In article <[hidden email]>,
[hidden email] says... > Comcast says that you don't exist. Do you exist? > I have heard it speculated that we are in a digital simulation. Consider, for example: There appears to be a minimum distance, called "Planck Lenght", that is the minimum theoretical distance that can be measured. It is reasonable to say that the resolution of the universe is down to approximately 1.616229 x 10^-35 meters. Yes, that is quite a bit better resolution than the 1920x1080 full HD screens one can buy today, but even so it appears that the universe is quantized. If the universe is quantized, though on a much higher resolution than we can achieve with present technology, some physiscists have speculated that we live in a digital simulation. If we are really in a digital simulation, then either we are not real, or our consciousnesses have been transferred to some computer that is running this simulation. Either that, or you will have to specify _what_ at Comcast is claiming _what_ doesn't exist. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
Mark12547 wrote:
> There appears to be a minimum distance, called "Planck Lenght", that is > the minimum theoretical distance that can be measured. John Baez, Joan's cousin (Joan's dad Albert, bigtime physics prof, was John's uncle) is a prof of math at UC Riverside -- he writes a lot about stuff related to such esoterica as Planck length. When one tries to integrate phenomena of the very very big stuff, gravity, black holes, etc with those of the very very small stuff, like the tiniest distances or areas, one runs into all kinds of glitches. We ordinary mortals who try to imagine/see things instead of just grinding hairy unimaginable math around are asked to imagine this: "if a particle or dot about 0.1 mm in size (which is approximately the smallest the unaided human eye can see) were magnified in size to be as large as the observable universe, then inside that universe-sized "dot", the Planck length would be roughly the size of an actual 0.1 mm dot. In other words, a 0.1 mm dot is halfway between the Planck length and the size of the observable universe on a logarithmic scale." Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html -- Mike Easter _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
On 3/14/2017 9:15 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Mark12547 wrote: >> There appears to be a minimum distance, called "Planck Lenght", that is >> the minimum theoretical distance that can be measured. > > John Baez, Joan's cousin (Joan's dad Albert, bigtime physics prof, was > John's uncle) is a prof of math at UC Riverside -- he writes a lot about > stuff related to such esoterica as Planck length. > > When one tries to integrate phenomena of the very very big stuff, > gravity, black holes, etc with those of the very very small stuff, like > the tiniest distances or areas, one runs into all kinds of glitches. > > We ordinary mortals who try to imagine/see things instead of just > grinding hairy unimaginable math around are asked to imagine this: > > "if a particle or dot about 0.1 mm in size (which is approximately the > smallest the unaided human eye can see) were magnified in size to be as > large as the observable universe, then inside that universe-sized "dot", > the Planck length would be roughly the size of an actual 0.1 mm dot. In > other words, a 0.1 mm dot is halfway between the Planck length and the > size of the observable universe on a logarithmic scale." > > > Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html > > > of theoretical thinking... Grin. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on
3/14/2017 11:54 PM: > On 3/14/2017 9:15 PM, Mike Easter wrote: >> >> Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: >> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html >> > Now if there were just some kind of practical application for this type > of theoretical thinking... Grin. > As a FanFic writer yourself, that should be obvious. It's relegation to the esoteric and obscure to be used to great effect in SciFi novels, more recently in the following, http://tinyurl.com/h5zbe68, as a means to analogize humans to, at times, make great leaps of faith based on little understood phenomenon. -- Sailfish Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote: >> Mark12547 wrote: >>> There appears to be a minimum distance, called "Planck Lenght", that is >>> the minimum theoretical distance that can be measured. >> >> Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: >> > Now if there were just some kind of practical application for this type > of theoretical thinking... Grin. > ... those of us who are in favor of the progress of the metric system of units may also favor the efforts to define (all or as many as possible) those standards in some manner that does not require a physical construct, such as has been the case for the kilogram mass unit for so long. That is, we need the kg based on some invariant universal constants of nature instead of a man-made metal cylinder in a jar. Planck had the same idea to a different end with his Planck units, which for mass is a much more 'sensible' size than his length. We also have planck time and planck energy. To me, I tend to think of things at Newtonian level rather than relativistically, and it is usually easier for me to conceive of things happening at the atomic level than anything smaller than that that involves uncertainties. We tend to see things from the perspective of the world we live in, rather than the very large universe or the very small quanta. When it gets out of our grasping range we are just throwing math and statistics at the visualization. The Baez articles are somewhat helpful for me to bridge my gap between Newton and Einstein on gravity and spacetime. -- Mike Easter _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
On 3/15/2017 10:00 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on > 3/14/2017 11:54 PM: >> On 3/14/2017 9:15 PM, Mike Easter wrote: >>> >>> Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: >>> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html >>> >> Now if there were just some kind of practical application for this >> type of theoretical thinking... Grin. >> > As a FanFic writer yourself, that should be obvious. It's relegation to > the esoteric and obscure to be used to great effect in SciFi novels, > more recently in the following, http://tinyurl.com/h5zbe68, as a means > to analogize humans to, at times, make great leaps of faith based on > little understood phenomenon. > with such things are for. I can write about things like that, but would have to leave the details fuzzy, like how the Enterprise managed to convert matter and anti-matter into energy, and derive propulsion from it. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on
3/15/2017 12:40 PM: > On 3/15/2017 10:00 AM, Sailfish wrote: >> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on >> 3/14/2017 11:54 PM: >>> On 3/14/2017 9:15 PM, Mike Easter wrote: >>>> >>>> Helpful math prof John Baez on Planck Length: >>>> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/planck/node2.html >>>> >>> Now if there were just some kind of practical application for this >>> type of theoretical thinking... Grin. >>> >> As a FanFic writer yourself, that should be obvious. It's relegation to >> the esoteric and obscure to be used to great effect in SciFi novels, >> more recently in the following, http://tinyurl.com/h5zbe68, as a means >> to analogize humans to, at times, make great leaps of faith based on >> little understood phenomenon. >> > That is what people with more technical knowledge, and more creativity > with such things are for. I can write about things like that, but would > have to leave the details fuzzy, like how the Enterprise managed to > convert matter and anti-matter into energy, and derive propulsion from it. > built on (FTL technology, aka slip space, aka slip stream, &c) and accurate laser weapon guidance and targeting on ships a few light minutes away :-) -- Sailfish Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg _______________________________________________ general mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |