A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Einstein's Method: Explaining Nonsense in Terms of More Nonsense



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 30th 16, 01:15 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's Method: Explaining Nonsense in Terms of More Nonsense

Einsteinians explain Einstein's nonsense in terms of much more nonsense:

http://nautil.us/issue/35/boundaries...bert-dijkgraaf
Robbert Dijkgraaf, director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton: "On the other hand, we know that time has these very bizarre properties, that it apparently can be created in the Big Bang, and if you think about black holes, time actually stops. So our concept of time might be too naïve and I'm personally very interested in whether or not we can use some of our ideas that we have seen in other areas. For instance, we have been able to make sense of space in a more significant way. Perhaps the greatest breakthrough during the last 20 years was actually by Juan Maldacena--he's here at the Institute too--who showed that in certain physical systems, space can emerge out of it naturally. The physical system doesn't have space but in certain limits, certain space comes out and relativity comes out. So there's something more fundamental than space, something more fundamental than Einstein's equations. Now you might think that this also works for time but time is always different. It has a completely different role than space. Now I can move up and down in space. I can't move up and down in time. I'm actually frozen now in a certain moment in time. I have to go through each time; I can't see my whole history at once. I can see my whole body at once, so it's a very asymmetric experience. You can try to use string theory and other theoretical ideas; you can play any of these games with time that we have been playing with space. I think it's somehow absolutely crucial because the really big open questions are still all tied in, in a new or improved way of looking at time and I think we all have basically kind of a gut intuition how it would work like that. So if you think about time as a river, you can say well, how do I think if I have a river and I go upstream, upstream, upstream; it becomes less volume and at some point you know. I get a little brook and perhaps you get a few little streams, and then what do you get? A few raindrops. So at some point the whole idea of the river disappears and there's something else. Well here we know it's H2O molecules or something. So I think all these efforts are finding something--what are the molecules of time? What are the bits of time?"

It is difficult to imagine that someone else would be able to put so much nonsense in such a short text. Robbert Dijkgraaf seems to be a champion in Einstein schizophrenic world.

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Before the nonsense breaks out oriel36[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 50 April 18th 08 08:48 PM
Why the 5-segments SRB is a NONSENSE gaetanomarano Policy 3 December 31st 07 05:53 AM
Stern - Nonsense and dangerous nonsense Ian Parker Policy 135 November 16th 06 06:29 PM
The ignorant Min and his nonsense same@anonymous UK Astronomy 2 October 25th 03 07:20 AM
Faq and some other nonsense! Brian Gaff Space Station 1 October 5th 03 08:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.