/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5691469

the word exist has no meaning in your quote

"God exists outside of space and time, but influences it"

>>5691469
>>5691471
But all these are correct...

>>5691472
Maybe not for you. Meaning is subjective.

"string theory is the future of physics!"

>>5691475
Connotation is subjective.
Denotation is a matter of fact.

It has no referent.

God damnit /a/, just leave.

"Quantum physics means what you think about will influence the universe"

>>5691469
>>5691471
>implying these are wrong

>>5691486

This one really rustles my jimmies, how did this even become a thing? Is it because of that double slit video with dr. quantum or whatever.

"there would be no universe with out counsciness"

>>5691494
it has been a "thing" since relativity. Illiterate faggots keep trying to force this idea into whichever branch of physics is most popular (i.e., relativity, "THE WHOLE UNIVERSE IS RELATIVE GUYS, REALITY IS RELATIVE FROM PERSON TO PERSON HURRR")

>>5691498

I'm sure he meant concierges

>>5691495

no universe without cousinness?

but that's Imposibru!!!

>>5691469
who is she?

Choice is empirically observable. What you think does influence the universe. This is blatantly obvious. A child could see it.

>>5691469
>>5691471
>infantile cartoon

>>5691724
>What you think does influence the universe.
Well your thoughts are part of the universe so yeah

I wanna play too!
"The universe is a time-space bubble born from the nothingness"
"that nothingness is outside time and creates all the possible universes and outcomes, generating a multiverse separated by time, space and nothingness"
"We discovered God!"

The rustliest rustlings have part of truth. Do I win?

>>5691724
We'll talk when you grow up and learn a little about materialism.
>implying your brain isn't bound by laws of physics
>implying you're any more different than a leaf blowing in the wind except you're more complex and create more entropy
>implications errywherrrr

>>5691728
>bumping the thread

>>5691762
>materialism.
> 100% right
lol no.

>>5691819
>believing in supernatural phenomenon
lol at yourself fag

>>5691827
>not materialism
>supernatural
wat? I only said that materialism has some flaws, get over it.

>>5691832
philosophy of materialism itself does not matter
as long as you accept that everything in universe is bound by physical laws my argument stands correct

>>5691836
I can accept that mostly.
But the primeval nothingness was not bound by any physical law (not current physics, at least) and it fact it created them all. We still don't know why the universe is how it is, but we do know that physics and nature laws do change every time the system is restarted.

I'm not claiming that God did it, though, just that this is an amazing discovery that somehow still escapes the materialist point of view. For now.

Time is just a label created by man for the progression of events.

>>5691855
>>5691861
why are you talking about physics and time when you both clearly lack the proper backgrounds?

If everything in the universe was a singularity at the start, how can this thing have time? Everything is practically the same.

The only thing that changes is entropy, time is an illusion created by humans. Basically we are still in the moment of the big bang

>>5691942
jesus fucking christ, just shut your mouth already you goddamn retard

go read a fucking book before sprouting shit about stuff you have no knowledge of

and yes I mad

>>5691956
>HURRR U R NOT BOOK ENOUF LAIK ME
You know what they say right? If you can't explain something you "know", you probably don't understand it very well.

I'll wait.

>>5691960
It wouldnt be a singularity, a likeness no doubt, but think about what you're talking about before saying it eh?

>>5691966
But one of the definitions of singularity is exactly that, the moment when the universe had infinite density and temperature.

I think before I talk that's why I came up with this idea. Shit or not it's up for discussion. I'm not a whiny manchild going HURR SHUDDUP READ BOOKZ

If you're so knowledgeable, why don't you chime in?

>>5691975
this.

>>5691975
density is irrelevant at the point of infinite, and even at that that comprehensible by the structure it's composed in, temperature is translatable a variety of things of potential

It would not be anywhere near a singularity as we interpret it, and if we were to compose it it would not be using mass, we already have electrons that are massless, a 2010 discovery even, it just wouldnt be a singlurity, things would opperate quite to quite a far extent to concieve of such a thing and then again letting in comprise itself to the extent of all the systems that we exist with that the format base would account for the most obscure of things, the universes creation did not start at the singularity, a comparible, but in truth absolutely nothing like it

>>5691993
incomprehensible*

Personally, quantum entanglement, the zero universes theory and the theory that information is actually a testable, observable and measurable entity makes me shit bricks like pyramids.

>>5692004
yep, strange stuff all this

>inb4 zero point energy get's transcribed to it's original literal interpretation

Dem Hin(d)ies

I just think people are inherently stupid, not evil.

>>5692017
Could you imagine if there a Huminoid that was just the opposite?

