|
|
| Author |
Message |
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 12:55 pm Post subject:
Re: Gravity/Entropy ( accumulation/dissipation, consumption )
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jul_1_QATI@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Hi Eeyore, Gravity/Entropy ( accumulation/dissipation, consumption )
creates/destroys/controls everything, including you.
While that's definitely God-like, in my opinion,
|
Note, this is all _your_ opinion. Like mos of your opinions they are
pointless.
| Quote: | ...it has nothing to do with traditional Gods.
|
No - just like your posts have nothing to do with (any) physics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Radium
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 15 Dec 2005
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:24 pm Post subject:
Re: What I hate and what I want
|
|
|
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
| Quote: | Radium wrote:
I hate the following entities:
[...]
4. Chaos
Hey, don't dis chaos. It rules.
8. Coulomb barriers
How can you hate Coulomb barriers? It's like hating electrons.
I want the following:
1. The opposite of the second law of thermodynamics
You mean, entropy never increases? How do you know that's not what we've got
now?
2. Extropy
Negentropy?
3. Order
4. Stability
Trains that run on time?
5. Anti-gravity
Hardly seems an improvement. How about levity?
6. Negative heat
Would you settle for negative temperature?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature
|
Of course. Oh I love this!
| Quote: | 7. Self-sustaining cold-fusion
Personally I hope water is never found to be unstable. I seem to recall
hearing that before the Trinity test, a few physicists worried that the
explosion would trigger a self-sustaining reaction that would burn away the
Earth's atmosphere. Fortunately these days we only have to worry about
strangelets.
-- Ben (writing from a cafe near Trinity College, Dublin) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
habshi
science forum beginner
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject:
Re: Is evolution irrelevant nonsense too ?
|
|
|
If a woman falsely accuses us of fathering her child , we will
use DNA testing to prove it false.
Why then do the religious refuse DNA evidence that we are the
closest relatives of chimps? In fact there was a lot of breeding
between the two until a few million years ago , and maybe possible
even today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evgenij Barsukov
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 1:02 am Post subject:
Re: What I hate and what I want
|
|
|
tadchem wrote:
| Quote: | Evgenij Barsukov wrote:
The only reason Life exist is...
Implicit in making such a statement is the assumption that life exists
as the result of an act of reason.
This assumption has never been empirically established.
|
Not so. We are routinely applying reason to discuss processes
which as such are not necessarily created by any acts of reason.
Any physical law can be used as an example. Life is just one
of such processes. Thermodynamics is an external treatment to all
processes (including Life) therefore it can be used to show why process
takes place.
Here is example of such "why" explanation: Reaction O2 + H2->H20
takes place at given temperature T and pressure P because
change of dG=dH - TdS from left to right is negative under this conditions.
The same approach can be applied to process "Life", except treatment
will include 3 steps:
1) reaction A + B --> C has dG1<0, however it is slow without
catalyst
2) catalyst L is thermodynamically unstable, e.g.
L + environment --> decomposition products has dG2>0
3) abs(dG1)>abs(dG2) therefore in presence of 1) reaction 2) can
be reversed (excess of dG1 is used to apply work to conteract dG2),
which means L is stabilized as long as A+B are present.
Above 3 points is a formula of Life (which is the conditionally stable
catalyst "L"). Its existence does not require any external "reason".
It does require that thermodynamics laws are correct, however these
laws are purely statistical in their nature and are therefore a-priory
correct.
We do have to apply reason to understand why this process takes place,
however.
Regards,
Evgenij |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: Entropy is the God of Gods.
|
|
|
Hi Tom_Davidson, I wrote:
To hate entroy is to hate yourself,
for 'twas entropy that created everything, inclusing yourself.
Zoom out a bit, and you can see evolution... you're related to apes.
Zoom out a bit more and you see that you're like a lit match,
where consumption ( entropy, dissipation ) creates/destroys all that is.
Entropy is the God of Gods.
And you replied:
Spoken like a faithful worshipper of Shiva: WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Shiva
Yes, while I haven't worshiped a stone phallus lately,
pantheistic ideas like mine ( and Einstein's )
were recorded thousands of years ago. See: WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Pantheism
Ironically, some people accuse me of being a kook and a crank,
coming up with Woolly_Ideas and, ha ha, Original_Research.
Speaking of entropy, consumption and dissipation,
the cosmological constant explains ongoing inflation:
Spacetime accrues according to the Density_of_Matter;
so our observable universe cooled faster when Density_Matter was higher.
In other words, mass-energy spontaneously dissipates.
Omega_Total = 1, meaning there is is no center of gravity.
So, by General_Relativity's field equations of the cosmos and e = m * c^2,
Negative_Pressure = Negative_Energy = Inflation.
