|
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
It will be interesting to eventually find out what that strange
placeholder in our equations really stands for: http://www.physorg.com/news139830010.html Regards, JS -- It is like a nightmare where the public servants are the people which the police are supposed to protect us from! |
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
"John Smith" wrote in message ... It will be interesting to eventually find out what that strange placeholder in our equations really stands for: http://www.physorg.com/news139830010.html Regards, JS -------- Damn, John. That was a good article/discourse. Ed Cregger |
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
On Sep 7, 2:27*am, John Smith wrote:
It will be interesting to eventually find out what that strange placeholder in our equations really stands for: http://www.physorg.com/news139830010.html That article was a real snoozer. As most of them are, they associate an increase of entropy (2nd law) with an increase of randomness as time moves "forward". Thus, a beautiful (orderly) greek temple built in ancient times becomes a random disorderly pile of dust and rubble millenia later. Certainly such randomness happens but the error is that we must complete the observation until maximum condition is observed. As if by some revelation, "scientists" (according to the author) have found increases in time symmetry with increase in entropy with RNA. What they have really discovered is that they do not bound their observations into a closed system which would require observation until maximum condition occurs. Of course, in many cases that is not possible but certainly they should recognize that their observations are incomplete. One example of an observation that gets closer to a closed system in time would be Darwin, found in the evolution of life. As cells divide, randomness (entropy) assigns a certain probability that mutations will occur. Such mutations are examples of assymetric time moving irreeversibly towards randomness. However, when your expand the observation to include the entire system of time and environment, you find that certain benign mutations are much more suited to the environment and the life form becomes improved. We have evolved from single cell life forms to human life, which follows a path from a much lower level of orderliness to a much higher level of order. Entropy (disorder) is actually what gets us there. I suspect it is the concept of "entropy" and not "time" that needs to be better understood. |
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
On Sep 7, 5:58*pm, John Smith wrote:
wrote: You may have just found this news group, the rest of us have been here awhile ... Actually I have been posting here as dfinn, KR4AJ and AI4QJ, and on "policy", since 1995 on nando.net. There have been several John Smiths' and John Does' over the years who have posted anonymously and the Cecil Moores' Gary Caufmans' and Todd Littles' that did not. You can say that you were an original John Smith but I never believe anything that anonymous posters write. Certainly you can even accuse them of being senile and not feel bad because it is as if you are writing any other inanimate object that does not have a brain. |
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
|
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
On Sep 7, 7:41*pm, John Smith wrote:
wrote: On Sep 7, 5:58 pm, John Smith wrote: wrote: You may have just found this news group, the rest of us have been here awhile ... Actually I have been posting here as dfinn, KR4AJ and AI4QJ, and on "policy", *since 1995 on nando.net. There have been several John Smiths' and John Does' over the years who have posted anonymously and the Cecil Moores' Gary Caufmans' and Todd Littles' that did not. You can say that you were an original John Smith but I never believe anything that anonymous posters write. Certainly you can even accuse them of being senile and not feel bad because it is as if you are writing any other inanimate object that does not have a brain. Actually, you stand here as an idiot, sure, I am ashamed for your sure, Please explain what it means to be ashamed for "your sure". What exactly is a "your sure"? I pity you ... but that does not change your words ... Of course not, nor was there any intent to do so. If you think I argue with those here in "less than what they expect terms", This sentence is rather awkward. But it does reveal that you choices to argue are not necesessarily founded on technical principles but guidedn instead by the ad hominem. the know you should expect nothing, "the know" I expect nothing. and certainly, if your catch me in a good mood--much less ... Cool, we should expect less than nothing from you. Define less than nothing. Regards, JS It is difficult to have a discussion with an organism whose brain approaches the intellect of a paramecium caudatum. |
Finally, some begins a real study of time ...
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com