Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Catalysis]
    #3466643 -

What do you do for a living? Are you a quantum mechanic?


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3466665 -

That notion is taking hold with scientists now. Quantum theory is losing ground.

It is? What are you talking about?

String/M theory does not discard quantum theory. It unites the principles of quantum mechanics and relativity.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Phluck]
    #3466698 -

"It is? What are you talking about?"

I know a physicist who tells me that this is the trend of late, that quantum theory will be replaced...something about the universe having more in common with a waveform than particles. Even I know string theory is already on the outs a few years ago...it was cool with all those dimensions (at least 10 I think) and wormholes(microscopic though they would have been)...I hate to see it go.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3466778 -

Well, not all physicists agree on the same things, but I think you may have been misinformed.

(To clarify, string theory has kind of been replaced... with M theory, which is basically an expansion on string theory)


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us

Edited by Phluck (12/08/04 07:03 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Phluck]
    #3467257 -

No I don't think I was. I am intelligent enough to understand quantum theory and string theory and have read many books concerning them, though I claim no formal education in this matter. My friend is a physics instructor at a state univrsity. Along with being very bright, most of what I have discussed with him agrees with my reading on this matter. I also know that quantum and string theory do NOT quite get along. String theory is popular with the sci-fi types, but it is not really taken seriously anymore. Quantum theory I am of the understanding has many inconsistancies. What would your qualifications be? I'll base my opinion on that.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3467299 -

I don't doubt that you're intelligent enough to understand them, but I do know that there is a LOT of very advanced math behind them that would be difficult to fully understand without an advanced degree in physics, or the equivelant knowledge.

If you can point me to some information showing how:

A) String theory, which was the theory that united quantum mechanics and relativity, contradicts quantum mechanics.

B) String theory has been discredited, or replaced with a better theory.

Then I might take you seriously.

Also, reading books about string theory does not make you an expert. Many of the books out there, like The Elegant Universe, for example, and drastically simplified versions of string theory, designed so that the layperson can have some understanding of what these theories explain, without having to dedicate years of their lives to learning advanced physics.

My or your qualifications are meaningless.

Facts are not.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Phluck]
    #3467331 -

I never said I was an expert,I did say "I claim no formal education in this matter", but I am not convinced you are either.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3467378 -

I'm not claiming I am, but I was reading a bunch about it recently, and your claims seem to be wholely inconsistant with what I've read.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #3467385 -

Quote:
What do you do for a living? Are you a quantum mechanic?


lol, no im a chemist and quantum mechanics plays a large role in contemporary chemistry.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Catalysis]
    #3467789 -

I myself am a lowly computer tech...so what is your take? Was Einstein on the right path by turning his back on quantum theory?


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Phluck]
    #3467846 -

As you should well know, such ideas change yearly and it all depends on how old the material you are reading is...and once again, the opinion of the writer. It is quite well known that much of theory is not agreed upon by all in the field. That is why it is a theory, and not a law. I do know that there are many in the quantum school of thought who see string theory as pseudoscience that cannot be tested. I will admit I went through my "quantum" phase about 2 years ago in order to keep up with the said friend's conversations, and because I believe all persons should be well versed in all subjects to a degree. I also learned a lot about the second law of thermodynamics during that time for the same reason. My studies in computer programming have used up most of my time lately, so I am not very inclined to scour the web for the evidence you requested. I find it interesting, but so are many other subjects.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Swami]
    #3468644 -

did einstein relly have a problem with quantum physics? there is one take to quantum physics where it is not so much that things are random, but rather that it is impossible for us to actually predict what will occur.


--------------------
/opinion
.sean

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: entiformatie]
    #3468696 -

Maybe QP is random for us only.


--------------------
- When the time stops, evil ones will be pointed out for all to see.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Phluck]
    #3469002 -

Quote:
Phluck said: For instance, Einstein completely disregarded quantum mechanics, claiming "God does not play dice", even in the face of some pretty damn convcincing, and elegant mathematics.



Einstein contributed a lot to quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics started at the turn of the twentieth century with a couple of papers on properties of radiation. one by Planck and the other by Einstein; these, after three decades of intense research, let to the formulation of quantum mechanics.

He thought there was more behind QM. Some undiscovered variable or something.

Quote:
OfflineHuehuecoyotl said: That notion is taking hold with scientists now. Quantum theory is losing ground.



Experiment after experiment prove how good QM predicts reality. Quantum theory is not losing ground at all. M-theory tries to combine relativity with Quantum mechanics. Both theories are perfect in their own field, but when they become equally important - black hole - the equations fail.

Quote:
I am intelligent enough to understand quantum theory and string theory and have read many books concerning them, though I claim no formal education in this matter.


