religion by itself.
The Seven Hermetic Principles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTFCpkrM2iI =. 1. The Universe is something Intellectual. 2. As above, so below. 3. From potential to active existence. 4. Everything in the Universe can vibrate. 5. Everything in the Universe has its cause. 6. Everything in the Universe has its opposite. 7. The Universe has its own rhythm. / Hermes Trismegistus / =. Can these Seven Hermetic Principles be explained by physical laws and formulas ? ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
The Universe ( as a whole) is a Double World: next to Matter World ( a few % of whole mass of Universe) exist Vacuum World ( with more than 90% of whole mass of Universe). Question: How can the more than 90% of Vacuum Mass in the Universe (dark mass, dark energy, quantum virtual particles, particles of ideal gas) create a few % of Matter Mass, which give possibility to many scientists and philosophers to say that God doesn’t exist ? ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
What is vacuum? =. The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description of something more complex? / Paul Dirac ./ # The most fundamental question facing 21st century physics will be: What is the vacuum? As quantum mechanics teaches us, with its zero point energy this vacuum is not empty and the word vacuum is a gross misnomer! / Prof. Friedwardt Winterberg / # Wikipedia : “ Unfortunately neither the concept of space nor of time is well defined, resulting in a dilemma. If we don't know the character of time nor of space, how can we characterize either? “ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime # Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic, said Peter Milonni from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. # Although we are used to thinking of empty space as containing nothing at all, and therefore having zero energy, the quantum rules say that there is some uncertainty about this. Perhaps each tiny bit of the vacuum actually contains rather a lot of energy. If the vacuum contained enough energy, it could convert this into particles, in line with E-Mc^2. / Book: Stephen Hawking. Pages 147-148. By Michael White and John Gribbin. / # Somehow, the energy is extracted from the vacuum and turned into particles...Don't try it in your basement, but you can do it. / University of Chicago cosmologist Rocky Kolb./ # Vacuum -- the very name suggests emptiness and nothingness – is actually a realm rife with potentiality, courtesy of the laws of quantum electrodynamics (QED). According to QED, additional, albeit virtual, particles can be created in the vacuum, allowing light-light interactions. http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/768.html # When the next revolution rocks physics, chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless infinite void. http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-of-everything ! ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Book ‘Dreams of a final theory’. / By Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 / Page 66. ‘ Most scientists use quantum mechanics every day in they working lives without needing to worry about the fundamental problem of its interpretation. . . .they do not worry about it. A year or so ago . . . . . our conversation turned to a young theorist who had been quite promising as a graduate student and who had then dropped out of sight. I asked Phil what had interfered with the ex-student’s research. Phil shook his head sadly and said: ‘ He tried to understand quantum mechanics.’ (!) ===. Conclusion. Don’t try to understand quantum theory if you want to reach success. ==. Page 138. ‘ It is true . . . there is such a thing as absolute zero; we cannot reach temperatures below absolute zero not because we are not sufficiently clever but because temperatures below absolute zero simple have no meaning.’ My opinion. It is true we cannot reach the zero temperature T=0K. But just because we cannot reach this Vacuum’s parameter, does it mean that it have no meaning ? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? If unseen virtual antiparticles can appear from vacuum (!) ( Vacuum’s fluctuations / transformation / polarization ) and we can observe them as a real particles doesn’t it mean that vacuum itself is a real structure, that without vacuum we haven’t matter world. ==. About that philosophy we are talking if we don't know what is the vacuum, what is the quantum particle ( they say it is math point), what is an electron (electron has six formulas and many theories) what is the reason of 'dualism of particle' . . . . etc ? =. P.S. Well, that's Philosophy I've read, And Law and Medicine, and I fear Theology, too, from A to Z; Hard studies all, that have cost me dear. And so I sit, poor silly man No wiser now than when I began. / Faust, lines 354–59. / ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
On Jan 10, 12:12 pm, Richard Ruquist yann...@gmail.com wrote: Particles in the vacuum ( T=0K ) have no volumes ( according to the laws of thermodynamics ) Wrong According to Charle’s law and the consequence of the third law of thermodynamics as the thermodynamic temperature of a system approaches absolute zero the volume of particles approaches zero too. ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Science is a religion by itself.
Nobody has seen primary matter, but the believer in it usually attribute it a fundamental role in our existence. ===. What is a primary matter from modern scientific point of view ? It is 'quantum virtual particles' and ' cosmic dark mass and energy' The problem is that nobody explain their concrete physical parameters. I explain this loss link. The ' quantum virtual particles ' have following concrete parameters: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1. ===.. socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Jan 11, 7:24 am, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Nobody has seen primary matter, but the believer in it usually attribute it a fundamental role in our existence. ===. What is a primary matter from modern scientific point of view ? It is 'quantum virtual particles' and ' cosmic dark mass and energy' The problem is that nobody explain their concrete physical parameters. I explain this loss link. The ' quantum virtual particles ' have following concrete parameters: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1, e^i(pi)= -1. ===.. socratus Pre-universe ( pre-condition) is vacuum : T=0K The Universe ( as a whole) is a double World: next to Material World ( a few % of whole mass of the Universe) exist Vacuum World ( with more than 90% of whole mass of the Universe). = socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Agreed, and I hope that truth is true . Richard Truth is true !!! / Richard / Very good proof. . . . . . . and . . ‘. . by Beauty that beautiful things are beautiful . . . by largeness that large things are large and larger things larger, and by smallness that smaller things ate smaller . . . . . . . by tallness one man is taller than another . . . . . . . and the shorter is shorter by the same ; . . . . .’ about 2500 years ago Plato wrote. =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Whoever invented the word God invented atheism.
Can we say that physical particles are often localised volumes that are full of infinities of discrete number relations Sounds to much physicalist for me (or comp). -- Particles in the vacuum ( T=0K ) have no volumes ( according to the laws of thermodynamics ) therefore we think that they have infinite parameters . socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Jan 7, 6:42 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:47 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Science is a religion by itself. Why? Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe only using physical laws, formulas, equations. Then God must get very board because that really doesn't leave much for Him to do. Why do you even bother to invent Him? John K Clark I don't need ' to invent Him.' He and His Souls are hidden in the formulas == socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Jan 7, 7:53 pm, John Clark johnkcl...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Theism, like atheism, is unprovable. Why is that? You're saying that even though God is omnipotent He is incapable of proving His existence to us. I can prove my existence to you but God can not. That seems a bit odd to me. John K Clark God is Atheist by His nature. == -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Jan 8, 1:48 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/7/2013 10:47 AM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 spudboy...@aol.com mailto:spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Consider God, a word for Mind OK, I have a mind therefore I am God. I said it before I'll say it again, for some strange reason that is unknown to me many people are willing to abandon the idea of God but not the word G-O-D. Those letters and in that sequence (DOG just will not do) MUST be preserved and it doesn't matter what it means. An observation also made by Bertrand Russell,People are more unwilling to give up the word 'God' than to give up the idea for which the word has hitherto stood Brent In beginning was Word. And the Word was written by the formula: T=0K. === -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
On Jan 8, 12:42 pm, Roger Cloughrclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi meekerdb Russell was a brilliant logician, but that's all he was. Brent To have logical mind is very good. But our brain sometime works unconscious. =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Science is a religion by itself.
