|
I'm just impressed you worked out how to type greek letters
Espen Harlinn wrote: r, θ and φ
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Maxxx wrote: I'm just impressed you worked out how to type greek letters
Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V
Espen Harlinn
Chief Architect - Powel AS
Projects promoting programming in "natural language" are intrinsically doomed to fail. Edsger W.Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
Cheat!
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
A curve is N dimensional.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
So does light travel in a ray or does it not
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it doesn't. Or no it does. It's definitely one of those.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
But a ray cannot deviate from a straight line. Light however can bend due to gravity. Someone has been lying but the question is who.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete Zahir wrote: But a ray cannot deviate from a straight line.
Says who? If that's your a priori definition of ray then light doesn't travel in one. No contradiction. No lying.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
I can prove it does deviate with a simple mirror, or prism...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
There we have it!
Everyone take heed, because CP's expert on deviation hath spake.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'll...um...take that as a complement?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously?
Where did they teach you this stuff?
"Ray" is a descriptive word, used to describe what light looks like, to the human eye. It's not a "thing" in its own right, and it's not measurable (so it can't be used in any kind of calculation), even though it's used in grammatical structures that make it look determinant.
i.e. "a pound of sugar" and "a ray of light" might look the same, and give the impression that "ray" is determinant, but it's not. It doesn't matter how big or small a ray of light is, it's still just "a ray of light".
So you can't talk about rays as if they're separate from light. They are light -- or a non-unit-ish unit of light.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: They are light
Search google for 'a ray of manure' ... you'll get a hit og two
Espen Harlinn
Chief Architect - Powel AS
Projects promoting programming in "natural language" are intrinsically doomed to fail. Edsger W.Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
Whoa, that's the gardening department. Might as well be Greek that's been google-translated to Hawaiian, for me.
Through that door, and talk to the missus.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Ray of manure? My aunt was married to him. Stinky old walking piece of Sh.t.
|
|
|
|
|
Gravity distorts space, the "ray" travels through space in a straight line, it's space that bends.
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Both.
Because of Quantum.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it can be quite quarky.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a charming effect!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Our brains are not ready.
Sorry I answered some others of you before reading this. Yep in this Point I can fully agree
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Your brains are not ready. How small of you.
|
|
|
|
|
Shut up all of you semi-theortical physicists! Cut the noise. Here's a name sounding like Russian. Let's sit down and listen to the real space man.
Go ahead Mr R. Giskard Reventlov!
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
The approach taken by superstring theorists is to add variables to represent motion in additional spatial dimensions. So while they cannot visualize in ten dimensions, by extension they can still calculate the behavior of particles moving in that many dimensions.
The problem is to avoid topological defects such as magnetic monopoles (particles that emit a magnetic field at rest). This is an amusing point in relativity theory: we know that a charged particle in motion curves under the influence of a magnetic field. But what if we shift to a reference frame that moves along with the particle. If the particle is at rest in that frame, there is no velocity, and so no force exerted by the field. The answer is that the fields themselves are also altered by the change of reference frame: in the particle's rest frame, there is an electric field that cause it to accelerate.
Similar things happen in General Relativity. One of the side effects in rolling up higher-dimensional spaces (to produce our three-dimensional reality) is that magnetic field lines can be forced into spatial rifts, which then appear as magnetic monopoles. A brilliant Indian mathematician "proved" (I'm not sure anybody understands the proof) that avoiding magnetic monopoles requires that the universe sit in ten or eleven spatial dimensions.
That current theory opts for the "ten" option may have something to do with the seven seals in the Book of Revelation. I'm not aware of any theoretical reason for the choosing ten over eleven. Much as Gell-Mann named his model of particle zoology the "eight-fold way" as a reference to Buddhism, my paranoid brain is half-convinced that some theorist chose ten because at the "end of days" that would mean the seven "sealed" dimensions would open upon our return to the Godhead - matching the number of seals on the scroll opened by the lamb.
|
|
|
|