Yin Yang and Einstein

[theprestige]

The fact about Yin/Yang and its symbol is that its a symbol and a concept of balance.

Okay, sure. But E=mc^2 isn't a symbol. It's a concrete prediction about how specific things work in the real world. And when we test that prediction, we observe that it is a true prediction.

Let us know when you can use Yin=Yang to predict something specific and concrete about the real world, and when your prediction is observed to be true.

 

[fuelair]

This is just too vague to be meaningful.

Kblood, what exactly are you claiming about relativity and ying/yang?

I think the implication is the math is out of someone's ying-yang. But, it could be a pile of something else. And, whose relativ'e could come out of their own ying-yang anyway? I surely wouldn't want to!!!

 

[kblood]

This is just too vague to be meaningful.

Kblood, what exactly are you claiming about relativity and ying/yang?

That Yin/Yang is a prelude to E=Mc2 and without it Einstein would have had a hard time getting to that conclusion, whether he studied Yin/Yang or its philosophy directly or not.

Okay, sure. But E=mc^2 isn't a symbol. It's a concrete prediction about how specific things work in the real world. And when we test that prediction, we observe that it is a true prediction.

Let us know when you can use Yin=Yang to predict something specific and concrete about the real world, and when your prediction is observed to be true.

As I stated above, you still need the philosophical groundwork to be able to get what Einstein showed the world. That everything, even time and space, is relative to something. One of the most constant things we can rely on is the speed of light. But how constant is that speed, when the light itself slows down sometimes?

Which is why there is a huge difference between "the speed of light" and the actual speed of light in reality. People here do know that light can be slowed when going through certain gases? And that huge parts of space has gas clouds in it?

But feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

And flying is defying gravity. How stupid are people who disagrees with that? Its just not defying gravity in any supernatural way. Why would you expect that to be needed?

 

[Mojo]

One of the most constant things we can rely on is the speed of light. But how constant is that speed, when the light itself slows down sometimes?

Which is why there is a huge difference between "the speed of light" and the actual speed of light in reality. People here do know that light can be slowed when going through certain gases? And that huge parts of space has gas clouds in it?

It is the speed of light in a vacuum that is the constant in Einstein's famous equation.

 

[Aridas]

That Yin/Yang is a prelude to E=Mc2 and without it Einstein would have had a hard time getting to that conclusion, whether he studied Yin/Yang or its philosophy directly or not.

I really don't see any real basis for your claim, based on the points you've actually presented, and the complete and utter failure demonstrated so far to understand either the math or the variables that you're trying to deal with.

As I stated above, you still need the philosophical groundwork to be able to get what Einstein showed the world. That everything, even time and space, is relative to something. One of the most constant things we can rely on is the speed of light. But how constant is that speed, when the light itself slows down sometimes?

Given that c is the speed of light in a vacuum, your argument falls apart completely as you try to use the speed of light under other conditions.

And flying is defying gravity. How stupid are people who disagrees with that? Its just not defying gravity in any supernatural way. Why would you expect that to be needed?

Where did this come from? It seems completely irrelevant to the preceeding.

 

[kblood]

It is the speed of light in a vacuum that is the constant in Einstein's famous equation.

Good Now... how long is a split second? What is the smallest digit on the speed of light, if its truly constant?

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

 

[Irony]

Good Now... how long is a split second?

A fraction of a second. It's not a precise measure, just slang for a very short time.

What is the smallest digit on the speed of light, if its truly constant?

Being a natural phenominon it's almost certainly irrational, so there is no "smallest digit".

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

Just because the digits are infinite does not mean they change, but by all means go tell the mathematical community that Pi isn't constant. They could use a good laugh.

 

[Aridas]

Good Now... how long is a split second?

Undefined. Therefore, completely irrelevant.

What is the smallest digit on the speed of light, if its truly constant?

Care to rephrase the question? So far, it sounds quite irrelevant.

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

Sounds irrelevant and based on a fundamentally wrong premise or several. I will use Pi as a counter-example.

EDIT: Oh, the Irony! It has defeated me!

 

[theprestige]

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

As others have pointed out, Pi. The relationship between a circle's circumference and its diameter is governed by this constant. It has infinite digits, but the more digits you calculate, the more circular your circle becomes.

