Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
zep73

The Nature of Reality

587 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

zep73

I only claimed to have learned and understood all sciences in 3 years. Can't see that as extraordinary. If I can, anyone can.


I actually have my own theories on dark matter (or lack of) and about non-locality. But you guys took a toll on me tonight (I'm in central Europe), so let's do that tomorrow, if you please. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
10 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

I know it depends on interpretation. If you can set aside your own, nothing is false - yet!

There is no interpretation conflict here, we can't see at the question scale thus we can't observe it. All we can observe is the results of measurements from devices, the uncertainty arises from the devices not our direct observations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zep73
2 minutes ago, danydandan said:

There is no interpretation conflict here, we can't see at the question scale thus we can't observe it. All we can observe is the results of measurements from devices, the uncertainty arises from the devices not our direct observations.

My theory is that the device is an extention of the observer. No observer, no device, no measurement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
1 minute ago, sci-nerd said:

My theory is that the device is an extention of the observer. No observer, no device, no measurement.

Apologises but that's rediculous and why this is a philosophical debate rather than a scientific one. Your taking Schrodinger's cat as a literal expression. It isn't it's a thought experiment, when we are looking at the cat we are the observer, however at the atomic or quantum scale the device is the observer. The issue is there is no uncertainty or experimental error in his thought experiment. In real experiments, like I do in work with virtual particles, the measuring device has uncertainty or error. This is the crux of the Copenhagen interpretation people confuse this with Schrodinger's cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zep73

Tomorrow. Please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StarMountainKid
28 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

- The limit of (light) speed in a vacuum makes no sence, if something shiny is already moving! Something stops it!

"The classical behaviour of the electromagnetic field is described by Maxwell's equations, which predict that the speed c with which electromagnetic waves (such as light) propagate through the vacuum is related to the distributed capacitance and inductance of the vacuum, otherwise respectively known as the electric constant ε0 and the magnetic constant"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

This stuff is so easy to know or to look up. 

34 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

- Everything that happens in this universe is displayed at its outskirts. We could just wonder why, or we could add it to the pile.

I don't know what this means. If it were stated in some proper scientific terms it would be easier to understand. 

What is your conclusion from all these listed examples? What's the fundamental meaning? Just implying our universe is a virtual reality is not saying enough about the subject, In my view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
5 hours ago, moonman said:

It's not a difficult question.

no it's not= especially when we've all got Google at our fingertips

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moonman
3 hours ago, Dejarma said:

no it's not= especially when we've all got Google at our fingertips

I didn't need Google to solve it. I may not be any good at writing a proof but I can do a simple formula.

Edited by moonman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StarMountainKid

1) Philosophically speaking, why would a creator of a virtual reality keep this a secret from its creation? 

2) Would virtual reality have to be artificially created, indicating a creator? For example, if there exists a deeper or more fundamental level of reality than the quantum scale from which our knowable universe manifests, this would be the same as creating a virtual or simulated universe without a Creator. Ours would be a naturally occurring virtual reality. 

3) No one knows what's going on. Existence is a mystery we may never understand. This may be because we're inside the mystery itself, an element of the mystery to which we have no external access. Everywhere we look we only see reflections of ourselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
9 hours ago, sci-nerd said:

My theory is that the device is an extention of the observer. No observer, no device, no measurement.

Isn't that the von Neumann–Wigner interpretation? It's basically vitalism and a favourite of new age woo. Eugene Wigner later abandoned it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
13 hours ago, danydandan said:

I have a PhD in Physics

...and did you achieve it in a year? If not, shame on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
12 hours ago, sci-nerd said:

Never claimed that. Just said I understand it. I'm an expert in nothing.

So you "understand" everything but you're an "expert" in nothing.

......right.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
1 hour ago, Emma_Acid said:

...and did you achieve it in a year? If not, shame on you.

Very very very long time.

Started as an electrician, did my four year apprenticeship (4). When I got qualified I did a higher certificate in automation (1). Then did three years industrial automation and energy systems degree (3). All part time. Then the economic crash happened. Did afew mathematical modules and engineering modules for two years. (2). Then did a masters in Electrical engineering while doing more mathematical modules (2). Then my PhD (3).

