21–30 of 53 posts
Each process has its own properties, to put it differently, one-time-for-it-all is just a concept of the mind and doesn't exist outside our head.
Lunchtime doubly so.
One universal time for everything is definitely an illusion, even guys who wrote Upanishads knew that. Each process has its own properties, to put it differently, one-time-for-it-all is just a concept of the mind and doesn't exist outside our head.
Question: Why do some physicists believe it's a problem that physics isn't unified? It seems odd to assume that just because throughout history we've unified more and more concepts that all of physics can be unified. What if there's a limit? It's interesting to think that 100,000 years from now, physicists will still be working on the problem since no one would know it's impossible.
"when" they looked in. They who are outside time.
This article gave me a headache. Maybe English isn't currently adequate to describe the ideas of a timeless universe..
Wow. They now have "proof" in Science. Genovese has brought the scientific method to a complete new level.
Time is weird stuff. When you can tell what altitude your atomic clock is by the offset in its notion of time with the clock at your side, you start to get an inkling about that. The professor who taught quantum mechanics at USC when I was there used to joke that God told Adam and Eve that it took 7 days to create the universe, but we know from our observations that it was closer to 14 billion years. Given these two…
Isn't that special relativity(time dilation) that your quantum mechanics teacher talking about there?
"It's a visualisation of the phenomenon, it's not a proof," Genovese says of the experiment. Wow. They now have "proof" in Science. Genovese has brought the scientific method to a complete new level.
"It's a visualisation of the phenomenon, it's not a proof," Genovese says of the experiment. Wow. They now have "proof" in Science. Genovese has brought the scientific method to a complete new level.
Question: Why do some physicists believe it's a problem that physics isn't unified? It seems odd to assume that just because throughout history we've unified more and more concepts that all of physics can be unified. What if there's a limit? It's interesting to think that 100,000 years from now, physicists will still be working on the problem since no one would know it's impossible.
In my view the inability to live with contradictory theories is one of the things that makes science what it is, and also that propels science forward. Gravity and quantum mechanics is a grand example, but we're trained on countless little contradictions, such as why channels A and B of my circuit seemed to behave differently yesterday, though they are nominally identical.
Letting a contradiction stand without investigating it would have to be a conscious mutual decision, in and of itself. Making that decision arbitrarily would be akin to making the contradiction a matter of dogma. This is why some folks struggle with cognitive dissonances that they perceive in religions. Otherwise, if the contradiction is discovered to be irreconcilable for a good scientific reason, that discovery will be equivalent to a unification.
So it's a game where there's nothing in between winning and giving up, and no time limit.
What we never know about contradictions is how long it will take to reconcile them. When I discovered the problem with channels A and B, I had no idea at that moment how or when I would solve it. We have to live with the remote possibility that unifying gravity and quantum mechanics will take 100,000 years.