Author Topic: from one scientist to the next...  (Read 10867 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #50 on: March 24, 2010, 08:22:00 PM »
See if you can figure out what's wrong with this.

Let a = 1, and b = 1.
Then, a = b
a2 = a*b
a2 - b2 = a*b - b2
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b
1 + 1 = 1
therefore 2 = 1.


If you can, then you'll have answered your own question.
1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #51 on: March 24, 2010, 08:57:51 PM »
So you meant output not put out, interesting.  Sorry I could not see it with out processing the jpeg to darken it a little.  My bad.


The airplane thread doesn't bother me grasshopper, obfuscation does...and the extent poor knowledge of physics is displayed by some, promoted by others for entertainment.


The really interesting part of the airplane thread was how some cannot even understand the evidence before their eyes, makes me afraid every time I think about making a mistake and winding up being tried by a group of people with this level of reasoning capability...scary.


So tell us are you a "1/0 is irrational". or a, "1/0 is an expression of infinity", type of guy?


There were two ways to interpret the airplane problem.  I linked you to a very good explanation of the two ways it in that thread.  Then I sent you the direct link in a PM.  Then tried to explain it in words.  Then I gave up on you. 

The link might still be there - in case you're still interested (yeah right!).  It's not that difficult.  But it doesn't really matter.  What's clear to some, seems like obfuscation to others.  That's life in the big city.



In practice, it's common to simply define x/0 = ∞.  However, division by zero is a no no.  It's 'undefined,' otherwise we get nonsense answers (like 1 = 2).

But one must always be careful when messing around with ∞.  For example, ∞ - ∞ is not necessarily 0.  Some expressions involving infinity are indeterminate forms.  Sometimes quantum mechanics are plagued by infinities.  They must employ a technique called renormalization, where they play fast and loose with unwanted infinities, but it seems to work. 

Mathematics can be every bit as interesting as physics.  Or as Carpy would say, 'Math is cooler than an eskimo's butt fresh off a Yukon outhouse seat.'  Well, maybe he wouldn't say that about math....
1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #52 on: March 25, 2010, 04:00:16 AM »
 :D

Nice post, fun with math.  

Unless you have the pilot collaborating with the treadmill, it takes off.  Read this blog, it explains the logical traps "no flies" fall into decisively.


There is no spoon here, just someone telling you there is no spoon.


On to the universe.

The interesting thing (to me) remains, what has zero to do with the real world?  Zero is our construct, it is only essential to current math theory.

Nature's closest connection to zero is inside the event horizon of  a black hole. Do we really know the degenerate matter is really at zero diameter?  I don't think any current theories give us a math model that accurately predicts observable events and what happens inside an event horizon.

But who knows?


I have been following the reporting about why Jupiter's upper atmosphere does not have the predicted amount of neon.  The reason they are postulating is a rain of helium inside a sea of hydrogen carrying the neon with it out of the atmosphere.  The layer is at the interface between gaseous hydrogen and metallic hydrogen within Jupiter.    

Interesting to contemplate what raining helium would look like.

Link to article about Helium Rain










« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 04:09:33 AM by Markcb750 »

Offline wannabridin

  • Patience made me a
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,237
  • -Garrett
    • 1976 CB750K, under construction:
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #53 on: March 25, 2010, 06:32:29 AM »
See if you can figure out what's wrong with this.

Let a = 1, and b = 1.
Then, a = b
a2 = a*b
a2 - b2 = a*b - b2
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b
1 + 1 = 1
therefore 2 = 1.


If you can, then you'll have answered your own question.

what's wrong with this is your jump from

"(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b"

simplifying that down you return to your original equation, a=b, so therefore, 1=1.  please elaborate as to where i could be wrong?

i do know where you're coming from on your proof here though.  i've seen it, and worked it out before, to where 2=1.  just wondering if you made a ty-po or i looked over something
1976 CB750K, currently under construction:
http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=64468.0

-And if you don't do it this year, you'll be one year older when you do...

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #54 on: March 25, 2010, 06:53:11 AM »
That is the point, but not why.

when the (a-b) term is removed by dividing, you are dividing by zero.  The answer becomes one of two choices.

∞ + ∞ = ∞  True

1 + 1 = 1  False


This does not answer the question I posed, except that by stating a response this way one is exposing that division by zero is undefined and leads to ambiguity.

The ambiguity is what is desired here, it stimulates response by obfuscating the answer…


 

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #55 on: March 25, 2010, 09:01:59 AM »
See if you can figure out what's wrong with this.

Let a = 1, and b = 1.
Then, a = b
a2 = a*b
a2 - b2 = a*b - b2
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b
1 + 1 = 1
therefore 2 = 1.


