• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Armchair Physics

AdamG

AdamG

[ INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
V.I.P Member
I'd like to see if anyone else enjoys talking about physics theory without the math. I do know basic calculus, though I haven't used it in a while so rusty. What I really enjoy is theorizing.
.
I'll start with an example. I read somewhere that everything moves at the speed of light (c). If an object is in relative non-motion, that object (relative to viewer) is moving at c through time. So, the more one moves through the spatial 3D, the slower one moves through the dimension of time. This matches relativity, and I like the view.
.
So, c is the speed of light "in a vacuum" which means, near a mass, it moves slower. It is diverted from it's straight line, moving through space, and thus slower through time.
.
In other words, a photon is completely motionless through time while it is in a vacuum, since it is moving in space at c.
.
Food for thought.
 
when the photon tavel as it at the speed of light it does not feel the passage of time does not exist from its perspective.
 
I see the universe as four spacial dimensions, all without using mathematics.my math background is grade 13 equal to one year university in mathematics physics and chemistry.
 
I've sometimes (cannot do it a lot) been able to visualize a calabi-yau manifold - six dimensions curled in upon themselves. Only way I can put into words is by rough analogy. String theory stuff.

I can at least manage to always imagine a couple of curled dimensions.
 
fyi, a curled dimension is like a piece of paper curled into a straw, but at Planck length. So it is, most of the time, almost a 1d string with 0 diameter. But since they are not, they can unravel or merge into each other here and there (e.g. black holes), they cannot be truly called strings.

At least this is my understanding.
 
I,m not sure if your aware I put together a thread on physics under obsessions and interests.

Personally, I think the universe is a Mobus strip the fourth dimension is the thickness of the paper plank thickness the trick is finding a way to explain bells theorem locality does not exist.
 
Ronald Zeeman said:
I,m not sure if your aware I put together a thread on physics under obsessions and interests.

Personally, I think the universe is a Mobus strip the fourth dimension is the thickness of the paper plank thickness the trick is finding a way to explain bells theorem locality does not exist.
Click to expand...
I was not aware of it. I'll swing by and take a look, thanks.
 
You can say you are traveling at whatever speed you want. Speed is relative. Find something, anything, going in one direction, and relative to it, you are traveling in the opposite direction at the same speed. There is no preferred frame of reference.
 
Au Naturel said:
You can say you are traveling at whatever speed you want. Speed is relative. Find something, anything, going in one direction, and relative to it, you are traveling in the opposite direction at the same speed. There is no preferred frame of reference.
Click to expand...
I did the same with colour difference is what matters.
 
Ronald Zeeman said:
The speed of light can actually not be measured see EIstein convention.
Click to expand...
oh I agree, I don't find c to be a "hard limit" so much as a divide by 0 error that nobody has bothered to correct. It is an important constant (observed speed of light in a vacuum) but then again, light is never in a true vacuum. There are fields all over, a photon is never alone. So it is artificial by its very definition.
.
(edit) well not observed, but mathematically observed... you know what I mean I hope.
 
the speed of light is based on Maxwells equations. Also he wrote is papers in Quaternions a form of complex numbers. most physicist's are unaware.
 
Not familiar with Maxwell's papers on quaternions. Though I did look at Hamilton's reasoning for it... since I actually had to use them for a while.
.
I really should read more Maxwell. I've always thought that :)
 
I took complex numbers in high school years ago quaternions do not look to complicated just lots of equations.
combine it with linear equations matrices, also took in high school, should be doable. Hamilton was a unrecognized genius.
 
oh Hamilton was great. Three imaginary axes with only one real axis. Took a minute for me to visualize, I got stuck on the word "imaginary". The key is i^2=j^2=k^2 = i*j*k = -1, and once I actually visualized it it made sense.
.
But the actual derivations and whatnot, I didn't look too far into, because I was using them mechanically.
 
the real genius with imaginary numbers is Roger Penrose took me a while to visualize twistors. easy after i realized they were based on imaginary numbers. Same as how they land plane using complex numbers with air traffic control.
 
PHYsics over the years has always moved ahead when the math lines up with the concepts. Enstein non Euclidian geomerty, Schrodinger linear equations, Glen Mangroup theory
 
Basically, from what I understand of twistor space, is that it is an N+1 non-Euclidian space through which the N dimensional space twists. Or something like that.
 
complex numbers involve rotation. What surprised me is Lee Smolin who is my age just recently discovered quaternions.
 
Ronald Zeeman said:
complex numbers involve rotation. What surprised me is Lee Smolin who is my age just recently discovered quaternions.
Click to expand...
ha, well he was probably so focused he didn't think of it for a while. I get that sort of tunnel vision :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom