The Apocrypha to the Vengeful Testament of Eris
Chapter I
http://earfatigue.multiply.com/music/item/123
Thanks, Cain.
:mittens:
Groovy. Once I've fixed my speakers I'll give it a listen.
I have a higher sound quality version at home if you want it.
Cool, that will be great. Same email as usual.
I'm still reading that pdf, by the way. Very interesting.
No kidding. I'm making notes & sending them along.
If there's anything you find unclear, let me know. I was talking to him last weekend, and apparently, we're his intended audience.
Alright, will do. Seems OK so far, but I'm reading it in bits and pieces mostly.
Sound idea actually, getting feedback of this sort.
LMNO - passes GO and collects $200 once again.
8-)
which pdf?
It's a book (unpublished as of yet) that attempts to explain quantum physics to people who are interested in the subject, but don't have the math chops.
The difference in this book being that he's trying his best not to use metaphors to explain the really weird concepts.
If you like, I can email you a copy.
Ooooh! Me too pls
can i have a copy as well? my inbox is open at public.transport@gmail.com
I'm on page 80 so far and it's pretty awesome, although I have to admit some of sails right over my head.
Yeah. It's best to read really slowly. And take notes. Currently, I'm working my way back through chapter 2, trying to rephrase what's being said, to see if I understand it.
What's mainly baking my noodle is how they came to conclusions like the secondary wave functions and antiparticles and stuff. I think it's my complete and utter failure to understand mathematical arrays that's doing it but for the purposes of reading the rest I'm kinda taking it as read that these people know this stuff.
That almost made sense to me.
What the anitparticles thing or my whole post?
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.
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.
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...
Aaaaargh :argh!: You really hate me don't yuo :cry:
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Fuck me standing! I just pulled it off in 1 dimension. 3-d would be a piece of piss after this.
(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i312/P3nT4gR4m/gravity.jpg)
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'.
srlsy dude get the pdf - I'm just making it look complicated on account of I'm thick as pigshit.
silly i think you got it.
i didn't quite understand the graph you made (what did you plot it with, btw?), but seeing you got a nice going parabola out of it, i think the sort-of-multiplication of gravity and force resulted in the correct trajectory.
if you did 3D modelling and graphics, maybe you know something about matrix multiplications? afaik the "tensors" (which are these .. arrays things afaik -- disclaimer: i haven't read the book yet) in quantum mechanics are kind of like matrices, only more different. they're sort of like what a number is to a matrix, a matrix is to a tensor. but in the end they're just mathematical operators.
also, i really must admit, i know hardly anything about it .. (but my gf does ^__^ she's an astronomy student and has to learn Everything about the Universe, from the small Quantum stuff up to the big Cosmology things)
and btw, LMNO, that "read a line, stop breathe, don't read further until you understand it" method is pretty much the way i used to prepare for every math-related exam i had to do at the university. it works good for me :)
Which is why I insist humanities are much fun and easier. Just find a point of view you like, trash every other theory and it doesn't matter if you're right, so long as you argue it well. Its like academic flaming.
Quote from: triple zero on February 10, 2007, 12:07:22 PM
silly i think you got it.
i didn't quite understand the graph you made (what did you plot it with, btw?), but seeing you got a nice going parabola out of it, i think the sort-of-multiplication of gravity and force resulted in the correct trajectory.
I did the graph in excel
I started with blast effect force, starting at 50 and reducing to 0 (49,48,47...) this simulating an intial blast which fired the projectile up and then tailed off over time.
Next I choose a constant force of 20 for gravity, to arrive at the projectile altitude, using the formula P+=(P+B)-G where P=position, B=blast force and G = gravity. Piss simple but it gave me the parabola I was looking for.
On another note I now have a folder in my documents called 'maths' thanks to LMNO and his dad I'm now a complete maths junkie. Albeit a totally crap one.
Quote from: triple zero on February 10, 2007, 12:07:22 PM
if you did 3D modelling and graphics, maybe you know something about matrix multiplications? afaik the "tensors" (which are these .. arrays things afaik -- disclaimer: i haven't read the book yet) in quantum mechanics are kind of like matrices, only more different. they're sort of like what a number is to a matrix, a matrix is to a tensor. but in the end they're just mathematical operators.
I'm not sure what a tensor is. I shoulda mentioned I'm not trained in 3d art I just sorta fiddle about with it sometimes and animation rigging is something that completely fucks me up.
