Notices
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: A new day

  1. #1 A new day 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2
    Uncertainty. It is all around us. There seems to be this kind of chance that surrounds us. I was once told that if you dropped an infinite number of bowling balls from an airplane, some would fall up.

    That being said, from my basic understanding of physics it seems that sort of a game of dice is being played here. My question is whether this is just a sign of the limits of our measuring devices or pure chance.

    Imagine this: You are able to start this day over as an observer. Every atom, every electron, every quark, EVERYTHING is exactly as it was. Would the day unfold differently?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Chance is a luxury of not bothering to calculate space-time properly. It is purely a perceptive "couch" those too lazy to offer the laws of space-time the credit that the laws are due.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2
    So it is just a limit of our measurements and knowledge of the universe as a whole. I wonder if we will ever have the capabilities to measure with enough precision to make 100% accurate predictions.

    Like you said, this illustrates the fact that current sceince models are flawed (for example, how the hell does gravity work?) . We are just using models that do the best job of predicting, answering WHAT is going to happen not HOW.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    You and me also, right.




    No, good luck to u.\\\
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    1. Heisenberg.
    2. Is free will an emergent property.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Yes, because you've noticed all of them. Therefore the atoms in your brain had to re arragne to notice that. Therefore the universe is not certainly bound. In any cirumstance. That is why I believe time travel free paradoxes are free of occuring, simply because every sinle possible moment of interference from a unique reference frame alters the dimension.

    A slight tad psudeo I know, but still its there. No wonder quantum theory and GR are so clashing constantly.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    1. Heisenberg.
    2. Is free will an emergent property.
    So, you do have a weakness.




















    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoidberg420
    So it is just a limit of our measurements and knowledge of the universe as a whole. I wonder if we will ever have the capabilities to measure with enough precision to make 100% accurate predictions.
    Not at all. At the most fundamental level, which is the quantum level, nature seems to not be deterministic. Quantum mechanics has shown that it is only possible to predict probabilities and not certainties.

    What is truly marvelous is that as we pass from the level of a few elementary particles and atoms to the macroscopic world of many billions of atoms and large masses that the laws of physics and of the mathematics of probability present us with an effectively deterministic view of physics. The macroscopic world is largely predictable. Were it not so there would be no engineering and we would not have the products of technology that make life easier. Indeed life as we know it would not be possible if the world were unpredictable.

    But there are also complexities that lead to a world with things that seem to be not so predictable. While the weather is determined by the laws of thermodynamics, heat transfer and fluid flow, the complexity of the systems that govern weather are such that even small uncertainties in our mesurements result in large uncertainties in predictions. Long range weather forecasts are essentially impossible. Even the slightest error in the initial data quickly is quickly magnified so that long-range forecasts become nonsensical. Other large-scale dynamical systems also reflect this level of unpredictability in the distant future. We do not, for instance, know if the orbital trajectories of the sysem of planets in our solar system is stable in the very long run. This property is sometimes called "chaos".

    So, if one considers the chaotic nature of large-scale dynamical systems in combination with the stochastic nature of the quantum world, one is led to the logical conclusion that it is impossible to be able to precisely predict the future, no matter what technological progress may come in our ability to make more accurate measurements.

    ]
    Like you said, this illustrates the fact that current sceince models are flawed (for example, how the hell does gravity work?) . We are just using models that do the best job of predicting, answering WHAT is going to happen not HOW.
    Current science models are not so much flawed as incomplete. We know that general relativity and quantum mechanics are incompatible. Research is underway to try to find a theory that can rectify that situation, but the task is daunting. However, the models that we have are quite good at predictioin HOW the natural world functions. What that cannot tell us is WHY it operates that way. That is a task for theologians.

    We have a pretty good idea of how gravity works. The explanation is called general relativity. It tells us that gravity is a manifestation of the curvature of space-time and that curvature is determined by the distribution of matter/energy in the universe. The theory is elegant and has been confirmed by a great many experiments.

    Certainly more research in the fundamentals of physics remains to be done. But there has been a tremendous amount of progress in the history of science and current theories are astonishingly accurate. Those theories have been highly refined, and while we know that the story is not yet complete we also know that the available theories are sufficient to explain all aspects of our everyday experience. In the extreme situations, as in the moment of the Big Bang and near thge singularity of a black holes that the theories break down. We don't understand the nature of "dark energy" or "dark matter" or if they really exist or if some other explanation remains to be found. But we do know the physics that governs all of chemistry, hence of biology and of the processes that are active in our everyday experience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    1. Heisenberg.
    2. Is free will an emergent property.
    So, you do have a weakness.
    .
    Yes.

    I once understood one of your posts, but a healthy diet, regular exercise and thinking pure thoughts, allowed me to get throught the moment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    121
    How would balls fall up?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart Thomson
    How would balls fall up?

    I think some plane companies had that problem in actuality. The military wanted rear firing missiles. When the missile released it sucked to the plane. Very different then the forward released missile.

    Certainly a bunch of balls being released at once could create an aerodynamic effect that could carry another ball being released into the plane. Or cause it to collide with the underbody of the plane.

    At certain speeds you do not want anything coming off your plane. Because it could destroy the plane.

    Balls tend to drop nicely though. That is probably why they used balls as an example.

    When a plane is going fast enough. All you need to do is suspend little metal objects out in front of it. Like those little Chinese umbrellas they put in drinks, but carrying one heavy shot under them. Launched from motors or rockets they could defend a country, out over 1000 miles out, during an air strike. From super sonic planes.

    Satellites can be taken down with the same thing.

    Then everyone will want perpetual motion planes again. Flying without GPS, perhaps no compass, and Loran, you do not want to be relying on fuel.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •