SHF posts #25! - args+
[picks up on 15/01/25]
beccabear67 <Musical omnivore>
My brain hurts.
Joe Meek was here first...
[rpm]
I hear a new world
an outer space music fantasy
JFeldt:
Mal said: ↑
I referred to this earlier, essentially they are ghosts of "quantum misunderstanding".
The Universe will produce results for you that are meaningless when you don't understand the complex-n twist to it all (double-slit, etc..).
Once you realise that the chaos/confusion on top of the simple structure is not actually "there" (structurally) then you realise why it looks the way it does experimentally/observationally (not the way it "is").
Nothing to be embarrassed about, we all got here by doing what we did/do.Click to expand...
I will never be embarrassed about asking about the standard model. If there are no gluons what holds quarks together in your theory?
Without the W and Z how does radioactive decay work and what is the explanation for the resonance peaks at their masses in scattering experiments? How does neutrino emission and absorbtion in your theory work? How are weak neutral currents explained?
If I were to abandon the standard model for the areas where it is a good model, it would only be for something that is simpler with the same predictive power, or for something with better predictive power.
jfeldt said: ↑
I will never be embarrassed about asking about the standard model. If there are no gluons what holds quarks together in your theory?
Without the W and Z how does radioactive decay work and what is the explanation for the resonance peaks at their masses in scattering experiments? How does neutrino emission and absorbtion in your theory work? How are weak neutral currents explained?
If I were to abandon the standard model for the areas where it is a good model, it would only be for something that is simpler with the same predictive power, or for something with better predictive power.
You already have QED and General Relativity (ie, complex-numbers - see Argand depiction).
Remember that what we call 'complex-numbers' is just "intuition" in this complex-nested-brains universe.
The rest is not "important" when it comes to understanding how the Universe works (why an ant can operate just fine, etc..).
The upshot is that the Universe involves 'unknown' stuff (as we 'know') and that is what you are trying to nail down (never going to work).
By all means carry on 'experimenting'* but now with the understanding of the origin of the underlying structure, that's all.
* now involves subjective as well as objective aspect to understand
Mal said: ↑
You already have QED and General Relativity (ie, complex-numbers - see Argand depiction).
Remember that what we call 'complex-numbers' is just "intuition" in this complex-nested-brains universe.
The rest is not "important" when it comes to understanding how the Universe works (why an ant can operate just fine, etc..).
The upshot is that the Universe involves 'unknown' stuff (as we 'know') and that is what you are trying to nail down (never going to work).
By all means carry on 'experimenting'* but now with the understanding of the underlying structure, that's all.
* now involves subjective as well as objective aspect to understandClick to expand...
Yes but QED would push two quarks of the same electrical charge away from each other. Ants notice if their protons disassociate or not, so they need something beyond QED.
jfeldt said: ↑
Yes but QED would push two quarks of the same electrical charge away from each other. Ants notice if their protons disassociate or not, so they need something beyond QED.
Quanta -1 is 24
{1->3->6->12->24}
That's all there is to it.
How it happens will always be a 'mystery' except you completely understand it intuitively.
You don't have to like the actual Proof of Everything (not a theory).
Mal said: ↑
Quanta - 1 is 24
{1 -> 3 -> 6 -> 12 -> 24}
That's all there is to it.
How it happens will always be a 'mystery' except you completely understand it intuitively.
You don't have to like the actual Proof of Everything (not a theory).Click to expand...
I’m not even talking about liking it or not, just want help understanding it. Ants like to eat sugar and drink water, and they use their sense of sight along with their sense of smell. QED would push all the protons apart, so the carbon that makes up sugar and the oxygen that makes up water can’t exist. This makes the ant sad, as does the lack of light from the sun since there is no nuclear force that gives up binding energy upon fusion. You don’t want to make the ants sad do you? GR isn’t enough since if you look at the stress/energy/momentum for the nuclei there isn’t enough to get the field equations to have a bound radii small enough.
jfeldt said: ↑
I’m not even talking about liking it or not, just want help understanding it. Ants like to eat sugar and drink water, and they use their sense of sight along with their sense of smell. QED would push all the protons apart, so the carbon that makes up sugar and the oxygen that makes up water can’t exist. This makes the ant sad, as does the lack of light from the sun since there is no nuclear force that gives up binding energy upon fusion. You don’t want to make the ants sad do you? GR isn’t enough since if you look at the stress/energy/momentum for the nuclei there isn’t enough to get the field equations to have a bound radii small enough.
