quote:Originally posted by glassman: i figure it like this:
Pi will never be known until the universe stops expanding...
It isn't that it is unknown, glass...., it is known and known for exactly what it is, the ratio of the circumference and the diameter of a circle.
It is an entity of logic.
It isn't derived from the existence or circumstances of the physical being of things, so the expansion or contraction or even the very existence of the universe or God or anything has nothing to do with it and what it is or isn't.
But, just as it is a logical derivative, it logically is impossible for there to be any decimal representation of Pi that can be expressed as either a finite or infinitely repeating decimal. Thus any decimal representation of Pi (or any other irrational number, for that matter), would be infinite and non-repeating....and that is something beyond the possibility of writing or indicating with writing, since writing is a physical thing.
The numbers that are the square root of 2 (there are two of them, one negative and one positive), the square roots of 10, the number e, that is the base of the natural logarithms, and many many others are in that same situation. They are the "irrational numbers". Indeed, there are even more than simply "infinitely many" irrational numbers, which most numbers are, there are "uncountably infinitely many"....even as many irrational numbers as all the numbers put together.
The strange query is: is there an uncountable set of numbers that forms a set less numerous than the set of all numbers. That turns out to neither true nor false. The assumption that there is such a set is called the "continuum hypothesis" and is one of the fundamentals allowable in formal logic.
Oops....
Sometimes the mathematician and logician deep within stirs to life and exerts himself openly and uncontrollably.
(Down, boy, DOWN. Back in your den and be quiet! Sleep now....hibernate, damned you...)
My apologies folk....
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
After that....It's 5 o'clock somewhere for me. lol.
-------------------- All post are my opinion. Do your own DD. Who's clicking your buy/sell button!? Posts: 7800 | From: Virginia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The strange query is: is there an uncountable set of numbers that forms a set less numerous than the set of all numbers. That turns out to neither true nor false. The assumption that there is such a set is called the "continuum hypothesis" and is one of the fundamentals allowable in formal logic.
lemme ask you a simple question budge. if the universe is infinite in size and mass? then can it ever finish expanding?
and if it can never finish expanding? then where in the hell is it expanding to?
infinity is an illogical concept...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Cool glass. Lets assume that the universe is constantly expanding. We have to assume that is expanding into a void, which brings up a series of questions on its own. Is the void infinite or does the universe have walls?
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
seriously? i'm just saying that infinity is a human construct that has no basis for reality and demonstrates the hubrus of the human mind...
here's another thing that occurred to me one day while i was listening to the dark side of the moon... we assume black holes exist. Dr Hawkings proved it..
i admit i can't read his proof...
then he turned around and proved they weren't black...
that one i understand...
but?
what if the black holes are the exact opposite of what he assumed...
what if they are really *holes* as in absolutely nothing (in this universe) and entropy forces matter into them instead of gravity sucking it in?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
we assume the universe is exapanding ONLY because of the doppler effect on the EM spectrum (red shift) there are other possible explanations for the red shift...
the universe APPEARS to be expanding no matter which direction we look...
that is hard to reconcile...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: we assume the universe is exapanding ONLY because of the doppler effect on the EM spectrum (red shift) there are other possible explanations for the red shift...
the universe APPEARS to be expanding no matter which direction we look...
that is hard to reconcile...
Expanding into WHAT????? Nothingness, dark matter, complete void???
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: The strange query is: is there an uncountable set of numbers that forms a set less numerous than the set of all numbers. That turns out to neither true nor false. The assumption that there is such a set is called the "continuum hypothesis" and is one of the fundamentals allowable in formal logic.
lemme ask you a simple question budge. if the universe is infinite in size and mass? then can it ever finish expanding?
and if it can never finish expanding? then where in the hell is it expanding to?
infinity is an illogical concept...
Infinity is not a place or a distance or measure of something. It only has logical validity in the consideration of things like sets and sequences.
....such as there is no end to the sequence of positive integers 1,2,3, - - -.
Strictly speaking we cannot "define" any word and we cannot define the word "infinitely". It has "usages", though and we can define (say what is meant by) a phrase or statement, provided we outlaw any that are illogical, (such as the set of all people that go to each others funeral......and you can never say what a set is, sometime what it isn't though).
We can give meaning to the statement that a sequence is infinite:
The statement that a sequence is infinite means that, it has no last term (or any term is followed by another.)
Equivalently: The statement that a sequence, S, is infinite , means that, if N is any positive integer, then S has at least N elements.
That "definition" of the statement that "the sequence, S, is infinite" can be the model to offer meaning to infinite sets:
The statement that the set, S, is infinitemeans that.if N is a positive integer, S has N elements.
(Careful, with that....the statement that 1 is a positive integer does not say 1 is the only positive integer the statement that a set has N elements does not preclude it from having more than N elememts.)
Digressing a moment, the question of whether or not the universe is infinite and even if it contains infinitely many "things" are questions of physics and not logic. If the distance "across" the universe is not infinite (the universe could turn out to be bounded but still infinite), if it is a mertic Euclidean space, and we accept the old argument of Archimedes to proved that the beach does not contain infinitely many grains of sand, then there cannot be infinitely many "things". (Even that does not disallow infinitely many possible positions for "things".)