If you can, then you'll have answered your own question.

what's wrong with this is your jump from

"(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b"

simplifying that down you return to your original equation, a=b, so therefore, 1=1.  please elaborate as to where i could be wrong?

i do know where you're coming from on your proof here though.  i've seen it, and worked it out before, to where 2=1.  just wondering if you made a ty-po or i looked over something


I posted this as a clear example of why we cannot divide by zero.  Dividing by zero leads to nonsense results.  


1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #56 on: March 25, 2010, 09:32:12 AM »
:D

Nice post, fun with math.  

Unless you have the pilot collaborating with the treadmill, it takes off.  Read this blog, it explains the logical traps "no flies" fall into decisively.


There is no spoon here, just someone telling you there is no spoon.


On to the universe.

The interesting thing (to me) remains, what has zero to do with the real world?  Zero is our construct, it is only essential to current math theory.

Nature's closest connection to zero is inside the event horizon of  a black hole. Do we really know the degenerate matter is really at zero diameter?  I don't think any current theories give us a math model that accurately predicts observable events and what happens inside an event horizon.

But who knows?


I have been following the reporting about why Jupiter's upper atmosphere does not have the predicted amount of neon.  The reason they are postulating is a rain of helium inside a sea of hydrogen carrying the neon with it out of the atmosphere.  The layer is at the interface between gaseous hydrogen and metallic hydrogen within Jupiter.    

Interesting to contemplate what raining helium would look like.

Link to article about Helium Rain



All numbers are mathematical constructs.  Sounds like you've been reading Charles Seife's Zero - The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.   ::)  (I've ran across others that have read this book, and for some reason, this book seems to leave the reader with crackpot ideas....)


The entire point of the airplane problem is that there are multiple ways to interpret the problem - not whether it would take off or not.  To get people to recognize the problem in its entirety was the ultimate goal.





There is no diagram grasshopper.
grasshopper
would like to have a comment from the zen master soichiro, but...

In case anyone is wondering what this is all about, Mark follows me around any thread that's science related and tries to play games.
1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Offline wannabridin

  • Patience made me a
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,237
  • -Garrett
    • 1976 CB750K, under construction:
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2010, 09:37:23 AM »
dividing by zero could yield an ultimate result, if we can ever figure out what happens in a black hole...

good thought game though soichiro, nice to be reminded of fun things to do in your head  :)

thanks for your take on it mark, when we look at math as just that with no other "greater" meanings like you discussed in an earlier post, then zero is the big wrench in the cogs, it leads to complete ambiguity.  but when one looks at it as the great equalizer of nature, then it starts to take on a newer meaning.

i'll stop now before i take the thread in the wrong direction by bringing in philosophy and other "meaning"   ;)




There is no diagram grasshopper.
grasshopper
would like to have a comment from the zen master soichiro, but...

In case anyone is wondering what this is all about, Mark follows me around any thread that's science related and tries to play games.

i figured something like this was going on.  soichiro, what's your real world profession?  how did you become so interested in all this?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 09:40:53 AM by wannabridin »
1976 CB750K, currently under construction:
http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=64468.0

-And if you don't do it this year, you'll be one year older when you do...

Offline Duke McDukiedook

  • Space Force 6 Star General
  • Really Old Timer ...
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,690
  • Wish? Did somebody say wish?
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2010, 11:36:21 AM »
And people couldn't and probably still can't wrap their heads around that concept when TT and I pointed that out early on in the plane-thought problem.
"Well, Mr. Carpetbagger. We got somethin' in this territory called the Missouri boat ride."   Josey Wales

"It's Baltimore, gentlemen. The gods will not save you." Ervin Burrell

CB750 K3 crat | (2) 1986 VFR750F

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2010, 01:00:36 PM »
:D

Nice post, fun with math.  

Unless you have the pilot collaborating with the treadmill, it takes off.  Read this blog, it explains the logical traps "no flies" fall into decisively.


There is no spoon here, just someone telling you there is no spoon.


On to the universe.

The interesting thing (to me) remains, what has zero to do with the real world?  Zero is our construct, it is only essential to current math theory.

Nature's closest connection to zero is inside the event horizon of  a black hole. Do we really know the degenerate matter is really at zero diameter?  I don't think any current theories give us a math model that accurately predicts observable events and what happens inside an event horizon.

But who knows?


I have been following the reporting about why Jupiter's upper atmosphere does not have the predicted amount of neon.  The reason they are postulating is a rain of helium inside a sea of hydrogen carrying the neon with it out of the atmosphere.  The layer is at the interface between gaseous hydrogen and metallic hydrogen within Jupiter.    

Interesting to contemplate what raining helium would look like.

Link to article about Helium Rain



All numbers are mathematical constructs.  Sounds like you've been reading Charles Seife's Zero - The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.   ::)  (I've ran across others that have read this book, and for some reason, this book seems to leave the reader with crackpot ideas....)


