Einstein @ MindSay 
physics
Date Line July 15, 2008
Einstein’s most famous theorem, E=MC2, relates the speed of light to energy and matter. The assumption is – Light’s speed is a constant. Therefore it would follow that the square of a constant – multiplying two quantities which are indisputably fix and equal – would yield a constant. The square of light speed is a fixed constant.
Energy divided by Mass is, according to Einstein’s theorem, equal to the square of light’s speed. The ratio of energy and mass is therefore fixed for all things – thus keeping the ratio constant. Universally, the energy and mass must be constantly in a fixed ration.
OK. We know this and it is the basis for atomic reactions and the source of energy for atomic bombs. We lower the mass and the energy must lower, the surplus being released into the environment. But that means – in terms of the environment – that released energy must be balanced by a new “released” mass. If not, the universal balance between matter, energy and the square of light speed is destabilized.
Destroy one matter and free its energy – a new matter of equal amount must appear which has an energy associate equal to the amount needed to maintain the light speed squared ratio. Otherwise the universal balance would destabilize.
When an atomic bomb goes off, where does the new matter appear?
If light is not a constant this is not a problem – every matter-energy ration could, and would, be different. But, even so, whatever is broken must come back together – either in the same ratio, or in a series of new elements whose combined ratios is equal the source ratio value.
Curiously. If we slow the velocity. That is. If we consider the formula as being velocity squared rather than light speed squared , the energy and mass of increase with speed. Which is what Newton said in his formulas – the explanation of kinetic energy or force.
... is the same formula as ...
Energy equals Mass times light speed squared.
It’s all the same, they just changed the names.
All Einstein did was push the Newtonian equation to its limit and then assert the force would be maximized. In the explosion the mass remains, it only changes form or shape. Basically, it is reduced in size and spread over a broader area.
Not sure where this was taking me ... and the phone just rang – bulldozer man heading by to price new driveway ... so I’ll see later if this has context.
_____________________________________________________
Date Line July 18, 2008
Can an object, a mass, move faster than the speed of light? Can it move the speed of light times faster than the speed of light?
That is what the Einstein theorem states relative to the Newtonian theorem. That is, Einstein say that the Energy of a mass is its force moving at the speed of light; in a substituted quantity expression, or formula, this is expressed as E=C(MV).or E=C(MC).
Let’s try that in terms of distance and time:
E=M(d/t)(d/t)=M(d2/t2)
Solve for time
t2=md2/E
time is the square root of the product of Mass times distance times distance divided by the Energy involved.
OK, so what is Mass? Is it weight?
1. “In particle physics, the invariant mass is a mathematical combination of a particle's energy E and its momentum p which is equal to the mass in the rest frame.”
2. “Relativistic mass is just another name for the energy.”
3. “Momentum is the product of the mass and velocity of an object (p = mv).”
So Momentum times Energy is Mass; with momentum defined as Mass times Velocity; so Energy times velocity is Momentum. And the feeling is we are running in circles without any variables which can be seen as tangible or quantifiable.
We could continue this insanity – the process of trying to define matter time or distance in some realistic framework – but there is no realistic framework into which to place anything. Basically, all is illusion and there is no reality; at least not in a world where everything, ultimately, is defined as simply itself ... that is mass is mass, time is time, distance is distance and energy is the three manipulated against themselves ... All is illusionary
This reduces things to the point where all is consciousness and there is no reality beyond thought and the constrains we impose on our own thoughts. This raises the problem of “we.”
There cannot be a collective “we”, without the ability to agree on rules – which we know is beyond the scope of human behavior. It is therefore likely that there is only one source for the rules. A single source because all rules governing what we think of as a physical universe are consistently perceived.
Yeeks and gad zuks ... does that mean logical and math forces the existence of a single deity and that we are all a thought or illusion or delusion within the consciousness of that entity? All collective consciousness is only a single consciousness playing mental gymnastics with possibilities as constrained by a predetermined construct of its own making? Or is the construct of the making of a different entity? One being manipulated as a thought exercise assigned to the entity in control of what we consider reality?
Miracles would be rule breaking – exceptions without any relevancy to the physical construct assigned. Therefore they cannot be widely repeated; and if occurring cannot have any actual rational effect, or influence on the outcome. Basically, if the consciousness cheats they either are cheating themselves, or their teacher. The teacher will know from the process that the cheating occurred and therefore would either permit it – as a short cut – or punish it. Punishment would be the termination of the exercise – failing the student. Or, if only one consciousness, the thought exercise and “miracle” is, in the long run, irrelevant because it is the game being played by the rule maker for their own purpose.
Imagine reality as a single celled amoeba – who is unaware of other amoeba, who are engaged in a similar exercise – performing mental gymnastics for the exclusive purpose of maintaining its (their) own sanity. Now imagine these amoeba exist in the consciousness of another; existing in the consciousness of another; existing in the consciousness of another – and continue that that thought until you reach the origin consciousness.