Quantum electrodynamics + Biology = Who am I ? ==. Cells make copies of themselves. Different cells make different copies of themselves. Cells come in all shapes and sizes. Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! ) and by chance ( or not by chance ) they change own geometrical form from zygote to a child. Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you. Cells they are you ( !? ) This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view. # Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’ But this explanation is not complete. Cells have an energy / electrical potential. Cells have an electromagnetic field. Therefore we need to say: ‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’ ===. Is this formulation correct? Of course it is correct. Why? Because: Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity) refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields produced by living cells, tissues or organisms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioelectromagnetism What does it mean? It means there isn’t biological cell without electromagnetic fields. It means that in the cell we have two ( 2 ) substances: matter and electromagnetic fields. And in 1985 Richard P. Feynman wrote book: QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter The idea of book - the interaction between light ( electromagnetic fields ) and matter is strange. He wrote: ‘ The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd. ‘ / page 10. / # Once again: 1. Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you. 2. We cannot understand their interaction and therefore we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’ ==. Where does electromagnetic field come from ? =. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t electromagnetic field ( em waves ) without Electron It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron The electron and the em waves they are physical reality Can evolution of consciousness begin on electron’s level? ==. Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe Electron takes important part in this work. # 1900, 1905 Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. 1916 Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c. 1928 Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy: +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s energy is infinite: E= ∞ Questions. Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ? Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ? a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass b) Maxwell’s equations c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law e) Fermi-Dirac statistics. Nobody knows. . What is an electron ? Now nobody knows In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron All of them are problematical. We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is an electron ? . Ladies and Gentlemen ! Friends ! The banal Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we are. =. According to Pauli Exclusion Principle only one single electron can be in the atom. This electron reanimates the atom. This electron manages the atom. If the atom contains more than one electron (for example - two) then this atom represents a Siamese twins. Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such children. ( ! ) Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it. ( ! ) ==. Question: Can consciousness be introduced into physics? Electron gives the answer to this question. =. Brain and Electron. Human brain works on two levels: consciousness and subconsciousness. The neurons of brain create these two levels. So, that it means consciousness and subconsciousness from physical point of view ( interaction between billions and billions neurons and electron). It can only mean that the state of neurons in these two situations is different. How can we understand these different states of neurons? How does the brain generate consciousness? We can understand this situation only on the quantum level, only using Quantum theory. But there isn’t QT without Quantum of Light and Electron. So, what is interaction between Quantum of Light, Electron and brain ? Nobody knows. Maybe therefore Michael Talbot wrote: ‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may not be the brain that produce consciousness, but rather consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’ / Book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ page 160. by Michael Talbot./ # Conclusion: We are cells + Electron. ( ! ) We must understand not only the cells, brain but electron too. And when we understand the Electron we will know the Ultimate
Science is a religion by itself.
Science is a religion by itself. Why? Becouse the God can create and govern the Universe only using physical laws, formulas, equations. Here is the scheme of His plane. =. God : Ten Scientific Commandments. § 1. Vacuum: T=0K, E= ∞ ,p= 0, t=∞ . § 2. Particles: C/D=pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, i^2=-1. § 3. Photon: h=1, c=1, h=E/t, h=kb. § 4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, E=h*f , e^2=ach* . § 5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : HeII -- HeI -- H -- . . . § 6. Proton: (p). § 7. The evolution of interaction between Photon/Electron and Proton: a) electromagnetic, b) nuclear, c) biological. § 8. The Physical Laws: a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy/ Mass, b) Pauli Exclusion Law, c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law. § 9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness. § 10. Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation. ===. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade.
Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. =. 1. http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Cosmos/FlatnessProblem.html 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatness_problem 3. http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/F/Flatness+Problem 4. . . . etc. =… There are many different spaces: 2 dimension space, 3D space, 4D, 5D . . . .. .10D, 11D . . . . maybe more. There are also ‘ closed’ and ‘open’ spaces. There are many topological spaces too. Question: Which space has the Universe as a whole? Answer: It is fact: the Universe as a whole has exactly the required density of matter to be flat. The average density of matter in the universe (even incorporating a dark mass and dark energy ) is equal to or less than critical density and therefore the universe as a whole is a flat infinite continuum. ==.. But the physicists refuse to admit this fact . Why ? Because they don’t know that to do with ‘ a flat infinite continuum’. And they ‘ burned ‘ the real infinite flat cosmological continuum ( using different abstract models ) to rid it of its infinite flatness. And from Einstein’s time they discus about cosmological constant that will close the flat- open Universe into a close- sphere. ==.. The Universe as a whole is an Infinite Flat Universe. Only in some rare places the Infinite Flatness is breaked. ==.. So, instead to say : ‘ It is fact: the Universe as a whole is flat, they say: ‘To take the Universe as an infinite flat space - it is impossible fact. There’s something wrong with the Universe. ‘ =.. P.S. ' But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice. 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.' / Lewis Carroll. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. / ==.. Vacuum is an Empty space between billions and billions Galaxies. Now (!) the physicists think (!) that the Universe as whole has temperature: T= 2,7K . The parameter T=2,7K is not constant. It is temporal and goes down. In the future it will come to T= 0K. From quantum point of view vacuum is some kind of Energy space: E= ∞ The average density of matter in the universe (even incorporating a dark mass and dark energy ) is equal to or less than critical density ( p= 10^30g/sm^3 ) and therefore the universe as a whole is a flat infinite continuum. It is true we cannot reach the T= 0K and we also cannot reach this density ( p= 10^30g/sm^3 ) of vacuum. But just because we cannot reach this Vacuum’s parameters does it mean that it cannot exist ? # If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? If unseen virtual antiparticles can appear from vacuum (!) ( Vacuum’s fluctuations / transformation / polarization ) and we can observe them as a real particles doesn’t it mean that vacuum itself is an Absolute Reference Frame which has its own physical parameter – Absolute Zero: T=0K. # The infinite space-vacuum is timeless, the eternity reign there. ==.. All the best. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Physics and Tautology.
Physics and Tautology. =. 1 Where did the masses for ‘ big bang ‘ come from ? These masses came from surrounding space. 2 Where did these masses from surrounding space come from ? These masses came from ‘big bang’. ===. Why is he poor ? Because he is stupid. Why is he stupid? Because he is poor. ===. The ‘big bang’ doesn’t give answer to the question: where did the mass come from ? To understand this we need go out from ‘ big bang’ . But ‘ the big bang theory is an effort to explain what happened at the very beginning of our universe. Prior to that moment there was nothing;’ So, . . where do we go out ? ==. Israel Socratus. … So, . . where do we go out ? ==. If we go out of mass then it can be only one possibility - - we will enter into an empty space. ==. ‘ A world without masses, without electrons, without an electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty world is flat. But if masses appear, if charged particles appear, if an electromagnetic field appears then our world becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.’ / Book ‘Albert Einstein’ The page 116 . by Leopold Infeld. / ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Physics and Tautology.
