How exactly does space/time fabric work?

fb360

Active Member
One of the main assumptions of physics is that laws of nature do not change depending on where you are. I have no idea what you mean when you claim that we don't know physics in our solar system.

BTW, it always seem that the first to resort to name calling usually doesn't have a strong argument. If you're going to continue to be a rude asshole, just stop responding to me since I'm not interested in a flame war. If you can keep from throwing around personal attacks, by all means, we can continue to discuss this.
You do realize that the current "hot" theory is that their are multiple parallel universes, maybe even an infinite number of them. Scientists also believe that each one might have its own physics. Furthermore, we are still defining our knowledge of physics, just 27 years ago not knowing if neutrinos even existed. We are searching for the Higgs Boson, another great example of how we KNOW that our understanding of physics is mediocre at best. I could go on and on with examples where we ourselves imply that we don't know everything about physics.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
You do realize that the current "hot" theory is that their are multiple parallel universes, maybe even an infinite number of them. Scientists also believe that each one might have its own physics. Furthermore, we are still defining our knowledge of physics, just 27 years ago not knowing if neutrinos even existed. We are searching for the Higgs Boson, another great example of how we KNOW that our understanding of physics is mediocre at best. I could go on and on with examples where we ourselves imply that we don't know everything about physics.
Parallel universes means the laws could be different... in a different universe, not necessarily here in ours. We are talking about aliens from our universe, not others. Higgs Boson was found this summer and I never said we know everything, or even a significant amount of anything about physics so that observation is irrelevant to our discussion.

I don't suppose you will man up and apologize for unwarranted personal attacks....
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
[h=1]Q: If we meet aliens, will they have the same math and physics that we do?[/h] Posted on May 15, 2011 by The Physicist
Physicist: Similar. We’re sure to have figured out stuff they haven’t, and they’re sure to have figured out stuff we haven’t. But there’s likely to be a fair amount of overlap.
Some things have a way of being figured out over and over. For example, the Pythagorean theorem got itself figured out in China, Greece, India, and Babylonia (Iraq).
Lower left: The Plimpton tablet, which lists Pythagorean triples, is from ancient Babylonia (modern-day Iraq). Upper left: a derivation of the Pythagorean theorem from ancient China (modern-day China). Right: the derivation of the Pythagorean theorem as seen in Euclid's Elements from ancient Greece.

However, there’s a fair chance that old school mathematicians were just copying each other. Specifically, Pythagoras probably stole “his” theorem from the Egyptians (Discoveries aren’t named after the first person to make them, they’re named after the last). Still, it’s the sort of thing that’s so useful and easy to prove that it’s hard to imagine an advanced culture not knowing about it.
And some ideas are just good. We can say it’s very likely that aliens have invented hammers, because people (in every culture), several other varieties of apes, several monkeys species, otters (cutest), and others have all done it. However, being a good idea doesn’t mean that different people/things will create exactly the same thing. For example the Old World (Europe, Africa, Asia) and Incan abacuses are subtly different.
These devices, the Yupana and Abacus, which were developed independently and served the exact same function, have very different forms. (Yupana beads not shown)

Point is, there are almost certainly going to be commonalities. At the same time, things like the Goldbach conjecture (every even number can be expressed as the sum of two primes), or half of the more obscure theorems in the more obscure mathematical disciplines, are unlikely to be in alien textbooks. Math, being an infinite science, is going to have plenty of twists and turns that only one civilization figures out, and many more that none figure out.
Which mathematical things are most likely to be common is the sort of question best left to sci-fi writers, and other experts (such as there are).
Ultimately the physical predictions each of our sciences make will be the same. Because of, you know: reality. Physics is just a mathematical and philosophical structure that describes the universe. What’s very surprising (or, alternatively, very not surprising) is that you can describe (predict) the same physical laws and behaviors based on very different (one might even say; “alien”) premises.
For example, Newton’s first and third laws (“inertia” and “for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction”) are essentially statements about the conservation of momentum. That is, if you total up the momentum (mass times velocity) of a closed system, then the total momentum remains constant forever. Now, you can mumble something about Lagrangians or reference frames, but when you boil it down, conservation of momentum is just something we take as true (because it always, always works).
But an alien might have a different way of approaching the same set of laws. Rather than saying “for a given system, if you multiply the velocity of each object with the mass of each object and add them all up you get something that never changes” (conservation of momentum), that E.T. might say something like “for a given system, the center of mass never accelerates”. Same laws, different intuition.
Left: Normally we describe Newton's laws in terms of momentum, P = m1 v1 + m2 v2, which never changes. In this case P=0. Right: Another way to describe the same results is in terms of the center of mass never accelerating. In this case the center-of-mass' velocity is zero, and will stay that way. It turns out that, mathematically, these are interchangeable, but the philosophy is a bit different.