The equation of state, w, is always -1 ; Omega_Lambda is always .74 ;
Pressure_Cosmos = - ( .74 / .26 ) * Density_Matter * c^2 ; So:
The positive pressure of radiation is insignificant.
See ESA.INT facts at: www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/W.PNG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 5:09 am Post subject:
The ignition of the match.
|
|
|
Hi Evgenij_Barsukov, When I say life is like a lit match,
that is, of course, merely a model... sans detail.
Your model emphasizes the ignition of the match,
because it is, to be sure, the least spontaneous aspect.
Eu-Life does not require liquid water, no doubt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:15 am Post subject:
Is Mars too cold and Venus too hot... or are we too picky ?
|
|
|
Hi T_Wake, I wrote:
Entropy is the top God because, like a lit match,
consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys _Everything_.
And you reolied: You truly are warped.
Can you live without consuming air, water and food ?
A lit match consumes air and wood... so it's a fair model of life, I say.
What's warped about it ?
Isn't it overly human-centric to assume that all life requires liquid water ?
Is Mars too cold and Venus too hot... or are we too picky ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tadchem
science forum Guru
Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 1348
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:41 am Post subject:
Re: Is evolution irrelevant nonsense too ?
|
|
|
T Wake wrote:
| Quote: | What you have here, Jeff, is
a string of logical fallacies. You need to try and keep up.
|
Are you *encouraging* him to keep up the string of logical fallacies?
As if he needs any encouragement...
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:29 am Post subject:
Here's some more empirical physics for you.
|
|
|
Hi Tom Davidson, Attempting to flame as well as
Gisse, T_Wake, Art_Deco, Crank_Seeker and T_Duckie, You told me:
Has it *yet* occurred to you that many here in the physics groups do
not care what you write because it fails to convey any physics ?
First off, since 1991, I've been flamed by the best,
and none of the people I've mentioned here are the best at it.
Second, take a look at the physics in this .PNG file,
containing ESA.INT facts: www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/W.PNG
Here's some more empirical physics for you:
( because I know you can't get enough )
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope
The Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) is
a planned wide-field "survey" reflecting telescope
that will photograph the available sky every three nights.
Construction should start in 2009 with completion in 2012.
The telescope will be located on Cerro Pachón,
a 2,700 metre high peak in northern Chile.
The LSST is unique among large telescopes ( 8m-class primary mirrors )
in having a very wide field of view 3.5 degrees in diameter
( 9.6 square degrees [ 40 moons ] ).
For comparison, both the Sun and Moon, as seen from the Earth,
are .5 degrees across. Combined with its large aperture
( and thus light-collecting ability ), this will give it
a spectacularly large etendue of 318 m^2 * degree^2.
To achieve this very wide undistorted field of view requires
three mirrors, rather than the two used by most existing large telescopes:
the primary mirror will be 8.4 meters in diameter,
the secondary mirror will be 3.4 metres in diameter, and
the tertiary one will be 5.0 metres in diameter.
The primary mirror will be built by the Mirror Lab at
the Steward Observatory in Arizona.
A 3.2 billion-pixel prime focus digital camera will take
a 15-second exposure every 20 seconds.
Allowing for maintenance, bad weather, etc.,
the camera is expected to take over 200,000 pictures
( 1.28 petabytes uncompressed ) per year, far more can be reviewed by humans.
Managing and effectively data mining the enormous output of the telescope
is expected to be the most technically difficult part of the project.
Particular scientific goals of the LSST include:
* Measuring weak gravitational lensing in the deep sky
to detect dark energy and dark matter.
* Mapping small objects in the solar system,
particularly Near-Earth asteroids and Kuiper belt objects.
* Detecting transient optical events such as Novae and Supernovae.
* Mapping the Milky way.
It is also hoped that the vast volume of data produced will lead to
additional serendipitous discoveries.
Synoptic is an adjective from the same root as the noun "synopsis",
and means "relating to data obtained nearly simultaneously over a large area."
__ WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/LSST |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Math Freak
science forum beginner
Joined: 11 Jul 2005
Posts: 43
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 10:25 am Post subject:
Re: Is evolution irrelevant nonsense too ?
|
|
|
On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 22:46:57 GMT, habshi wrote:
| Quote: | If a woman falsely accuses us of fathering her child , we will
use DNA testing to prove it false.
Why then do the religious refuse DNA evidence that we are the
closest relatives of chimps? In fact there was a lot of breeding
between the two until a few million years ago , and maybe possible
even today.
|
Somewhere in India I'm sure. If they can wed a human to
a dog, they can copulate with a monkey no problem.
