Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Apr 20, 2015 - 11:06pm PT
|
If we say that the inherent quality is "mass," what has mass, from what does mass emerge, what sustains said mass and why does it - whatever "it" is - have mass? Fixed that for you...
[ P.S.: Mass is an inherent quality, not 'thing' - think m = E/c2 and gluons + quarks and you'll find that 'mass' and 'spin' are not so different with regards to the kind of thinking Largo is doing.
P.P.S. Largo, ask your rideshare buddies to account for the 'mass' of a proton... ]
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2015 - 09:47pm PT
|
Those particles are nice and Largo seems to have a firm grasp of them, but what about time? Is time continuous or discrete? In my studies I have always assumed continuity as a result of an infinite process of dividing time intervals into smaller and smaller bits. Chronons and Planck Time are competing concepts:
"A prominent model was introduced by Piero Caldirola in 1980. In Caldirola's model, one chronon corresponds to about 6.27×10−24
seconds for an electron.[4] This is much longer than the Planck time, which is only about 5.39×10-44
seconds. The Planck time is a theoretical lower-bound on the length of time that could exist between two connected events, but it is not a quantization of time itself since there is no requirement that the time between two events be separated by a discrete number of Planck times. For example, ordered pairs of events (A, B) and (B, C) could each be separated by slightly more than 1 Planck time: this would produce a measurement limit of 1 Planck time between A and B or B and C, but a limit of 3 Planck times between A and C.[citation needed] Additionally, the Planck time is a universal quantization of time itself, whereas the chronon is a quantization of the evolution in a system along its world line. Consequently, the value of the chronon, like other quantized observables in quantum mechanics, is a function of the system under consideration, particularly its boundary conditions." (Wiki)
And then there is the subjective experience of the passage of time which is related to some sort of vibrating filaments(?) in the brain.
Once again, the question posed back some pages, Can the past be altered?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2015 - 10:18pm PT
|
Can the past be altered?
Everyone already knows it's not possible by any mortal whatsoever .....
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2015 - 10:35pm PT
|
Those particles are nice and Largo seems to have a firm grasp of them
I would disagree given his [resolute] conception of 'mass' as a thing versus a property / attribute. This is problematic given the mass of a proton can't be accounted for by the masses of its constituent quarks alone which leaves gluons somehow 'providing' the remaining mass. And, as his own ride-share argument points out, bosons have no mass, so where does this 'thing' he calls 'mass' come from? Not from quarks and not the sum of the masses of its quarks and gluons - there is no physical thing that is 'mass'. In other words, particles 'have' mass in the same way they 'have' spin. In fact, the quarks don't entirely account for a proton's spin either.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 07:26am PT
|
But!!!!
You have no clue to the source of mass ......
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 10:26am PT
|
The Higgs field confers mass to the W, Z and Higgs bosons through spontaneous symmetry breaking.
Just sayin...
There is no 'source' of mass, just as there is no 'source' of a relationship between two people. It's a property that comes about through an interaction between a particle and a field.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 10:31am PT
|
Bullsh!t ^^^^^ everything has a source .....
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 10:38am PT
|
Someday, we may well discover the Nutter Butter field that confers Loudness to Germions.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 11:48am PT
|
Nutter Butter field that confers Loudness to Germions
If I may. It seems more likely people often feel that persistence indicates a strong character, something to be desired. Persistence when faced with resistance to one's efforts only indicates truly strong character, or so it can be seen.
everything has a source
"Everything" is a reversion to an absolute. The word can be used as a statement of experience only when one has actually looked at ALL THINGS. And every one of those things was found never to appear without being associated with some other entity or event. Absolutes carry with them a burden of proof beyond measure.
Failing satisfaction of that burden, statements become unsubstantiated opinion.
That too can be OK, as long as we are clear as to what they really are.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 12:05pm PT
|
"Everything" is a reversion to an absolute.
The word can be used as a statement of experience only when one has actually looked at ALL THINGS.
And every one of those things was found never to appear without being associated with some other entity or event.
Absolutes carry with them a burden of proof beyond measure.
Yep you said perfectly as Largo has repeatedly said also "Beyond Measure"
Yet modern science remains in the deep shackled trench of measurement.
And every one of those things was found never to appear without being associated with some other entity or event.
Yes, to your limited defective material instruments it only appears that way.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 01:55pm PT
|
^^
Can I have bread with that word salad?
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 02:01pm PT
|
Not to be a measurement junkie, but I would like to see a YouTube of Big Brown tossing back some Hg. No need to film the Cu extrusion stage - an after-the-fact still would suffice.
|
|
tolman_paul
Trad climber
Anchorage, AK
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 02:30pm PT
|
Bullsh!t ^^^^^ everything has a source .....
But what about nonthings, do they have a source?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 02:40pm PT
|
Those particles are nice and Largo seems to have a firm grasp of them . . . (jg)
I would disagree given his [resolute] conception of 'mass' as a thing versus a property or attribute (hj)
Joe, those of us who have been on this crazy thread for some time poke at each other. No one here could possibly think that Largo has a "firm grasp" of elementary particles and quantum phenomena. His car pool keeps him revved up and makes the whole thing fun.
;>)
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 03:30pm PT
|
I used to think I knew what mass was...until I checked.
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 03:56pm PT
|
Some things just.. are.
Describing them doesn't explain them at the ultimate level.. what explains existance?
It just is..Science doesn't pretend to explain the origins or existence of everything. Such as what caused the big bang what created the laws of the universe?.. It does try to understand what they are.
So is mind.. or consciousness just something that.. IS ..?? Sometimes I think I'm just trying to dig too far.. farther than there is to go.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 04:19pm PT
|
At their most detailed, fundamental physical relationships are mathematical - a language few speak very fluently. And they are incomplete - so those who do disagree on some things that may seem 'already sorted out' due to our classical training - gravity, for example.
Are these relationships candidates for 'universal truth'? Sure. Could or would another technological species discover them? Yes - they'd have to to make any widgets of any complexity. Would the universe continue to work in the same way without us? Presumably.
While other 'truths' may apply only to our species, these physical relationships do not.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 08:36pm PT
|
As Blue suggested, the relationships may have existed before matter appeared, and formed a matrix upon which the physical universe was hung. This may be roughly what Tegmark is talking about in his mathematical universe conjectures. It's easy to think of math as a kind of symbol manipulation, but originally mathematics may have been a sort of mold into which the universe was poured.
Too bad Rich and Tim are not interested in this thread for they would do a better job of explaining recent mathematical concepts and results. These days I've returned to the 19th century and its charming analytics.
I'm an old "duffer" as Largo said who grumbles about the young guns, the Car Pool from Caltech! (CPCT)
All of this relates to the mind since it is the task of humankind to interpret and symbolize that eternal matrix supporting the physical world.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 09:26pm PT
|
it is the task of humankind to interpret and symbolize that eternal matrix supporting the physical world.
Waste of time.
One should understand who one is and why one really is here ....
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2015 - 09:41pm PT
|
One should understand who one is and why one really is here ....
And one is really here because . . . ?
Oh wait, I forgot you told us earlier we have been here for a billion years and scientists back then knew far more than us.
And it is a waste of time for ducks.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!