Physics and Tautology. =. 1 Where did the masses for ‘ big bang ‘ come from ? These masses came from surrounding space. 2 Where did these masses from surrounding space come from ? These masses came from ‘big bang’. ===. Why he is poor ? Because he is stupid. Why he is stupid? Because he is poor. ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Socratus: Metaphysics ( science and religion)
Socratus: Metaphysics ( science and religion) ==. Physics and Religion: a) T=0K b) c/d=pi, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0 Mathematics and Religion: i^2= -1, e^ipi= -1 Biology and Religion: Vitalism Practice and Religion: Meditation, Parapsychology. ==. Israel Socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/zH868csOB-8J. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Gravity and Vacuum.
Gravity and Vacuum. =. Einstein was mistaken using his Gravitation theory to the all Universe as a whole. The Gravitation theory doesn’t work in the Universe as a whole. The Gravitation theory is a local theory. Why? Because the detected material mass of the matter in the Universe ( the cosmological constant / the critical density) is so small ( the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3 ) that it cannot ‘close’ the Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe as whole must be ‘open’, endless, infinite. The Universe as a whole is an Infinite Pure Vacuum: T=0K. More concrete: § 1. Vacuum: T= 0K, E= ∞ , p = 0, t =∞ . =. Another argument: One postulate of SRT says: the speed of quantum of light in a Vacuum is a constant ( c= 299,792,458 km/ sec =1, Michelson-Morley experiment ). In this movement quantum of light doesn’t have time. The time is ‘stopped ‘ for him. But this is possible only if his reference frame – vacuum - also doesn’t have time. It means that the reference frame – Vacuum is an Eternal Continuum. =.. One more argument. According to QED when electron interacts with vacuum its parameters becomes infinite. This is possible only when Vacuum itself is an Infinite Continuum. 3. The Infinity appears in many physical and mathematical problems. Physicists don’t know that to do with ‘ infinite’ and therefore we can read: Infinity is the cause of the crisis in Physics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity 4, ‘ A world without masses, without electrons, without an electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty world is flat. But if masses appear, if charged particles appear, if an electromagnetic field appears then our world becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.’ / Book ‘Albert Einstein’ The page 116 . by Leopold Infeld. / It means: a). ‘A world without masses, without electrons, without an electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty world is flat.’ – it is a Vacuum World. b). ‘But if masses appear, if charged particles appear, if an electromagnetic field appears ‘ - / - in the flat vacuum - , / ‘ then our world becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.’ – it is Material World of our stars and planets. c). We have two (2) Worlds: Vacuum and Material and we need to understand their interaction. ==. All the best. Israel Sadovnik Socratus ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Einstein and Socratus.
Einstein and Socratus. =. Einstein, you was mistaken using your Gravitation theory to the all Universe as a whole. The Gravitation theory doesn’t work in the Universe as a whole. The Gravitation theory is a local theory. Why? Because the detected material mass of the matter in the Universe ( the cosmological constant / the critical density) is so small ( the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3 ) that it cannot ‘close’ the Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe as whole must be ‘open’, endless, infinite. The Universe as a whole is an Infinite Pure Vacuum: T=0K. More concrete: § 1. Vacuum: T= 0K, E= ∞ , p = 0, t =∞ . =. We have two (2) Worlds: Vacuum and Material and we need to understand their interaction. ==. Socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Einstein and Formulas.
Einstein and Formulas. =. Einstein said, that the scientist does not think with formulas. But, dear Einstein, please see how nice to think with the help of these formulas: you can imagine the whole picture of Existence’s creation. =. § 1. Vacuum: T= 0K, E= ∞ , p = 0, t =∞ . § 2. Particles: C/D= pi=3,14, R/N=k, E/M=c^2, h=0, c=0, i^2=-1. § 3. Photon: h=E/t, h=kb, h=1, c=1. § 4. Electron: h*=h/2pi, c1, E=h*f , e^2=ach* . § 5. Gravity, Star formation: h*f = kTlogW : He II -- He I -- H -- . . . § 6. Proton: (p). § 7. The evolution of interaction between Photon / Electron and Proton: a) electromagnetic, b) nuclear, c) biological. § 8. The Physical Laws: a) Law of Conservation and Transformation Energy/ Mass, b) Pauli Exclusion Law, c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Law. § 9. Brain: Dualism of Consciousness. § 10. Test and Practice: Parapsychology. Meditation. ===. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik Socratus . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Does somebody know what Vacuum is ?
Can Perfect Vacuum as a ' Nothing' as ‘ an Infinite Space’ as an Absolute Reference Frame have Concrete Physical Properties ? Socratus =. One Concrete Physical Properties of Vacuum is Absolute Zero. What is Absolute Zero ? Classic Physics says: It is a dead space. Quantum Physics says: It is not a dead space. There are ‘ Virtual Particles’ exist. What is Absolute Zero ? =. Socratus ===. P.S. What is Absolute Zero ? Where is a wise answer and where is a fool answer if these two theories ( Classical and Quantum theories) are correct ? ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Does somebody know what Vacuum is ?
Does somebody know what Vacuum is ? 1. Book : ‘Dreams of a final theory’ by Steven Weinberg. Page 138. ‘ It is true . . . there is such a thing as absolute zero; we cannot reach temperatures below absolute zero not because we are not sufficiently clever but because temperatures below absolute zero simple have no meaning.’ / Steven Weinberg. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979 / 2. ‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive of as God within the universe of the new physics, this ground state, coherent quantum vacuum might be a good place to start.’ / Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208 by Danah Zohar. / 3. And Paul Dirac wrote: ‘ The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description of something more complex? ‘ ==. Does somebody know what Vacuum is ? ==. Socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.
What is the electron configuration ? Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology? http://www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.
# A New Limit on Photon Mass. http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/625-2.html ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.
Electron’s fine structure constant.
=.
It is interesting to understand the Sommerfeld formula:
a= e^2 / h*c, where {a} is fine structure constant: 1/137
Feynman expressed (a ) quantity as
‘ by the god given damnation to all physicists ‘.
But the fine structure constant is not independent quantity,
it is only part of formula of an electron: e^2=h*ca .
The constant {a} is only one of three constants which
belong to the formula of electron: e^2=h*ca.
(a), (c), (h*) are three constants which created the electron.
And if we don’t know (a) then we don’t know what electron is.
Therefore in the internet is possible to find 100 different models
of electron. For example.
