Einstein's Search & the Illusion of Reality

[KE-25]

---

Interesting read Thanks for posting

[abortretryfail]

...and trying their best to make them be understood in layman's terms...

"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure."
- Albert Einstein

Einstein himself did just that very well...

“Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity.”
____

[fritzd]

"It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure."
- Albert Einstein

Einstein himself did just that very well...

“Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity.”
____

hehehe! nice! I think what Einstein meant here was that it would be pointless to describes "Art" scientifically. Art is art, science may just may be a tool for its beauty but in the end its the human perception that is the ultimate judge. But when we talk about scientific concepts, then the best possible solution to enable anyone to understand it, is to find something we all observe in nature that is related to this scientific concept. However, this could be very difficult when it comes to advanced physics but still possible. And from my experience, the best instructors that I have encountered are the ones who can find a way of communicating a very complex physical concept to his students through simple metaphors and of course without stirring more confusion into the student. The key to understand a very complex idea is to first learn its simplest concepts and sometimes these supposed to be simple concepts may be hard to grasp.

[rodsky]

hehehe! nice! I think what Einstein meant here was that it would be pointless to describes "Art" scientifically. Art is art, science may just may be a tool for its beauty but in the end its the human perception that is the ultimate judge. But when we talk about scientific concepts, then the best possible solution to enable anyone to understand it is to find something we all observe in nature that is related to this scientific concept. However, this could be very difficult when it comes to advanced physics but it is still possible. And from my experience, the best instructors that I have encountered are the ones who can find a way of communicating a very complex physical concept to his students through simple metaphors and of course without stirring more confusion into the student. The key to understand a very complex idea is to first learn its simplest concepts and sometimes these supposed to be simple concepts may be hard to grasp.

Beat me to it. Nice post fritz

And yes, it's still possible. Otherwise, I wouldn't have made 100 or so students (who don't have the proper background info on the subject) understand the principles behind orbital mechanics, when I was head of an amateur astronomy society once. It was during those times, that I began to appreciate the value of analogies, to explain something complex to someone who is not equipped (by default) to tackle the subject matter.

-RODION

[vanschen]

ohh.. ok... i see what you mean. unfortunately, from what i know, the answer is no.... E=mc^2 is not the answer to what you are talking about. What you are talking about is more on philosophical abstractions of reality. They are trying to explain the philosophy of existence using ideas in Physics because in fact Physics is the result of Philosophy and Mathematics. I've seen and read many articles about this but as of now its mostly theoretical in nature. I don't know much about it. It is a very interesting field. But as of now its all just theory. I'd have to say String Theory is at a better position than this. I have a friend here who is also a physicist (actually my roommate last semester, haha). We always talk about these things. The meaning of existence, and consciousness through Physics.

If you think about it critically, the universe we have right now is a product of all physical theories and fundamental constants. You can also ask why does the universe operate in the way it is now when it shouldn't have to. You can also ask the question, "Why does gravity follow the inverse square law?" Physicists have have done simulations using astronomical objects using an inverse cube relationship instead and they found out that the planets simply can not hold on a stable orbit. And the universe wouldn't exist at all. It is like our universe was a grand design by a higher being way beyond our comprehension of reality. We see reality now based on our past observations and experiences. A higher plane of existence existing out there is simply just way beyond our futile minds. I agree, it is possible that our universe could be just a virtual world masterfully design but virtual in an abstract way. For us it seems real.

Anyway, I'll stop talking. There is really no right answer for this one. It's very difficult to prove. It's like searching for God through science. Einstein said that, "God does not play dice with the Universe." It's a short and simple sentence which has wild implications. And I agree with Einstein, the universe is masterfully design by a higher being who we probably call God. Anyway, sorry for straying away from the topic. hehehe!

so E = mc2 just belongs to physics.

i have a quote:

Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it. propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty of reality. - Albert Einstein

i think Einstein believed the laws of physics [equations] to be god.

[fritzd]

so E = mc2 just belongs to physics.

i have a quote:

Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it. propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty of reality. - Albert Einstein

i think Einstein believed the laws of physics [equations] to be god.

I agree. That is what i believe also. It is also the reason why Albert Einstein is one of my favorite physicists aside from Richard Feynman.

[brownprose]

yeah, you got that right.. light has some mass.. but very very light..
only a blackhole can bend light through its gravitational pull..

i think light doesn't have a mass only force/momentum. there is an old theory that light could have a "rest mass" but it no longer holds true for lack of evidence. The momentum in light means we can actually measure the push it gives to objects it runs into. Thus the famous equation E=mc2.

[brownprose]

^^ which also humors me to the idea that if light has a momentum, does a shadow also have a momentum?

[bugztronic]

hmmmmnnnnn

murag nawala akong idea sa inyo response, wala na gyud ko kasabot about space mystery

[LIBER777]

so E = mc2 just belongs to physics.

i have a quote:

Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it. propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty of reality. - Albert Einstein

i think Einstein believed the laws of physics [equations] to be god.

Sages and seers in ancient times who spoke of the spiritual side of nature gained their insight by moving beyond the confines of the rational physical world. In a similar way to the principles of Godels theorem the ancient mystics gained access by deep meditation to a perspective beyond the physical in order to attain a more complete picture of the physical realm.