Like the abacus/yupana and big-rock/hammer parallels, these different theories do exactly the same thing, but look pretty different.
So (pressed for an answer), I’d expect that no matter how alien an Alien is, whether non-social, immortal, hive-minded, slug-based, whatever, their physics and math has to do a lot of the same stuff ours does, and may even be understandable (to our non-hive minds). At the very least, our physics and Alien physics has to describe the same universe. So, while they may have a completely different approach, it should look familiar, and ultimately do the same stuff.
 

Samwell Seed Well

Well-Known Member
i got into this same argument with my father a physics major from the 70's

math is univerasl . .the symbols we use to represent those values is illrelvent
 

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Prove it!!! They didn't find it, they found something, and they stopped short of calling it the Higgs.
No they identified it specifically as the Higgs boson. Two separate teams independently discovered the particle, and they announced it on 7-4-2012.

EDIT

Go read up on it. Wiki has all the information regarding the discovery and press conference. This only happened a few months ago. I remember reading about it in threads on riu.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Well, true. The Higgs boson was not found last summer. But, anyone can swing in and out of absolute precision when trying to describe concepts. And though people will flame me for the slightest perceived fault. I see it as no big deal.

Mr. M, knows, they could very well have the Higgs. The data stood quite well to the first round of correctness review. So, what is gained from, calling UNTRUE for this passing detail? In context it is true.

Nothing is gained either from saying, ...."can't imagine." Nothing gained from trotting out someone's human opinion about discovering physical relationships within the human experience. Sanskrit geometry says nothing to me about ET math.

We don't even need other dimensions. Before Hubble, we didn't know about galaxy. He brought a constant into play that is now in serious question. Our entire macro view, BB Theory is based on it. And now Dark energy is blowing up the constant.

These simple equations are the basis of physics, our physics. Our LOCAL fundamental forces. Now, Hubble is blown and so is the 1A superNova Standard Candle, replaced by the questions of Dark Energy. DE is causing completely unknown rates of acceleration and changes over time. And so we have no idea of actual distances or age of the Universe.

We are beginning to see that our local physics is not completely correct. we see Real Uncertainly on a Macro scale. Our model of atoms is incorrect. We wish we could know what gravity is. Maybe we don't have Math, at all, in a Universal sense.

There could be modes of this universe that we just don't see. Quantum modes? These modes could birth ET that may then have no need for cumbersome Math. Just a feeling, and Understanding, I could imagine.

It is very naive IMO, to try to have it both ways. It is only the statistical possibility that makes us even consider ET. In the giant game of chance and change, the odds favor ET. But, those same odds favor a mathless ET, just as much as ET with human similar math.

We are constantly surprised, even by our own ecosystem. To say you can't imagine manipulating reality without human math or even Math at all is just a raw, human based guess.

It is not the '70s. An entire new realm of thought is just opening up. Quantum, non-casual energy exchange is what seems to balance the energy budget at the submicro-scale. Non-causal? What's up with that?

I can't even buy the main assumption that Physics is universal.
 

HappyMan420

Well-Known Member
jello and marbles? Clean socks? Space is the absence of mass. you can move in all directions. 360 degrees by 360 degrees. left and right are subjective along with up and down. Time is our understanding of linear movement.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
No. No mass, equals no space. Volume is defined by the material container. And Space seems to sort itself by density according to mass.

Time is how we sub-divide the major durations. We use the smallest regular duration we can find to diivde the big ones.

Cesium atomic vibration subdivides the earth's orbit period. We created Time to measure space using matter.
 

Seedling

Well-Known Member
No they identified it specifically as the Higgs boson. Two separate teams independently discovered the particle, and they announced it on 7-4-2012.

EDIT

Go read up on it. Wiki has all the information regarding the discovery and press conference. This only happened a few months ago. I remember reading about it in threads on riu.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
Looks like you're the one that needs to read up on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

The Higgs boson or Higgs particle is an elementary particle in the Standard Model of particle physics. The Higgs boson is predicted to exist for theoretical reasons, and may have been detected by experiments at the Large Hadron Collider. If confirmed, this detection would further support the existence of the hypothetical Higgs field—the simplest[SUP][4][/SUP] of several proposed mechanisms for the breaking of electroweak symmetry, and the means by which elementary particles acquire mass.
 

fb360

Active Member
You guys are still trying to associate any other life form with humans...

I bet if our species survives for another 1000 years even, that we will look back and laugh hysterically at the mathematics we currently have. Our language of mathematics is a primitive, premature, young and growing one. To say that another advanced species would be at the same level, doing the same reasoning, using a similar language, is highly unlikely.

Certain geometric constants hold true, as well as a very few physical constants. Aside from those entities, we didn't discover anything in terms of mathematics.