Fun thing – the chain is infinite. It is also finite. Finite in the sense that there need be only the source consciousness – a consciousness believing it is within a sequence; but ultimately recognizing that it is the beginning and the end of that sequence.
You have to get out of your seat and walk away from your computer. People may think you're crazy. But it's well worth it. :)
When you look at this picture close up, you see Albert Einstein, but if you stand about fifteen feet away, the picture will become Marilyn Monroe.
I was sent the following by my manager. I managed to solve it on paper, see if you can solve it.....
------------------------------------------------------------
Einstein's Puzzle
Variations of this riddle appear on the net from time to time. It is sometimes attributed to Albert Einstein and it is claimed that 98% of the people are incapable of solving it. Some commentators suggest that Einstein created such puzzles not to test out intelligence but to get rid of all the students who wanted him as an advisor. It is not likely that there is any truth to these stories. Whereever this comes from, it is a nice riddle.
Let us assume that there are five houses of different colors next to each other on the same road. In each house lives a man of a different nationality. Every man has his favorite drink, his favorite brand of cigarettes, and keeps pets of a particular kind.
- The Englishman lives in the red house.
- The Swede keeps dogs.
- The Dane drinks tea.
- The green house is just to the left of the white one.
- The owner of the green house drinks coffee.
- The Pall Mall smoker keeps birds.
- The owner of the yellow house smokes Dunhills.
- The man in the center house drinks milk.
- The Norwegian lives in the first house.
- The Blend smoker has a neighbor who keeps cats.
- The man who smokes Blue Masters drinks bier.
- The man who keeps horses lives next to the Dunhill smoker.
- The German smokes Prince.
- The Norwegian lives next to the blue house.
- The Blend smoker has a neighbor who drinks water.
The question to be answered is: Who keeps fish?
_____________________________________________________
Date Line July 6, 2007
IRAN! Bush accuses it of wanting nuclear capabilities for the purpose of making nuclear weapons. Bush, of course, has an ideal track record of assertions: he has yet to be correct on anything.
Iran, one of the world leaders in oil production, has imposed gasoline rationing. Iran does no produce its own gasoline; thus it cannot hope to have a mechanized military capability of any meaning other than defensive.
Iran, one of the world leaders in oil production, has declared it is going to promote dual usage, hybrid, vehicles. Apparently, Iran�s leadership sees no long-term future in gasoline production.
Iran, one of the world leaders in oil production, wants nuclear power, nuclear electric production capacity; Iran, one of the world leaders in oil production, wants hybrid, fuel efficient vehicles.
There is only one rational conclusion, Iran, one of the world leaders in oil production, is attempting to free its oil reserves for export in a period which promises much higher energy prices.
What are the possible reasons for a nation which boasts forty CENT per gallon gasoline to be looking to cut its consumption?
Could it be the Iranians foreseeing a collapse of domestic production throughout the Middle East? Would that require an expansion of American disruption of Middle East oil production; we have witness this in Iran, under our oil industry President and Administration.
Could it be the Iranians foreseeing the reality behind persistent reports, denied by the Bush Administration, that global reserves are depleting at a much higher than anticipated rate?
Could it be the Iranians foresee a a profit in selling carbon credits to the richer, very wasteful, nations? America would certainly be their primary market.
Whenever a nation behaves contrary to rational understanding, it is time to check what we are basing our understanding upon. To date, we have based our actions and understanding on the Evangelical concept of reality.
The Evangelicals promote a literal reading of a "divine" document, the authors of which view as fluid.
Evangelicals fail to adhere to any of precepts and commandments they assert should be taken literally. In fact, as I have previously pointed out, Evangelicals follow the teachings of one whose real purpose might well have been their self-annihilation.
The choice made is between superstitious "faith" and unsupported "belief", or three elements of the divine spirit: "Knowledge, Wisdom, and Understanding." Do we live by assertion, or by reality?
Upon what basis have we built society? Do we rely upon witch trials, burning people at the stake, inquisition through torture, and all the other Evangelical, Right-wing, derived techniques? Certainly the Bush Administration believes we should; but they get everything wrong.
It is time that we study reality. It is time we moved in the direction of universal peace and government. No need for a single sovereign state; rather a union of sovereign states, a Global Union of States.
That is, in essence, the prediction which the Evangelicals say should be taken literally. Why are they working against it? Why are they working for a Global Destruction of States? Why do they persist in their desire for inflicting the most harm on the most people?
Evangelicals are interesting. Osama Bin Laden is clearly an Islamic Evangelical with the same agenda as those Christian Evangelicals who hold that Mormons and Catholics are not Christians. The problem, of course, is the one which Gandhi pointed out: it's a great religion, too bad nobody practices it.
Islam is a great religion, but once again we have the problem that none follow the Koran teachings; most simply find the hate passages and follow those. It is no wonder that the Khazar King, given the option of selecting a religion for his people, rejected both the Islamic and Christian faiths. Why follow followers, when you can follow the one they both acknowledge as the true leader.