The book What is the Electron?
Volodimir Simulik
Montreal, Canada. 2005. /
In this book:
‘ More than ten different models of the electron are presented here.
(!!!)
More than twenty models are discussed briefly. (!!!)
Thus, the book gives a complete picture of contemporary theoretical
thinking (traditional and new) about the physics of the electron.’
ftp://210.45.114.81/physics/%CA%E9%BC%AE/What%20Is%20the%20Electron%20by%20Volodimir%20Simulik%20.pdf
All of these models are problematical.
We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics.
But how can we trust them if we don’t know what electron is.
And somebody wrote:
If I well remember Einstein once said about particle physics:
why do we study some many particles?
Understand really what is an electron would be enough.
. . .
‘ Finding the structure of the electron will be the key
to finding the origin of the natural laws.’
=.
By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand
the closest and simplest particle photon /electron and
then to study the far away spaces and another particles.
=.
Best withes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
==.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Matter and Form: when they are paradoxical.
Matter and Form: when they are paradoxical. =. Wood is itself a matter. Wood is itself a form, a geometrical form. A cupboard made of wood is a real whole of form and matter. Geometrical form and matter are 'grown together' in it. No form exist without matter. Nor can there be matter without form. But in micro-physics, physicists took up another conception. According to this doctrine matter does exist, but the form is not a physical object. The form is disappeared from the physical reality. They works with a 'point'. Question. Isn’t physics a science of the matter, form, energy and motion ? Aren’t all these subjects 'grown together' ? Take away one subject and you have all modern paradoxes in the physics. =. Israel Socratus. =. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron.
A crazy thoughts about structure of Electron. =. Electron isn’t a point. Electron has a geometrical form. Electron’s geometrical form isn’t static, isn’t firm. Electron’s geometrical form can be changed by his own inner spin. Electron’s own inner spin can be described with three ( 3 ) formulas: Plank: h=Et, Einstein: h=kb, Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: h*=h/2pi. The speed of photon is minimal : c=1. The speed of electron is c1 Quantum of light, photon and electron are one and the same particle in different conditions. =. Question: Where did electron come from? Answer: Electron came from the Kingdom of Coldness: T=0K. =. All the best. Israel Socratus ===. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
On Apr 23, 9:20 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:45 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant. Socratus Yes, that's exactly what I said. Jesse =. Why the result is constant ? Because all different inertial frames ( stars and planets of billions and billions galaxies ) exist in infinite motionless, stationary, fixed (rest) reference frame of Vacuum. Socratus Your because is a non sequitur argument though--you haven't given any logical argument as to why a rest frame of the vacuum is needed, or whether there could be any way to experimentally test this idea. As long as any single inertial frame measures (1) that rulers moving relative to that frame are contracted by the length contraction factor of relativity, and also measures (2) that clocks moving relative to that frame are slowed down by the time dilation factor, and as long as this frame also measures (3) that light rays have the same speed c in all directions in that frame, then you can prove mathematically that these conditions 1-3 are sufficient to guarantee that all other inertial frames will also measure light rays to move at c relative to themselves if they use their own rulers and clocks. So although it's possible there is some special inertial frame like the rest frame of the aether or what you call the reference frame of Vacuum, such a thing is in no way *needed* in order to guarantee that all inertial frames will measure light to move at c, all that's needed are that the 3 conditions I mentioned above hold in any one inertial frame (it doesn't matter which, since if they hold in any one they will hold in every other too). It would be mathematically impossible to come up with a theory where the conditions 1-3 above hold, but all inertial observers *don't* measure light to move at c in their own frame. === P.S. Remember gentlemen, we have not proven the aether does not exist, we have only proven we do not need it (for mathematical purposes).. / Einstein's University of Leyden lecture of May 5, 1920. / ==. I agree, but if a hypothesis is mathematically unnecessary and also leads to absolutely no new experimental predictions, it cannot really be considered an independent theory of physics, though one might adopt it as a sort of philosophical interpretation, similar to Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics described athttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/(which also makes no new testable predictions different from standard quantum mechanics). So, aether theories can be considered as philosophical interpretations of relativity, though some good arguments against the plausibility of such interpretations are offered athttps://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!msg/sci.physics.relativi... Jesse On Apr 23, 2:17 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: No, none of the postulates take the vacuum as a reference frame, which doesn't make sense since a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame (there are no landmarks in a vacuum that could be used to measure the velocity of the vacuum relative to anything else). One postulate does talk about the speed of light in a vacuum, but they're still talking about the speed of light as measured in an inertial frame--in a vacuum is just there to specify that it's not talking about a light beam moving through some measurable medium like water or air. Jesse ==. One postulate says: In vacuum the speed of quantum of light is constant. Yes, but in vacuum does not mean relative to the vacuum here, it just means that the light ray in question is moving through a vacuum rather than some medium like air or water. The speed of the light ray is still being measured relative to whatever inertial reference frame you choose to use. Because in vacuum the speed of quantum of light is maximum and time is stopped, become infinite, unlimited. It means that the reference frame of vacuum is also infinite, unlimited. By in vacuum do you mean relative to a vacuum rather than just light traveling through a vacuum? How would you to propose to measure the speed of light relative to the vacuum, or measure the speed of other objects (like the planet Earth) relative to the vacuum? If you can't measure these things then your statements aren't scientific ones, perhaps they are metaphysical beliefs of yours but you haven't given me any arguments for why I should agree with them. And infinity we cannot measure. But this doesn’t mean that infinite vacuum doesn’t exist. We have theories ( thermodynamics and quantum physics) which explain us
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
why a rest frame of the vacuum is needed, or whether there could be any way to experimentally test this idea. Jesse ===. # The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description of something more complex? / Paul Dirac ./ # The most fundamental question facing 21st century physics will be: What is the vacuum? As quantum mechanics teaches us, with its zero point energy this vacuum is not empty and the word vacuum is a gross misnomer! / Prof. Friedwardt Winterberg / # Wikipedia : “ Unfortunately neither the concept of space nor of time is well defined, resulting in a dilemma. If we don't know the character of time nor of space, how can we characterize either? “ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime # Now we know that the vacuum can have all sorts of wonderful effects over an enormous range of scales, from the microscopic to the cosmic, said Peter Milonni from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. # Although we are used to thinking of empty space as containing nothing at all, and therefore having zero energy, the quantum rules say that there is some uncertainty about this. Perhaps each tiny bit of the vacuum actually contains rather a lot of energy. If the vacuum contained enough energy, it could convert this into particles, in line with E-Mc^2. / Book: Stephen Hawking. Pages 147-148. By Michael White and John Gribbin. / # Somehow, the energy is extracted from the vacuum and turned into particles...Don't try it in your basement, but you can do it. / University of Chicago cosmologist Rocky Kolb./ # Vacuum -- the very name suggests emptiness and nothingness – is actually a realm rife with potentiality, courtesy of the laws of quantum electrodynamics (QED). According to QED, additional, albeit virtual, particles can be created in the vacuum, allowing light-light interactions. http://www.aip.org/pnu/2006/768.html # Dark energy may be vacuum http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-01/uoc-dem011607.php # An experiment. According to QED Electron in interaction with vacuum has infinity parameters ( energy, mass …etc ) Physicists do not understand what to do with infinite sizes, and therefore they have invented a method of renormalization, The method of renormalization is a method to sweep the dust under the carpet. / Feynman./ # When the next revolution rocks physics, chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless infinite void. http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-of-everything ! ==. # - Philosophy of ‘ Vacuum.’ ( Part 1 - My opinion.) 1. In beginning was Vacuum an Infinite / Eternal continuum. 2. Vacuum is not Empty space. ‘ Virtual particles’, ‘ dark matter’ and ‘zoo of elementary particles’ exist in the Vacuum. 3. Now (!) the physicists think (!) that the Universe as whole has temperature: T= 2,7K . The parameter T=2,7K is not constant. It is temporal and goes down. In the future it will come to T= 0K. 4. The simplest question: Which geometrical form can have the ‘ virtual particles’, ‘ the particles of dark matter’ , the ‘ zoo of elementary particles’ in reference frame T= 2,7K - –-- T= 0K ? The answer is: ‘ They must be flat particles.’ Why? Because according to Charle’s law and the consequence of the third law of thermodynamics as the thermodynamic temperature of a system approaches absolute zero the volume of particles approaches zero too. It means the particles must have flat forms. They must have geometrical form of a circle: pi= c /d =3,14 . . . . . . Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. … -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Who am I ?