Quote from: SillyCybin on February 09, 2007, 11:37:59 PM
srlsy dude get the pdf - I'm just making it look complicated on account of I'm thick as pigshit.
i'll ask LMNO for it. i've just finished 'view from the center of the universe' and am now reading a book on kaballah & cosmology. but if things get into math, then i just switch off.
I'm like that. But thankfully, this book is meant to be for the likes of us. I sometimes struggle a bit, but I hit up Wikipedia or Standford's philosophical dictionary and that normally sorts me out.
Quote from: Mangrove on February 10, 2007, 05:19:36 PM
Quote from: SillyCybin on February 09, 2007, 11:37:59 PM
srlsy dude get the pdf - I'm just making it look complicated on account of I'm thick as pigshit.
i'll ask LMNO for it. i've just finished 'view from the center of the universe' and am now reading a book on kaballah & cosmology. but if things get into math, then i just switch off.
lol - QBL without maths is like fish and chips without the fish ... or the chips - it's just a greasy paper bag where your meal ought to be. Fortunately it's mostly geometry - I can get my head round geometry cos I can see it.
Quote from: Mangrove on February 10, 2007, 05:19:36 PM
Quote from: SillyCybin on February 09, 2007, 11:37:59 PM
srlsy dude get the pdf - I'm just making it look complicated on account of I'm thick as pigshit.
i'll ask LMNO for it. i've just finished 'view from the center of the universe' and am now reading a book on kaballah & cosmology. but if things get into math, then i just switch off.
I'll send it off to ya -- it doesn't have any high maths, mostly. It explains concepts in relatively comprehensible English, and if it does bring in math, it's pretty much just basic algebra. PM me yr email addy again.
thanks LMNO, i'll send you my e-mail later.
if you're reading this and the zohar, then you're going to love the 'let there be light' book.
full of cosmological head splodey.
Bits and pieces of the Zohar only-- too much work, too many books, so little time.
On the other hand, I had really great sex this weekend, so the world is temporarily a much softer place.
Quote from: LMNO on February 12, 2007, 02:47:33 PM
Bits and pieces of the Zohar only-- too much work, too many books, so little time.
On the other hand, I had really great sex this weekend, so the world is temporarily a much softer place.
must resist....making....on the
other hand/great sex pun.....[grits teeth]
Oh, no. You misunderstand.
LMNO
-has to use both hands.
+SMUG levels increasing.
Quote from: Mangrove on February 12, 2007, 06:54:54 PM
Quote from: LMNO on February 12, 2007, 02:47:33 PM
Bits and pieces of the Zohar only-- too much work, too many books, so little time.
On the other hand, I had really great sex this weekend, so the world is temporarily a much softer place.
must resist....making....on the other hand/great sex pun.....[grits teeth]
Now why would you resist? You can seriously injure yourself holding these sorts of things back.
Quote from: LMNO on February 12, 2007, 06:56:28 PM
Oh, no.  You misunderstand.
LMNO
-has to use both hands.
+SMUG levels increasing.
*mumble**grumble*"timeofthemonthbs*mumble**grumble* :evilmad:
Quote from: LMNO on February 12, 2007, 06:56:28 PM
Oh, no.  You misunderstand.
LMNO
-has to use both hands.
i guess that was a nice...uh...come back..... :wink:
+SMUG levels increasing.
Quote from: Mangrove on February 12, 2007, 07:13:26 PM
Quote from: LMNO on February 12, 2007, 06:56:28 PM
Oh, no.  You misunderstand.
LMNO
-has to use both hands.
i guess that was a nice...uh...come back.....  :wink:
+SMUG levels increasing.
:rimshot:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 12, 2007, 07:45:04 PM:rimshot:
yuo do NOT want to know what imagery i got when i half-interpreted that word as dutch in this context.
Trust me, I'm amazed no one here has done anything about it yet.
Quote from: triple zero on February 12, 2007, 09:10:49 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 12, 2007, 07:45:04 PM:rimshot:
yuo do NOT want to know what imagery i got when i half-interpreted that word as dutch in this context.
Oh, I'm sure someone around here does, and if you don't, they will.
ok, well, "rim" is the verb for asslicking
so idunno
also i recall some horrible video about .. nah well i must have got it from here, where else