Weird Theories

I am almost positive that time is not linear. I challenge any of you to prove beyond doubt that it is.

As far as I can see/observe each of us has our own timescape which changes and expands or contracts on a personal and biological level. Time does speed past and stand still.

Maybe

I challenge any of you to prove beyond doubt that it is.

Get with it! We did that already!!

Where?

You mean ‘Where?’ or ‘When?’

Have we talked about mating a fox with a badger yet?

A fadger!

Although that sounds like it could get me a ban for swear-filter avoidance.

Sure, but if there was time, how long would it have been

Eh?

This apple is not an orange, but if it were, which way would it vote?

There wasn’t time. Time does not apply to the pre-big bang situation. So why ask such things? It makes no sense.

What’s 53 divided by 0?

I am almost positive that time is not linear.

Reality is subjective. Therefore time for us is indeed non-linear. Fairly basic, that 🙂

I am almost positive that time is not linear. I challenge any of you to prove beyond doubt that it is.

As far as I can see/observe each of us has our own timescape which changes and expands or contracts on a personal and biological level. Time does speed past and stand still.

Maybe
I came here to post something similar.

I think time is linear. But can be variable for every person. Like if 1 second is a given period of time, for some people it may pass ‘quicker’ or ‘slower’ at a nervous level relative to other people. It always seems to that person to be be 1 second though. If that makes sense at all.

Take someone who is really fast at touch typing. Compared to me who is not. If I was sat inside their head, everything would be moving much slower compared to me… they have ‘more time’ (relative to me) to think about where their fingers are moving etc.

This would probably explain why some people are well good at things like F1 and Red Bull Air Races etc.

I DON’T KNOW! I’ve just confused myself. I can’t really explain this any better.

There wasn’t time. Time does not apply to the pre-big bang situation. So why ask such things? It makes no sense

So… what was this ‘singularity’? How did it get there? When did it get there? Has it always been there?

What’s 53 divided by 0?

Oh, you can’t do that. division is only a model for use with numbers

j_me – Member
Hoops’ law of diminishing sanity:

The diameter of the ear ring hoop is inversely proportional to sanity.

Youre about 25 years too late for me there

have you talked about time varying with speed and distance yet/ not read the threa tbh. Technically you have a point in that we all have personal time in a sense which could be best demonstarted if you could travel at near light speed.
I think a clever cyclist gu proved that it was essentially all relative.

Theory of relativity.

Chiropractic.

A friend of mine insisted that people’s behaviour was noticeably changed by the full moon.

Lunacy.

(Seriously, ‘s where the term comes from)

True, it does come from lunar.

There is also a reasonably famous study which showed that rates of burglary increased dramaticall around a full moon compared to a new moon. This was taken as proof that the moon affects behaviour in strange ways, until someone said “maybe burglars just find it easier when they can se what they are doing?”

Anyway, back to the god stuff. First, you tell me why every other religion is false and then I’ll tell you why yours is.

this guys got some wierd theories[/url]

Anyway, back to the god stuff.

No, let’s not. It’s been done to death here, and it’s always just idiots crowing about how superior they are. Let’s move on please.

Oh, you can’t do that. division is only a model for use with numbers

No it’s not. Take a pie, eat some today and some tomorrow. No numbers there but you’ve divided by two. Numbers are a model for things, and division is a model for things that happen in the physical world. Take a pie, share it between no people, how much do they each have? It’s nonsensical.

So… what was this ‘singularity’? How did it get there? When did it get there? Has it always been there?

Do I look like an expert in cutting edge Big Bang theory? 🙂

So… what was this ‘singularity’? How did it get there? When did it get there? Has it always been there?

Well of course it’s not there now. It went off with a bloody great bang, dinnit!
It was always not-there, then it was, then BANG! Not there any more. See? Everything else was, and going like buggery to get away from the noise.

It’s nonsensical.

that’s right because zero isn’t a number.

Take a pie, eat some today and some tomorrow. No numbers there but you’ve divided by two.

you’ve only divided by 2 when you model the problem with numbers

Do I look like an expert in cutting edge Big Bang theory?

dunno, post a pic

It was always not-there, then it was, then BANG! Not there any more. See? Everything else was,

hmm… the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really.

I’m not sure about the ‘always not-there’ bit, what does ‘always’ mean when there is no such thing as time?

did the big bang actually make a noise?

box is simpler than fadger but the name may have been taken.

you’ve only divided by 2 when you model the problem with numbers

Not so. Two is a very real concept. The word ‘two’ is simply our name for it.

the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to the completely uninformed layman.

FTFY.

the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to the completely uninformed layman

yeah, but it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?

