The Theory of Relative Motion and Natural Purpose

heckler73 · Jan 3, 2015

god1 said:
On the other hand, he makes a whole lot more money than me, so he must be playing something right.

Benny Hinn became rather wealthy, too.

So long as there are people who can be influenced by woo, they can equally be influenced to have digits in their bank accounts make 'quantum leaps' into the higher energy levels of Chopra's wallet. It's not so much a case of him doing something right; rather, it is the people being wooed who are doing something wrong.

RE: Bohr's Quantum model
Bohr's model is only really useful for S-orbitals of a hydrogen or Helium atom IIRC. When p, d, or f orbitals become involved, one needs to move into Schrodinger's equation with separation of variables, Laguerre Polynomials and Spherical Harmonic solutions, etc. That's where the equations get bloody ugly :lol:

But they do wind up working out nicely in the end, surprisingly. At least I am always gobsmacked when I reach the end of one of those calculations by the subtle beauty that falls out of it. There are other problems with Bohr's model which can be quickly found if one google's it.

mudballs · Jan 3, 2015

god1 said:
As a practicing eng, heavily planted in Newtonian physics, I'll bet this nut (Chopra), couldn't calculate the thermal cycle on closed loop grow room to save his life...

this what i was referring to. you made a broad detractive statement against his ability to do math off the top of his head. i retorted it isn't fair and countered that you (many engineers) forget things but once they look them up they can do it.

warble · Jan 3, 2015

mudballs said:
unobservable future or not the following statement nags at me; you can always add 1. 186,000mps+1.

Smoke a bowl, and let it stop naggin'. I figered it out it equals 186,001mps. It only equals that, its not exactly 186001mps, and not an approximation. I don't think I can always add 1. Sometimes I have couch lock and I am so heavy, it is so hard to accelerate while at rest. I just want to eat. Sometimes I don't have the time. You math zealots have your beliefs. I try not to believe in numbers, I just believe that I'll have another bowl.

heckler73 · Jan 3, 2015

warble said:
Smoke a bowl, and let it stop naggin'. I figered it out it equals 186,001mps. It only equals that, its not exactly 186001mps, and not an approximation. I don't think I can always add 1. Sometimes I have couch lock and I am so heavy, it is so hard to accelerate while at rest. I just want to eat. Sometimes I don't have the time. You math zealots have your beliefs. I try not to believe in numbers, I just believe that I'll have another bowl.

But you are never at rest anyway. It's an illusion of the non-inertial frame. The fact you want to eat shows you are consuming energy, even when in this perceived state of 'rest'.
Wasn't it the the Grateful Dead who said, "the faster we go, the rounder we get"?

warble · Jan 3, 2015

The illusion is that we are moving, In the multiverse everything has occurred and we are just perceiving moments in one path. So it all exists, but we only get the pieces, a little at a time. I think it was the dead that said "A foolish heart will call on you to toss your dreams away, then turn around and blame you for the way you went astray."

mudballs · Jan 3, 2015

Robert Hunter wrote most of it, the Dead just sang em.

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

Moebius said:
When photons are absorbed by an electron the photon is essentially destroyed. This is what happens inside a blackhole. The energy is simply absorbed by matter which is then pulled further into the singularity. No need for faster-than light travel to explain why they can not escape

Argument from Ignorance. Please explain how you know that matter is destroyed inside of a black hole when there are other possibilities.

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

Hypothesis: when a star collapses the mass creates such an extreme dilation in time that everything gets sucked into the accelerated future and does break the speed of light.

Moebius · Jan 3, 2015

New Age United said:
Argument from Ignorance. Please explain how you know that matter is destroyed inside of a black hole when there are other possibilities.

What happens when an object from space falls to earth? The friction tends to burn it up creating light as it passes through our atmosphere.
The same thing happens to Black holes but on an unimaginable scale, as matter approaches the Black hole it burns up creating light. This actually makes Black holes some of the brightest objects in the Universe. (more specifically the halo around them).

Any object that is able to make it's way past the event horizon then has to deal with the intense gravity. The object it elongated before it is pulled apart in a process commonly called 'Spaghettification'.

