FTL travel here we come!

[Jim of WVa]

more constants

If the behavior of the dynamic universe can be quantitatively described, then the evolution of any part of the universe or the universe as a whole can be described in the following manner:

X[SUB]t[/SUB] = f(X)

Where:

X = vector containing all of the state variables of the universe.
X[SUB]t[/SUB] = first time derivative of the vector X.
f(X) = non-linear function of the vector X.

And the non-linear function of the vector X will contain many constants.

I will think up of a good example and come back to you.

For a particle of an incompressible, homogeneous and Newtonian fluid, vector X becomes:

X = {x, y, z, P, ρ, μ}

Where:

x, y, z are the coordinates of the fluid particle position.
P is the fluid pressure in the fluid particle.
ρ is the density of the fluid (constant).
μ is the viscosity of the fluid (constant).

If the fluid is compressible, vector X becomes:

X = {x, y, z, P, T, μ, ρ}

And:

P = ρ * n * R * T

Where:

n is the number of moles of fluid per unit mass (constant).
R is the ideal gas law constant.
T is the absolute temperature.
μ is the viscosity (normally a constant, if temperature does not vary much).

 

[Overmind One]

For a particle of an incompressible, homogeneous and Newtonian fluid, vector X becomes:

X = {x, y, z, P, ρ, μ}

Where:

x, y, z are the coordinates of the fluid particle position.
P is the fluid pressure in the fluid particle.
ρ is the density of the fluid (constant).
μ is the viscosity of the fluid (constant).

If the fluid is compressible, vector X becomes:

X = {x, y, z, P, T, μ, ρ}

And:

P = ρ * n * R * T

Where:

n is the number of moles of fluid per unit mass (constant).
R is the ideal gas law constant.
T is the absolute temperature.
μ is the viscosity (normally a constant, if temperature does not vary much).

All of those are arbitrary constants are they not? That is my point. We can create constants much like we create values like religious deities, moral codes, and social tenets. But do they PHYSICALLY exist? No, they dont. Mathematical equations using constants and used to describe constants is convenient, but hardly incontrovertible. I cannot prove that God exists or does not exist, but the notion of God is a construct like physical constants are. It only takes a consensus of agreement to make them real despite any empirical evidence to the contrary. Like the concept of "race" for instance.

 

[Jim of WVa]

Tebow

All of those are arbitrary constants are they not? That is my point.

No, the constants in the above equation are not arbitrary. The values of the constants have been empirically determined.

We can create constants much like we create values like religious deities, moral codes, and social tenets. But do they PHYSICALLY exist? No, they dont.

Yes, the constants do exist because they were determined by experiment. Religious deities, moral codes, and social tenets are not empirically determined by experiment.

Mathematical equations using constants and used to describe constants is convenient, but hardly incontrovertible.

The constants in the above equation are questioned by virtually no one. They are used extensively in the design of machines and structures that are used by humans on a daily basis.

I cannot prove that God exists or does not exist, but the notion of God is a construct like physical constants are.

The question whether or not God exists is not an empirical question.

It only takes a consensus of agreement to make them real despite any empirical evidence to the contrary.

There is no empirical evidence to the contrary. Water is a Newtonian fluid, and the mechanics of water flow is determined the Navier-Stokes equation. Air is a Newtonian fluid, and the mechanics of air flow is determined by the Navier-Stokes equation. Liquid concrete is not a Newtonian fluid, so the Navier-Stokes equation must be modified appropriately.

Like the concept of "race" for instance.

Race is off topic.

 

[OMNI]

No, the constants in the above equation are not arbitrary. The values of the constants have been empirically determined.

the point is there is no constants in an ever changing adapting and evolving universe if you fail to grasp such an easy concept i feel sorry for you.
(i already did but for other unrelated issues.)

Yes, the constants do exist because they were determined by experiment. Religious deities, moral codes, and social tenets are not empirically determined by experiment.

no they dont "constants" are a human conept and obviously FLAWED since new data allways disproves said constants and truths eventually or do you still believe the earth is flat and we arwe the center of the universe?

The constants in the above equation are questioned by virtually no one. They are used extensively in the design of machines and structures that are used by humans on a daily basis.

i question it and im SOMEONE.

and yes HUMAN machines and constructs not natural ones and they are not constants.

The question whether or not God exists is not an empirical question.

isnt it? intresting.

Race is off topic.

it was a way of getting his point across not another topic

 

[Stonelesscutter]

the point is there is no constants in an ever changing adapting and evolving universe if you fail to grasp such an easy concept i feel sorry for you.
(i already did but for other unrelated issues.)





no they dont "constants" are a human conept and obviously FLAWED since new data allways disproves said constants and truths eventually or do you still believe the earth is flat and we arwe the center of the universe?



i question it and im SOMEONE.

and yes HUMAN machines and constructs not natural ones and they are not constants.



isnt it? intresting.




it was a way of getting his point across not another topic

Are you on your period again? How are those painpills doing for ya?

 

[OMNI]

Are you on your period again? How are those painpills doing for ya?

off topic.

 

[Jim of WVa]

the universe is ordered

the point is there is no constants in an ever changing adapting and evolving universe if you fail to grasp such an easy concept i feel sorry for you.
(i already did but for other unrelated issues.)...