Thank you Mr. John Mikes. My opinion. Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ? =. In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron The electron and the em waves they are physical reality Can evolution of consciousness of life begin on electron’s level? ==. Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe Electron takes important part in this work. # 1900, 1905 Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. 1916 Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c. 1928 Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy: +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s energy is infinite: E= ∞ Questions. Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ? Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ? a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass b) Maxwell’s equations c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law e) Fermi-Dirac statistics. Nobody knows. . What is an electron ? Now nobody knows In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron All of them are problematical. We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is an electron ? . Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations: One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own, that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers, that we get more out of them than was originally put into them. . Ladies and Gentlemen ! Friends ! The banal Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we are. =. Once again: Brain and Electron. Human brain works on two levels: consciousness and subconsciousness. The neurons of brain create these two levels. So, that it means consciousness and subconsciousness from physical point of view ( interaction between billions and billions neurons and electron). It can only mean that the state of neurons in these two situations is different. How can we understand these different states of neurons? How does the brain generate consciousness? We can understand this situation only on the quantum level, only using Quantum theory. But there isn’t QT without Quantum of Light and Electron. So, what is interaction between Quantum of Light, Electron and brain ? Nobody knows. Therefore I say: we must understand not only the brain but electron too. And when we understand the Electron we will know the Ultimate Nature of Reality. =. Socratus ==. On Apr 25, 12:09 am, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Socratus, and discussion friends: are we so simpletons, indeed? does a flat EM (field?) plus the 'variety' of cells constitute a 'person'? does it justify our psychological mistakes? (I mention deliberately those, not the regularities, to divert from 'rules we know'). I think (?) a sort of pattern functionality (or rather: relations) may be needed and as I read in these discussions: nobody feels knowledgeable enough to go into that. This is the 'part' we did not (yet???) learn and I call it the complexity of a person within the wider complexity of everything. It is just NOT *THIS AND THAT*.* * Would you reduce us into - let us say - a million varieties of cells (OK, make it a billion) plus the one and only EM field - even if in a million variables of control in interference. I think (in the ongoing theoretical views) even the RNA has to be directed into directing the DNA - which still may be only one imaginary factor we speak about for a genetic (?) ordering. And - all this in believing in 'atoms' and a 'physical world'. (And photons?) As I wrote within my diatribe Science Religion in 2003. I stick to my agnosticism, smile upon my 50+ years actively and result fully working as a chemist-Ph.D. and a polymer Science D.Sci. with my 38+ patents and papers, books, and my journal published. Now, past 90 I can afford to 'not knowing' about what I was brainwashed into in college (1940-44). JM On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:59 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: Cells make copies of themselves. Different cells make different copies of themselves. Cells come in all shapes and sizes. Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! ) and by chance ( or not by chance ) they change own geometrical form from zygote to a child. Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you. Cells they are you ( !? ) This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view. # Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’ But this explanation is not complete. Cells have an energy / electrical potential. Cells have an electromagnetic field. Therefore
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
Einstein’s SRT: what is it about? 1. One of Einstein’s postulate says that particle – quantum of light- moves in a straight line with constant speed c=1 in the vacuum. So, in SRT we have one reference frame and it is vacuum. But because Einstein took time as an constant length (1 sec= 299,792,458 m) Minkowski decided to take this constant time as a fourth coordinate and created his negative 4D continuum. We don’t know what minus 4D continuum is and therefore we lost the direction. But the root of the SR theory is the postulate: the constant and independent speed of quantum of light in the vacuum. (!) 2. The other root, the other Einstein’s SRT postulate says that movement is relative conception. The name of Einstein’s SRT is : “ On the Electrodynamics of moving Bodies.” ( SRT). Einstein wrote about moving of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ (!) It means he wrote about particles like quantum of light, electron. (!) And then this other Einstein’s SRT postulate must be understand as: ‘every speed, even the speed of quantum of light is relative.’ It means that quantum of light in a vacuum can have two kinds of motions: constant and relative. 3 SRT is theory about relativity of every particle’s speed, including the motion of particle - quantum of light. (!) SRT explains only the behavior of Quantum of Light (!) So, in my opinion, the essence of Einstein’s SRT is hidden in the question: What will be happen if the particle – quantum of light – changes its constant and straight movement in the vacuum? =. All the best. Israel Sadovnik Socratus. ==.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Occam's Razor and the Scheme of Universe.