So that's 4+1+3+2+2+3 so that's 15years what a waste lol. I'm basically a glorified lab technician now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
10 hours ago, Dejarma said:

no it's not= especially when we've all got Google at our fingertips

I think it's an SAT question in the US. Never seen a proof of it online. Although I never looked one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
15 hours ago, danydandan said:

The proof may take time to write, the answer is very simple. I'm no mathematical genius by any stretch of the imagination and I'm pretty sure first year students got solve it pretty easily.

It's linear algebra. High school kids should be able to do it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

It's linear algebra. High school kids should be able to do it. 

I'd hope so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
On 09/07/2018 at 8:16 AM, sci-nerd said:

I started my research back in 2015. One day I decided to learn everything there is to know about the universe. Everything. From quantum mechanics to black holes. It took me a year to learn everything, but it took me an additional two years to process and confirm everything.

May I seek some clarification, it could have far reaching implications for all of humanity.

What exact method/s did you specifically use to learn everything known about the universe in one year?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
1 hour ago, danydandan said:

Very very very long time.

Started as an electrician, did my four year apprenticeship (4). When I got qualified I did a higher certificate in automation (1). Then did three years industrial automation and energy systems degree (3). All part time. Then the economic crash happened. Did afew mathematical modules and engineering modules for two years. (2). Then did a masters in Electrical engineering while doing more mathematical modules (2). Then my PhD (3).

So that's 4+1+3+2+2+3 so that's 15years what a waste lol. I'm basically a glorified lab technician now.

Always thought of going into physics, probably dodged a bullet with that one

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
6 minutes ago, Emma_Acid said:

Always thought of going into physics, probably dodged a bullet with that one

My route was a very long one. Most people I know got their PhD in 8 to 10 years.

Do some very basic online courses the Khan academy is a great resource. But I've read a number of your posts and the material there might be too rudimentary for you to be honest.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
6 minutes ago, danydandan said:

My route was a very long one. Most people I know got their PhD in 8 to 10 years.

Do some very basic online courses the Khan academy is a great resource. But I've read a number of your posts and the material there might be too rudimentary for you to be honest.

I'm just in a bit of a career quagmire at the moment and want to retrain. My (scientist) uncle said "go do physics!" but knowing me I wouldn't get a job until I was 60. 

I really want to go into science communication, but not sure I'm at all qualified to do this.

Another uncle has spent something like 20 years to do his PhD, and as far as I know he hasn't finished yet, so yours was speedy by comparison.

Edited by Emma_Acid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
10 minutes ago, Emma_Acid said:

I'm just in a bit of a career quagmire at the moment and want to retrain. My (scientist) uncle said "go do physics!" but knowing me I wouldn't get a job until I was 60. 

I really want to go into science communication, but not sure I'm at all qualified to do this.

Another uncle has spent something like 20 years to do his, and as far as I know he hasn't finished yet, so yours was speedy by comparison.

May I ask what you do now?

A really interesting field is the history of science.

Edit: I thought I read science of communication, but now I see you mean like scientific journalism? That's really interesting too. You should start with a blog or an article here, I tried one awhile ago and am in the middle of writing one about relativity which I'm hoping to post in afew weeks.

Edited by danydandan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
15 minutes ago, Emma_Acid said:

I'm just in a bit of a career quagmire at the moment and want to retrain. My (scientist) uncle said "go do physics!" but knowing me I wouldn't get a job until I was 60. 

I really want to go into science communication, but not sure I'm at all qualified to do this.

Another uncle has spent something like 20 years to do his PhD, and as far as I know he hasn't finished yet, so yours was speedy by comparison.

Almost sounded like your uncle was Brian May

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
11 hours ago, moonman said:

I didn't need Google to solve it.

i'll have to take your word for it i guess... shame i find it difficult having the same attitude towards claims of alien abduction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moonman
39 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

i'll have to take your word for it i guess...

Seriously? You don't even need the formula to figure out the answer. As long as you know 212F = 100C and 32F = 0C (which is basic knowledge) the answer is just common sense. There can't be any 59 degree swings between a degree change on either of the two scales.

Edited by moonman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zep73

I'm gonna limit my replies to questions about the topic itself. Mocking and slander will be ignored.

How I learned, or how long it took to learn, doen't matter. It's off topic and irrelevant. You don't believe it? Fine! ;)

Edited by sci-nerd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.