Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Natural Environment
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Natural Environment How Human History has been impacted by the environment, science, nature, geography, weather, and natural phenomena


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:09 AM   #231

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 10,691

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
First, and with all due respect, from what you have shared with us here I'm afraid you doesn't seem to be particularly suited at all to teach us anything about QM
On what grounds?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
That said, your bizarre point is, has been and will continue being infinitely irrelevant for the OP until you may explain any such even remotely potential relevance for the OP.
What part of "an atom is part of the universe" do you not agree with?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Again, you are simply attempting a bizarre fallacious false attribution from mere fallacious bare assertion.

In plain English, just explain here why should the (BTW evidently finite) number of positions of any subatomic particle be related at all with the determination of the limits of the Universe.

Just easy as that;
no more, no less.

Because so far, you have been absolutely unable to explain that: in fact, you have been actively evading any such explanation "tending to infinite" times.

What I've said agrees with experiment, I can't change the laws of nature just to make them appear more aesthetically pleasing for your worldview. The fact that you don't like it doesn't have much affect.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how QM works and atomic particles don't appear in two places at once?
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:22 AM   #232
Historian
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Sep 2011
From: Egotistical.Apes.Ruining.This.Habitat
Posts: 16,798
Blog Entries: 8

Quantum mechanics... oh what a topic to debate!

(maybe I'll just head towards the door...)
Brisieis is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:29 AM   #233
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlpinLuke View Post
Indeed, this site quotes Einstein thought and then presents a brief introduction to his cosmology.

Albert Einstein Cosmology, Physics: Uniting Finite-Infinite. WSM Explains Albert Einstein's Cosmology
Again, this apparent paradox has alredy been explained above; apples and oranges.

More explicilty [sic]
Quote:
...our Finite Spherical Universe exists within an Infinite Space
The "Spherical Universe" corresponds to the "observable Universe" explained earlier.
("apples")

Einstein's "Infinite Space" corresponds to the "whole Universe" (i.e. all what exists) as defined in a previous post.
("oranges")
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:34 AM   #234
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl_of_Rochester View Post
On what grounds?




What part of "an atom is part of the universe" do you not agree with?





What I've said agrees with experiment, I can't change the laws of nature just to make them appear more aesthetically pleasing for your worldview. The fact that you don't like it doesn't have much affect.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how QM works and atomic particles don't appear in two places at once?
The part that it is just an obvious red herring that explains nothing about your bizarre position here.

Smells are also part of the Universe, so?
What does that have to do with the determination of the limits of the Universe?
This is still just the same fallacious false attribution from the same fallacious bare assertions.

Not to mention a blatant fallacious straw man; where did I state that atoms may not be part of the Universe?

So your ostensible QM misconceptions, right or wrong, are still infinitely irrelevant here.

Why should I like to explain anything else about such a complex and absolutely irrelevant issue (for the OP) here?
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:41 AM   #235
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisieis View Post
Quantum mechanics... oh what a topic to debate!

(maybe I'll just head towards the door...)
That would actually not be required, at least until someone may explain here why should anything stated here about QM should be relevant at all for the OP
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:43 AM   #236

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 10,691

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
The part that it is just an obvious red herring that explains nothing about your bizarre position here.
You repeat yourself without explanation. I've said atoms are part of the universe ergo their behaviour is a part of this subject - "Is the universe infinite?" Will you require me to say that another time when you repeat yourself yet again?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Smells are also part of the Universe, so?
I've already covered this in my last post, did you not read it or are you just replying with the same information for the sake of replying?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
What does that have to do with the determination of the limits of the Universe?
This is still just the same fallacious false attribution from the same fallacious bare assertions.

Not to mention a blatant fallacious straw man; where did I state that atoms may not be part of the Universe?
Did it not occur to you that QM is about the behaviour of atoms? If you agree that atoms are part of the universe then what's wrong with discussing their behaviour as an attribute to the universe itself?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
So your ostensible QM misconceptions, right or wrong, are still infinitely irrelevant here.

Why should I like to explain anything else about such a complex and absolutely irrelevant issue (for the OP) here?

Perhaps because you can't?
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:51 AM   #237
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl_of_Rochester View Post
You repeat yourself without explanation. I've said atoms are part of the universe ergo their behaviour is a part of this subject - "Is the universe infinite?" Will you require me to say that another time when you repeat yourself yet again?