Are you going to argue that the circle has serious flaws?

 

[Pixel42]

That Yin/Yang is a prelude to E=Mc2 and without it Einstein would have had a hard time getting to that conclusion, whether he studied Yin/Yang or its philosophy directly or not.

The question Einstein asked himself, which led directly to his discovery that energy and mass are two forms of the same thing which can be converted into each other, was "What would the universe look like if I could travel on a beam of light?". How exactly did the concept of Yin/Yang prompt him to ask that question?

 

[kblood]

As others have pointed out, Pi. The relationship between a circle's circumference and its diameter is governed by this constant. It has infinite digits, but the more digits you calculate, the more circular your circle becomes.

Are you going to argue that the circle has serious flaws?

Same difference. Its just another constant that is only as constant as we make it. That is, we keep discovering new split seconds, when it comes to how constant the speed of light is.

I suspect you are still lost about all of this.

Take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuji-in

 

[Mojo]

Same difference. Its just another constant that is only as constant as we make it. That is, we keep discovering new split seconds, when it comes to how constant the speed of light is.

It is a constant which has been measured with increasing precision. The precision to which we can measure something doesn't change what is being measured.

For example, if I were to estimate someone's height as about 6 feet, and then later measured them as being 5 foot 11 inches tall, their height wouldn't actually change.

I suspect you are still lost about all of this.

Take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuji-in

I've looked. It has nothing to do with Einstein's theories.

 

[dafydd]

Take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuji-in

I looked. A load of guff.

 

[kblood]

It is a constant which has been measured with increasing precision. The precision to which we can measure something doesn't change what is being measured.

For example, if I were to estimate someone's height as about 6 feet, and then later measured them as being 5 foot 11 inches tall, their height wouldn't actually change.

No, only the height relative to the measurement.

I've looked. It has nothing to do with Einstein's theories.

Look closer.

 

[TjW]

Good Now... how long is a split second? What is the smallest digit on the speed of light, if its truly constant?

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

Oh, that's easy. The last digit of the speed of light is zero. Just like all the other digits except the first, which is 3.

Once you know where to put the decimal point, you're golden.

 

[Mashuna]

Look closer.

Yep, still has absolutely nothing to do with Einstein's theories. Unless by tortuous and bad analogy.

 

[kblood]

Oh, that's easy. The last digit of the speed of light is zero. Just like all the other digits except the first, which is 3.

Once you know where to put the decimal point, you're golden.

And here I thought the last digit would be 9 Why would it be 0? Because you round the number off? Or because you do not believe in infinite numbers?

What is the biggest number we know? Or science knows I better ask... And what is the smallest number we know?

Why is any of that relevant to Einstein's theory? Or would most of you, if not all, still claim there is no relation.

 

[tsig]

Good Now... how long is a split second? What is the smallest digit on the speed of light, if its truly constant?

Because if it is constant, there cannot be infnite digits. Otherwise, how will we ever truly use it in science without having serious flaws sooner or later?

Depends on how fine you want to split it.

The smallest digit of the speed of light is the measurement of error of the instrument used to measure it.

 

[tsig]

Same difference. Its just another constant that is only as constant as we make it. That is, we keep discovering new split seconds, when it comes to how constant the speed of light is.

I suspect you are still lost about all of this.

Take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuji-in

From the link:

Ku-ji simply means “nine syllables”, and refers to a variety of mantras that consist of nine syllables. The syllables used in kuji are numerous, especially within the realm of mikkyo (Japanese esoteric Buddhism)[citation needed]. The kuji most often referred to is of Taoist[citation needed] origin, not Buddhist. There is no record of the kuji in any of the Shingon or Tendai records that were brought back from China.

I don't think Einstein used Ku-ji.

 

[tsig]

And here I thought the last digit would be 9 Why would it be 0? Because you round the number off? Or because you do not believe in infinite numbers?

What is the biggest number we know? Or science knows I better ask... And what is the smallest number we know?

Why is any of that relevant to Einsteins theory?

Well one is the loneliest number.

The only thing I'll say about the biggest number is "+1".