wazua Thu, Mar 19, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

6 Pages«<3456>
Whats happening @ NASA
tycho
#41 Posted : Saturday, October 10, 2015 1:49:34 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Ash Ock wrote:
Add more confusion to the argument:

There Is Growing Evidence that Our Universe Is a Giant Hologram

Quote:
If a friend told you that we were all living in a giant hologram, you’d probably tell him to lay off the kush. But incredibly, physicists across the world are thinking the same thing: That what we perceive to be a three-dimensional universe might just be the image of a two-dimensional one, projected across a massive cosmic horizon.

Yes, it sounds more than a little insane. The 3D nature of our world is as fundamental to our sense of reality as the fact that time runs forward. And yet some researchers believe that contradictions between Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum mechanics might be reconciled if every three-dimensional object we know and cherish is a projection of tiny, subatomic bytes of information stored in a two-dimensional Flatland.

“If this is true, it’s a really important insight,” Daniel Grumiller, a theoretical physicist at the Vienna University of Technology, told me over the phone. Grumiller, along with physicists Max Riegler, Arjun Bagchi and Rudranil Basu, recently published the very first study offering evidence that the so-called “holographic principle”—that certain 3D spaces can be mathematically reduced to 2D projections—might describe our universe.


smile


All language, scientific or not, is metaphorical. Metaphor works in social context. If we remember this then there can be no confusion.
masukuma
#42 Posted : Saturday, October 10, 2015 2:22:52 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 10/4/2006
Posts: 13,823
Location: Nairobi
tycho wrote:
@masukuma, it's not only possible to have a being comprising of energy alone, but such a being exists. Apparently, this universe allows for such beings.

if you insist!!
All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
tycho
#43 Posted : Saturday, October 10, 2015 2:56:59 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
masukuma wrote:
tycho wrote:
@masukuma, it's not only possible to have a being comprising of energy alone, but such a being exists. Apparently, this universe allows for such beings.

if you insist!!


in·sist /inˈsist/
verb
demand something forcefully, not accepting
refusal.

Clearly you're getting unduly emotional here. Anyway, I don't see the need to insist on anything. There's never been need for such for the free. Lol.
tycho
#44 Posted : Saturday, October 10, 2015 11:56:42 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
I've been scouting for beings of pure energy without mass, and it's quite an adventure. The mind, comes to mind, then software/ intelligent programs, I was thinking also of neural networks ... here are some links that may 'inspire' more thought.

http://discovermagazine....does-the-internet-weigh

http://superuser.com/que...ly-weigh-on-a-hard-disk

http://scienceblogs.com/...the-weight-of-software/

http://www.sciforums.com...ughts-have-mass.112471/

Then again, I have been wondering, is a photon a 'being'?
¿
#45 Posted : Sunday, October 11, 2015 12:09:52 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 6/4/2015
Posts: 604


smile
masukuma
#46 Posted : Monday, October 12, 2015 11:52:52 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 10/4/2006
Posts: 13,823
Location: Nairobi
¿ wrote:


smile

seriously dodgy physics but yeah.... general relativity gave us a formula...
E= MC*C
Working both ways you end up with either Mass or Energy and the Energy holding protons together (quacks in place) well thats where the standard particle physics model come up with the 'gluon'. A PARTICLE. In the very beginning I stated by saying Energy and Mass are relatives = they behave in different manner but they are interchangeable. The creation of 'beings' can only sensibly happen on one side of that Energy equation and not the other.... do these 'beings' have an ecosystem? if we are Mass beings i.e. we wrap space and we use energy to 'do stuff'. What do the 'energy' beings do? do they use mass to do stuff? do they consume Energy and convert it to mass to be ... i don't know... still? or something? I realize that I am falling into the trap that Christiaan Huygens fell in with his hemp on Jupiter deductive reasoning - but I would love the energy beings side of this debate to construct just how an energy being would be like.... would it live in an energy ecosystem? Instead of attempting to behave like the second set of these people
All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
¿
#47 Posted : Monday, October 12, 2015 1:01:37 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 6/4/2015
Posts: 604
masukuma wrote:
¿ wrote:


