/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14952449
>>14952857
>>14954344
>>14954472

Light travels? Proof?

>>11837980
>By "the universe" you could read it as "reality" or "the wave function"
Waves of what?

>>11665874
>>11665897
>>11665921
>>11665949
>>11665895
"Waves" of what?

>>11375795
>Light isn't a particle, it's a wave.

Of what?

>>10561580
>conceptually, a holographic universe has nothing to do with self-similarity.
>_you_ need to convince me that the two terms are the same
I'm talking about reality, not concepts. How they work is what matters, but you're right they don't mean the same thing.
>yes. learn some particle physics and then get back to me
Yeah, and none of them explain what a field is. Just what they do.
>are holograms self-similar? sauce?
How else would they work?
>and also i find that trees look quite different from acorns. do you think they look the same?
They are self_similar or "approximately similar to a part of itself". An oak tree has acorns. Their qualities are different which makes them not copies. Just like a spit magnet isn't necessarily split the same way that another magnet is.
>oh, so now you deny math?! tell me why math is wrong.
It tells you how many acorns there are, but not what an acorn is.
>you literally deny thermodynamics now too! okay, i thought that was one of the foundational principles of your argument.
self-similarily does imply that "From nothing comes nothing" as "nothing would be similar to nothing". This statement is ludicrous though.
>i thought you were a good electric universe idiot and harkened back to the physicists of old! but no, you deny Kelvin. astounding. absolute zero is an empirically established fact, and if you call it psychosis, that's textbook projection
Really. You think that absolute zero can be "measured"?
>we measured nothing, experienced it.
>us measuring "nothing" while producing the means to negate it.
Fool.

>>10478972
>Entropy is not cosmic inflation.
Then where does the "disorder" go? It becomes ordered again, obviously.

>Wow almost like that’s what it is made of.
Wow! Descriptions are not explanations.

>What does “incoherent and many types of matter mean to you”? And prove it.
Neutron: Turns into a proton after 15 minutes of isolation, part of an "Atomic nucleus". How it differs has been dubbed "neutral charge", but other than that I fail to see how it's different than a proton.
Proton: another part of an "atomic nucleus"
More protons and neutrons mashed together: Sounds to me like an incoherent bunch of fucking protons and neutrons. Makes all the other elements too. I fail to see how all the other elements are just hydrogen/helium smashed together.

>OOOOOOh, you mean stars in the core have lower metallicity! I dunno maybe? Don’t see how that matters.
No I am talking about the actual center of the galaxy. Where there's an alleged "black hole". So far the best explanation to a "Blackhole" I've found is "the absence of force and magnitude".

>Pressure is functionally nonexistent in space
You are "in space" currently. What is the pressure outside your house right now? Now compare that to "space" (filled space). It's a DIFFERENT PRESSURE YOU MORON. A MEDIATION OF PRESSURE.

>except within planets and other large objects like stars. How could it make stars in the core have lower metalicity? By what mechanism?
Coherency. Like a fucking magnet.

>What? Order and chaos don’t exist. They’re silly human concepts that live only in our heads.

Order is empirically observable you dunderhead. Chaos doesn't exist because how would things come about to be ordered? How would the ball your currently standing on spin into said ball? How would you have a functioning body structure if everything was chaotic? You wouldn't, you'd be nothing other than a hunk of random shit. FFS go look at a goddamn anthill if you want to see some "order".

>>10389007
>Yeah it turns out that the way you arrange things in a system matters. I know, big news.

Yeah and that has nothing to do with math. It has to do with the relationship of one quality to another.
If you have two things made of the same thing yet one is in a different form. how is that related to math? Ice, steam, water are all qualities of water regardless of how you arrange them or how much more quantity of water you add to it. It's the same shit in a different form, itself against itself. No math, no useless descriptions, it's just water.
Does the water punch numbers in a calculator and turn into ice? No, it turns into ice because something else with the properties of "coldness" gave it to it.

>>10360834
>Space is the reals
As in "real numbers"? Space is not a number, sorry. Measurements have no properties

>The Continuum and space are literally the same thing, existing both in an idealized and material form.
In that they have no properties and therefore don't exist, then yes.

>Thus, any stupid notion of "but what are the reals/where do they come from" is illogical and irrelevant.
Because the universe doesn't plug shit into a calculator.