Will they please stop publishing great books!

Quote from nitro:

I remember the quote, but I don't remember who said it. I am actually surprised that Feynman said that. One of the consequences of Special Relativity (SR) is that there is no such thing as "now." We all have our own "now" time lines. Hence simultaneity doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "at once."

Perhaps he meant the time that is left when you normalize this time out, what is called cosmic time. In SR, time is another coordinate like space, except that it's geometry is very different than the geometry of the "physical" dimensions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_time

Think about it for a second, if there is no such thing as and absolute "now", how can we say that the universe is 15 billion years old? In what frame or reference? This is called cosmic time.


Well, I am not sure I follow. Time is definitely something that we think we understand, but is much deeper than we think. For example. in Godel's solution to Einstein's Field Equations of General Relativity, time does not even exist. Physicists can't really explain time. Nothing in physics requires it, with the exception of the neutral kaon in weak interactions, and even that is somewhat contrived.
More...

Time is not absolute; it is relative, however. So unless you happen to be driving a car at the speed of light, the notion of time being irrelevant really doesn't apply to us mortals. Speaking of cosmological relativity properties doesn't apply to our pragmatic experience much either, as we operate at different levels. It's like saying tachyons move at the speed of light, or particles can be entangled billions of light years away; regardless, we'll never experience that in our limited forms.

There is such a thing as a "now" with regards to the big bang, it is a point of reference; much like a ground potential is to a circuit voltage. We measure relative properties of time, the same way we measure relative properties of circuits in the above argument.

Some interesting ideas, though. Thanks for sharing fun topics. Much more interesting than the political drivel that goes on here.:)
 
Quote from nitro:

I agree. I liked that book quite a bit.

My ex was into Jewish mysticism [it's another story, but before meeting her I believed all things were explained by science. She was the first evidence I had that there are non "physical" things in this world], she suggested I go to a talk on the connections between Grand Unified Field theories and Jewish mysticism at a local synagogue. I was astonished by some of the parallels and it was really interesting.
More...

So you believe the kabbalah has much merit?:D
 
Quote from nitro:

I remember the quote, but I don't remember who said it. I am actually surprised that Feynman said that. One of the consequences of Special Relativity (SR) is that there is no such thing as "now." We all have our own "now" time lines. Hence simultaneity doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "at once."

Perhaps he meant the time that is left when you normalize this time out, what is called cosmic time. In SR, time is another coordinate like space, except that it's geometry is very different than the geometry of the "physical" dimensions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_time

Think about it for a second, if there is no such thing as and absolute "now", how can we say that the universe is 15 billion years old? In what frame or reference? This is called cosmic time.


Well, I am not sure I follow. Time is definitely something that we think we understand, but is much deeper than we think. For example. in Godel's solution to Einstein's Field Equations of General Relativity, time does not even exist. Physicists can't really explain time. Nothing in physics requires it, with the exception of the neutral kaon in weak interactions, and even that is somewhat contrived.
More...

Lost track of this thread. I'm wrong on the quote. I've been wrong for decades about who to attribute it to; it was Thomas Wheeler.

The quote does imply all the things you're citing here as in time only being a concept we impose on an indifferent universe. Entropy is used as a way to suggest times arrow points in the classical direction but theres just as much organization as there is the other when you bring natural selection into the picture.

All ears on Chris Botti. Great stuff, discovered him when Sting used him. That along with Marsalis were some of Stings best years.
 
Ok, a trading book makes an appearance:

http://www.amazon.com/Analysis-Geometry-Modeling-Finance-Mathematics/dp/1420086995/ref=pd_sim_b_11

This book is on it's way from Amazon.

I have a very special fondness for this particular metaphor, a bridge between, the language of trading and Physics/Mathematics. This book even has an appendix with a dictionary so that Physicists and Mathematicians can translate what objects in Phynance correspond to what they are used to talking about in their own domain. Very very nice.

If anyone has comments on this book and it's material, I would be interested in hearing it.
 
Quote from omegapoint:

Lost track of this thread. I'm wrong on the quote. I've been wrong for decades about who to attribute it to; it was Thomas Wheeler.
More...
Since I don't know who Thomas Wheeler is, I can believe he said something like that. :D

The quote does imply all the things you're citing here as in time only being a concept we impose on an indifferent universe. Entropy is used as a way to suggest times arrow points in the classical direction but theres just as much organization as there is the other when you bring natural selection into the picture.
More...
Yeah, the citation of entropy has been used as an explanation for time. To me this is not even close. Time and entropy are consequences of something much deeper. I doubt we see anything close to a solution to it in this century. It is 22nd century physics, imo.

Here is an example of the research that is going on now:

http://www.physorg.com/news98468776.html

Or if you want more formal:

http://physics.usc.edu/~bars/twoTph.htm

All ears on Chris Botti. Great stuff, discovered him when Sting used him. That along with Marsalis were some of Stings best years.
More...
I agree. I like Chris Botti way more than Marsalis, but that is just taste.
 
Quote from dtrader98:

So you believe the kabbalah has much merit?:D
More...
I honestly don't know what to think about it. The parallels may be accidental of course. I believe in accidents. This one is a bit eerie.
 
Quote from nitro:

I honestly don't know what to think about it. The parallels may be accidental of course. I believe in accidents. This one is a bit eerie.
More...

I hear you. I don't know if you read much on the fiction side, but there was an interesting book I read, titled, "Dante's equation," by Jane Jensen.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Dantes-Equation...e9b0aebe&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65:12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1205|293%3A1|294%3A50
(You'll notice the shape on the cover emulates the kaballah tree).


It's a pretty interesting fiction read, combining aspects of modern physics, time travel, and the kaballah. Pretty interesting, if you are familiar with the kaballah a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top