The entire point of the airplane problem is that there are multiple ways to interpret the problem - not whether it would take off or not.  To get people to recognize the problem in its entirety was the ultimate goal.





There is no diagram grasshopper.
grasshopper
would like to have a comment from the zen master soichiro, but...

In case anyone is wondering what this is all about, Mark follows me around any thread that's science related and tries to play games.


No haven't read that one. but i will look for it, thanks for the heads up.


I understand your objective in presenting the airplane problem here.

Entertainment.  
 
The fact that people an miss-understand the problem or can get lost in understanding the evidence before their eyes is part of the problem, it is why people pay me to solve problems for them.   People can interpret the problem incorrectly, the "no flies" people are assuming evidence not stated in the problem, just read the link I provided.


I find these exercises entertaining, it is why I spend time hunting and pecking out responses, whether it is you or someone else does not mater to me, it is something I like to do. thanks for posting.



Where does this lead us Grasshopper?   Is this a Newtonian clockwork universe or is it a Heisenberg uncertainty universe?

If the grasshopper thing really really bothers you, I might stop.  I'll have to take a poll first.


« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 07:03:02 PM by Markcb750 »

Offline wannabridin

  • Patience made me a
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,237
  • -Garrett
    • 1976 CB750K, under construction:
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #60 on: March 25, 2010, 01:11:17 PM »
so what DO you do mark?
1976 CB750K, currently under construction:
http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=64468.0

-And if you don't do it this year, you'll be one year older when you do...

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #61 on: March 25, 2010, 01:15:30 PM »
Not much right now, before the world decided it was best to let communist slaves build everything I was the head of engineering and special sales for a manufacturing equipment company...Great work if you can get it.


how about you?




*Thought I would add that I took so much astronomy in college they would not allow me to matriculate because I did not diversify my education with enough non science classes, so I got to spend another semester taking Business Economics, Marketing, and Public speaking....damn I hated that semester.  Not that this gives me any expert status, just that I have been interested in this subject for a long time.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 07:41:13 PM by Markcb750 »

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #62 on: March 26, 2010, 01:07:09 PM »
Sounds like you've been reading Charles Seife's Zero - The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.

No haven't read that one. but i will look for it, thanks for the heads up.



You might like Velikovsky.  He's more your style.
1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #63 on: March 26, 2010, 01:17:12 PM »
Sounds like you've been reading Charles Seife's Zero - The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.

No haven't read that one. but i will look for it, thanks for the heads up.



You might like Velikovsky.  He's more your style.

I haven't thought about him for decades...His obfuscation of facts to baffle the rabble is right up your alley.  I take it you're a fan of his.

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #64 on: March 26, 2010, 02:14:26 PM »
Any of you tried this?

Chat with Albert

Very polite AI

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #65 on: March 26, 2010, 05:17:00 PM »
New Proof Unknown "Structures" Tug at Our Universe


Putting aside the belief that working theories of what "is" out there are not proof that that "is' what is out there for a while...

Back to the original post:


The news this week about the apparent stream of Dark mater which extends toward the Coma cluster is interesting.  Dark Matter and Dark Energy have been the theories that many loved to hate. 


I had a long series of threads with an internet entity who was a hard core creationist.  His primary argument was that something could not come from nothing. 

Every where he could find a debate about a subject he would pounce on the issue and stuff a magical being to fill in his understanding. Dark Energy and matter where among his favorites. 

He made the case that something we can never sense directly with our instruments cannot be part of the proof of the expanding universe theory that indicates an age of 13.7BY.    Philosophically he is using an extension of the same philosophical traps that lead one to the "logical" conclusion that one cannot prove anything besides ones own conciseness exists. 


I made my case that the ability to predict events is indicative that a theory may be correct, that  if Dark matter was not due to large halos of standard mater, then the hidden mater would reveal its presence by the tracks it left and its existence is proved by the tracks whether we see it or not. 


This latest set of reports is some good tracking evidence. As I told old Tommaso Caccini* (I nicknamed him also… ::))  if the theory had merit tracks would appear and tell us the nature of the creature we where tracking, we might not ever see it but we would know a lot about it.

Mark


*Tommaso Caccini accused Galileo Galilei of heresy.

Offline sangyo soichiro

  • Tuck
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,167
  • ☢ the atomic playboy ☠
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #66 on: March 26, 2010, 08:10:00 PM »
Sounds like you've been reading Charles Seife's Zero - The Biography of a Dangerous Idea.

No haven't read that one. but i will look for it, thanks for the heads up.


You might like Velikovsky.  He's more your style.


Boy, oh boy!  When I think of Velikovsky my worlds collide!  Oh whatever would I do without you soichiro?!  Thanks a million!  No... make that a billion!

