Does Socratus write an unintelligent garbage?

[darkbeaver]

That was a big press eh. I don't believe it. Religious nonsense from day one. It was the suck of all time in fact.

Todays unintelligent garbage becomes tomorrows best sellers,just ask Einstein or Hawkings

 

[socratus]

How an electron ( slower than c ) emits photon at c=1?

==.

' Now take the electron. Even if its velocity is close to that
of light – 10^10 cm/s – it will have a momentum of only
about 10^-17 g cm/s. The gamma photon used for
illumination has a very short wavelength ( say, 6 10^13 cm)
and a momentum of 10^-14, which is thousands of times that
of the electron. So, when a photon hits an electron, it is like
a railway train smashing into a baby- carriage.’

/ ABC’s of quantum mechanics. By V. Rydnik. Page 98-99. /
==.

 

[darkbeaver]

If Rydnik wants to sell that book he'll have have to add the steam. How about sumptin like this, Fast scantily dressed photon assaults invalid electron, escapes with purse, Hawkings investigating, arrests expected soon.

 

[Spade]

Quan tum fizz six is ease year to un der stand than a smart fone. If won stud ease quan tum fizz six inn dis screte you nits, itz a breez! Itz like walk king a Planck.

 

[taxslave]

Still haven't figured out if it is garbage but DEFINITELY unintelligible.

 

[socratus]

Dualism of particle.

Without Einstein's SRT we cannot understand
the dualism of elementary particle.

==.
socratus

 

[Dexter Sinister]

We don't really understand it *with* SRT either, though SRT really has nothing to do with what I presume you're talking about, the wave-particle duality, that's a quantum-level effect that SRT doesn't directly address.

 

[coldstream]

Matter and Form .
=.
Wood is itself a matter.
Wood is itself a form, a geometrical form.
A cupboard made of wood is a real whole of form and matter.
Geometrical form and matter are 'grown together' in it.
No form exist without matter.
Nor can there be matter without form.
But in micro-physics, physicists took up another conception.
According to this doctrine matter does exist,
but the form is not a physical object.
The form is disappeared from the physical reality.
They works with a 'point'.
Question.
Isn’t physics a science of the matter, form, energy and motion ?
Aren’t all these subjects 'grown together' ?
Take away one subject and you have all modern paradoxes
in the physics.
=.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
=.

I'm not sure if this is science, philosophy or poetry.. It is certainly parsed like the latter.

It seems to show some signs of an intelligence behind it.. but that does not mean it's necessarily intelligible.

 

[socratus]

Time , Particles and Consciousness.
=.
We have biological consciousness and
we have consciousness on the quantum level

What is connection between biological consciousness
and the consciousness on the quantum level ?

What is role of time in this connection between biological
consciousness and the consciousness on the quantum level ?

What is happened with time in this connection ?
What can happen with time in this connection ?
1
Can we speak about biological and quantum consciousness
without particles (cells and em waves) ?
The answer is 'no'.
2
Can we talk about time without particles?
a)
According to Newton the answer is
'yes, we can talk about time without particles'
b)
According to Einstein the answer is
'no, without particles we cannot talk about time'

Paradox or puzzle ?
3
Does biological consciousness exist only in time?
Does consciousness on the quantum level exist only in time?
!!??
===..
socratus

 

[55Mercury]

Time , Particles and Consciousness.
=.
We have biological consciousness and
we have consciousness on the quantum level

What is connection between biological consciousness
and the consciousness on the quantum level ?

What is role of time in this connection between biological
consciousness and the consciousness on the quantum level ?

What is happened with time in this connection ?
What can happen with time in this connection ?
1
Can we speak about biological and quantum consciousness
without particles (cells and em waves) ?
The answer is 'no'.
2
Can we talk about time without particles?
a)
According to Newton the answer is
'yes, we can talk about time without particles'
b)
According to Einstein the answer is
'no, without particles we cannot talk about time'

Paradox or puzzle ?
3
Does biological consciousness exist only in time?
Does consciousness on the quantum level exist only in time?
!!??
===..
socratus

biological consciousness implies life
life regardless of duration exists from time A to time B
if time stands still, life stands still, biological consciousness stands still
conclusion? biological consciousness cannot exist without time

I believe Newton is correct, that time can exist without particles (necessary for biology)

though Einstein is also right in the context that if there is nothing around to detect it (life) then what is it, really? a second would equal eternity, and eternity would equal a second

perhaps this is the pressing point of life's beginning?

I wonder how God was doing in that eternal second before life evolved from time?