Multi-quote, apparently, does not work on gatefans (It does not work on the other web site either.). I wanted to quote both my statements and your replies, but I just got your responses.

If the universe is a ΛΟΓΟϚ and not a ΧΆΟϚ, then it's behavior can be described quantitatively. That quantitative description will include some constants.

 

[Stonelesscutter]

Multi-quote, apparently, does not work on gatefans (It does not work on the other web site either.). I wanted to quote both my statements and your replies, but I just got your responses.

If the universe is a ΛΟΓΟϚ and not a ΧΆΟϚ, then it's behavior can be described quantitatively. That quantitative description will include some constants.

What language is this now?

 

[OMNI]

Multi-quote, apparently, does not work on gatefans (It does not work on the other web site either.). I wanted to quote both my statements and your replies, but I just got your responses.

If the universe is a ΛΟΓΟϚ and not a ΧΆΟϚ, then it's behavior can be described quantitatively. That quantitative description will include some constants.

from a human POV (what we can observe) yes but it is still a human third dimension concept and as such it cannot be constreved as fact or constants as we simply cannot now given our current level of abiltiy to grasp and logically understand our surroundings.

oh and mutli quote does work but you cant multi quote a single post.
multi quote does exactly what it intails ie quotes multiple posts not multiple sentances in a singular post.

 

[OMNI]

What language is this now?

gooogle heard of it ?

 

[Jim of WVa]

account has been hacked

By definition, "empirically determined" describes an arbitrary measurement or value. Just SAYING something is constant does not make it so. Mathematics use arbitrary units for calculation, and the values of those unites are 100% arbitrary, sorry.


Experiments also yielded the Flat Earth theory, the existence of Piltdown Man, the "science" of Phrenology, the construct of "race", the formulation of the Stanford-Binet IQ test, and the belief at one time that Man would never be able to travel faster than the speed of sound. Experimentation is the way to solutions, but not if those experiments are compromised by flaws in methodology. There are no constants observed in the physical universe.


EXACTLY MY POINT. It was the same way before Einstein. Physics was about Newton and some others, but there was more than a century of stagnant, dogmatic adhesion to crusty old ideas. So now, we have visionaries coming into the fold, the possibility of faster than light particles being observed in the physical universe, re-thinking gravitation and the foundations of physics itself. I am uninterested in the lemming physics, its boring. It reminds me of classical music. I was trained to play JS Bach, love the music and the challenge of playing three part fugues and sprightly arpeggios, but the fact is that the only creativity involved in it is interpretation of SOMEBODY ELSES art. Its why classical music is never new, and never much different. But its compose, that was a visionary.



For many, it is very much an empirical question.


This is what I am talking about...LOL. So, was was the fluid before Newton slapped his name on it? And what were/are the mechanics of water flow before Navier and Stokes put their names on it? Why to so many of our natural processes have people's names attached to them? Science was a much different thing before the 19th Century. People did not put their names on processes, on days of the week, on chemicals. They did not add in months to the calendar to glorify themselves. Just sayin. Physics should not hit a dead end because of dogma.



No moreso than God or any other topic. :icon_e_wink:

My account has been hacked.

 

[shavedape]

My account has been hacked.

If you believe so why don't you take it up with an admin? At the very least take it to the tech forum. Somehow I don't think FTL travel can help your "hacked" account. I could be wrong though.

 

[OMNI]

My account has been hacked.

no i think a simple misstake has been made hold on while i look into it.

 

[OMNI]

If you believe so why don't you take it up with an admin? At the very least take it to the tech forum. Somehow I don't think FTL travel can help your "hacked" account. I could be wrong though.

i think its a simple misstake in which overmind happened to press EDIT instead of reply. purly accidental it has happened to me more then once ill let Om1 undo his misstake when he gets back!

also lol!

 

[Bluce Ree]

If you believe so why don't you take it up with an admin? At the very least take it to the tech forum. Somehow I don't think FTL travel can help your "hacked" account. I could be wrong though.

If the science is applied correctly within our lifetime, Jim could slingshot his butt back a week and change his password.

 

[Stonelesscutter]

If the science is applied correctly within our lifetime, Jim could slingshot his butt back a week and change his password.

Yes but the hacker could do the same and arrive before Jim changed his password.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Yes but the hacker could do the same and arrive before Jim changed his password.

Only if he's had access to Jim's secret project files on his "FTL Drive" and his related life's work stored right here on GF under his publicly accessible profile page.

 

[Stonelesscutter]

Only if he's had access to Jim's secret project files on his "FTL Drive" and his related life's work stored right here on GF under his publicly accessible profile page.

Yes. But I forgot, Jim could have taken another trip back in time arriving before the hacker arrived back in time before he arrived back in time and removed all of that sensitive data from his GF profile.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Yes. But I forgot, Jim could have taken another trip back in time arriving before the hacker arrived back in time before he arrived back in time and removed all of that sensitive data from his GF profile.

Would a paradox ensue or would Jim disappear into his own time stream, thereby eliminating the chance of a paradox but losing Jim to a parallel universe forever?

 

[Stonelesscutter]

Would a paradox ensue or would Jim disappear into his own time stream, thereby eliminating the chance of a paradox but losing Jim to a parallel universe forever?

You're asking me?