The Apocrypha to the Vengeful Testament of Eris

[LMNO]

That almost made sense to me.

[P3nT4gR4m]

What the anitparticles thing or my whole post?

[LMNO]

Maybe it's my inner grammar nazi, but that just sounded like a run on babble of words to me.

Something about antiparticles and arrays and wave functions.


What's interesting is, if you read carefully & slowly, you can almost understand it all, without the math.


However, if you want the math, i'm sure i can get it for you.

[P3nT4gR4m]

It's the math thats the problem. The whole 'arrays' concept is just too abstract for me. I kinda got the idea of a spreadsheet, I mean I'm hnd'd in computing I ought to. It was the idea of making an array of functions and then multiplying these by each other. I couldn't get my head round it. I do intend to read up in it tho but I'm aiming to finish 'beneath reality' before I do. Then I'll prolly reread the bits I didn't get first time round to see if it makes any more sense.

The whole problem I have with maths is the abstractness of it. I'm a visual thinker and I find it hard to picture it in my head.

[LMNO]

Funny, because it's the maths that i find easiest to picture in my head.

I can't actually do them, but i can see them.

I think there's a bit in the book about arrays.

As far as I can understand, it goes like this:

Let's call 1+2 "a" and 3+4 "b"

So if I say "a + b", I'm saying "(1+2)+(3+4)"  It's simpler to say.

Now, what if I called x+2 "a" and y+4 "b"

now, when I say "a+b", I'm using a symbol to describe a symbol.

Finally, we'll call x+z "a" and y+q "b"

So, when i say "a+b", I'm using simple language to describe difficult processes.




I think that's how it goes, at least...

[P3nT4gR4m]

Aaaaargh  You really hate me don't yuo 

[LMNO]

Stop.


Take a breath.



Read a line.

Stop.

Repeat it to yourself with your eyes closed until you understand what I'm saying.

Stop.

Take a breath.

Go to the next line.






This is how I'm reading "Beneath Reality", by the way.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Okay heres the core concept I'm missing. You take a 'tic tac toe' grid and you fill each square with a complicated scientific equation then you put a multiply sign after it, followed by another 'tic tac toe' grid full of equally complicated equations.

1) what does the answer look like? or is this the answer in itself?

2) what possible use is it? I know it's used to describe things like proton 'spin' and vectors and stuff but I'm just not seeing how

I appreciate you taking the time to patiently explain this to me. I know you're not having a go at me and I hope you realise I'm not having a go at you. I'm trying as best I can to explain the quintessential part of the thing that's fucking me up. I reckon I pretty much get the rest of what I've read so far but these equation things are just killing me.

[LMNO]

1.  The answer is how a "thing" behaves, in numbers.  That is, you'll get some sort of equation, or formula, that describes an object's motion.  That's the best I can do in english.

2.  see above.


Look at it this way.  You know when you hear a song, and you think, "hey, this sounds like Hendrix meets Kraftwerk."?

Well, "Hendrix" describes a whole lot of shit going on, and "Kraftwerk" describes a whole lof of other shit that's going on.  "Hendrix meets Kraftwerk" is a kind of equation that actually discribes something that's happening.

Now, pretend we actually have scientific equations that describe Hendrix and Kraftwerk, and you have a parallel.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Fuck me I think I might be getting it! Lemme run this by you.

you have a 7 dimesional array that describes to sets of xyz cartesian coordinates as origin and another set of xyz that describes a destination, through which you can plot a line that gives a direction of motion. Cell 7 in the array is velocity. Then you would have another 7 dimensional array that described gravity in xyz directional terms and force as cell 7. By multiplying these together you would arrive at a trajectory?

I know this totally has to be complete bollix, in that there's no way in hell I'd just randomly work something like this out, but is the principle the kind of thing we're dealing with?

[LMNO]

I think you've got it, but your knowledge of specifics on equations far exceeds mine.

Srsly.  I could barely get a fingernail on what you just said.


LMNO
-big on concepts, small on specifics.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I know a little bit about 3d geometry from mucking about with 3d rendering software and game engines. Now I'm gonna have to try this out on paper and see what happens. Be back in about a month.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Fuck me standing! I just pulled it off in 1 dimension. 3-d would be a piece of piss after this.

[Mangrove]

LMNO - i was going to ask to see the pdf of the book, but i've been following this thread and feel too stupid.

please to be asking your father to write 'quantum mechanics with dick & jane'.

[P3nT4gR4m]

srlsy dude get the pdf - I'm just making it look complicated on account of I'm thick as pigshit.