God equals the total energy of the universe.
Before matter there was only energy without time (the eternal second).
When God transformed Itself in part to matter (the big bang?)
the stage was set for time and life to progress/evolve
(not but a second ago)

The Holy Trinity: Energy/Time/Life

lol stupid fvcking edit feature

 

[socratus]

biological consciousness implies life
life regardless of duration exists from time A to time B
if time stands still, life stands still, biological consciousness stands still
conclusion? biological consciousness cannot exist without time

I believe Newton is correct, that time can exist without particles (necessary for biology)

though Einstein is also right in the context that if there is nothing around to detect it (life)
then what is it, really? a second would equal eternity, and eternity would equal a second

perhaps this is the pressing point of life's beginning?

I wonder how God was doing in that eternal second before life evolved from time?

God equals the total energy of the universe.
Before matter there was only energy without time (the eternal second).
When God transformed Itself in part to matter (the big bang?)
the stage was set for time and life to progress/evolve
(not but a second ago)

The Holy Trinity: Energy/Time/Life

lol stupid fvcking edit feature

Comment by / 55Mercury /
The Holy Trinity: Energy / Time / Life.
=.
biological consciousness cannot exist without time
I believe Newton is correct, that time can exist without particles
(necessary for biology)
though Einstein is also right in the context
that if there is nothing around to detect it (life) then what is it,
really?
a second would equal eternity, and eternity would equal a second
perhaps this is the pressing point of life's beginning?
I wonder how God was doing in that eternal second
before life evolved from time?
God equals the total energy of the universe.
Before matter there was only energy without time
( the eternal second).
When God transformed Itself in part to matter (the big bang?)
the stage was set for time and life to progress/evolve
(not but a second ago)
/ 55Mercury /
===.

It is saying strongly.
socratus
===.

 

[55Mercury]

wtf

why can't you edit spaces into sh!t?

f*ck

^not meaning you, Socratus. (thanks for your reply)

 

[darkbeaver]

biological conscience cannot exist without charge? time does not exist?, it's just distance?

 

[socratus]

wtf

why can't you edit spaces into sh!t?

f*ck

^not meaning you, Socratus. (thanks for your reply)

If you don’t like my edit I ask apology.

 

[55Mercury]

wtf

why can't you edit spaces into sh!t?

f*ck

^not meaning you, Socratus. (thanks for your reply)

my issue here wasn't with Socratus' edit, but mine.

I took that lump of text from my previous post and c&ped it into that last post, added all the spaces so that it might make more sense, clicked on post, and voila!: lump of text with no spaces in post! so....

no apology necessary, Izzy. But I apologize for confusing everyone with that last post.

 

[socratus]

my issue here wasn't with Socratus' edit, but mine.

I took that lump of text from my previous post and c&ped it into that last post,
added all the spaces so that it might make more sense, clicked on post,
and voila!: lump of text with no spaces in post! so....

no apology necessary, Izzy.
But I apologize for confusing everyone with that last post.

Thank you for explanation.
( I really felt myself confused )

=.

 

[darkbeaver]

I need a pitcher of time.

 

[socratus]

I need a pitcher of time.

The time is relative conception and depends of a mass and speed.
If you go and live into the pitcher then you maybe have your pitcher of time.

==.

 

[socratus]

Where is the root of all elements ?
=.
An interesting stuff
(phys.org, Oct 2012)
Lithium in action: Advanced imaging method reveals fundamental reactions behind battery technology
The nano-engineering technology is grown every day,
every day a new success - new discovery.
And it seems that really all elements are magical and amazing.
==.
But . . . . .
1
Let us say that we want to write a full theory about elements.
Then we cannot begin from the lithium.
Lithium is too complex element.
The Periodic table says we need to begin from hydrogen.
But in my opinion we need to begin from helium II.
Why?
Helium II exists below at 2.19 K
We don’t know any another element that exist below this coefficient
Below is Nothingness : T=0K
The idea of the Nothingness is not a new one.
There are enough physicists who try to understand it.
#
When the next revolution rocks physics,
chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum,
that endless infinite void.
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-of-everything
#
And Paul Dirac wrote:
" The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? "
==.
2
Professor Yang Shao-Horn says:
"We focused on finding out what really happens during
charging and discharging,"

In my opinion there isn’t charging and discharging without photon
( electric charge)
=.
So, we come again to QED: what is happen in interaction
between photon / electron ( quantum of light) and matter.
=.
All the best.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus

=.

 

[The Old Medic]

The answer is YES!
You attempt to proclaim your "superior knowledge", in order to try to make others appear stupid. You are not sharing knowledge, you are crowing about YOUR superiority.