| Author |
Message |
Reg Edwards
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 11:20 am Post subject:
Albert Einstein |
|
|
Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us other poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
----
Reg.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Reg Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 1:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
| Quote: | Reg Edwards wrote:
Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us
other poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
I think you've got it wrong. Einstein effectively wasted his old age in
a misdirected search for the theory of everything precisely because he
rejected the messy realities of the quantum world, where all you can
predict are statistical expectations. Quantum electrodynamics isn't
actually completely incomprehensible, but it is certainly full of
counter-intuitive features.
-------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
|
==========================
"Probability and Statistics" is by far the most neglected subject in our
infants, primary and secondary schools and universities. Six and seven-year
olds are capable of grasping the essentials.
It is but another relatively simple branch away from arithmetic into
Mathematics in general.
Yet it embraces ALL the clues to the Secrets of our Universe.
It can be assumed Einstein's statistical education suffered in his youth.
If only Sir Ronald Fisher's head and his could have been brought together in
Einstein's later life who knows what might have transpired.
As it was, Fisher, these days a little heard of genius, devoted his
mathematical efforts to the more mundane subjects of medicine, disease, the
weather, agriculture and food production, and genetics.
In his spare time he enjoyed himself, in his quiet way, by tearing to shreds
the 'old-wive's tales' of traditional statisticians and gamblers.
In the meantime, the mysteries of the Universe remain unsolved. They never
will be. Only an imaginary non-existent God knows the answers.
And I'm quite happy with that.
----
Reg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gregory L. Hansen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 2:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <1107689730.976919.255570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
| Quote: |
Reg Edwards wrote:
Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us
other poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
I think you've got it wrong. Einstein effectively wasted his old age in
a misdirected search for the theory of everything precisely because he
rejected the messy realities of the quantum world, where all you can
predict are statistical expectations. Quantum electrodynamics isn't
actually completely incomprehensible, but it is certainly full of
counter-intuitive features.
|
When I was taking classes I thought the worst thing about quantum
mechanics was that it worked. That meant I had to learn it.
--
"Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler."
-- Albert Einstein
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reg Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 4:48 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
e raised to the power of j * Pi = minus 1 is known as the Eutectic Point
of Mathematics.
It introduces negative quantities.
The phrase was stolen from metallurgists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Reg Edwards wrote:
| Quote: | Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us
other poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
|
I think you've got it wrong. Einstein effectively wasted his old age in
a misdirected search for the theory of everything precisely because he
rejected the messy realities of the quantum world, where all you can
predict are statistical expectations. Quantum electrodynamics isn't
actually completely incomprehensible, but it is certainly full of
counter-intuitive features.
-------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Woodgate
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:48 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
I read in sci.electronics.design that bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote (in
<1107689730.976919.255570@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>) about 'Albert
Einstein', on Sun, 6 Feb 2005:
| Quote: | Quantum electrodynamics isn't
actually completely incomprehensible,
|
It is, if you really understand it. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kim Sleep
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 9:37 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Could be worse...just look at all the crap Tesla left us. People are still
wandering around trying to make something useful out of his mess.
--
Kim..."A Man Of True Frankenstinean Proportions"
"Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:cu4uhp$k2s$1@titan.btinternet.com...
| Quote: | Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us other
poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
----
Reg.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter O. Brackett
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 10:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
NO!
It was Euler who did the easy bit telling us how the five primary
mathematical constants [ j, pi, e, 0 and 1 ] are related.:
exp(jpi) + 1 = 0
By introducing the imaginary to the real and leaving the solution of real
problems to the rest of us.
I wonder, which is more fundamental E = mc^2 or exp(jpi) + 1 = 0?
--
Pete
"Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:cu4uhp$k2s$1@titan.btinternet.com...
| Quote: | Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us other
poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
----
Reg.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 10:28 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Peter O. Brackett wrote:
| Quote: | NO!
It was Euler who did the easy bit telling us how the five primary
mathematical constants [ j, pi, e, 0 and 1 ] are related.:
exp(jpi) + 1 = 0
By introducing the imaginary to the real and leaving the solution of
real
problems to the rest of us.
I wonder, which is more fundamental E = mc^2 or exp(jpi) + 1 = 0?
|
Euler wins hands down. E = mc^2 only has to be true in this particular
universe.