Occam's Razor and the Scheme of Universe. =. The principle states that: Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. Now the Occam's Razor is in conflict with mainstream science. ==. At first I take the simplest reference frame - - the Euclidean space ( 2D). Now I will put a virtual - ideal particle in this 2D. The 2D is a very thin and flat homogeneous space, so my particle also must be thin and flat and symmetrical. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited line- string? No. In my opinion even this very thin and tiny line under good microscope will be looked as a rectangle. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited loop? No. The geometrical form of a loop is too complex, needs supplementary forces to create it. Can it be a very thin and tiny limited circle? Yes. From all geometrical forms the circle is the most symmetrical. The surface of a circle takes up the minimal area it can and I will write it by formula: C/D= pi= 3.14. (!) But I can put many particles there, for example, Avogadro's number of particles: N(a). (!) # What is my next step? If I were a mathematician I would say nothing. But if I were a physicist I would say that 2D must have some physical parameters like: volume (V), temperature (T) and density (P). Yes, it seems the idea is right. Then, volume (V) is zero, temperature (T) is zero but . . but density (P) cannot be zero if 2D is a real space then its density can approximately be zero. # What can I do with these three parameters? I have only one possibility, to write the simplest formula: VP/T=R ( Clausius Clapeyron formula ! ) What is R? R is some kind of physical state of my 2D. And if I divide the whole space R by Avogadro's numbers of particles then I have a formula R/ N(a) = k, then k ( as a Boltzmann constant) is some kind of physical state of one single virtual- ideal particle. (!) # But all creators of Quantum theory said that this space, as a whole, must have some kind of background energy (E). And its value must be enormous. But the background mass of every Avogadro's particles in 2D has approximately zero mass, it is approximately massless (M). Fact. The detected material mass of the matter in the Universe is so small (the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that physicists say: ' More than 90% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.' And nobody knows what this unseen 'dark matter' is. So, if I divide enormous energy (E) by approximately dark massless (M) then the potential energy/ mass of every single virtual- ideal particle ( according to Einstein and Dirac) is E/M=c^2 (potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 ! ) ( I don't know why physicists call E/M= c^2 'rest mass' and never say potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 .) In potential state my particle doesn't move, so its impulse is h = 0. # My conclusion. I have virtual- ideal- massless particle which has geometrical and physical parameters: C/D= pi= 3.14 . . . . , R/ N(a) = k, E/M=c^2, h=0. All my virtual- ideal- massless particles are possible to call ' bosons' or 'antiparticles' . These bosons are approximately massless but have huge potential energy/mass E/M=c^2 . But I have no fermions, no electric charge, no tachyons, no time, no mass, no movement at this picture. # ===.. Now, thinking logically, I must explain all the effects of motions. And. . . and I cannot say it better than Newton: 'For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces.' # How can one single virtual- ideal particle start its movement? At first, it will be right to think about some simple kind of movement, for example: my particle will move in straight line along 2D surface from some point A to the point B. What is possible to say now? According to the Michelson-Morley experiment my particle must move with constant speed: c=1 and its speed is independent. Its speed doesn't depend on any other object or subject, it means the reason of its speed is hidden in itself, it is its inner impulse. This impulse doesn't come from any formulas or equations. And when Planck introduced this inner impulse(h) to physicists, he took it from heaven, from ceiling. Sorry. Sorry. I must write: Planck introduced this inner impulse (h) intuitively. I must write: Planck introduced his unit (h) phenomenologically. At any way, having Planck's inner impulse (unit h=1) my particle flies with speed c=1. We call it photon now. Photon's movement from some point A to the point B doesn't change the flat and homogeneous 2D surface. Of course, my photon must be careful, because in some local place some sun's gravitation can catch and change its trajectory I hope it will be lucky to escape from the sun's gravity love. # My photon can have other possibility to move. This second possibility was discover by Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck in 1925. They said the elementary particle can rotate around its diameter using its own
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant. Socratus Yes, that's exactly what I said. Jesse =. Why the result is constant ? Because all different inertial frames ( stars and planets of billions and billions galaxies ) exist in infinite motionless, stationary, fixed (rest) reference frame of Vacuum. Socratus === P.S. Remember gentlemen, we have not proven the aether does not exist, we have only proven we do not need it (for mathematical purposes).. / Einstein's University of Leyden lecture of May 5, 1920. / ==. On Apr 23, 2:17 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:25 PM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: No, none of the postulates take the vacuum as a reference frame, which doesn't make sense since a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame (there are no landmarks in a vacuum that could be used to measure the velocity of the vacuum relative to anything else). One postulate does talk about the speed of light in a vacuum, but they're still talking about the speed of light as measured in an inertial frame--in a vacuum is just there to specify that it's not talking about a light beam moving through some measurable medium like water or air. Jesse ==. One postulate says: In vacuum the speed of quantum of light is constant. Yes, but in vacuum does not mean relative to the vacuum here, it just means that the light ray in question is moving through a vacuum rather than some medium like air or water. The speed of the light ray is still being measured relative to whatever inertial reference frame you choose to use. Because in vacuum the speed of quantum of light is maximum and time is stopped, become infinite, unlimited. It means that the reference frame of vacuum is also infinite, unlimited. By in vacuum do you mean relative to a vacuum rather than just light traveling through a vacuum? How would you to propose to measure the speed of light relative to the vacuum, or measure the speed of other objects (like the planet Earth) relative to the vacuum? If you can't measure these things then your statements aren't scientific ones, perhaps they are metaphysical beliefs of yours but you haven't given me any arguments for why I should agree with them. And infinity we cannot measure. But this doesn’t mean that infinite vacuum doesn’t exist. We have theories ( thermodynamics and quantum physics) which explain us the parameters of infinite vacuum. Thermodynamics and quantum physics don't say that the vacuum has its own rest frame like a physical medium (a collection of air or water molecules for example), so the notion of speed relative to the vacuum would be simply meaningless in these theories. Nope, all speeds are measured relative to a particular frame. Jesse If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant. Socratus Yes, that's exactly what I said. Jesse === On Apr 23, 12:03 am, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 10:40 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep. 1. One postulate of SRT takes vacuum as reference frame. Another postulate of SRT takes inertial reference frame (s). No, none of the postulates take the vacuum as a reference frame, which doesn't make sense since a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame (there are no landmarks in a vacuum that could be used to measure the velocity of the vacuum relative to anything else). One postulate does talk about the speed of light in a vacuum, but they're still talking about the speed of light as measured in an inertial frame--in a vacuum is just there to specify that it's not talking about a light beam moving through some measurable medium like water or air. In one reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is constant. In another reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is relative. Nope, all speeds are measured relative to a particular frame. But in relativity it works out that if you and I are riding in spaceships at rest in different inertial frames (so we are moving relative to each other), and we each measure the speed of the *same* light ray using our own rulers and clocks, we will each find that the ray travels at a speed of 299792458 meters per second relative to ourselves (i.e. as measured in terms of distance/time by rulers and clocks at rest relative to ourselves). This in spite of the fact that in my frame, according to my rulers and clocks, the distance between your spaceship and the light ray is changing at a rate different than 299792458 meters per second (and you will say the same thing about me when you measure with your