Not so. Two is a very real concept. The word ‘two’ is simply our name for it.

that’s all true, but as I say, you only divide by two when you start modelling

A helium nucleus had a charge of 2e long before we were around to invent the word ‘two’. Scalar quantities are a fundamental aspect of reality, they are not part of our model.

it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?

Yes, and no respectively.

The thing is that the creation of the universe is something many people are interesting, but the science (such as it is) is pretty impenetrable to the layman. Most that I am (vaguely) aware of is about modelling how the universe expanded out of the BB at varying stages of development. However, figuring out what the BB actually was and how it happened, and what was ‘before’ it is a lot more esoteric..

Google might be a good place to start, then the works of people like John Gribbin or Martin Rees – although they might be out of date by now. Avoid Hawking, his books are tough going and not as interesting as the others.

Dividing by 0 = Complex infinity (Obviously)

Dividing by 0 = Complex infinity

No – the result of dividing by 0 is ‘not defined’ because it’s nonsensical.

it seems that no one here is anything other than that.
Are you? Can you tell me more about it?

Yes, and no respectively.

So.. on the basis that no one here is anything other than an uniformed layman, including you. and that

the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to the completely uninformed layman.

as you kindly ‘fixed for me’
then

the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to molgrips.

Right?

No – the result of dividing by 0 is ‘not defined’ because it’s nonsensical.

because zero is not a number

A helium nucleus had a charge of 2e long before we were around to invent the word ‘two’. Scalar quantities are a fundamental aspect of reality, they are not part of our model.

that doesn’t conflict with what I said. Though at a tangent I would question the idea of a measure of a charge of 2e before we were around. If we used a different measurement scale we might say it had a charge of 36.89CHM

Hmm.. Zero is a real integer, just not a natural number.

integer is a whole number right? So you’re saying zero is a number?

also this one

the whole creationist bit sounds a lot more plausible really to molgrips.

Right?

I didn’t answer that CM – it’s clearly a troll because you know I am not a creationist!

Wiki tells me that zero is indeed an integer and therefore a number.

I didn’t answer that CM – it’s clearly a troll because you know I am not a creationist!

Not a troll, based on what you said. when you fixed my post

Wiki tells me that zero is indeed an integer and therefore a number.

😀
Ok, but what do you think?

I can give you a number of reasons why it is not

The crystalline origin of life is a weird theory that’s interesting to read about – put together by a bloke called Cairns-Smith.

The idea that inorganic minerals – rocks basically – were important in prebiotic chemistry is not controversial. The metal ions are capable of catalysing all sorts of organic bond-forming reactions. Cairns-Smith went way beyond this and postulated that clay minerals were a primitive information storage media that preceded organic genes. These inorganic genes acted as repositories for information in the clay crystal structure, which was capable of propagation in certain circumstances.
When pre-biotic synthesis of rna got up and running, a ‘genetic takeover’ occurred, whereby the inorganic data was transferred to the vastly more efficient organic system.

Dawkins mentioned the theory in one of his books so it has some popular exposure. It’s generally seen as a very speculative idea, but respected nonetheless as a piece of original thinking.

Ok, but what do you think?

Well since the question is a mathematical one and I am not a mathematician I will defer to those who are. I am not afraid to admit that I don’t know something, and I realise that given my lack of knowledge conjecture is pointless 🙂

It’s generally seen as a very speculative idea, but respected nonetheless as a piece of original thinking

If only we could gain recognition for original speculative thinking.. many of us would be more famous than we are 🙂

figuring out what the BB actually was and how it happened, and what was ‘before’ it is a lot more esoteric..

well no the standard view is the BB created the universe and therefore the laws of th euniverse what happened befor ethis is impossible to say as it was nto borne of these laws as far as we can tell
Answering the question involves a guess,you may guess god if you want to but then I will just ask how god came from nothingness 😆

36.89CHM

I fully intedn to support the SI unit of Internet tomfoolery
I give this thread 12 CHM charliemumgus [ oooh is it mungui?munguses?] damn now it is a 13.4

Well since the question is a mathematical one and I am not a mathematician I will defer to those who are. I am not afraid to admit that I don’t know something, and I realise that given my lack of knowledge conjecture is pointless

Oh that’s good to know. I am a mathematician, and I’ve said it’s not. Though wikipedia (I assume that’s the wiki you refer to) link also says that a number is a mathematical object used to count and measure. Since zero cannot be used for either of those things, it fails by that definition. Agreed?

I was originally going to say that zero was the absence of numbers, but really it’s the absence of quantity isn’t it? In real number terms?

You can use zero for counting tho surely? Saying ‘I have 0 pounds’ is conceptually the same as saying ‘I have 3 pounds’.. is it?

PS were you really spoiling for an argument by not telling us you were a mathematician in the first place? Fishing for me to start proclaiming things I didn’t know about? 🙂