logo
Wrong email address or username
Wrong email address or username
Incorrect verification code
back to top
Search tags: Physics
Load new posts () and activity
Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
review 2017-09-21 14:12
Shitty Philosophy and Physics : “Time Reborn - From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe” by Lee Smolin
Time Reborn: From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe - Lee Smolin

“I propose that time and its passage are fundamental and real and the hopes and beliefs about timeless truths and timeless realms are mythology.”

 

 

In “Time Reborn - From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe” by Lee Smolin

 

 

Impermanence, Buddhist style?

 

Buddhism seems to acknowledge the play of opposites I've referred to elsewhere.

Recognising the yin-yang nature of the universe, in order to claim there is constant 'flux' (fluidity, rather than change; a subtle difference) - or for argument's sake, change - Buddhists balance that by asserting a 'greater' reality - the one, eternal, stable, whole (a supposed 'deeper' reality).

 

Contradiction and paradox is near the heart of evidenced, reasoned contemplation?

 

As for Aristotle:

time is a measurement of change is a measurement of time.

Change makes time possible, and vice-versa.

In principle, it seems that time persists, even in conditions of perfect stillness.

Yet any attempt to conceive a temporal progression, absent all change, seems to lead us into perplexing self-contradictions: any attempt to imagine how such unchanging time-flow could be measured, requires changing. It seems that time must be more than change; yet remove change, and time vanishes!  But if time is just a means to measure change, then in principle, it should permit the possibility of a world where change is cyclical. Yet our understanding seems to limit time to a linear, one way progression.

 

Or does it?

 

 

If you're into shitty physics, read on.

Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
review 2017-09-19 07:44
All Much Ado about Nothing: “The Trouble with Physics” by Lee Smolin
The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science and What Comes Next - Lee Smolin

“The Weinberg-Salam model requires that the Higgs field exist and that it manifest itself as the new elementary particle called the Higgs boson, which carries the force associated with the Higgs field. Of all the predictions required by the unification of the electromagnetic and weak forces, only this one has not yet been verified.”

 

In “The Trouble with Physics” by Lee Smolin

 

 

Hello physicists and Lee Smolin in particular,

 

I can't say I agree with such a hard stance against string theory personally like Smolin does, but I’m what’s known as a stupid person, so it doesn’t really matter what I think. However, I do feel it is healthy for science to have people that challenge ideas from all sides. All this will do is galvanise people to work harder to provide evidence to prove or disprove any theory that tries to describe realty. Science thrives in areas of confliction.

 

Life is the memory of what happened before you died, i.e. we cannot extricate ourselves from the universe in any way shape or form, including our "objective," apparently repeatable theoretical notions. By definition, there is only one UNI-verse. If you want to call it a universe of multiverses or a multiverse of universes, or balls of string with no limits, no problem, but there is only one of everything that is and isn't. This assemblage of atoms, no different from any other atoms, called the human body, has a life and death, as do the stars; it also has an internal resonance we like to call the consciousness of self-awareness of existence. We all too often, de facto, accept that there is a universe outside our "selfs", our bodies, i.e. it’s just me, my-self, and I, and the universe that surrounds my body, as if there were a molecular separation of some sort. This starting point for science, i.e., this assumed separation from a universe that surrounds our (apparent) bodies is the first thing that has to go. By definition there is only one UNI-verse that includes Heisenberg, I, the photos and videos of flying objects that make apparently perfect right angle turns at thousands of miles per hour, which we casual observers are not able to identify, black holes, white holes, pink holes, blue holes, our memories, our records, not to mention everything else. It's all much ado about nothing. As someone else used to say, "This IS the cosmic drama," we are living at the interface of the Sun's outgoing light and the apparent incoming light from the universe that appears to surround the Sun. Ah, but, what if we live in a black hole and don't realize it? That would mean the night sky, which most of us consider to exist outside the sun would actually be all the light of the sun after doing a 180, except, and here's the kicker, daylight, i.e., the light of the sun that we experience as sunshine.

 

 

If you're into Physics and String Theory in particular, read on.

Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
text 2017-09-08 09:31
Reading progress update: I've read 47 out of 250 pages.
Basics of Plasma Astrophysics - Claudio Chiuderi,Marco Velli

Brutal section on kinetic theory: the key is to understand the underlying statistical arguments, independent of the physics, then come back and realise you're doing nearly the same thing to a vector distribution which happens to have a physical meaning, as you were doing to a scalar probability distribution. Then apply a bunch of vector calculus tricks that allow you to get some really clever results.

Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
text 2017-09-07 10:36
Reading progress update: I've read 42 out of 250 pages.
Basics of Plasma Astrophysics - Claudio Chiuderi,Marco Velli

With the aid of a colleague I've understood the argument used to define the mean velocity field of a plasma from its microscopic velocity distribution field. The argument is not clear either conceptually or mathematically. Frowny face.

Like Reblog Comment
show activity (+)
text 2017-09-01 08:46
Reading progress update: I've read 41 out of 250 pages.
Basics of Plasma Astrophysics - Claudio Chiuderi,Marco Velli

I almost skipped the orbit theory chapter (same old same old) but I'm glad I didn't because it's very clear on relativistic limits to the theory, stuff you don't typically see elsewhere. The derivation of the Fokker-Planck equation from kinetic theory is also very good. If this book was converted to SI Units it would be brilliant, going by the evidence so far.

More posts
Your Dashboard view:
Need help?