-------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Woodgate
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 10:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
I read in sci.electronics.design that Peter O. Brackett <none@no-such-
domain.nul> wrote (in <ifrNd.3278$wK.1660@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.n
et>) about 'Albert Einstein', on Sun, 6 Feb 2005:
| Quote: | I wonder, which is more fundamental E = mc^2
|
.... might not be true in another universe;
| Quote: | or exp(jpi) + 1 = 0?
|
.... is true irrespective of where you are.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Feb 06, 2005 10:51 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <gRqNd.181$Ub4.49672@news20.bellglobal.com>,
Kim Sleep <ksleep@sympatico.ca> wrote:
| Quote: | Could be worse...just look at all the crap Tesla left us. People are still
wandering around trying to make something useful out of his mess.
|
He also left us much that was very useful.
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
Edison made a practical electric light but he had a recifier tube in his
hand and missed the point. If he hadn't electronics would have been
several years ahead.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:13 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <o48d015k167gkdtt4i8dn0qbn9101j9f46@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
|
Yes, my error.
| Quote: |
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
|
No.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin Aylward
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:32 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Reg Edwards wrote:
| Quote: | Reg Edwards wrote:
Albert did the easy bit : E = m*c^2
Just look at the horrible incomprehensible mess he bequeathed us
other poor
mortals to sort out . . . .
I think you've got it wrong. Einstein effectively wasted his old age
in a misdirected search for the theory of everything precisely
because he rejected the messy realities of the quantum world, where
all you can predict are statistical expectations. Quantum
electrodynamics isn't actually completely incomprehensible, but it
is certainly full of counter-intuitive features.
-------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
==========================
"Probability and Statistics" is by far the most neglected subject in
our infants, primary and secondary schools and universities. Six and
seven-year olds are capable of grasping the essentials.
It is but another relatively simple branch away from arithmetic into
Mathematics in general.
Yet it embraces ALL the clues to the Secrets of our Universe.
It can be assumed Einstein's statistical education suffered in his
youth.
|
Oh dear. This is simply irrelevant, and does a major disservice to the
dude. It don't look like you really understand the issues involved. Just
saying, its "statistical" doesn't bring out what the fundamental problem
*is*.
Suppose we knew *exactly* the position and momentum of a particle at
time t0. QM says the new position and momentum cannot be known exactly.
This means cause and effect has *failed*. This is *key*. It says that
the particle could be in a new state for *no* reason whatsoever. This is
what is hard to deal with. That things can happen with no cause. That
is, there is no way to determine *why* a particle is in one position
rather then another.
Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gregory L. Hansen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:52 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <N9vNd.38499$K7.10964@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Kevin Aylward <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Reg Edwards wrote:
Oh dear. This is simply irrelevant, and does a major disservice to the
dude. It don't look like you really understand the issues involved. Just
saying, its "statistical" doesn't bring out what the fundamental problem
*is*.
Suppose we knew *exactly* the position and momentum of a particle at
time t0. QM says the new position and momentum cannot be known exactly.
This means cause and effect has *failed*. This is *key*. It says that
the particle could be in a new state for *no* reason whatsoever. This is
what is hard to deal with. That things can happen with no cause. That
is, there is no way to determine *why* a particle is in one position
rather then another.
|
It's better than that. Your description suggests that the particle does
have a definite position and momentum, even if they change and we don't
know what they are. But the position is not only unknown, it doesn't
exist. Diffraction of electrons from a crystal depends on the electron
sampling a large enough region that the arrangement of atoms matters.
The old question of classical atomic physics was why doesn't the electron
radiate away all its energy and fall into the nucleus. The answer is
that it already had radiated away as much energy energy as it can, it's
fallen as far into the nucleus as the uncertainty principle will let it
go.
--
"When the fool walks through the street, in his lack of understanding he
calls everything foolish." -- Ecclesiastes 10:3, New American Bible |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter O. Brackett
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:50 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Hey Reg:
So then... who was the greatest, Euler or Einstein?
Me? I vote for Euler!
--
Pete
"Reg Edwards" <g4fgq.regp@ZZZbtinternet.com> wrote in message
news:cu5hpi$5c9$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
| Quote: | e raised to the power of j * Pi = minus 1 is known as the Eutectic
Point
of Mathematics.
It introduces negative quantities.
The phrase was stolen from metallurgists.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in