Arrow of Time

On Jul 3, 1:03*pm, "Robert L. Oldershaw"
wrote:


Another way to think of it is that fractal structures are the natural,
most energetically favored, structures in the Universe.

Prove it.
It would take less than one page to do.


RLOwww.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw

Well, not REALLY Amherst....

"Robert L. Oldershaw", ususally Old'n Shallow
finally said somenting that was not, when he wrote:
Hung Lo aka Huang wrote:

Hung Lo wrote:
Is it possible to morph in and out of a fractal structure,
[snip]

Robert wrote:
Well Huang, the answer is mostly "No". [snip]
Bottom Line: If fractal structure is lost [via decay or annihilation],
it will reform efficiently as soon as energy/entropy conditions
permit. ... [snip] ... fractal structures are the natural, most
energetically favored, structures in the Universe. They
completely dominate the cosmos.

hanson wrote:
Rob, let's hope that your notion will get some traction. The
study of SEFC (Self Similarity/Emergence/Fractals&Chaos)
may bring on hope to clean & rid the slate of all those retarded
Einstein Dingleberries who have prevented the progress of
Fundamental Physics for more than a century now.
Keep at it, guys. Kudos and Congrats... --- hanson



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
rates.

You are confused. Relativity says no such thing.

In SR, "time dilation" applies to MEASUREMENTS of moving objects' time rates,
not to the objects themselves. In a spaceship, one cannot observe any effects of
time dilation on processes occurring inside the ship, even though an external
observer would do so if the ship is moving with respect to the observer's frame,
and if the observer made the measurements in the usual way by projecting onto
her own coordinates.


Tom Roberts

Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
Have you ever heard about the vacuum energy density crisis?
Disparity = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,...total is 120 zeros.
I would say that is a, shall we say, significant contradiction from
what General Relativity and modern cosmology estimate for the vacuum
energy density.

I would say that to get such a disparity you are making assumptions in the
computation that are unrealistic. I believe John Baez has a webpage on this....


Tom Roberts

On 7/3/10 10:07 PM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
In journals like Nature and the Journal of Theoretical Biology, many
authors have demonstrated empirically and analytically how fractal
structures are energetically favored and maximize the efficiency
collecting light (see: Phyllotaxis), or maximizing the absorption of
oxygen in the lungs, or the absorption of nutrients in the intestines.


Doesn't work over the range of atoms to galaxies!

----- ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... ----------

"Robert L. Oldershaw" now very Old'n Shallow
waded into his shallow waters again as he wrote:
"hanson" wrote:
"Robert L. Oldershaw", ususally Old'n Shallow
finally said somenting that was not, when he wrote:
Hung Lo aka Huang wrote:

Hung Lo wrote:
Is it possible to morph in and out of a fractal structure,
[snip]

Robert wrote:
Well Huang, the answer is mostly "No". [snip] Bottom
Line: If fractal structure is lost [via decay or annihilation],
it will reform efficiently as soon as energy/entropy conditions
permit. ... [snip] ... fractal structures are the natural, most
energetically favored, structures in the Universe. They
completely dominate the cosmos.

hanson wrote:
Rob, let's hope that your notion will get some traction. The
study of SEFC (Self Similarity/Emergence/Fractals&Chaos)
may bring on hope to clean & rid the slate of all those retarded
Einstein Dingleberries who have prevented the progress of
Fundamental Physics for more than a century now.
Keep at it, guys. Kudos and Congrats... --- hanson

Old'n Shallow Robert wrote:
So you have a fixed idea that Einstein was not a great
physicist?

hanson wrote:
What gave you that silly idea? Of course, Einstein was a
great scientist because he, unlike you, recognized and
fessed up, that his SR/GR was ****. In his own words:

::AE:: "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
::AE:: reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
::AE:: are certain, they do not refer to reality."
::AE::"why would anyone be interested in getting exact
::AE:: solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
::AE:: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
::AE:: on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
::AE:: case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, [my]
::AE:: gravitation theory included."

but you, Oldershaw, and the other Einstein Dingleberries
and Albert Admires are too stupid to see that.. ahaha..

Worse, you are so obsessed with your numerology that you
have the fixed idea that if you hang it onto Einstein's crap it
may gain believability. But the responses you got from other
hardcore Einstein Dingleberries show that they all reject
your crap... Bad Scene, Robert... ahahahahaha...

Old'n Shallow Robert wrote:
And no, I definitely do not want to discuss
this particular subject any further.

hanson wrote:
WOW!... see what your Einstein Dingleberryism has done
to you? You were just made aware of that you have a great
way out of your intellectual desert by pursuing SEFC
(Self Similarity/Emergence/Fractals&Chaos)...but you kill
yourself with a single scentence... ahahaha... AHAHAHA...
Thanks for the laughs, though... ahahaha.. ahahahanson



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
...

On 7/3/10 10:07 PM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
In journals like Nature and the Journal of Theoretical Biology, many
authors have demonstrated empirically and analytically how fractal
structures are energetically favored and maximize the efficiency
collecting light (see: Phyllotaxis), or maximizing the absorption of
oxygen in the lungs, or the absorption of nutrients in the intestines.

"Sam Wormley" wrote
Doesn't work over the range of atoms to galaxies!

hanson wrote:
.... ahahahaha... Nobody made that claim, Sam. You being a
hardcore Einstein Dingleberry are of course not cognizant
of SEFC (Self Similarity/Emergence/Fractals&Chaos)....
Sam, like you so often say: "Google is your friend"... Try it, Sam.
ahahaha... ahahahanson


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---