smile

seriously dodgy physics but yeah.... general relativity gave us a formula...
E= MC*C
Working both ways you end up with either Mass or Energy and the Energy holding protons together (quacks in place) well thats where the standard particle physics model come up with the 'gluon'. A PARTICLE. In the very beginning I stated by saying Energy and Mass are relatives = they behave in different manner but they are interchangeable. The creation of 'beings' can only sensibly happen on one side of that Energy equation and not the other.... do these 'beings' have an ecosystem? if we are Mass beings i.e. we wrap space and we use energy to 'do stuff'. What do the 'energy' beings do? do they use mass to do stuff? do they consume Energy and convert it to mass to be ... i don't know... still? or something? I realize that I am falling into the trap that Christiaan Huygens fell in with his hemp on Jupiter deductive reasoning - but I would love the energy beings side of this debate to construct just how an energy being would be like.... would it live in an energy ecosystem? Instead of attempting to behave like the second set of these people


What is 'dodgy' about the physics? Do you know what energy is?

masukuma wrote:
in the ages before we observed a phenomenon and then the science that explained it followed it. we have gotten to a point where the science has overtaken observation and we have robust models and theories that predict things. For example - the boson higgs particle, the math and physics that supported it's existence existed in 1960 but it was 53 years later when the observation of the same was made. So the "it does not exist until i can touch it" frame of mind is being overtaken by events.


http://www.wazua.co.ke/f...amp;m=685743#post685743

I only suggested that there could be beings of pure energy and based on little we know about the universe,you provided the guesswork to fit a certain narrative. smile
masukuma
#48 Posted : Monday, October 12, 2015 1:15:09 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 10/4/2006
Posts: 13,823
Location: Nairobi
¿ wrote:


I only suggested that there could be beings of pure energy and based on little we know about the universe,you provided the guesswork to fit a certain narrative. smile


yes... I took your abstract guess and took a journey from the known to the unknown where your suggestion lies. You did not such thing and thus I gave up and Oprah gave you and @tycho those beings....
All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
¿
#49 Posted : Monday, October 12, 2015 1:28:34 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 6/4/2015
Posts: 604
masukuma wrote:
¿ wrote:


I only suggested that there could be beings of pure energy and based on little we know about the universe,you provided the guesswork to fit a certain narrative. smile


yes... I took your abstract guess and took a journey from the known to the unknown where your suggestion lies. You did not such thing and thus I gave up and Oprah gave you and @tycho those beings....


masukuma wrote:
¿ wrote:
masukuma wrote:
¿ wrote:
masukuma wrote:

pluto is a bit too cold bwana unless it has europa like behaviors. It should be -248 (last time i checked)


We don't know the origin of life,the conditions necessary for life or how radically different the life forms(if any) may be. The universe is a big place.

agreed! we don't even have a complete definition on what "life" is. think about it - the universe does not have 1 of anything. We have multiple planets, multiple solar systems, we have multiple of X and even the string theorists believe we have multiple universes - so it follows that we should (ideally) have 1 single exhibition of life. My theory has always been - we know only one type of life. A carbon based life possible made possible by liquid water thriving on the goldilocks zone of our solar system. What is life really? rather than the most complex manifestation of chemistry. If there could be some form of complex replicating molecule similar to DNA/RNA made primarily out of nitrogen (instead of carbon) that would thrive in seas of liquid nitrogen - why not consider that 'life'? But I guess then we could have life on mercury - right... made out of liquid zinc or lead! or even some other thing surviving in the green house gas affected planet that is venus. So... yeah - you are right... there could be "life" but not our type of "life"


I agree. There could be beings of pure energy.

That's a stretch but energy and matter are 2 sides of the same coin. So yeah... I guess.


If you say so.
T-Bag
#50 Posted : Monday, October 12, 2015 2:13:30 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 9/25/2008
Posts: 510
Say hello to the God Particle aka Higgs boson here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

@tycho they are tachyonic too... sneaky bastards!
I AM trust in GOD, I AM belief in THYSELF
6 Pages«<3456>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.