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


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!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Check out this formula!
    #5079846 -

I just wanted to put this out there.  I thought of it while pondering applications of quantum theory.

 
2E<->E+mc2   

c=Speed of light=299,792,458 meters/second. 

In standard math, both E's would cancel themselves out. Notice this is an interchange symbol not an equal sign.  Then you would have Einsteins Theory of relativity.  Look at it in from the viewpoint of fractal geometry.  The mandelbrot set is created from the formula Z<->Z2+t (c changed to t here for clarity). I wont tell what good I think this is, but try it out.  You may be amazed at the philosphical implications.  If you are good with numbers, ponder this while tripping.  Wow! 

:heart:Peace:heart:

:hippie:

Edited by Quoiyaien (12/18/05 09:37 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5080558 -

no offense, but that doesnt make any sense.

What you are proposing is 2Xenergy<.>energy + (mass)(speed of light) squared....

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5080623 -

Quoiyaien said:
I just wanted to put this out there.  I thought of it while pondering applications of quantum theory.




And how much quantum do you know?
Edit: Now wheres your gamma, tsk tsk, :dancingshroom:

Edited by TheCow (12/19/05 02:39 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5080739 -

all you have there is 2E implies and is implied by E + mc^2, which on its own without any derivation makes little sense. it seems to me all you have done is added E to E = mc^2 and swapped the equality for an equivalence, which again makes no sense without an explanation or derivation.

and what exactly do you think this has to do with quantum theory?

and oh yeah, E = mc^2 is not the theory of relativity; it is a result of it.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Edited by alsey (12/19/05 06:34 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081285 -

As e=mc^2, 2e=mc^2+mc^2 or e+mc^2

as I see that, I don't see where it leads yet :smile:


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: alsey]
    #5081332 -

I am not a mathematition BTW.  I was chatting with some physics/engineering majors, and I put this out there, and they said they would check it out.  It is a hypothetical formula only.  We were not sure of the actual mathematical viablilty of this.  Hence, I wanted others to see if it made sense.  Apparently not :crazy:  Perhaps I didnt get things right.  Oh well I know what I am trying to get across, and the group of us figured that I should play with this equation.  I am going to meet with these guys again, and further discuss it.  But the intent is to try and show a fractal relationship between light, matter, time, and consciousness.  The large is but a reflection of the small, and vice versa, therefore the same principles that apply to specific quanta (quarks, or the "string" they are made of) apply to that of a larger scale.  Planck length is something like 10^-35 (I think?) so maybe in our attempts of unification, we are looking at the wrong base quanta. I just got up, so I am having a little trouble communicating my thoughts.  The group unanimously agreed that this was worthy of further investigation.  I will ponder this some more at work, and try and come up with a more coherent explanation.  Maybe I should just avoid the math until I have a better understanding of what I am trying to get across  :tongue:

:heart:Peace:heart:

:hippie:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081405 -

Math is one of those things that must be understood and not memerized.

I'm still trying to understand physics formula reasoning. Formula's are just logical models that explain an event and/or object. To get what that means, you have to go back in history and retrace ancient mathematics.

WHY is the formula for the area of a circle pi times the radius squared? Well, quite simply there are approximately 3.14 squares (of the radius' length) inside a circle. Of course, the reasoning is much deeper than that, and to understand WHY there are 3.14 squares in a circle takes a bit more investigation.

Start from the bottom up, modern math is hard and I do not understand the reasoning behind much of it. Its going to take a lot of time to get to that level of understanding.

Now, to go off with more rambling. What is energy? Officially, we dont know, so this is opinion. Energy is sound, and so everything is vibration. The vibrations alter the properties of atoms. Everything, is an extremely intricate overlay of waveforms... a holographic multi-dimensional fractal. A lot of expirements conform to this idea, however it is currently a "metaphysical" idea, called string theory (which is dying, due to lack of supporting details... or IMO, indiscovered phenomena).

I'm interested in your idea, but you're going to have to elaborate more.


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081416 -

Maybe, we should not be looking at quanta at all...  Afterall, quantum particles emerged from something, so I think the planck particle (as I will call it, smallest possible particle in existance, so we think) is just the first manifested condensation of this primordial energy.  That which is beyond the scope of the wave vs. particle duality.  Just imagine for a second that everything was like steam.  Steam condenses into droplets (first actual particle) which then forms larger droplets, which bind together into even larger droplets (lets say that at this point we are at atoms) which then forms puddles, then lakes, then oceans.  The same principles that drew the water together in the first place, continue to draw it together to create larger bodies.  So the same forces that acted upon the atom (nuclear forces) are the same forces responsibe for binding molecules.  Then before you know it, you have planest, stars, galaxies, universe(s) etc...  But because of our limited human intelect, we have called all these forces something different, therefore separating them.  Look at gravity.  If we assume that gravity is a particle/wave in itself (graviton) then the forces causing us to stay on the planet, are therefore the same forces that acted upon the protons, neutrons, and electrons creating atoms.  Afterall, if gravity is a binding energy, it is just attracting our molecular mass through the same nuclear forces.  Althought because of the relative size difference, we interpret the forces with significantly different powers of attraction.  Gravtiy =weak, nuclear force=strong.

Its funny, last nights discussion started out as a way to show that faster than light travel is possibleby taking the mind of the observer on earth and directly relating it to that of the observer actually moving.  Light in its very essence will always move away from its source at the speed of light.  Therefore if we are travelling half the speed of light, the speed of light relative to us, is travelling 1.5x the speed of light.  We assume that time slows down, but time is still a very controversial subject in the realm of neurologic function.  To elicit change, (ie passage of time) one must be aware that there is something in the first place, therefor making time simply a mental construct.  So in the "physical" world can time really exist without an observer? 

Alright I have to go, I am really getting into this however, and I will try and come up with some better analogies at work. 

Thanks for all your input. 

:heart:Peace:heart:

:hippie:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081518 -

Quoiyaien said:
It is a hypothetical formula only.


that doesn't make any sense. it is an equivalence relation; there is nothing hypothetical about it. what i don't understand is what you are trying to represent by that formula. maybe you have some viable idea which you havn't been able to express properly yet. if you tell us what you're trying to describe, maybe someone can give you a mathematical model for it.

Quote:
We were not sure of the actual mathematical viablilty of this. Hence, I wanted others to see if it made sense.


well, E = mc^2 -> 2E = E + mc^2, but that's just adding unnecessary terms to the equation. there's nothing mathematically wrong with it, but in terms of physics it adds no new knowledge.

Quote:
But the intent is to try and show a fractal relationship between light, matter, time, and consciousness.


now i admit i know very little about fractals, but there are still some problems with that:

-light, matter and conciousness are not physical quantities. you cannot produce mathematical relations for things that you cannot quantify.
-what exactly do you mean by a fractal relationship? (this is probably just me being ignorant about fractals)

Quote:
The large is but a reflection of the small, and vice versa, therefore the same principles that apply to specific quanta (quarks, or the "string" they are made of) apply to that of a larger scale.


sort of. rather the large is composed of the small, and the principles that apply to individual particles can be approximated when dealing with groups of particles.

Quote:
Planck length is something like 10^-35 (I think?) so maybe in our attempts of unification, we are looking at the wrong base quanta.


err...no. i don't mean to be offensive but i think you're really out of your depth here. there is a very good reason for the planck length being what it is.

do you really understand the unification theories in contemporary theoretical physics? because i don't and i have a degree in physics.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: psyka]
    #5081540 -

psyka said:
I'm still trying to understand physics formula reasoning. Formula's are just logical models that explain an event and/or object. To get what that means, you have to go back in history and retrace ancient mathematics.


or just look up the definitions of the terms in the formula. also, formula's don't really explain, they just describe things. for example, newton's F = ma describes how things move but it doesn't explain why things move.

Quote:
WHY is the formula for the area of a circle pi times the radius squared? Well, quite simply there are approximately 3.14 squares (of the radius' length) inside a circle. Of course, the reasoning is much deeper than that, and to understand WHY there are 3.14 squares in a circle takes a bit more investigation.


again, equations do not tell you why, they just describe how.

Quote:
Now, to go off with more rambling. What is energy? Officially, we dont know, so this is opinion. Energy is sound, and so everything is vibration. The vibrations alter the properties of atoms. Everything, is an extremely intricate overlay of waveforms... a holographic multi-dimensional fractal. A lot of expirements conform to this idea, however it is currently a "metaphysical" idea, called string theory (which is dying, due to lack of supporting details... or IMO, indiscovered phenomena).


sound is a form of energy, but energy is not sound. sound requires a medium in which to travel, while energy (in general) does not. but you are correct; energy is a pretty abstract concept. energy is more of a property of something; any object (whether its macroscopic or infinitesimal) has a certain amount of energy.

string theory is essentially a description of the fundamental constituents of matter and energy. in the standard model, you have infinitesimal particles with particular properties, in string theory you have strings which vibrate in various dimensions.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081562 -

right, brief history of particles:

after the big bang, everything in the universe is at a very high energy. at this energy, there is once force acting on everything. as the universe cools and the particles lose energy, something called spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs. the one force starts behaving in four different ways, which today are known as the gravitational, strong nuclear, weak nuclear and electromagnetic forces. with this symmetry breaking comes essentially a load of new particles.

the main goal of theoretical physics is to come up with one set of equations that describe all four forces. at the moment, this has been done for the weak and electromagnetic forces (the electroweak unification), and string theories are an attempt to unify the strong, weak and electromagnetic. the problem lies with gravity, because we really don't understand it very well.

so yes, you are right in saying that the force that keeps on the planet is ultimately the same force that binds a nucleus together.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081603 -

Quoiyaien said:
Light in its very essence will always move away from its source at the speed of light. Therefore if we are travelling half the speed of light, the speed of light relative to us, is travelling 1.5x the speed of light.


ouch. that would make einstein turn in his grave. if you are travelling at half the speed of light towards a light beam, the light beam is propagating AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT relative to you, not 1.5x the speed of light. that's special relativity.