--
"shotorsavAri ro yavAshaki nemishe kard." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:26 pm Post subject:
Re: Here's some more empirical physics for you.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jul_3_oQnv@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Tom Davidson, Attempting to flame as well as
Gisse, T_Wake, Art_Deco, Crank_Seeker and T_Duckie, You told me:
Has it *yet* occurred to you that many here in the physics groups do
not care what you write because it fails to convey any physics ?
First off, since 1991, I've been flamed by the best,
and none of the people I've mentioned here are the best at it.
Second, take a look at the physics in this .PNG file,
containing ESA.INT facts: www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/W.PNG
Here's some more empirical physics for you:
( because I know you can't get enough )
|
Here comes J Relf, B.Wiki famous physicist (snicker)
No, you're just copy and pasting from websites without any clue as to
what it means.
--
Relf's Law? -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
PWNER of Vert and TomGee since 2006
"I don't know that much math." - tomgee; 2 April 2006
"I don't claim to know what I'm talking about" - tomgee; 10 May 2006
PWNED
"Puddlefuck tou are on my kill file. Good bye" - Vert admits he cannot
calculate \gamma for a photon and admits defeat - 2nd July 2006
PWNED
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject:
Re: Entropy is the God of Gods.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jul_2_dlH9@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Yes, while I haven't worshiped a stone phallus lately,
pantheistic ideas like mine ( and Einstein's )
|
You have NOTHING in common to Einstein, except in your own twisted mind.
--
Relf's Law? -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
PWNER of Vert and TomGee since 2006
"I don't know that much math." - tomgee; 2 April 2006
"I don't claim to know what I'm talking about" - tomgee; 10 May 2006
PWNED
"Puddlefuck tou are on my kill file. Good bye" - Vert admits he cannot
calculate \gamma for a photon and admits defeat - 2nd July 2006
PWNED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evgenij Barsukov
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 2:21 pm Post subject:
Re: The ignition of the match.
|
|
|
Jeff…Relf wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Evgenij_Barsukov, When I say life is like a lit match,
that is, of course, merely a model... sans detail.
Your model emphasizes the ignition of the match,
because it is, to be sure, the least spontaneous aspect.
Eu-Life does not require liquid water, no doubt.
|
The thermodynamical definition of Life makes is very clear
that it has nothing do do with water, proteins etc etc.
The only requirement for Life is a presence of matter
which entropy increase can be accelerated. Here I understand
entropy in a wider sense than it is used in chemistry, as
"total degrees of freedom" of a system (including quantum
states which are not accessible through
chemical reactions and are therefore hidden in dH, as well
as sub-nuclear degrees of freedom).
So entropy increase does include for example nuclear reactions,
dropping matter into a black hole (60% of energy is getting
irradiated as light, hugely increasing entropy of the system)
or any other entropy increasing (e.g. spontaneous, irreversible)
processes imaginable.
Regards,
Evgenij |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject:
Re: Is Mars too cold and Venus too hot... or are we too picky ?
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jul_2_jfHH@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, I wrote:
Entropy is the top God because, like a lit match,
consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys _Everything_.
And you reolied: You truly are warped.
Can you live without consuming air, water and food ?
|
Logical fallacy based around the fact the analogy is "false" (insofar as an
analogy can be).
| Quote: | A lit match consumes air and wood... so it's a fair model of life, I say.
What's warped about it ?
|
Nothing. I said _you_ were warped.
| Quote: | Isn't it overly human-centric to assume that all life requires liquid
water ?
|
It is very Earthbased-life-centric though. It is beyond the realms of
science to discuss the possibility of some unusual circumstances allowing
"life" to exist.
We discuss "lifetimes" of a vast array of non-liquid-water-requiring things.
Even stars have a "life cycle" in which they are born, age and die. How is
that very different from human life - taking your child like model as an
example.
| Quote: | Is Mars too cold and Venus too hot... or are we too picky ?
|
You are too concerned with appearing deep and philosophical. I bet you wish
you were 10 years older so you could have sat round coffee shops in a French
beret and quoted poetry or philosophy at the young impressionable girls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:51 pm Post subject:
Re: Is evolution irrelevant nonsense too ?
|
|
|
"tadchem" <tadchem@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1151912468.132736.216150@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
T Wake wrote:
What you have here, Jeff, is
a string of logical fallacies. You need to try and keep up.
Are you *encouraging* him to keep up the string of logical fallacies?
As if he needs any encouragement...
|
Sorry, I should have phrased it better......  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:47 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Electronics forum |
Medicine forum |
Unix/Linux blog |
Unix/Linux documentation |
Unix/Linux forums |
send newsletters
|
| |
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Science and Technology
»
Physics