I've already covered this in my last post, did you not read it or are you just replying with the same information for the sake of replying?




Did it not occur to you that QM is about the behaviour of atoms? If you agree that atoms are part of the universe then what's wrong with discussing their behaviour as an attribute to the universe itself?





Perhaps because you can't?
Again, any explanation here is required (and absolutely lacking) from you, not me.

Naturally because the bizarre correlation between absolutely unrelated factors was proposed by you, not me.

BTW, there's another nice fallacious red herring above (yup, they "tend to infinite" here)
Smells are also about the (in this case chemical) behavior of atoms.
So?????

The Red Hot Chili Peppers are also part of this Universe, and their music is also explained by the (this time physical) behavior of atoms.
Should we require to discuss them in this thread too in your opinion?
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 05:59 AM   #238

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 10,691

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Again, any explanation here is required (and absolutely lacking) from you, not me.
I have explained by direct quote that the observation of atoms suggests they can display qualities which indicate that they exist in an infinite amount of different locations. This is not 'tends to infinite' or 'because the machine can't count that high'. According to the research atomic matter does take an infinite amount of paths.

Is that a sufficient explanation?



Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Naturally because the bizarre correlation between absolutely unrelated factors was proposed by you, not me.
Atoms are part of the fabric of reality, the universe itself. Therefore they are directly related to the OP - "is the universe infinite?" Atoms are the very building blocks of the universe. Do you require any further explanation for how atoms are related to the universe in a discussion about an infinite universe?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
BTW, there's another nice fallacious red herring above (yup, they "tend to infinite" here)
Smells are also about the (in this case chemical) behavior of atoms.
So?????
Smells are the chemical behaviour of atoms but the smell itself is detected by the senses. If you want to discuss the fundamental behaviour of atoms then you may join me in discussing QM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
The Red Hot Chili Peppers are also part of this Universe; should we require to discuss them here too in your opinion?

Red Hot Chilis are composed of atoms but they behave as Newtonian objects. As I've attempted to explain in my previous post, Newtonian objects do not have the same properties as Quantum particles. Perhaps you don't understand the difference between Newtonian objects and Quantum particles?

I kindly suggest you study the subject further before making such sweeping statements which have nothing to do with what I'm talking about.
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 06:05 AM   #239
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl_of_Rochester View Post
I have explained by direct quote that the observation of atoms suggests they can display qualities which indicate that they exist in an infinite amount of different locations. This is not 'tends to infinite' or 'because the machine can't count that high'. According to the research atomic matter does take an infinite amount of paths.

Is that a sufficient explanation?
No, not by a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong (infinite number of oooo's) shot.

Again, this is a complex and entirely irrelevant issue here.

For the purposes of the OP, it is more than enough to remark that absolutely all subatomic particles are finite.

And of course, that it couldn't be any more mistaken to pretend that any "tending to infinite" used in mathematics could be any actual concrete infinity, entirely irrespectively if you may understand it or not.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 06:07 AM   #240

Earl_of_Rochester's Avatar
Scoundrel
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Feb 2011
From: Perambulating in St James' Park
Posts: 10,691

[quote=sylla1;1271066]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl_of_Rochester View Post
I have explained by direct quote that the observation of atoms suggests they can display qualities which indicate that they exist in an infinite amount of different locations. This is not 'tends to infinite' or 'because the machine can't count that high'. According to the research atomic matter does take an infinite amount of paths.

Is that a sufficient explanation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
No, not by loooong (infinite number of oooos) shot.


Again, this is a complex and entirely irrelevant issue here.

For the purposes of the OP, it is more than enough to remark that absolutely all subatomic particles are finite.

If that's the case then why are subatomic particles shown to appear in two places at the same time? Not different particles, but the same one being in two different places at once.

Why does Prof Brian Cox also state that they take an infinite amount of paths?

Last edited by Earl_of_Rochester; November 28th, 2012 at 06:19 AM.
Earl_of_Rochester is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Natural Environment

Tags
finite, infinite, universe


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where did the Universe come from irishcrusader95 Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 70 December 24th, 2012 10:44 AM
The Universe: Finite, closed, open or shut or what? Gile na Gile Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 46 July 27th, 2012 04:06 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.