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
No, none of the postulates take the vacuum as a reference frame, which doesn't make sense since a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame (there are no landmarks in a vacuum that could be used to measure the velocity of the vacuum relative to anything else). One postulate does talk about the speed of light in a vacuum, but they're still talking about the speed of light as measured in an inertial frame--in a vacuum is just there to specify that it's not talking about a light beam moving through some measurable medium like water or air. Jesse ==. One postulate says: In vacuum the speed of quantum of light is constant. It is correct that ‘a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame’. Why? Because in vacuum the speed of quantum of light is maximum and time is stopped, become infinite, unlimited. It means that the reference frame of vacuum is also infinite, unlimited. And infinity we cannot measure. But this doesn’t mean that infinite vacuum doesn’t exist. We have theories ( thermodynamics and quantum physics) which explain us the parameters of infinite vacuum. ===. Socratus Nope, all speeds are measured relative to a particular frame. Jesse If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant. Socratus === On Apr 23, 12:03 am, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 10:40 AM, socra...@bezeqint.net socra...@bezeqint.net wrote: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep. 1. One postulate of SRT takes vacuum as reference frame. Another postulate of SRT takes inertial reference frame (s). No, none of the postulates take the vacuum as a reference frame, which doesn't make sense since a vacuum doesn't have a measurable rest frame (there are no landmarks in a vacuum that could be used to measure the velocity of the vacuum relative to anything else). One postulate does talk about the speed of light in a vacuum, but they're still talking about the speed of light as measured in an inertial frame--in a vacuum is just there to specify that it's not talking about a light beam moving through some measurable medium like water or air. In one reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is constant. In another reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is relative. Nope, all speeds are measured relative to a particular frame. But in relativity it works out that if you and I are riding in spaceships at rest in different inertial frames (so we are moving relative to each other), and we each measure the speed of the *same* light ray using our own rulers and clocks, we will each find that the ray travels at a speed of 299792458 meters per second relative to ourselves (i.e. as measured in terms of distance/time by rulers and clocks at rest relative to ourselves). This in spite of the fact that in my frame, according to my rulers and clocks, the distance between your spaceship and the light ray is changing at a rate different than 299792458 meters per second (and you will say the same thing about me when you measure with your own rulers and clocks); I will explain the fact that you nevertheless measure the ray to be traveling at exactly 299792458 meters per second in terms of the fact that your rulers and clocks appear to be distorted relative to mine, with your meter-stick appearing shrunk relative to mine, your clock ticking slower than mine, and your synchronized clocks appearing out-of-sync in my frame (and again you will say exactly the same thing about my rulers and clocks relative to yours) So, in this sense the speed of light is constant, because it has the same measured speed of 299792458 meters per second relative to all inertial frames. But the speed can still only be measured relative to a particular frame, and if you make use of a *non* inertial frame (an accelerating coordinate system like Rindler coordinates, for example), the speed of light relative to that frame's coordinates may be quite different. Jesse -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
# If we measure the speed of quantum of light in vacuum from different inertial frames the result will be the *same* - constant. Why? Because all different inertial frames ( stars and planets of billion s and billions galaxies ) exist in infinite motionless, stationary, fixed (rest) reference frame of Vacuum. Socratus === -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep. 1. One postulate of SRT takes vacuum as reference frame. Another postulate of SRT takes inertial reference frame (s). Can we say what these two (2) reference frames are equal ? No, they aren’t equal. Why ? Because all inertial reference frames are relative. And vacuum as reference frame isn’t relative, it is motionless, fixed reference frame. / Michelson - Morley experiment. / 2. In one reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is constant. In another reference frame speed of ‘Electrodynamics Bodies’ is relative. 3 And the Lorentz transformations explain interaction between these two postulates. ==. P.S. Einstein's special theory of relativity is based on two postulates: One is the relativity of motion, and the second is the constancy and universality of the speed of light. Could the first postulate be true and the other false? If that was not possible, Einstein would not have had to make two postulates. But I don't think many people realized until recently that you could have a consistent theory in which you changed only the second postulate. / Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics, p. 226. First published in 2006. / ===. Socratus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: From 1905 the SRT doesn’t give sleep.
INTRODUCTION Modified 01-10-11 Hans J. Zweig, With a PhD from Stanford, a masters degree from Brown and a B.A. from University of Rochester: # Newtonian physics is not the ultimate truth about the universe, but neither is Einstein's Relativity. Newton did not know, or anticipate, an upper bound to motion. Einstein cannot simply have it that all motion is relative and at the same time that there is a unique hard upper limit, c. Einstein’s Special Relativity Theory (SRT) attempts to solve the problem, but it is invalid, as can be shown using several distinct approaches: (1) through a logical analysis of the important concepts and thought experiments, (2) through recently available empirical results in astronomy, and (3) through a physical/ mathematical analysis of the foundation of SRT. . . . . . . . . . . . . The ultimate truth is still hidden from us but is somewhere between these extremes. http://www.aquestionoftime.com/intro.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Who am I ?
Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ? ==. Can QED give the answer to the question: ‘ Who am I ? ’ To answer to this question allow me to take one biological cell. The cell has two ( 2 ) substances: matter and electromagnetic fields. Then we need to understand : Where did the matter and electromagnetic fields come from? Question: Do we need to search for two sources or enough one source ? # Matter and electromagnetic fields are some kind of energy. But matter and energy were tied in one formula: E=Mc^2. Therefore I will unite matter, energy and electromagnetic fields in one simple question: Where does E=Mc^2 come from ? We have many sources of E=Mc^2: F. Hasenohrl, A. Einstein, P. Dirac. . Socratus. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Who am I ?