You're very welcome Mark. 
1974 CB 750
1972 CB 750 http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,57974.0.html
1971 CL 350 Scrambler
1966 Black Bomber
Too many others to name…
My cross country trip: http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php/topic,138625.0.html

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #67 on: March 26, 2010, 08:26:29 PM »
 :D

I knew it, both a fan and a practitioner of his art!

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #68 on: April 01, 2010, 02:27:19 AM »
Evidence Mounts for Water on the Moon


Offline wannabridin

  • Patience made me a
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,237
  • -Garrett
    • 1976 CB750K, under construction:
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #69 on: April 01, 2010, 06:04:01 AM »
 ;D ;D ;D

wow, must be new findings!!  how'd we miss that awhile ago???

but interesting topic to discuss nonetheless...  who's upset that the constellation program got canned??  i know i am!!  i would of loved to see a base on the dark side of the moon, especially a telescope array!!!  would of made Hubble look like a set of binoculars down here on Earth!!

EDIT: Mark, i hadn't checked APOD yet today until just now, but my latest post mentions it and here's this picture!!  nice to know someone else frequents this website!!   ;D ;D
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 11:18:36 AM by wannabridin »
1976 CB750K, currently under construction:
http://forums.sohc4.net/index.php?topic=64468.0

-And if you don't do it this year, you'll be one year older when you do...

Offline Caaveman82

  • Zippo
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,299
  • That'll do pig. That'll do.
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #70 on: April 01, 2010, 06:19:57 AM »
I know I am way late on the matter but I feel it needs to be said.

Way back when everyone thought the earth was flat, it took a handful of visionaries to prove otherwise.

Could be the same way with this "edge of the universe" thing.

You'll never know for sure, but even if it is not probable, it's possible.
Do not act as though you could kill time without injuring eternity. - Dave Thoreau

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #71 on: April 01, 2010, 06:54:00 AM »
I know I am way late on the matter but I feel it needs to be said.

Way back when everyone thought the earth was flat, it took a handful of visionaries to prove otherwise.

Could be the same way with this "edge of the universe" thing.

You'll never know for sure, but even if it is not probable, it's possible.

Could be, but it leaves one with; what is over that edge? 

Could be turtles, could be more of the same, just expanding faster then light relative to the observable universe so it cannot be observed.

It is an interesting area of thought. 

Everything I have read on the Dark Matter debate continues to center onone of two basic concepts:
1. Something outside Einstein's space time contributes to the evolution of the universe we observe.
2. Something in Einstein's space time has mass but no other characteristics which interact with space time.



Until I read this the other day:

For One Tiny Instant, Physicists May Have Broken a Law of Nature 

I felt neutral on the debate, nothing made me lean one way or another.

Now I think this Brook­haven experiment points to #1.  For how can you break a law, unless there is a reality where the broken law is real?

Or the Brook­haven gold smashers could be wrong.






Offline Caaveman82

  • Zippo
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,299
  • That'll do pig. That'll do.
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #72 on: April 01, 2010, 06:58:22 AM »
Or maybe we think it is one way because we are attempting to observe.

In this book I just read called Time Travel; A New Perspective by J.H. Brennan, the guy was telling a story about this guy who was shooting atoms through tinfoil and when he would watch they would do one thing and when he was not watching they would do something else. He then talked about many other cases where just having an observer for experiements could change the outcome.

Pretty strange...
Do not act as though you could kill time without injuring eternity. - Dave Thoreau

Markcb750

  • Guest
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #73 on: April 01, 2010, 07:18:28 AM »
Or maybe we think it is one way because we are attempting to observe.

In this book I just read called Time Travel; A New Perspective by J.H. Brennan, the guy was telling a story about this guy who was shooting atoms through tinfoil and when he would watch they would do one thing and when he was not watching they would do something else. He then talked about many other cases where just having an observer for experiements could change the outcome.

Pretty strange...

It is strange. 

The experiment with electrons and tinfoil really occurred, it is one of the fundamental experiments that lead to development of quantum mechanics as a method to predict how fundamental particles behave.   

this a link to the Wikki page:

Uncertainty principle and observer effect

Offline Caaveman82

  • Zippo
  • Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,299
  • That'll do pig. That'll do.
Re: from one scientist to the next...
« Reply #74 on: April 01, 2010, 07:34:32 AM »
I am not educated from a university on this matter and everything I know on the subject is from documentries and books that I have read.

With that said, I know quantum theory has a lot to do with just that, the observer effect, so I would assume that it could be a logical explination as to the behavior of the universe. Maybe it did nothing untill we, or other life (if it exists), became interested in it.

Most theories that are considered to be the way it is now, started as just an idea in their day, like black body radiation or the earth being round.

I mean a guy, Max Planck, that didn't even believe in atoms at the time, gave birth to quantum theory....
Do not act as though you could kill time without injuring eternity. - Dave Thoreau