Furthermore, we know that if we encounter other intelligent life forms, they will inherently have an understanding and intellect about the universe that we can't begin to comprehend. We know this because even our closest star besides the sun is about 4.3 light years away in the star Alpha Centauri... Ergo, it would take us a minimum of 4.3 years, moving at the speed of light, to reach our nearest neighbor. Furthermore, we currently believe that the speed of light is the ultimate speed and is impossible to be broken. Again implying that if we encounter any intelligent life from outside of our solar system, they either live very long lives, or have developed techniques which abolish our physics. Further implying that their physics and language of understanding will be different than ours. How different? One can only speculate.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
You guys are still trying to associate any other life form with humans...
No we are not! You either are not paying attention or have some sort of mental block. Certain facts about math have nothing to do with humans or how we experience the world. Do you actually think that addition will be different if done by another species? Is counting a human trait? Addition and subtraction is just counting. Multiplication is just adding many times. The rest of basic math follows from these basics, just like you learned them in school. Euclidean geometry is is inherent to any three dimensional being. Until you can demonstrate where the human bias comes in, you are just blowing smoke.

Here again we have another RIU member that is smarter than all of these mathematicians and physicists. Your arrogance amazes me.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
"if science went extinct and another intelligent species arose, it would be developed identical to what it is now, if your religion went extinct, it would never be exactly the same.. What does that tell you?"

Wish I knew who said it, it rings completely true...

Science is universal, religion is not. Biased much?
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
"if science went extinct and another intelligent species arose, it would be developed identical to what it is now, if your religion went extinct, it would never be exactly the same.. What does that tell you?"

Wish I knew who said it, it rings completely true...

Science is universal, religion is not. Biased much?
Somewhat dissenting opinion. Science is a humanity: it is marked at every turn by the imagination and limitations of its pioneers. Math, being entirely abstract, has a better claim to universality. Jmo. cn
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
the refuge for the ignorant it to invoke a higher power, with disdainful logic. religion and ideology of any kind both intrude.

Refering to "all of these mathematicians and physicists. Your arrogance amazes me. " as top cover.... and then the pussy parting Shot. Well, it is clear now.

The ducks really quack when aroused. It has nothing to do with relative smarts. What I'm amazed at is the low tone of people that claim they just want discussion. The appeal to their gods when aroused. The smoking anger of the retort the insult stab, like they really don't know how to have civil conversation.

And the subject is Alien Math!!!! The gods can't be of any help.

It is an exercise to try to be non-anthropomorphic in thinking, if at all possible.

If you have no need in your perceptions to build geometric solids, then you won't have or understand math for that. These Pythagorean solids are not natural. They are conceived. As the smart bet says, we could easily be trying the equivilence of sticks and rock and just calling it math. Our persceptions could be so limited that we have no idea of what real MATH is. That is the human arrogance.

Oh, poor Sacred Cow.....mmmmmm. Barbecue!
 

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
That you are crazy. I am still wondering how you think some intelligent life form could evolve in this universe and NOT need to understand geometric solids, or more precisely, the math behind them. Or how you think it's some human construct that will not hold true across the universe.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Oh, I see, just call the name, if you're to stoop to that. No need to hide. No need for personal attacks. What you have just said is proof of the hurbis hiding within the insular, subjective nature of human perception. No more no less, except for hiding behind the emoticons to call some that disagrees crazy. You deserve more than that.

I am sure you are much more capable than that, in fact. I've seen it. The statement only proves that you do not know and you can't imagine. That's my point. Thanks. It is the definition, we could say, of anthropomorphism. Pertains to gods, dogs and aliens.

BTW, it so pertains to ourselves. We want to assume everyone is like us or crazy otherwise, yes? We as individuals are hampered by extreme anthropomorphic logic against each other.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Without any concept of a sphere, there will be no way for any intelligent being to figure out the forces of a star for example. Triangles are necessary for things like triangulation and calculating parallax of the stars for distance measurements. Oh wait, I forgot, measurements must be a completely human thing. I'm anthropomorphizing too much.

I can't understand how someone trained in computers cannot see the truth of this. The fact that we can come to the same conclusions in a calculation regardless of the number base used. IOW, symbols or even the counting system is irrelevant to the conclusions reached. Binary, decimal, Base-12 or even Base-57 will all give us identical results.

I'm not sure what you are imply by arguing about the Platonic solids (I have no idea what Pythagorean solids are). I never once mentioned them. I did mention plane geometry, and it's odd that someone would argue that aliens would not have some sort of geometry. If they live in this universe and are normal, physical animals that can manipulate the environment, i.e the physical world, in order to make technology, then there will be certain concepts they MUST have figured out and they will necessarily have used some sort of math to do so. Continuing to point and say "noooo!" and claiming we are being too anthropomorphic is not an argument, it is whining. You have presented NOTHING to support the argument we are wrong. You have only asserted it, over and over. We, OTOH, have given numerous examples, including some by actual mathematicians and physicists. The only thing you have done with that is argue some weird anti-argument from authority. You have accused me of deifying actual authorities on the subject, a ridiculous notion. It's not an appeal to gods to want the perspective of actual math and physics experts and to insinuate otherwise tells me you a have no real argument. You have an idea on the subject and you think others are wrong so you attempt to belittle them. Well fuck off Doer. You're acting like a petulant child that can't get an adult to understand his crazy ideas.
 
Top