Re: Public Service Announcement
- From: "Huang Xien Chen" <huangxienchen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 19:18:49 -0500
"boson boss" <junkerade@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1177885099.796158.103380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 29, 5:23 pm, "Huang Xien Chen" <huangxienc...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:your
Attn: All Physicists of Planet Earth.
Please drop your pants, bend slightly at the waist, and gripping
assleft
foot behind your back just go ahead and kick yourself right in the
withinon
behalf of myself.
Repeat this 3 times while hopping on the right foot and spinning
counterclockwise as viewed from above.
http://sciphysicsopenmanuscript.blogspot.com/
I'd like to point out figure (k) which has a certain relevance for
further expansion. Imagine that you have to deliver information
occupiesthe "rod". The wave occupies whole rod or one middle. Then it
isone half or the quarter at the center. As it searches for it's own
definition of that region it is folded into halves. So nonlocality
meterlike realizing that all reality exists inside of an antenna, and yet
another one folded. It is unknowable where antenna is.
I can smell a setup a mile away. You're good, but my string theory
~b ).is
going nuts right about now.
Image (k) represent length where the quantization if fixed. Thegraduations
are stationary. This contrasts with image (f) where the placement of
graduations is indeterminate.
[1] When length is acting like image (e) we can write this as ( a +
(a)*( ~b).[2] When length is acting like image (f) we can write this as
around,
There are who possible ways to charaterize waves in this scheme.
In situation [1] the green (sub-Plancklength and trivial) region moves
around discretely, basically a cellular automata-like wave.
In situation [2] you simply allow probability densities to slosh
theand
the notion of scale would really help here I think.
Lastly, situation [1] and [2] are basically two different aspects of
onsame thing due to topological indeterminacy. Space is indeterminatelyeither
continuous or discrete.
You can easily craft some arguments based on this approach which address
everything in QED. Partial reflection of light by a surface of glass,
diffraction gradients, bla bla bla. In fact, this approach sheds light
the"why" you have partial reflection of light on the surface of glass in
first place, I suspect that absorption reflectance and transmittance is
rather quite a bit like the Huygens-Fresnel model, the usual wave
explanation which explains pinhole diffraction.
I dunno if the waves can go through phase change of medium or
something like that. The push pull philosophy for waves across glass
navigates into zone of free discharge in the empty space.
I get the feeling that folks have been thinking about this exact approach
that I am pursuing. That people have been toying with it for many years, but
have not been able to make it work. That nonexistence makes no sense, and
nobody ever got past that point.
But I am very curious, because allowing existence to be indeterminate does
not seem like such a huge leap. But making the connection to order,
disorder, randomness, bla bla bla, ........now that is quite a stretch,
.....and allowing space to flip flop back and forth from discrete to
continuous freely ? I think that most people would probably scoff at that -
initially anyway. Until it is shown that it might make sense algebraically.
Woo-wee
.
- References:
- Public Service Announcement
- From: Huang Xien Chen
- Re: Public Service Announcement
- From: boson boss
- Re: Public Service Announcement
- From: Huang Xien Chen
- Re: Public Service Announcement
- From: Huang Xien Chen
- Re: Public Service Announcement
- From: boson boss
- Public Service Announcement
- Prev by Date: Re: Which clock is ahead?
- Next by Date: Re: Homeless people don't just die faster, they live faster.
- Previous by thread: Re: Public Service Announcement
- Next by thread: Quantum Gravity 122.4: Logistic PDF and Minima
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|