Q. What experiments can you conduct that will show how the 'other realm' provides all the 'mysterious forces', 'ghost' particles, etc. that you perceive in 'your realm' and that you want to understand?
A. No physical experiments. Only intuition can answer that for you.
Mal said: ↑
Q. What experiments can you conduct that will show how the 'other realm' provides all the 'mysterious forces', 'ghost' particles, etc. that you perceive in 'your realm' and that you want to understand?
A. No physical experiments. Only intuition can answer that for you.
If you don’t want to answer my questions, you aren’t going to get a concert to this new theory. It would also need to explain the destructive power of the atomic bombs detonated in World War II. We don’t want to deny that the suffering of those people took place do we?
jfeldt said: ↑
If you don’t want to answer my questions, you aren’t going to get a concert to this new theory. It would also need to explain the destructive power of the atomic bombs detonated in World War II. We don’t want to deny that the suffering of those people took place do we?
You already know all the 'real' (incomplete) answers to as much 'precision' as you'd ever need.
To me "suffering" is an illusion but we don't need to get into all that since that is for everyone to interpret as they wish.
It's proven - use you eyes.
<<The Cardigans - “Give Me Your Eyes”>>
Maybe part of the difficulty here is what people expected from the 'theory of everything'.
It's really just like reading the instructions inside the lid of a board game (the only bit I was ever interested in, unsurprisingly).
Now you know the 'rules' of the Universe.
So what - nothing else has changed.
Jaap74 said: ↑
This thread reminds me of Terrence Howard......
Does he consciously 'understand' complex-numbers?
Complex number - Wikipedia
We all do intuitively and there is a way to have a grasp on them in conscious thinking if you allow both objective and subjective in.
Whatever Terrence is doing is just a variation on what we are all doing, fundamentally.
Perfectly valid in complex-n Universe terms.
GBrett said: ↑
The question everyone is afraid to ask is how we went from nothing but Shania Twain videos to this thread.
I do whatever I am inspired to do - by the complex-n double-arrow fractal-braneworld Universe.
In other words, don't blame me.
“Ka-Ching” (Sowatt Hip-Hop Mix)
Mal said: ↑
[MEDIA]Give me Your Eyes[/MEDIA]
The Major Crisis in Fundamental Physics... We're in trouble!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUvZotdaGAY
Curt Jaimungal - ‘The Major Crisis in Fundamental Physics’...
Me:
Flat Earth - Wikipedia
Big Bang - Wikipedia
"Science" people like to stick it to the 'flat-earthers' and yet that's exactly what they did to the Universe.
The "Big Bang" is the 'flat-earth' mistaken interpretation of a 'wraparound' universe.
It's like standing on the beach looking offshore and assuming the horizon keeps going off into the distance...
Time to admit it, that's all.
”What A Way To Wanna Be” [RED]
John B Good:
I was always struck by the observation that the experimenter is part of the experiment. So the observer or commenter is not necessarily neutral, let alone God-like. Whatever that is.
Now, what about everyone urging Mal to identify all the excellent videos he references in text, so that if You Tube deletes them, someone looking at this thread in the future will know something about what he is going on about.
John B Good said: ↑
...Now, what about everyone urging Mal to identify all the excellent videos he references in text, so that if You Tube deletes them, someone looking at this thread in the future will know something about what he is going on about.
Not up to me!
Rick Robson:
Shania Twain won't like it ha ha!
Me:
“We’ve Got Something They Don’t” - ST
The Best Of Norm Macdonald Part One [Letterman]
Rick Robson:
Shania Twain - Man! I Feel Like A Woman! (Official Music Video) [YT]
:love:
==============
Thanks,
DMS xx
