 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008Every mathematical object is, in a sense, its own universe?
Agree? http://72.32.204.58/2008/jul/16-is-the-universe-actually-made-of-math/article_vi ew?b_start:int=0&-C= "Is the Universe Actually Made of Math? Unconventional cosmologist Max Tegmark says mathematical formulas create reality ...... But why do some equations describe our universe so perfectly and others not so much? Stephen Hawking once asked it this way: “What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe?” If I am right and the cosmos is just mathematics, then no fire-breathing is required. A mathematical structure doesn’t describe a universe, it is a universe. The existence of the level IV multiverse also answers another question that has bothered people for a long time. John Wheeler put it this way: Even if we found equations that describe our universe perfectly, then why these particular equations and not others? The answer is that the other equations govern other, parallel universes, and that our universe has these particular equations because they are just statistically likely, given the distribution of mathematical structures that can support observers like us." > Agree? No, math is only a description of the object, not the object itself. If you stated every "object" was in sense it's own Universe, then I would agree. :) <snipped total math infection of brain patterns> :)  SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 4, 10:58 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > Agree? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > then I would agree. > :) Acceleration for example needs math to describe the process or calculations but the Lie Group or Eightway Path in particle physics for example may be describing a unique self referencing math object. It's like in the Singularity there are only two things, math and Allah. Then the universe is a result of the math of Allah or whatever. I'm not exactly sure what Tegmark has in mind yet. Just came across it a while ago. I'll look into his article in more details to understand his genius when I have time later in the day. Noke > <snipped total math infection of brain patterns> > :) > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 4, 10:58 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > details to understand his genius when I have time later > in the day. It is just simple ignorance as to what is a cause for an effect, It is as bad as "spacetime" being a cause yet spacetime is just 2 measurement. Saying spacetime causes things is like saying an inch-second caused something. It is a complete lack of the "physical" of physics. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 5, 12:01 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 4, 10:58 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I think what Tegmark is saying is like this. There is math and something vivify it enough to become physical object. This what vivifies it is the incredible energy that created the big bang from the singularity. In simple description, we can say that in the beginning there was just math, and God breaths math life and the universe is created as math object. Stuff like that. Catch you later. Have to blow up some firecrackers up in the sky. > On Jul 5, 12:01 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Stuff like that. Catch you later. Have to blow up some firecrackers > up in the sky. Just don't rely on math alone to make the firecrackers work. numbers on paper won't fly in the sky and blow up that well without other stuff making it so. :) Happy 4th! :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 5, 12:13 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 5, 12:01 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > Happy 4th! > :) I think you have a point. I just can't imagine making out with a woman made of pure math. Noke > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > On Jul 5, 12:13 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > I think you have a point. I just can't imagine making out with > a woman made of pure math. Yes, :) I can imagine it, but that is the problem. Imagination just is not the same as the real thing always has been. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman > Agree? > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > structures > that can support observers like us." Oh Good Lord, another guy quoting Hawking, a name that I doubt if you will find cited in any real physics text. Harry C. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.