shirgall Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 1 hour ago, A4E said: Thanks. I'm trying to understand. In the meantime. As a thought experiment. What if a photon was going at 101 percent of the speed of light. (even if its not possible in the theory), what would happen? And is there any chance that it is happening, but we are just not able to see/understand the effects of it? We don't have a way to predict. Mathematically the answer to your question is "undefined".
Goldenages Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 9 hours ago, A4E said: What if a photon was going at 101 percent of the speed of light. (even if its not possible in the theory), what would happen? And is there any chance that it is happening, but we are just not able to see/understand the effects of it? If light or something else carrying information was faster than c, we would be in big trouble concerning causality. As said, different observers moving with different speeds at different positions in spacetime do not agree about wether events are simultaneous or not. Alien 65 million lightyears away from us see an asteroid falling onto earth in their "now", while our now here is in the 21. century. But, and thats important, every observer, regardless of his position and speed, will agree to a causal chain of events. First an asteroid falls. Thereafter the dinosaurs go extinct. If information could move faster than light, there would be observers who would watch that it was the other way round. To understand this, have a look at the Minkowski diagramm linked in a previous post. It is math drawn in a picture, and yes it is nothing that is normally understood by just reading it once. What I do: Just start reading. Make a pause. Then I try to remember what I have understood. It will be little, thats perfectly normal. Read again. Remember once more, wait til the next day, read again. I make some sports, run for an hour. Then comes the point where I get angry to be so stupid not to reenact what somebody else discovered Thats normally the push to go through it again, til it makes "click" and things are clear. regards Andi
AllanN Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 On 6/23/2017 at 11:16 AM, steljarkos said: CONCLUSION ... It's the same kind of bullshit, with the same kind of smug, self-indulgent, intellectual weaklings controlling the discourse. I'd always thought the sciences were: kind of smug, self-indulgent, intellectual weaklings controlling the discourse, such that in debate I've often enjoyed defending religions tooth and nail from the sciences, even if I disagreed with the religions' stances. I realize I'm generalizing using: the sciences. Now there's Islam against which few dare speak, certainly here in Europe. The sciences too seem to have become just another political wing, alas Evolution overlooked, and the driving factor has always been money. You say that stupid culture can only create stupid science, but then the sciences generally, even prior to the problems you elucidate, offered only arrogant dismissiveness, and frequently ad hominem approaches to anyone without muh credentials and to anything not considered, ye scientific method. Therefore perhaps you are out-of-touch with recent progressions of the scientific attitude? I can draw no other conclusion. Who could have foreseen Richard Dawkins inclining to the defence of Christianity against something worse, as he said in a video. Certainly the sciences didn't forsee it, but the religions, if nothing else had their faith. I'm not here to gloat. In my opinion religions today have so many faults they could almost be abolished, but currently there's nothing to replace their yearnings. Towards that end, the sciences have failed again. Iphones, bulldozers and skyrockets, a fabulous benefaction when probably 99% of people yearn for things like green pastures and innocence, well, for Eden. Can the sciences be saved? We shall see.
barn Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 (edited) On 07/26/2017 at 2:22 AM, shirgall said: . wrong quote, sorry. Edited March 29, 2018 by barn wrong quote, sorry
barn Posted March 29, 2018 Posted March 29, 2018 On 07/26/2017 at 1:19 AM, A4E said: What if a photon was going at 101 percent of the speed of light. (even if its not possible in the theory), what would happen? And is there any chance that it is happening, but we are just not able to see/understand the effects of it? Have a read about Tachyons
Loz Posted April 29, 2018 Posted April 29, 2018 On 04/07/2017 at 8:22 AM, ofd said: As long as you don't have evidence to back up your theory, it has the same epistemological status as witches. First you come up with a theory, then you look for experiments that validate it. I have evidence that life can come from non-life, but I'm keeping it to myself. I'll never share the secret. For the rest of the world, it will have to remain an article of faith.
Loz Posted April 29, 2018 Posted April 29, 2018 4 hours ago, ofd said: I am sure you have, bud. That's what I like, FAITH!
ofd Posted April 29, 2018 Posted April 29, 2018 God of the gaps, 6 millionth attempt. Doesn't get more convincing over time.
AllanN Posted April 29, 2018 Posted April 29, 2018 19 hours ago, Loz said: I have evidence that life can come from non-life, but I'm keeping it to myself. I'll never share the secret. For the rest of the world, it will have to remain an article of faith. I'll give you that, where else could life have come from... The method is another matter.
Loz Posted April 30, 2018 Posted April 30, 2018 22 hours ago, ofd said: God of the gaps, 6 millionth attempt. Doesn't get more convincing over time. It takes some faith to believe in gaps.
ofd Posted April 30, 2018 Posted April 30, 2018 Indeed, especially if they become fewer and fewer over time.
Loz Posted April 30, 2018 Posted April 30, 2018 7 hours ago, ofd said: Indeed, especially if they become fewer and fewer over time. I thought the more we discover the more we realise we don't know. As for evolution, how many gaps devoid of transitional forms are there now, roughly?
lorry Posted May 1, 2018 Posted May 1, 2018 Article on theory of life as function of energy dissipation. Paper linked in article. https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/
ofd Posted May 7, 2018 Posted May 7, 2018 Quote I thought the more we discover the more we realise we don't know. That's where you are wrong. Quote As for evolution, how many gaps devoid of transitional forms are there now, roughly? No idea. Phyolgenetics now has moved on to DNA analysis, so the heavy reliance on transitional fossil forms isn't needed any more.
Recommended Posts