This can go on and on and actually does amongst cosmologist.
Logically, infinity is a property that sets sequences may or may not have and is only a valid concept for them.
THUS, in fact, your conclusion that "infinity is an illogical concept..." is faulty because
infinity is ONLY a concept of logic.Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
that article referenced a new pub from Case western...
it was published;
Observation of Incipient Black Holes and the Information Loss Problem Authors: Tanmay Vachaspati, Dejan Stojkovic, Lawrence M. Krauss (Submitted on 7 Sep 2006 (v1), last revised 7 Jun 2007 (this version, v3))
Abstract: We study the formation of black holes by spherical domain wall collapse as seen by an asymptotic observer, using the functional Schrodinger formalism. To explore what signals such observers will see, we study radiation of a scalar quantum field in the collapsing domain wall background. The total energy flux radiated diverges when backreaction of the radiation on the collapsing wall is ignored, and the domain wall is seen by the asymptotic observer to evaporate by non-thermal ``pre-Hawking radiation'' during the collapse process. Evaporation by pre-Hawking radiation implies that an asymptotic observer can never lose objects down a black hole. Together with the non-thermal nature of the radiation, this may resolve the black hole information loss problem.
here's some posts that were put up by me and blue in mich before they published....
i wonder if they were reading.... or if blue is one of "them"
Member
Icon 1 posted March 23, 2004 23:38 Profile for glassman Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote Ok--I'll bite---I really didn't want to do much typing tonite-BUT
The red shift is the basic evidence for the expansion of the universe right now(well OK last year. we may have some new stuff worked up that isn't in print yet) the red shift is a phenomena splained currently as the "stretching" of light waves as they are emitted from an object that is moving directly away from the viewer--One of the BIG problems presented by this theory is that EVERYTHING we look at in deep space is displaying it---That means that EVERYTHING in the universe is moving away from everything else----HMMMMMMMM One possible explanation that is not fully accepted YET--is that the red shift may actually be caused by gravity-----------there are a lot of implications produced by this theory and Einstein did in fact say plainly that gravity sretches/curves space-- the curvature of space could in fact be causing the red shift not "the traveling away".
There are a lot of theories that are accepted and considered to be fact by the general populace--- the theophysicists debate these theories constantly--if you read the discusions/arguments they have--it becomes clear that there is a lot of assumption going on. We still are a long way from a unified theory. That in itself proves we don't have anywhere near the right answers yet--our current poor theories don't even give us ONE theory that we can start to test.
The string theory has been falling out of favor lately.
you'll have to find the thread yourself since no matter how i try i can't figger out how to post a link thru my searches. i have to go an put a response on the old thread to bring it forward, and i would appreciate it you did NOT do that....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: we assume the universe is exapanding ONLY because of the doppler effect on the EM spectrum (red shift) there are other possible explanations for the red shift...
the universe APPEARS to be expanding no matter which direction we look...
that is hard to reconcile...
Expanding into WHAT????? Nothingness, dark matter, complete void???
the answers that we have right now depend on which branch of study you favor....
surgeons are gonna cure you with a scalpel.. radiologists prefer a gamma knife...
if you are a quantum physics person? the edges of the universe are literally everywhere.. in you outside you etc...
see quantum foam... they are "holes" that are sub-nano-scopic...
they are so small that we can't exchange information or matter across the "boundary"... if they are correct? and since you are a Dark Side of the Moon person? i'll offer up the idea that complex neural nets may be able to exchange information across the boundaries
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will accept that idea, I am in agreement with the thought that black holes, no matter how powerful, do not have the ability to completely destroy or erase matter or data. Some part still remains, if even energy.
If I may recomend some light, and entertaining, reading. The four book series: The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy The restraunt at the end of the Universe Life, the Universe and everything So long and thanks for all the fish.
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe light's frequency deteriorates with distance traveled (equivalently with time), but at such a rate as to seem not to be locally. Then the change in the frequency of blue light that starts and we measure it across a laboratory or an ocean is so small we can't measure it, but over light years of distance we detect it and interpret it as a Dopler shift?
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
one of the assumptions of astrophysicists is that every galaxy has a black hole in the center as sort of a well, a uh, gravity "anchor"... of course? we can't SEE them....
but? if you reverse the gravitational function and look at a black hole as a drain?
you get this:
the rotational energy of the galaxy keeps it out of the "hole"..
where did the hole come from?
the rotational energy of the galaxy stretches the quantum holes to unusual dimension?
who knows?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cottonjim: I will accept that idea, I am in agreement with the thought that black holes, no matter how powerful, do not have the ability to completely destroy or erase matter or data. Some part still remains, if even energy.
If I may recomend some light, and entertaining, reading. The four book series: The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy The restraunt at the end of the Universe Life, the Universe and everything So long and thanks for all the fish.