Cells make copies of themselves. Different cells make different copies of themselves. Cells come in all shapes and sizes. Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! ) and by chance ( or not by chance ) they change own geometrical form from zygote to a child. Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you. Cells they are you ( !? ) This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view. # Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’ But this explanation is not complete. Cells have an energy / electrical potential. Cells have an electromagnetic field. Therefore we need to say: ‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’ ===. Is this formulation correct? Of course it is correct. Why? Because: Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity) refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields produced by living cells, tissues or organisms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioelectromagnetism What does it mean? It means there isn’t biological cell without electromagnetic fields. It means that in the cell we have two ( 2 ) substances: matter and electromagnetic fields. And in 1985 Richard P. Feynman wrote book: QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter The idea of book - the interaction between light ( electromagnetic fields ) and matter is strange. He wrote: ‘ The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd. ‘ / page 10. / # Once again: 1. Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you. 2. We cannot understand their interaction and therefore we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’ ===. Socratus. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Review of Consciousness: Creeping up on the Hard Problem
Source of Consciousness. Will Physics explain Consciousness? =. Does consciousness begin on big bang level? Does consciousness begin on the quarks level? In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron. Does an electron have consciousness ? At first glance this seems to be a rather senseless questions. But . . . . . Energy is electromagnetic waves (em). In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron The electron and the em waves they are physical reality Can evolution of life begin on electron’s level? We say: Molecular biology molecular evolution, Cosmology cosmic evolution. If Universe evolve can electron evolve too ? Does evolution of life begin on electron level ? Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe Electron takes important part in this work Question: Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas: E=h*f, e = +ah*c, e = -ah*c, +E=Mc^2, -E=Mc^2, E= ∞ ? Nobody knows Question: Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ? a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass b) Maxwell’s equations c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law e) Fermi-Dirac statistics Nobody knows. . Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations: One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own, that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers, that we get more out of them than was originally put into them. . Ladies and Gentlemen ! Friends ! The banal Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we are. =. Once again: Brain and Electron. Human brain works on two levels: consciousness and subconsciousness. The neurons of brain create these two levels. So, that it means consciousness and subconsciousness from physical point of view ( interaction between billions and billions neurons ). It can only mean that the state of neurons in these two situations is different. How can we understand these different states of neurons? How does the brain generate consciousness? We can understand this situation only on the quantum level, only using Quantum theory. But there isn’t QT without Quantum of Light and Electron. So, what is interaction between Quantum of Light, Electron and brain ? Nobody knows. Therefore I say: we must understand not only the brain but electron too. And when we understand the Electron we will know the Ultimate Nature of Reality. =. According to Pauli Exclusion Principle only one single electron can be in the atom. If the atom contains more than one electron (for example - two), this atom represents Siamese twins. Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such cells. And therefore the human brain has only one Electron. Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it. As the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says: Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. / Chapter 9. Text 11./ # Where is the root of consciousness? At what step does consciousness begin? The consciousness begins on electron’s level. An electron (quantum of light) has its own initial consciousness. This consciousness is not rigid, but can develop. The development of consciousness goes “from vague wish up to a clear thought” / Veda./ == . Best wishes Israel Sadovnik Socratus ==. P.S. Robert Milliken, who measured a charge of electron, in his Nobel speech ( 1923 ) told, that he knew nothing about the “last essence of electron”. # Question: Does DNA Know Geometry ? # The verse: The world of electron. But maybe these electrons are World, where there are five continents: the art, knowledge, wars, thrones and the memory of forty centuries. / Valery Brusov./ ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Two Mathematicians in a Bunker and Existence of Pi
Where does the information come from? / Quantum Theory as Quantum Information / ===… # Does information begin on the quarks level? No. Quark cannot leave an atom. Maybe does proton have quant of information? No. Single proton has no quant of information. Why? Because information can be transfered only by electromagnetic fields. And we don’t have a theory about protono-magnetic fields. # In our earthly world there is only one fundamental particle - electron who can transfer information. Can an electron be quant of information? Maybe at first glance this seems to be a rather senseless questions. But . . . . . Energy is electromagnetic waves (em). In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron The electron and the em waves they are physical reality == # 1900, 1905 Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. 1916 Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c. 1928 Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy: +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s energy is infinite: E= ∞ Questions. Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ? Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ? a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass b) Maxwell’s equations c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law e) Fermi-Dirac statistics #. What is an electron ? Now nobody knows In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron All of them are problematical We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is electron ? . Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations: One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own, that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers, that we get more out of them than was originally put into them. . Ladies and Gentlemen ! Friends ! Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we are. ==. # We know, there is no information transfer without energy transfer. More correct: there is no quant information transfer without quant energy transfer. And the electron has the least electric charge. It means it has some quant of the least information. What can electron do with this information? Let us look the Mendeleev / Moseley periodic table. We can see that electron interacts with proton and creates atom of hydrogen. This is simplest design, which was created by electron. And we can see how this information grows and reaches high informational level. And the most complex design, which was created by electron is the Man. The Man is alive essence. Animals, birds, fish are alive essences. And an atom? And atom is also alive design. The free atom of hydrogen can live about 1000 seconds. And someone a long time ago has already said, that if to give suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he would turn into Man. Maybe it is better not to search about dark, virtual particles but to understand what the electron is, because even now nobody knows what electron is. === In my opinion the Electron is quant of information. Was I mistaken?No ! Because according to Pauli Exclusion Principle only one single electron can be in the atom. This electron reanimates the atom. This electron manages the atom. If the atom contains more than one electron (for example - two), this atom represents Siamese twins. Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such children! Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it. # Many years ago man has accustomed some wild animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.) and has made them domestic ones. But the man understands badly the four-footed friends. In 1897 J. J. Thomson discovered new particle - electron. Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him. But the man does not understand what an electron is. By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand the closest and simplest particle photon /electron and then to study the far away space and another particles. ==. Best wishes. Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. =… P.S. Robert Milliken, who measured a charge of electron, in his Nobel speech ( 1923 ) told, that he knew nothing about the “last essence of electron”. # The verse: The world of electron. But maybe these electrons are World, where there are five continents: the art, knowledge, wars, thrones and the memory of forty centuries. / Valery Brusov./ ===… -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group
God as an Atheist.
If your God is dead, try mine. =. God as an Atheist. God as a Scientist : Ten Scientific Commandments. ===. Can a Rational Individual believe in God ? In other words: Can God be atheist, governed by scientific laws? Of course Because if God exists, He/She/It would necessarily to work in an Absolute Reference Frame and had set of physical and mathematical laws to create everything in the Universe. If we find and understand this Absolute God’s House then is possible step by step to find and understand God’s Physics Laws, which Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein and many others scientists discovered. # Has God known the formula: E=Mc^2 ? If God has known the formula why HE / SHE /IT didn't write it in His Bible? =.. The people created a God. No one knows what the external characteristics of this God are, a God who made himself known with the name I am who I am . Is it enough for us in the XXIc ? Why wasn’t the formula E=Mc^2 written in the Bible? ===. . Each religion uses a system of symbols (images, metaphors, ancient myths and legends , beautiful stories) to explain its truth. But Bernard Shaw wisely remarked : “ There is only one religion, although there are a hundred versions of it.” It means that the source of all religion is one. And I try to prove this idea with the formulas and laws of physics. I don’t invent new formulas. I use simple formulas which ,maybe, every man knows from school. Is it possible? Is it enough? Yes. Because the evolution goes from simple to the complex. So, in the beginning we can use simple formulas and laws. For this purpose I explain what the first law of Universe is, and second law is and ...etc. Step by step I create a logical system of the Universe. = . . How can God be Scientist? Scheme, Fundamental Theory of Existence: Ten Scientific Commandments. 1 The infinite Vacuum T=0K, E= ∞ ,p= 0, t=∞ . 2 The particle: C/D = pi, R/N= k, E = Mc^2 = kc^2, h = 0, c=0, i^2= -1 3 The spins: h =E/t , h =kb, h* = h/2pi 4 The photon, the inertia: h=1, c=1 5 The electron: e^2 = h*ca, E = h*f , c1 electromagnetic field 6 The gravitation, the star, the time and space: h*f = kTlogW 7 The Proton: (p) 8 The Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton a) electromagnetic b) nuclear c) biological 9 The Laws a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy/mass b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law 10 The test. Every theory must be tested logically ( theoretical ) and practically a) Theory of brain: Dualism of Consciousness. b) Practice : Parapsychology. Meditation. . Best wishes Israel Sadovnik Socratus . # God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light. It means: The secret of God and Existence is hidden in the ‘ Theory of Vacuum and Light Quanta ‘. # I want to know how God created this world I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details / Einstein / ==. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
