Stumble This | You should also watch “Conan and Jim Carrey Talk Quantum Physics” |
Duration 5 mins 47 seconds.
The late Robert Anton Wilson has an interesting take on explaining quantum physics. There seem to be a number of his talks spliced together and he speaks eloquently on the subject ending with a rumination on philosophy. Interesting and somewhat poetic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Anton_Wilson
The late Robert Anton Wilson has an interesting take on explaining quantum physics. There seem to be a number of his talks spliced together and he speaks eloquently on the subject ending with a rumination on philosophy. Interesting and somewhat poetic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Anton_Wilson
Always an upvote for R.A.W.
I 'believe' the core of the human condition is to find comfort in knowing what we wish to know. At what point do we really 'know'? We believe we truly know when we are in a state of comfort with the knowledge we hold... even when totally absent of actual knowing. Whatever 'actual knowing' is.
Those perceptions which makes us uncomfortable is as a result, quite undesirable. The atheistic vs the religeous. The scientific vs the superstitious. The borderline between these states of mind rests on the threshold/border at which we consider ourselves 'in the know'.
The superstitious likely live along the boundaries of emotional knowing to reach comfort. The scientific mind desires statistics to reach their state of knowing, and thus comfort.
Some require constant validation, review, and redefinition of what they know to maintain comfort. Some thrive on a non-changing perception of their reality, such as with many religions, desiring to be told what to know to maintain comfort. There can be comfort found in a simpler perspective of reality.
Who is right? The question should be. 'What perspective is right?'. I think neither truly are. Each sees the universe within their own parameters. Neither party sees existence as it 'truly' is. Nor can 'we'. We live as prisoners of our own minds. Only capable of thought and understanding within our own perceptions, and NOT beyond them.
What is physics? It is the HUMAN interpretation/representation of the world through mathematics WITHIN THE BOUNDS of our perception and understanding. Do 10+ dimensions exist as string theory might suggest? According to our mathematics, yes. Is that how the 'true' Universe actually is? Likely not.
By no means does this mean we should just roll over and give up. As long as we understand that our perceptions are our own and within the bounds of our own minds and the scope of our ability to grasp existence, then by all means we should strive to learn as much as we can.
The key is to understand that we, ourselves, are the only limitation to our understanding of 'everything'. We won't ever be able to grow beyond our own perceptions until we come to understand the limitations of OUR RESTRICTED FRAME OF REFERENCE in perceiving the Universe.
I suspect it is impossible for us, humans as we are today, to break beyond our own inherent limitations.
OMG I had soo many theorys and im starting to remember them all because of this. This is as good at acid (and minus the voices), its funny but its things ive though of since i was about 8. Everything comes around full circle.
As imposed by universal law. When our technology gets close to breaking those laws, we'll become aware of where the legal limits are posted.
> OUR RESTRICTED FRAME OF REFERENCE
As imposed by universal law. When our technology gets close to breaking those laws, we'll become aware of where the legal limits are posted.
Interesting point for sure. However, when/if we reached those limits, how would we truly know that those are in fact the limits. What defines what a limit is? We are yet again stuck within the bounds imposed by our frame of reference. The problem is, we can never see beyond our current point of reference.. though over time, without a doubt, our capability and reference frame will change. Whether it be through social or biological evolution.
Quite interesting, and confusing
The End is nigh! Repent sinners! Repent homosexuals! Repent ...um ...Democrats!
Someone's perception doesn't change what's actually in this universe in front of them (don't forget the other physics).
Great until just before the end, the concept of 'reality tunnels' is a bit too new age-y.
Someone's perception doesn't change what's actually in this universe in front of them (don't forget the other physics).
To a great extent, yes it does.
Our perception of the universe is in fact all that we know of the universe.
Our eyes aren't the only eyes in this world, nor the best.
When RAW noted that when we measure light as a particle, it is a particle, yet when we measure it as a wave, it is a wave, that was a pretty good example of that paradox.
I think Anais Nin said it best: "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."
Anyone who survives Physical Chemistry deserves a year-long vacation if you ask me. I'm still waiting for mine. WTH.
Schrodinger is my worst freaking enemy. Never have I felt so insufficient.
Anyway, relativity is easy to buy and it has been proven. In brief, they synchronized an atomic clock "stationary" on the ground (that is, it was the "stationary" frame of reference for the experiment) and an atomic clock on a high-speed jet that proceeded to fly VERY fast around the world and such. At the end of the experiment the clock on the jet was BEHIND the one on the ground. There were significant and quality controls in place that allow us to conclude that time itself was moving at a relatively slower rate on the jet than it was on the ground. Light is related to both velocity and "length" of space. A GREAT explanation can be easily found on Wikipedia.
The mind-boggling part of this is that if you are on the top of a high mountain, you are experiencing time at a slower rate than those in a valley. Soooo, if you wanna life a millionth of a second longer than the Jones's in the valley, get thee to a mountain.
Also of note, several authors have used special relativity as a key part in their works, see the "Ender's Game" series (A LEGENDARY CLASSIC) in which Ender et.al. sometimes jets off into space at HUGE speeds in order to let a HUGE amount of time pass before he returns.
I absolutely love special relativity, but it really complicates everything. Newton may have been right about a number of things, but not on a quantum level. And not in reality in fact. Chaos theory is the new Newtonian theory. Now THAT is fun stuff.
In brief? Chaos Theory is the idea that in order for one to understand an event in REALITY, one must include EVERY SINGLE VARIABLE in addition to Newtonian physical calculation. That means: the mass of the object, the wind, the air resistance, the chemical make-up of the air at that moment and throughout the experiment, the particulate matter in the air, the light amount and angle, the gravity, the velocity relative to the many gravity sources, the many gravity sources, the human error, the sensor error, and on and on and on. This is of basically impossible since it would change constantly... in other words, it would change so fast that you would not be able to isolate a single moment with everything stable. mwahahaha fun.
And all this makes Rougy's citation absolutely relevant: "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."
Good quote, dude.
Though, his idea of other people existing like him is based in reason (how can you ever show logically that people exist in the same way as you and not as automatons). There is no way to show but using reason that other people indeed "experince" events instead of just react to them, much like the chinese room argument from Sartre.
Anyway, vid is worth a gander.