Tau Zero by Poul Anderson is good,
Have Spacesuit Will Travel explores the edges of the unvierse concepts too... it's a classic...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glass, by that logic then we can assume that, since the water goes down the drain in a clockwise rotation we could stop the water from draining if we could force the water into a equal couter clockwise rotation. Sounds like a freakin science fair experiment. THis is all way to heavy for a Friday afternoon
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cottonjim: I will accept that idea, I am in agreement with the thought that black holes, no matter how powerful, do not have the ability to completely destroy or erase matter or data. Some part still remains, if even energy.
If I may recomend some light, and entertaining, reading. The four book series: The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy The restraunt at the end of the Universe Life, the Universe and everything So long and thanks for all the fish.
Tau Zero by Poul Anderson is good,
Have Spacesuit Will Travel explores the edges of the unvierse concepts too... it's a classic...
I will write that down and look for it next time I am at Barnes, thanks.
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Maybe light's frequency deteriorates with distance traveled (equivalently with time), but at such a rate as to seem not to be locally. Then the change in the frequency of blue light that starts and we measure it across a laboratory or an ocean is so small we can't measure it, but over light years of distance we detect it and interpret it as a Dopler shift?
could be,
it could also simply be that light is "slowed down" (doppler shifted) by gravity and every time we point our scopes at a source? well, there's gravity in the source...
it is als possible the space is not "nothing" and space itself distorts the wavelength...
the "space is not nothing" assumption also answers the glaring question of where all the extra mass in the universe is "hiding"...
do fish know they are in water?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cottonjim: Glass, by that logic then we can assume that, since the water goes down the drain in a clockwise rotation we could stop the water from draining if we could force the water into a equal couter clockwise rotation. Sounds like a freakin science fair experiment. THis is all way to heavy for a Friday afternoon
how do i 'splain this????
the reverseness isn't on that plane
(i'm actually just posting this between peices..., and the furnace is hot so i can't waste $$)
maybe this will help, it's not really a drain that i'm trying to make the comparison to...
it's the creation of the hole you are seeing in the water...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what you are saying is, the drain is not the black hole, rather the hole that is created by the vortex of water is the "black Hole". That I understand, but... that does then not explain why "the rotational energy of the galaxy keeps it out of the hole".. The hole, while draining water, is caused by the rotation of mass. Are you possibly implying that is the rotation of the mass in the universe that causes a black hole in the very center of the universe? This could go on all day
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another possibility is that time is not homogenous with respect to itself. Maybe light is, though, and over time it remains the same, but with a sped up or slowed down time, the distance between wave peaks "look" to have changed, when in actuality it is the variation in the rate of time that changes.
That too would make for a a Dopler effect and maybe explain the red shift observations without necessitating an expanding universe.
Something that is in vogue among the cosmologist now and has been considered only recently is the possibility that time doesn't exists and is but an illusion.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So here’s a thought using your theory. The universe is not growing; it is just spreading out as the hole is the pizza crust gets bigger. OR is this what is meant by the univ. expanding? It is not "growing" in mass, merely spreading out. Basically we are living in a doughnut and as the hole in the center keeps getting larger, the mass that makes up the bread is getting thinner and thinner until one day.......................... Poof, no more doughnut
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy? Posts: 2647 | From: MN | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cottonjim: So here’s a thought using your theory. The universe is not growing; it is just spreading out as the hole is the pizza crust gets bigger. OR is this what is meant by the univ. expanding? It is not "growing" in mass, merely spreading out. Basically we are living in a doughnut and as the hole in the center keeps getting larger, the mass that makes up the bread is getting thinner and thinner until one day.......................... Poof, no more doughnut
if we build a telescope powerful enough? we'll see the back of our head
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Another possibility is that time is not homogenous with respect to itself. Maybe light is, though, and over time it remains the same, but with a sped up or slowed down time, the distance between wave peaks "look" to have changed, when in actuality it is the variation in the rate of time that changes.
That too would make for a a Dopler effect and maybe explain the red shift observations without necessitating an expanding universe.
Something that is in vogue among the cosmologist now and has been considered only recently is the possibility that time doesn't exists and is but an illusion.
with your math back gorund? you might be able to prove some of these theories..
i don't have the math... i just have the "visual playground"...
i'll keep making glass, it's more fun than a slide rule to me..
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was a time I considered that, glass....
Back in the student days, I considered that maybe there was some character of time we can see or even know is ther from observation, that maybe what we see of time is only a closed dense in itself subset embedded as a nowhere dense subset of another set (or space), such as results when one embeds the real line in what is called a Souslin space.
What we know as the "time continuum" is basically a topological equivalent of the real line, so if it is embedded in a broader space that, like a Souslin space, does not have uncountably many mutually exclusive open sets and is not separable, then as a subspace of the larger space, it is nowhere dense and closed, implying that between any two points of time, there is a lot of time we cannot observe.
A professor heard of my ideas and talked to me about pursuing the questions as a possible dissertation topic under him. I considered it, but found other queries that were more intriguing and followed another path.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
