NSX Posted February 18, 2003 Posted February 18, 2003 Have you guys come upon this article or anything similar? If so, [or not], what are your thoughts? http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1035777849035&call_page=TS_Canada&call_pageid=968332188774&call_pagepath=News/Canada
PogoC7 Posted February 18, 2003 Posted February 18, 2003 Sounds intresting. Great thought, great women. But a question. That lumpiness comes from a network of individual atoms — but atoms that are themselves composed of small packages of space-time? So what does that mean. Update: 2006
fafalone Posted February 18, 2003 Posted February 18, 2003 Not really enough details to talk about... sounds interesting though.
atinymonkey Posted February 18, 2003 Posted February 18, 2003 Well, it's probably because I'm tired but this sounds a little showbiz for a serious theory. The references to lumpyness sound as though Markopoulou is trying to create catch phrases, to grab media attention with a theory that cannot be tested until 2006. Mind you, I hate physics theorys. The 'lumpyness' descibes the proposed experiments with a NASA satellite to track gamma-ray photons from as far away as feasable. If the theory works, then individual photons should travel at slightly different speeds, depending on their wavelength. That would make bumps I suppose. But your right, it dosen't explain the dispersion, just makes pointers towards quantum gravity. Apparently that's a good thing, but as I said, I hate physics theorys.
Raider Posted February 18, 2003 Posted February 18, 2003 The very basic discription for which you fault her is really just a dumbing down by whoever wrote the article IMO.
contradiction Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 so you have 2 polarized filters, with the polarization at 90 degrees to each other. no light gets through both. first one gets the "up and down" polarized light waves, witch is half, second is horazontal, so it blocks the rest. .... now put a third one in between the two... at 45% to either one... and somehow 25% of the original light gets through all three. something to do with waves bending
contradiction Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 so is individual photons travel at different speeds, then what does that say about the speed of light.... that they are either traveling at or slower than it? i dont like the supposed absolute speed of light idea. no such thing as absolutes. what do you guys think?
contradiction Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 what do you think about chaos theory? i think its bull... at least in the way its presented: as if there was true chaos. some people forget, at least it seems, that it is only our inability to perceive. they take it to this new level where causality is accually failing. fantasy.
contradiction Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 what do you folks think of the theory of indeterminecy, or the uncertainty principle? crap..
contradiction Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 how about the brain--mind relation? i think mind is a caricteristic of brain. its seperateness is an illusion. i guess its real, since thoughts are physical. but its seperateness, as well as the illusion of seperate bodies-are functions to keep "me" organized this specific way. why? because if i didnt, then i wouldnt be here, and any organized matter that didnt try to stay organized simply wouldnt do so. a wave in a ocean has no intention. truely, either do i. what are the chances? look at the effect infinite time has on probability. everything has to happen some time. DETERMINISM anyone? central state materialism? thoughts are physical events in my brain, and therefore subject to determinism. look at it on a very inaccurate phycological level, as to why i did something or am typing right now, or get down to the nitty gritty and think of it physically. as in photons coming from this computer screen blah blah... but thats the realityi just read the other day that all humans emit electromagnetic radiation of all frequencies, all the time. like 200-250 watts an hour! presumably the majority is of infrared...
aman Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 On brain-mind relation. Since I have all my senses, I close my eyes and my mind feels behind my eyes, between my ears, and behind and above my nose and mouth. If I were blind and deaf from birth and communicated by touch, do you think my mind would be in my hands since that is where my main sense would be situated? Just aman
atinymonkey Posted February 19, 2003 Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by Raider The very basic discription for which you fault her is really just a dumbing down by whoever wrote the article IMO. Actually I was looking at http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0007E95C-9597-1DC9-AF71809EC588EEDF&catID=2 and there is again evidence of creating catchy phrases, see the prominent nod towards cooking in this article. Journalists are being given enough information to make a fun story, Woman/Cooking/Physics/Einstein. Mind you, I guess you have to do that sort of thing to get grants nowadays.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now