You understand quantum theory and string theory? I don't think you really understand them. I'm sure I don't understand them at all. String theory is nothing like relativity. It's only mathematics. I like to read about quantum mechanincs and string theory, because I do understand what's in the popular books. I'm aware that that's physics in layman's terms and just to give you an idea what it's about. I love to read about it.

Has anyone read "The Fabric of the Cosmos"?

There are some clear and simple discussions about time, does time flow and the arrow of time in it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: entiformatie]
    #3469015 -

Quote:
there is one take to quantum physics where it is not so much that things are random, but rather that it is impossible for us to actually predict what will occur.


That's what Einstein was thinking. But if you can't measure or predict something, it's not part of science. Einstein refused to accept that and I sometimes have the same feeling, while rational thinking tells me that the way QM is right. QM tells that you'll never know if the moon is in the sky when you don't look at it and therefor it's not science to discuss the situation where you don't see the moon. Einstein said that the moon is still there if you look away from it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: Annom]
    #3469708 -

from what i've read/understand, we can't measure these particles because we can only calculate speed or trajectory at any given moment, is this true?

i believe that some intent led to the creation of the universe (not an old man in the sky), and that in order to comply with the rules of logic, perhaps quantum mechanics was necessary to give order and chaos a balance. not so much that these particles are scientifically unpredictable, but that from a subjective viewpoint they are, but given an objective one (timeless egoless spaceless etc) these particles make complete sense. this is of course assuming that what i have read regarding speed and trajectory of particles is true.


--------------------
/opinion
.sean

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: entiformatie]
    #3469835 -

from what i've read/understand, we can't measure these particles because we can only calculate speed or trajectory at any given moment, is this true?

Yes, that is exactly true! To "see" a particle, we have to bounce another particle off it. When you look at something under a microscope, you are bouncing particles of visible light off the object. When you use an electron microscope, you are bouncing electrons (which are much smaller than the wavelengths of visible light, and thus can "see" smaller details) off the object.

When your electron hits the object, it CHANGES the object by giving some of its momentum to it. This isn't a problem for physical objects (large collections of atoms) because if you change the location/orientation of a single atom, or even a bunch of atoms, the object on large remains the same.

The problem is when we try to look at INDIVIDUAL particles.

Say you want to find the location of an electron. You could fire some short-wavelength photons (light) at the electron and have them bounce off. You can then determine the LOCATION of the electron by examining how the photons are deflected by the electron. You need to use VERY short-wavelenghts to have any kind of accuracy, however short-wavelengths are also high-frequency/high energy...so when your photons hit the electron they knock it out of place and cause it to change direction. So you can pinpoint the LOCATION to a high degree, but you have entirely disturbed the VELOCITY of the electron and thus cannot determine the velocity to any high degree. The opposite is also true, you could determine the VELOCITY to a high degree, but would then disturb the location of the electron and hence not have a good fix on the location at all.

It's called the Uncertainty principle. You can know the velocity OR the position to a high degree, but never both. The higher the precision in either one, the lower the precision in the other.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: trendal]
    #3470203 -

"It's called the Uncertainty principle."

Does this mean that we never really know what we are looking at?


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: LunarEclipse]
    #3470211 -

yrs?


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Albert Einstein [Re: trendal]
    #3470312 -

would it be impossible to calculate the original velocity by factoring in the momentum from photons bouncing into the electron?

i figure it is, cause that's not really a novel idea, but why can't we just see how fast a photon is going, and use simple physics to calculate how fast the electron was originally going?

thanks for your explanation btw, very informative  :thumbup: :smile:


--------------------
/opinion
.sean

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Albert Einstein quoted sleepy 2,125 6 11/02/07 10:30 PM
by Grok
* Albert Einstein got bored +
( 1 2 all )		 Icelander 1,677 23 12/03/07 05:14 PM
by CJJ
* Einstein was smart enough to believe in himself not God
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 hitch hiker 8,563 83 05/30/08 10:31 AM
by backfromthedead
* Photon Entropy?
( 1 2 3 all )		 OrgoneConclusion 4,069 54 04/10/09 02:44 PM
by Zanthius
* Einstein: Religion and Science trendalM 1,713 13 01/25/04 09:15 AM
by trendal
* Does A Photon Have Awareness?
( 1 2 all )		 DiploidM 3,233 28 05/04/05 04:27 PM
by cubed
* Einstein's Riddle
( 1 2 3 all )		 Muppet 3,156 48 06/06/04 10:50 AM
by Ped
* Einstein A Father of Science Believed in GOD...
( 1 2 3 all )		 BleedingSickness 6,301 42 10/07/02 02:00 PM
by Zahid

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
7,985 topic views. 0 members, 122 guests and 15 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.