So in answer to your question, I don't really 'know' but this is what the maths tell's us is happening.

Moebius · Jan 3, 2015

New Age United said:
Hypothesis: when a star collapses the mass creates such an extreme dilation in time that everything gets sucked into the accelerated future and does break the speed of light.

but time is relative. That is to say - the time dilation effect is only significant when compared to another object NOT experiencing the effect.
I can't see how it is applicable in the example you gave.

Moebius · Jan 3, 2015

New Age United said:
Hypothesis: when a star collapses the mass creates such an extreme dilation in time that everything gets sucked into the accelerated future and does break the speed of light.

I'm afraid that general relativity shows us 'faster than light' travel is IMPOSSIBLE.

The problem is our mass. .. Current, physicists believe that it is the interaction with the 'Higgs field' that gives particles their mass. and E=MC^2 shows us that even with all the energy in the observable universe, you would not be able to accelerate an object even as small as an electron to light speeds.

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

Moebius said:
but time is relative. That is to say - the time dilation effect is only significant when compared to another object NOT experiencing the effect.
I can't see how it is applicable in the example you gave.

In this case the object not experiencing the effect is the present universe.

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

Moebius said:
I'm afraid that general relativity shows us 'faster than light' travel is IMPOSSIBLE.

The problem is our mass. .. Current, physicists believe that it is the interaction with the 'Higgs field' that gives particles their mass. and E=MC^2 shows us that even with all the energy in the observable universe, you would not be able to accelerate an object even as small as an electron to light speeds.

I am aware and concur, it's just mudballs has me thinking of other possibilities, it's just a thought.

Moebius · Jan 3, 2015

New Age United said:
Hypothesis: when a star collapses the mass creates such an extreme dilation in time that everything gets sucked into the accelerated future and does break the speed of light.

New Age United said:
In this case the object not experiencing the effect is the present universe.

For the time dilation effect to happen, objects do not need to travel faster that light. Obviously the faster they go the more pronounced the effect is on the observer.

I believe this is what occurs in the movie 'Interstellar' .. although I have not seen it yet, I think the Astronaut comes home to find a daughter his own age. This is despite time appearing to have passed normally for both father and daughter. ... (gonna wait for a decent torrent

)

mudballs · Jan 3, 2015

enough of that let's get back to metaphysical shit. what purpose would sentient forms of energy have in the physical universe?

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

Moebius said:
For the time dilation effect to happen, objects do not need to travel faster that light. Obviously the faster they go the more pronounced the effect is on the observer.

I believe this is what occurs in the movie 'Interstellar' .. although I have not seen it yet, I think the Astronaut comes home to find a daughter his own age. This is despite time appearing to have passed normally for both father and daughter. ... (gonna wait for a decent torrent )

Perhaps I will watch it myself. No objects do not need to travel anywhere near the speed of light to experience time dilation. If an object travels for long enough in the opposite relative motion it will experience a degree of time dilation no matter what the speed. 8 believe there is an astronaut that is projected to be existing 2 seconds Into the future because he has been revolving in the opposite direction of the earth (relative motion).

eye exaggerate · Jan 3, 2015

mudballs said:
enough of that let's get back to metaphysical shit. what purpose would sentient forms of energy have in the physical universe?

To understand its sentience (remove the i from sentience and there's the one verse) (I guess it's the same at any level of description) (

)

mudballs · Jan 3, 2015

eye exaggerate said:
To understand its sentience (remove the i from sentience and there's the one verse) (I guess it's the same at any level of description) ( )

sorry but....what was that all about? is that another one of those veiled insults that go over my head? n/m bored of thread

peace out

eye exaggerate · Jan 3, 2015

mudballs said:
sorry but....what was that all about? is that another one of those veiled insults that go over my head? n/m bored of thread

peace out

God no, lol

New Age United · Jan 3, 2015

mudballs said:
enough of that let's get back to metaphysical shit. what purpose would sentient forms of energy have in the physical universe?

OK, you like metaphysics, I am open to discussing it. Why is nature so beautiful, did it not know that a Witness (sentient being) would come to behold it's beauty?

The Theory of Relative Motion and Natural Purpose

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member