As societal progress goes on there is simply less and less place for excelling, and less and less access to those that might, it's only reasonable to think that if another race in the universe exists that they might have succumb to just that

Why else would they travel here and bang our womens
>Gensises 16:4:fuckingidk

>>5691993
But I will say again, singularity is defined as what I said.
I'm sorry but this is just how the word is defined and it saddens me to say that your post only makes spirals around itself. Also I didn't research stuff to make this up, I learned of it in school and according to the references in wiki it is attributed to this book 'The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time' by Hawking and Ellis.

Now, the topic is time not what defines a singularity. Would you care to talk about time?

>>5692017
>Drol
Did you pick that name intentionally? Link related.
V

http://www.google.co.uk/search?um=1&hl=e
n&biw=1366&bih=549&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Drol&
oq=Drol&gs_l=img.3..0l10.3016.3773.0.401
6.3.3.0.0.0.0.67.172.3.3.0...0.0...1c.1.
9.img.vFHrdj9ecas

>>5691960
>>5691975
>>5692037
FYI the idiot you're talking to is not me. Neither of you don't know anything about the stuff you're talking about.

I've been arguing with illiterate faggots all day long and I've had enough.

Ok ultrafaggot.

Pull your secret book of ultimate knowledge out of your rectum and enlighten us.

>>5692037
That we're not inside a blackhole and I dont give 2 fucks about Hawkings.

Every single thing in existance is made as a kind of time, when I'm looking at physics I think of it as a math rollercoaters, system intended, and when looking at math seeing the entire system as it immediately breaks down, the forms play into eachother for study btw, the point being that as we are all things have constance, every particle has a CONSTANT rendering of A: I'm going to bump into this particle and will interact this way, or B: My interaction with another particle is transpiring before an event- this being the case that essentially either is constant, that time is more than a constant, it's a derivative of the composure of the states that manifests a derivative of the composure of the states that... , the point being that things dont happen one after another, but we have to look at it that way to understand it or we're just to far out of our league of notation

>>5692057
Scientifical proof that knowledge doesn't stop you from being a dick.

Now going back to the serious issues, is this even possible?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/apr/16/alice-and-bob-communicate-without-transferring-a-single-photon

another question, could information be 100% matter free? I'm no scientist so I'm absolutely puzzled here.

>>5692064
>but we have to look at it that way to understand it or we're just to far out of our league of notation
Oh right, thanks for validating what I said earlier, that time is a human construct.

>>5692076
No I'm saying we don't extensively constitute what it's 'posture/angle/flannel/flanangle' is in our notation, and lose out for it.

>>5692068

i don't know if the researchers here are being dubious or not, but if there's no detectors switched on during transmision, you'll get a diffraction pattern at the end. photons are still transmitted. the absence of them is the inference that the signal was sent. there's nothing interesting going on here

>>5692076
Also, >>5692064 ITT Time = Math , Reality = Physics

>>5692068
ITT: Matter=Transitors
Yes OP, check yur radio.

But seriously that's some interesting stuff there, it's litrally ftl com without entanglement, fucking well played, it also proves my point >>5692104 , in terms of how those interactions of the test system could be translated to blatant math as opposed to the extents of what they think they're dealing with.
rualistr francisco

>>5691886
>proper backgrounds
Moron.

>>5692090
Sorry but are you dyslexic? Your posts are very strangely worded.

If I understood correctly you're saying that there is an absolute version of time and we can only perceive it the way we do because of our inherent system as humans? Or is it because of the notation we have created?

Time is what we have created to put "change" into our perspective. You could say that time is the rate of change for reality but does it exist as a parametre like mass? I have no idea to tell you the truth.

>>5692128

not him, and i don't know what he's getting at

but we don't know for sure whether or not time is a physical parameter yet. we know of evidence that would suggest whether or not that's the case though

>>5692134
Could you please link/talk about this evidence?

YA! More another crypto-superatheist shitposting parade the janitors and mods won't clean up!

Together we will solve our homework and blame the religious!

YA! Another crypto-superatheist shitposting parade the janitors and mods won't clean up!

Together we will solve our homework and blame the religious!

>>5692128
sorry I went to french immersion for half my elementary and never finished it so my L33t writing skillz can get missplace quite badly with a bad coma or ' this thing

>>5692128
No, it has nothing to do with Human or anything like that, if anything the Human state is simply proof that Math and Physics are not uniquely empirical in their exposings and can be demonstrated together, fucking nuerons, how do those work.

There is an absolute spectrum of time, and everything it produces is the full induction of it's process. Basing on, but not limited to, physics, as to say its 'notation' of itself.

I dont know why you would follow up what you said with the much of a downplay and irrelivancy as apposed to the other way around, but all I'm saying is that even as extensive as those equations can get they are not accounting for some aspects that the particles are naturally encompassing, and thus missing out on some of the interpretation, time is really a subsection to those comprisals- to follow your lead.

Time is what we have created to understand memory, that something can be perceived or understood outside it's immediacy, that being said is it in it's actuality of the fact that our brains as they are instinctually playing across so much of it as the brain passively opperates and subsequently acquiring an intuitive aspect of recognition of it as soon as a species gains notation.

