PI IS EQUAL TO THREE YOU HOMOPROMOTING DEVIL EVOLUTIONIST

[Prawn Connery]

Can A perfect Circle exist in the real world?

Funnily, that is exactly what I was arguing with my wife this morning. But I can't really discuss these things with her in a rational manner because she gets frustrated with me. I would never belittle her profession, but as is the case in most relationships, people tend to takes things more personal the closer they are to said person, and so she things I am just stirring the pot (so to speak).

In theory there is a perfect circle, but in reality we will never know. It appears to me that mathematics is very much reliant on being able to be measured: we can only prove the ratio of Pi if we can accurately measure the circumference and diameter; we can only prove the lengths and angles of each side of a triangle if we can measure them; etc.

We can't prove any of these things in reality because we can't measure down far enough – infinity inverted.

Of course, we can try to prove things on paper, and these proofs are good enough to get us to the edge of the solar system and beyond, but they are really only "good enough". We always have to draw the line at some point because otherwise we would spend infinity time measuring something to infinity to find its true value.

Speaking of truth, the truth of the matter is I can't argue mathematics because I'm not a mathematician – not even close. But I can at least argue semantics because I am a wordsmith (at least by trade). That a lot of maths – to me, at least – relies on semantics is proof that it is not actually real.

Maths needs rules – without rules, there is no maths – and so rules are limitations.

Infinity is not limited. So perhaps it doesn't even belong in maths. I suspect it doesn't. That at least gives me grounds to argue its definition.

[Sally]

Infinity is not limited. So perhaps it doesn't even belong in maths. I suspect it doesn't. That at least gives me grounds to argue its definition.

Hmm my perspective is if we can observe it or imagine it it belongs in 'maths'. Even describing transcendental non-corporeal things as our soul.

Maths needs rules – without rules, there is no maths – and so rules are limitations.

Rules! We don't need no stinking rules we're mathematicians

Sorry for intrudeing into your relationship but all mathematicians have an insecurity. we've all studied the monsters in math. Goes back to that video 'there's a hole in the bottom of mathematics' (with Cantor's diagonal). Godel's incompleteness theorems: a complete set of rules is impossible.

Thus I think mathematics is a religion, philosophy. . mathematicians believe it's a truth and we dare anybody to prove otherwise. Intrinsic insecurities.

In theory there is a perfect circle, but in reality we will never know. It appears to me that mathematics is very much reliant on being able to be measured

Quantify, not so much measured but quantifiedable. example the Wave Function. I at least can live with that pi is unmeasurable.
.

[Sally]

and I also believe you're a mathematician at heart

We can't prove any of these things in reality because we can't measure down far enough

Which comes to the question once we get down to the molecular level, the atomic level, the quantum level. what is distance at the atomic quantum level, the rules are different. Distance (space-time) doesn't seem to exist as we see existence.

To get accurate results beyond the atomic level distances, we have to add up Divergent infinite sums, as if they do converge, convergent series.** So I see it as infinites do resolved, we call that a Quantum level, with respect to the Human Condition

So how can we measure exactly once we get to the atomic quantum level which measurement of pi will take us to. Space-length is meaningless relative to a us here in the macro world.
That's why when we take a length and move it's 2 to ends to match up and make a circle, somewhere on the quantum level I believe they can never match you can't just nudge it closer to fit there is no space time inside atomic quantum level. whatever goes on inside those dimensionsless quarks. That is dimensionsless of our known four dimensions anway.

Works the other way, infinite distances in space. That's why i think some of the models came up with 11 dimensions and we argue is the universe donut shape, closed, open...

Footntes
**

When you're dealing with infinite series you need to know what kind of infiite series you're talkin about.

Such as 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5...
The summation of intergers from 1 to Infinity.

You pick the wrong infinity (change philosophy) and you end up with a impossible but legitimate, result that summation equals negative one twelfth.

-1/12 = 1+ 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7...
Right, an infinite addition of positive integers will equal a negative fraction. I have not provided the proof, there are multiple proofs out there deriving this solution, QED and Quantum string theory use it.
We have a valid and provable yet impossible result.
Well in the real world it's a paradox, that's why we know infinities are not all the same. Math defines different infinities with different attributes.

BTW above series is a is Divergent infinite series and you get that non-intuitive result if you treat it as a Convergent infinite series.

[Prawn Connery]

I would argue there are likely infinite universes that are expanding and contracting into each other all at once. One of my theories is if this universe is expanding at a faster rate as it gets bigger, then that is because the universe (likely multiverses) on the other side (and all around) is (are) contracting faster as it (they) get/s smaller.

That is to say, our universe is expanding into the space left by neighbouring universe/s contracting. As they contract, they get denser, gravity gets stronger, and thus the contractions speed up – a bit like the pull of a black hole increases as it gets bigger, but in this case the universe is getting smaller as it contracts into a singularity before it goes BANG again and forms a new universe that is a little bit different to the one it replaces, even though it is made of the same "stuff".

This goes on forever, every singularity made up of slightly different "stuff" – infinite in number – with each unique (and infinite) singularity able to explode into an infinite number of slightly different universes that together form every possibility and experience conceivable and inconceivable.

Like a room full of balloons inflating, deflating, inflating, deflating . . .

I deal in photons now, which I find infinitely fascinating, because they experience no time and can thus be in two (and more) places at once. From the perspective of the photon, it disappears the moment it appears and yet in that immeasurable instant has potentially travelled across the entire universe itself!