SIGH, once again, drifted from the subject. Look to the small mentions in the news. Ask the question "WHY?" And continue to ask it until you have an answer which works.
Einstein did not necessarily like the answers Relativity provided; it is clear that he ignored many subsequent findings in his search for that one simple formula which would provide causality. Causality, reality, are often difficult; one truth, the Right-wing causes of the problems.
_____________________________________________________
FOOTNOTE Observation: Einstein had a series problem with Quantum Physics; most reality based physicists acknowledge Quantum probabilities are a rational approach to reality. What they fail to acknowledge, what Einstein should have realized, is that Quantum Physics is relative in the most amusing sense.
To any seeking a solution to the probabilities which comprise the basis of Quantum Physics: Their perspective is the problem with the quest for any Unified Field Theorem.
Quantum Physicists view the universe relatively, they view reality relative to the perspective of the observer, rather than the perspective of the particle being observed.
Reality, planets and such, are observed in their own right. Nuclear particles must be deduced and therefore they cannot be observed until the are observed. The observer has the problem of guessing when and where a particle will be at any moment of observation; hence it is a science based upon probabilities.
Quantum Physicists are the Evangelicals physical science.
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Date Line June 28, 2007
Some days I wake with the weirdest thoughts and feelings. Often they are connected with things I'm involved in and have "slept on"; like the new book "Einstein", relativity and the Unified Field Theory.
If Space is curved, gravity is physical; if electromagnetic force and magnetic force are interchangeable, they are different perspectives on the same thing, on makes the other, male and female; but gender applies to which force of nature?
I have taught, wrote and professed: "Everything is the same, they just change the name." I have also been known to postulate what can be readily seen in the structure of the formulas for the movement of both planets and electrons around their respective structural centers: "Everything is the same, they just change the order of magnitude."
Gravity is a curvature of spacetime related to mass. Ultimately, the mass of creation causes space time to close upon itself (evidenced by "black holes" discovered in Einstein's Relativity Formulations) and so we have a continuous, infinite, spacetime within a finite structure.
That is all simple and obvious enough. Yet the Unified Field Theory seems to have alluded the great mind of Einstein; and it is complicated by the behaviors associated within Quantum Mechanics.
Could it be that the problem is one of an "order of magnitude" as defined in the respective constants? That the Unified Field Theory is predicated on the formula necessary to derive the constant for each level of magnitude; and that formula is the unifier?
A "Constant" is a fudge factor that is unique to a realm of behavior, or to a context, as expressed by the words. Under "these conditions" all things are defined by X adjust by a constant order of magnitude factor of Y. The words "these conditions", can also be expressed as "when talking about."
The "Constant", the context defining "fudge factor", is the control. It can be seen as the core of a cluster grouping. Or, it can be seen as the common center of all cluster groupings. Consider that this concept is pictured in a previous posting of the haplogroups and their cultural, or regional, connections.
Since all Humans have a common ancestor, thus all haplogroups and haplotypes are derived from mutations in that primary genome; and it serves as the central locus. We define the constant of change by simply saying there is change and now this cluster is grouped around certain values.
The Unified Field Theory is the formula for the constant which defines, or validates, the formula order of magnitude for each cluster; where Einstein Clusters are quantum, gravity, electromagnetic, and all other fields definable within the physics discipline.
Now that the search is defined, who will be the mathematical to derive the basic formula? And it will be as elegant as E equals MC squared.
At times, like the Genie of Aladdin, it is to awaken with anger - anger towards children who do not communicate with their father. Other times, it is thinking on genealogy, heritage, and origins. Guess there is an obvious pattern in the connection.
Once a Jew, always a Jew. It is the basic law of Judaic thought; and a factor in the element of "Chose Life" which allowed Maimonides to counsel conversion under the sword over death by the sword. To the Jew, being a martyr is disrespectful, and disobedient, to God.
God knows what you are, and, regardless of what is declared for the sake of living with fools, you are that. The objective is to live, reproduce, and, over time, the fools will vanish.
Spacetime turns back upon itself; and all is at the end as it was in the beginning; yet there is no end, nor beginning after it has begun.
The single constant toward which we move, that single constant to be resolved, is the creation point lost within the folding of spacetime. It can also be said that, that which cannot be resolved is the creator: all things have a starting point; deny that truth and you deny the creator, or deny the creator, and you deny that basic reality.
Einstein may well have been hooked on causality. Causality is nice, it says "if A, B will follow." Predictability based on prior observation and derived predictive calculation. Where does random motion fall?
Does the creator play dice? Are we to tell the Creator what can, and cannot, be done in the game created? Probability, a certainty of the game! Rationality underlying the probability, a define certainty.
Intervention? Ridiculous! Internal influence? Most assuredly. There is a Unified Thought Theory encompassing a Unified Field Theory.
_____________________________________________________
Showing 1 - 5. [ Next ]