>>5692155
shut the fuck up and leave

>>5691836
>as long as you accept that everything in universe is bound by physical laws
I don't accept that. That is clearly false. If there is such a thing as a set of physical law then those laws exist here in the universe with all the other 'stuff,' therefore they can act on that stuff, and (this is the really important part) VICE VERSA. It's the feedback that is important, it's the feedback that allows for choice. You're making the erroneous assumption that there is only a single set of law. Why would that just automatically be true?

>>5692155
yeah no, fuck off

On the front page there are the following threads
>post your dick size spam
>google solar phenomena for me please
>4 homework threads
and a few other related to science threads like this one.

I bet you're that faggot that prances around the board posting HURR UR NOT KNOW ENUF. Please do all of us a favour and go cuddle with your dawkins man pillow

>shut the fuck up and leave
Exactly what I'm talking about..
I know you have a lot of threads to get to on your todo list mr. shitposter but pls respond and tell me to shut the fuck up again.

>>5692194
> >>5692178
Shut the fuck up and leave.

>doing, learning, and talking about science
>carrying out an ideological agenda, spouting out mindless opinions, telling people to shut the fuck up without using sage on a futaba based imageboard
which one?

>>5692178
>all I'm saying is that even as extensive as those equations can get they are not accounting for some aspects that the particles are naturally encompassing,
Like what? Please explain.

>as soon as a species gains notation.
We are not in the position to know this until we find another species on earth or elsewhere that has a notion of time like ours.

Again you are saying that we have created time to suit our needs, specifically memory.

>There is an absolute spectrum of time
Do we have any evidence for this?

>>5692230
Both, blow me.

>inb4 infinity is said 2b mindless

>>5692230
go suck some dicks
are you some kind of protector for this board?
Do you jerk off at the thought of mindlessly bashing other people for talking about stuff?
Do you know that you have a severe case of stop talking what I dont like talking about?

I won't give you a troll rating because you clearly aren't one, you're just asspained for some retarded reason only you can understand.

for the last time fuck off

>hurr u dident sage
>hurr u swer on blu bord
top lel

>>5692250
> >>5692064

>
Notation, period. 'Notion of time like ours' varies from person to person, there is a reason for this.
>next post

>
The extent our our existance and the recomprissals of enviroment without any sway of what we are existing as exactly at that moment, that is going as far to say that similar has happened in the past.

>'lack*' of pic of big bang theory progression related and its 'flaws*'.
>*=time

>you some kind of protector for this board?
>you're just asspained
bro, you're my melting my skin off with the intensity of your projecting

>both, blow me
(skepticism isn't science)
(taunting the non-believers, aka skeptics, isn't doing science either)

>>5692301
>
[{}]

>
it is both.
Blow me.

science makes theories and tests them
skepticism does not

i see a massive congregation of idiots

>>5692313
Science uses evidence, hopefully skepticism does to- putting more fuel into a already giving potentialled gas tank will not change the performance of the car.

>Cops use guns, hopefully the mafia does to- putting more fuel into a already giving potentialled gas take will not change the performance of the car
It's called 'putting style before substance', you faggot skeptics do it all the time and this is why I hate you being on the internet, let alone 4chan, let alone the internet. You're all a cultural parasite.

>Cops use guns, hopefully the mafia does to- putting more fuel into a already giving potentialled gas take will not change the performance of the car
It's called 'putting style before substance', you faggot skeptics do it all the time and this is why I hate you being on the internet, let alone 4chan, let alone /sci/. You're all cultural parasites.

>>5692416
>says the guy referencing projecting
Style before substance indeed Mr. Skeptic.
Go ahead and try to toke what you're rolling man, supr edgy but soooo, so, sooo 2010

ITT: We try to talk about time

good luck with that ITT

>>5692557
ITT: No luck needed
>time

>numbers aren't created by man they are created by universe
>its just that you cant see/touch/hear/smell/taste/feel/perceive/etc/etc
>when the big bang happened numbers were created from atoms that are invisible

>>5692611
>we can scale time with numbers

>>5692700

>>5691472
This, it's just using vague language

>>5691494
It's because of that stupid "What the Bleep Do We Know" movie

>>5692183
as you may find this hard to believe, humans did not create the universe through a set of laws, these laws that you are referencing are not actual societal regulations you must follow, they're just observations of how the universe functions

>>5692838
You're right that humans did not create the universe. But what the humans have created is what we know of today. Everything we know is a human creation. We didn't create the universe, what we created is a model of the universe with many laws that apply to the models. Both models/laws have been changed many times throughout our history. So we know that its not a perfect model. What we know about everything is a creation of human mind. What we don't know are the creations of the universe.

>>5692588
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map%E2%80%93territory_relation
here's what you're really trying to talk about in this thread