Universe or Multiverse ?, page 2

Originally posted by Protector

Protector : You are probably right. I'm not a mathematician. I'm a physicist, so I'll take your word for it... unless I find proof otherwise .

[color=Yellow]i'm old school.[/color]

"i do not believe in particles. particles are an imaginary way to understand waves."

Protector : Particles are an imaginary way to understand any form using a dot or sphere. The problem is, people actually believe particles are dots or spheres and not just a way to represent what the "particle or wave" actually look like. A true particle could look like a figure 8, but the public would still think its a dot. Oh well... I suppose ignorance is bliss for some people.

yeah, man. a spinning helical structure as seen through time. like, DNA.

"now, all these definitions of light use our linear time understanding. i do not believe in linear time."

Protector : Linear time is real, but Hawking and another scientist are working on imaginary time as being a 2d quality to that linear (1d) timeline. Time is linear, but it may be more.

see previous post.

"i believe in energy soup, time being another form of energy."

Protector : Time is a part of space, what we call spacetime.

or is it? a MATTER of perpective.

Protector : Energy is a property of spacetime.

MASSIVE.

Protector : I believe time is just a quantitative way to understand 3 dimensional movement... as we would normally define time. Energy is more of a quality that forces motion and transformation. There is probably a link, but I doubt it is direct, such as energy-->time (energy implies time). Time probably shows that energy does exist, but I don't think we should go as far as to say that time is a result of energy... although it could be with a whole lot of physics, math, and philosophy. I prefer to stick to relationships that are more direct and much less abstract in connection to one another.

[color=Yellow]i was with you 'til the end. i like the abstract.[/color]

Protector : We could argue that all things are related, but putting a rhinosaurous and a bottle of beer on the same plane is a waste of time.

i actually tried this. it was funny.

Protector : I fear that arguing that energy and time are closely related leaves out too many other factors and are thus not directly related. Maybe you see it otherwise.

excacly. der een lize de dali lama. die lama. ach-hem, ...dill e=ma squared.

"i have a theory that there are levels(densities and dimensions) of energy, and we only percieve a certain bandwidth/azimuth."

[color=Yellow]"the human brain operates between 0 and 20 some hertz(some yogis have been measured at 40 and higher)."[/color]

Protector : I have no idea. I hate biology, so I stick to physics.

[color=Yellow]me either. i'm just putting some memeing into the conversation. biology can be good with the right music, a bottle of wine and a few well placed compliments. physics is good to know while driving in rush hour traffic.[/color]

"our perception and measurement of time is based on certain cycles. the sun, the moon and spin of the earth, mostly."

Protector : I believe science has started to move beyond that and dealt with quantum time, as well as relating time to the "beginning" of our particular universe. Perception is important, but mathematics and physics have helped to get rid of many false perceptions and have a good foundation for study of the fourth dimension.

[color=Yellow]well, that's just it. the uncertainty factor of quantum reality. is it it?[/color]

"yet, we all notice that time changes for us, under certain conditions, ie., extreme boredom or stress(like a car accident)."

Protector : That's because your brain speeds up when flooded by chemicals and the body flooded by adrenaline. Those highs cannot be biologically sustained for long. The perception of time changes, but time itself is not actually changing.

or is it?

"our vision has a frame rate."

18 frames per second... give or take a couple.

[color=Yellow]i'll take a fill up, please. overclock the machine(the true enemy).[/color]

"if we could slo-mo or fast forward reality, we might be able to see other shapes which are hidden from our perception."

Protector : Shape is not hidden from perception, but higher dimensional figures are. This is a matter of us not having the sensory organs to detect anything above standard time. If you would like to know what higher dimensions do, then math has already does the work.

yeah, man.

Protector : Welcome to your first glimpse of the 2 interacting objects in the 4th dimension

"like the way a single row of led's can cause the impression of words in our minds(i think you know what i'm talking about), by side scrolling text."

Protector : Yes, but again those are "optical" illusions for the ways our eyes work and the way our brains interpret symbols. That touches on psychology and performance magic.

see previous post.

"also, this theory of ninety degree electro magnetic waves leaves 359.99999 degrees of free space on the axis."

Protector : Well, the 90 degree EM wave is just a matter of orientation of the waves. The strength of the fields vary throughout the rest of the orientation. Basically, the 90 degree angle keeps balance between the forces and gives light its particular properties.

hmmmm? i wonder?

"didn't they tell us in school that we're mostly space?"

Protector : Yes... which should be appended to say mostly spacetime and energy waves in what you might call a "soup."

mmmmm, energy soup, ...(insert homer drooling sound).

Protector : Still, the science is much more realistic about how to view that logically. Philosophy adds that, "we are not atoms, but shadows of atoms. Less than one percent material and the rest is the motion of electrons that you see.

nice.

"N.S.A. wanted john nash. didn't work out well, i heard. they don't want me, i'm just a fringe lunatic. my house is full of butterflies flapping their wings. i'm so ignorant, i don't even know what time it is."

Protector : You are smart enough to use your brain to come up with possible solutions... one day the NSA may be interested in your application.

[color=Yellow]huh? you talkin' to me? i wasn't paying attention. sorry, ....i'm listening....[/color]

"protector, you have a good mind. don't believe everything the teacher says, though. science is the new dogma."

Protector : Actually, most of my research was done outside of the classroom.

me too.

Protector : I found that the library is just as smart as a good professor.

books good. no indoctrination process associated.

Protector : Late fees are far less than the tuition to take all of the class required to be as learned as I am. I perfer to see myself as self-taught, but regulated and reinforced by formal class.

[color=Yellow]i don't like most teachers. so preachy![/color]

Protector : Science is not a dogma, but idiots who claim to be using science make us look like we are full of doggie-do.

[color=Yellow]exactly. so. we must admit that "science" is pretty primitive in light of the neato tricks you can do with math and karma.
please sir, can i have some more? ....MOOORE SOoooUP???!!!![/color]

Protector : Good thing many scientists are guys like me (and maybe smarter... maybe ).

some can make money. some can add and subtract. some can fix cars(very handy skill). some kill(ouch!). there are many kinds of smart. i often lose things.

and a big shout out to thebandit795 for FORCING me to edit my post for clarity.

(just kidding, bandit, although your choice of words was rather direct.)

[Edited on 13-7-2003 by billybob]

[Edited on 13-7-2003 by billybob]