If a particle can be everywhere all at once, does that mean there are infinite dimensions? The photon has height, width, depth (3D) and at this time (4D) it is here, but it is also here (5D) and here (6D) and here (7D) as it travels at the speed of itself (light). It is at any point along an infinite line all at the same time.

Now paradoxes . . . probably don't exist. Because the above perspective proves some things can not only be in two states at once, but infinite states at once.

We ourselves are a paradox, because we shouldn't even be here – but we are. Something, nothing, something, nothing . . . perhaps they are simply the same thing. We talk of positive and negative being opposite states, but the third state is the one that cancels them out – the "nothing". Big, fat zero.

But again, I am no more a physicist than I am a mathematician. I'm just someone who has always found it hard to sleep at night.

[Sally]

Interesting if you say they , let's just say multiverses for convenience, connect orthogonal into whatever they are expanding-ontracting into. (Or onto as with Munchy's holograph universe.) Would expect a correlation that is they, the different multiverses, are not independent phenomenons but connected in some way as a dependent phenomenon

That is to say, our universe is expanding into the space left by neighbouring universe/s contracting. As they contract, they get denser, gravity gets stronger, and thus the contractions speed up – a bit like the pull of a black hole increases as it gets bigger, but in this case the universe is getting smaller as it contracts into a singularity before it goes BANG again and forms a new universe that is a little bit different to the one it replaces, even though it is made of the same "stuff".

Sure sure. The Universal constants would change proportionally. yin and yang

I'm still reading

[Sally]

If a particle can be everywhere all at once, does that mean there are infinite dimensions? The photon has height, width, depth (3D) and at this time (4D) it is here, but it is also here (5D) and here (6D) and here (7D) as it travels at the speed of itself (light). It is at any point along an infinite line all at the same time.

it's not a particle. The phenomenon is described as a wave function. Which has two orthogonal attributes electric and magnetism oscillating in and out of sync canceling each other. I think it's a mistake to think of it as a particle. Like an electron or quark. personally I think of it as a phenomenon intersecting us interdimensionally. And has no dimensionality in our time-space. There I said it.

Where do you get the idea that a photon has dimension other than time relative to us?


 If a particle can be everywhere all at once, does that mean there are infinite dimensions? 

Speculating, no you just need to reach an Infinity somewhere like infinite number directions in Quantum Electricdynamics, which I think you're referring to. quantifying that Infinity becomes a Quantum level, that is another dimension orthogonal to us. So you don't need infinite dimensions you just need one more. The every occurring (n+1).

Still reading

[Sally]

We ourselves are a paradox, because we shouldn't even be here – but we are. Something, nothing, something, nothing . . . perhaps they are simply the same thing. We talk of positive and negative being opposite states, but the third state is the one that cancels them out – the "nothing". Big, fat zero.

But again, I am no more a physicist than I am a mathematician. I'm just someone who has always found it hard to sleep at night.

We're in the same boat mate.

How about this: I started studying microbiology found myself drawn into quantum mechanics. Cuz I got to know.

The way some large proteins fold is an unmanageable amount of possibilities. But the only way they do fold in 3D space is what makes life. Why?

So what are the rules that makes a protein fold you've got to start looking at atom interactions that make chemistry. Which needs the math of quantum mechanics to describe the rules for those atoms. Which led me to the joys Infinity and paradoxes. Soooo.. long story short, For me life may be just an artifact of multidimensional phenomenon passing through or interacting with us orthogonally, at right angles, only when you isolate four of the dimensions is what we describe as life. Discounting the other orthogonal right angle dimensions mathematical rules that we apply to right angles in 3d led to Studying angles that are not 90° right angles (in 3d) results in pi again. Fwiw

[Prawn Connery]

Geeze Sal, took me a while to wade through the muck to find this thread again . . .

Is a photon a particle, is it a wave, or is it both? It has properties of both, no? It carries the same energy as an electron. And it can transfer that energy from one place to another.

So if that energy can be in many places at once – because from the perspective of the packet of energy (photon) it moves from one place to another, and through a direct line of space-time in no time at all – is it actually moving through space-time?

Is that what you mean by "no dimensionality in our space-time"? Because – little that I know about quantum mechanics – that is kind of (clumisly) what I was trying to say.

We do know that a photon influences space-time, yet appears interdependent of it.

So from the photon's perspective, where, exactly, does it start and stop? Is it not in all places along that space-time line at once?

[Sally]

Sorry you had trouble finding the place, so glad you're back ♫♪♫♪♫
I'm going to start at the bottom

So from the photon's perspective, where, exactly, does it start and stop? Is it not in all places along that space-time line at once?
It ends and starts at right angles from us, orthogonal to space-time
Space Time is our three dimensions. As I said the photon is interacting at right angles to each of our three dimensions. My opinion.

Think of a ball passing through a two-dimensional plane the two dimensional beings see a small dot form and grow bigger and bigger and then shrink and shrink and disappear. Okay here's a better one imagine a tree with its branches and leaves trunk and and a two-dimensional plane intersecting some of the leaves, branches ,roots.
The 2D beings will see separate phenomenon concluded there are similarities in the phenomenon but without the third dimension can't explain it fully.

Light, I don't think we've been able to isolate a single Photon, how can you measure it it's not a particle. it's a wave function. It has properties of wave it has properties of a particle but it is neither.

Whoa! energy that's a can of worms...

[Prawn Connery]

OK, but space-time is four dimensions, no?

It's that fourth dimension I'm referring to.