Quote:
We assume that time slows down, but time is still a very controversial subject in the realm of neurologic function. To elicit change, (ie passage of time) one must be aware that there is something in the first place, therefor making time simply a mental construct. So in the "physical" world can time really exist without an observer?


you're confusing time with human perception of time. time is a dimension, or a co-ordinate. human perception of time is rather different and a lot more complicated.

sorry if i nitpicked to much, i hope i havn't put you off thinking about this stuff. it might be a good idea to read up on special relativity and the basic ideas of quantum theory.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: alsey]
    #5081639 -

Degree in physics?  Cool!  I will definately work on this some more at work.  I am triyng to avoid getting trapped in numbers.  Everything that there is in theoretical physics seems to have a solid mathematical background.  Maybe what I am approaching is philosophical Physics?  New age metaphysics I suppose.  Thank you for all your input.  It will definately help me clarify what I am going after here.  Planck length 10^-33 cm.  See, prove me wrong, reinforce my knowledge.  If I was never wrong, I'd think that I was always right. That would suck. 

Never worry about being offensive, I need someone to prove me wrong so I can research and learn more thoroughly what I am talking about.  Please do so as often as you see fit.  It is the only way I see getting my point across.  And I do have a sound theory, It just hasnt quite found its way out yet.  Work in progress.   

:heart:Peace:heart:

:hippie:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: Quoiyaien]
    #5081680 -

Quoiyaien said:
I am triyng to avoid getting trapped in numbers. Everything that there is in theoretical physics seems to have a solid mathematical background.


that's the nature of physics. unfortunately there is no way around it. if you want to understand the physics, you have to understand the math. its one thing saying 'particles behave like waves', but to acurately describe how that wave behaves you need the math.

if you really want to understand physics properly, grab yourself a 1st year undergraduate text (i can recommend one if you want) and start reading. its a long learning process, but there really isn't any other way of doing it.

special relativity is a good place to start because its interesting, but its also quite easy. the hardest math you have to do in special relativity is take a square root.


--------------------
"Gently return to the simple physical sensation of the breath. Then do it again, and again, and again. Somewhere in this process, you will come face-to-face with the sudden and shocking realization that you are completely crazy. Your mind is a shrieking, gibbering madhouse on wheels." - ven. henepola gunaratana

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: alsey]
    #5081853 -

Ive taken quantum classes, tensor classes, and I can tell you, its not glamorous at all. I find that people are fascinated with the abstract few paragraph explanations of quantum, but give them some math, and they will call you crazy. If you are really interested though, learn some higher level math, and physics. Im sure theres some college around you.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Check out this formula! [Re: TheCow]
    #5083635 -

i just started a new job programming
my boss gave me some crazy transformation i'm supposed to represent in excel
i spent the weekend trying to understand it, and got 90% there.
then he talked about adding another dimension to it, so now i dont do the equation, but i have to represent it an infinite number of times, and an infinite number of times backwards, and watch as they change over time.
at first i didnt know what he was saying and felt my brain going through the grinder, then suddenly squish i got it and felt so relieved...
then he's like, 'now for the next step.  dont be scared' let me tell you i was scared shitless
and he literally adds another dimension to the problem, and says, let's look at the relations between the transformations forwards, and the relations between the transformations backwards, and, watching how they change over time, write a spreadsheet that looks at the relationship between the two sets of transformations, and compares this relationship with they relate to the last element in the time series, as the series changes over time.  or something.  :frown:
i ain't no math major.  and today i had my brain melted more than it's ever been melted, in a long long time.
i :heart: math


--------------------
"consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature 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
* String Theory is messed up! nubious 2,885 19 09/15/09 10:09 PM
by DieCommie
* Kaballah and String Theory undecided 1,423 16 01/16/03 10:41 AM
by SnuffelzFurever
* String theory Traveller 2,557 7 09/10/01 02:17 AM
by UrQuattro
* "Freewill problem" check
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 buttonion 19,137 152 04/22/07 10:13 PM
by Phred
* Pain Formula Swami 1,015 10 02/22/03 10:48 AM
by David_Scape
* reality created by consciousness
( 1 2 all )		 Lallafa 4,112 31 02/22/02 11:47 PM
by ArCh_TemPlaR
* imagine > no really, check it out psychopsilocyber 914 13 05/11/03 07:20 PM
by You_are_God
* Fractals
( 1 2 3 all )		 Sole_Worthy 5,331 43 12/20/05 11:27 PM
by ElectricJW

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
791 topic views. 2 members, 69 guests and 12 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.