OT- the geometry of spacetime (nassim haramein vid -AWESOME)

Machinate · Post by **Machinate** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:21 pm

Tone Deft wrote:check this PBS documentary on String Theory, there's a section on multiple dimensions, 2nd row from the bottom, the pic of the tea cup.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

blew my mind, incredibly well explained and hits on a lot of fun areas.

I second that link, a lot of really cool videos right there. I found it via stumbleupon some time ago, neat.

Winston · Post by **Winston** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:11 am

there's also a book of the elegant universe, which is good because you get more detail. I found the pbs series to be very repetitive. Still good though. Got much better towards the last third for sure.

slicedbread · Post by **slicedbread** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:27 am

this thread needs more zombo.

Anubis · Post by **Anubis** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:43 am

Is this like Scientology? How much $ for enlightenment?

adventurepants_ · Post by **adventurepants_** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:12 am

screw this, I wanna hear about Tone's experience in the Church of Jorgenson!

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:30 am

adventurepants_ wrote:screw this, I wanna hear about Tone's experience in the Church of Jorgenson!

MW - they had a different guy sing the stuff from Pslam69 and A Mind... know who he was? tall lanky guy with a nose length mop top, brown hair... great voice, nailed the tunes.

great fucking show, had a blast, wore out my neck muscles. first off IMO Ministry hasn't changed their sound since Pslam69 which helped usher in Nu Metal. since then 'weird' Al Jorgenson pledged to do a trio of anti-Bush albums that pretty much sound the same.

I dig their sound, so a few hours of same sounding chugga chugga RAWK anti-Bush material was alright by me. they played a few classics from 'The Mind..." and "Psalm 69" only at the end of the set. the whole time the band was having fun, 2 guitars, a bass, a minimal synth droping samples I guess, he had a cool haircut

, drums, a few mic stands. the band was behind 3 panels of chain link fence so the crowd could throw stuff at them (so Al said, I think) nobody did. Al did keep climbing on the chain link prop in front of him, I was just waiting for him to fall over the top and off the stage.

I think Jorgenson is on this forum, every song was proceeded by Al growling 'Bush/911/ Iraq... whatta buncha bullshit, here's a song about it'... chugga chugga. every once in a while some dude would stumble through the crowd coming out of the pit, people just got out of the way, he'd push people anyway, nobody cared, it's a fucking Ministry concert. sausage fest, a few dates going on, a few cleanly dressed group picture taking tools, the whole right half of the upstairs section was blocked off and packed with the Private Party crowd.

later on Al kept calling out the wrong songs. a guitar player talked to him and Al announced all pissy "the band's complaining that I'm too drunk!" which got a great response from the crowd, the band laughed too. \m/ seemed to lighten the mood on stage. I yelled "fuck you Al!!" a few times, I think I got him to laugh, anyway, good vibe. pit was small but constant, the guitar players kept giving them the 'mix the pit' sign (pretend you're using your finger mixing a drink, instead of the drink it's the pit, you just don't lick your finger afterwards, that's a Manson show.) at least a 2 hour set, got out at 1am.

at the Fillmore West they give you a poster after most shows (there are also free apples, always quality) this one is pretty cool, but a bad pic from some site (ebay the guy's selling a free poster the next day for $25, bet he has a monome for sale too.)

which direction do pits go in in different countries? in the US I think every pit I've been in was counterclockwise. sometimes they reverse because you can do more damage that way.

Dcease - I didn't get mugged but I fucked your mom, she's in a dumpster behind the Blood Bank at Masonic and Turk. closed casket funeral for her.

The Phat Conductor · Post by **The Phat Conductor** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:58 pm

ministry were fucking RETARDED awesome when i saw them a couple years ago. i have NO issues with them not updating their sound. it's dope! they put on a great show. i got so drunk and rowdy after that i fell with my girlfreind on my shoulders and both of us landed on my knees, mangling them so bad that when i woke up my pants had fused with my knee scabs.

it was great

roby · Post by **roby** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:22 pm

omg... Scientology, watch out!!!

Moody · Post by **Moody** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:36 pm

What I don't understand is how you can argue something with the evidence that the person you are arguing against has denied. Many scientists have run into the wall because of our current understanding of mathematics. This is why things such as calculus arise. It certainly does not mean calculus is the math for the Universe so, using it to disprove someone’s work, in particular someone trying to work beyond its boundaries is ludicrous. Even those people we consider credible in the world of science have apposing ideas. It is this that fuels our evolution, particularly when these ideas intersect. The intersections between the ideas usually lead to the strongest theories, probabilities and laws for us to govern the next radical ideas and so it swings back and forth in a spiral pattern. Hopefully in a pleasant direction.

As we should try to do in this thread.

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:48 pm

and you're dismissing calculus without ever taking a class in it. calculus is the main language of physics, it's amazing the stuff you you do with it. I love how you throw around ideas like scientists being limited by math without being versed in the area. it's a huge blanket statement that's entirely wrong. calculus is the language of the universe, ALL high level physics uses it, what do you think they used only algebra, trig and geometry?

you cannot translate ideas from dimension to dimension without identifying initial conditions, therefore his entire notion that all the data from dimension x is available in dimension y is completely wrong.

you don't know what you're talking about, stop pretending.

I'm all for having an open mind and seeking new ideas. I listened to 20 minutes of this guy and he clearly made a mistake. nobody's really said anything about the guy's theory, it's comments about comments.

Moody · Post by **Moody** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:17 pm

Tone Deft wrote:and you're dismissing calculus without ever taking a class in it. calculus is the main language of physics, it's amazing the stuff you you do with it. I love how you throw around ideas like scientists being limited by math without being versed in the area. it's a huge blanket statement that's entirely wrong.

you cannot translate ideas from dimension to dimension without identifying initial conditions, therefore his entire notion that all the data from dimension x is available in dimension y is completely wrong. you don't know what you're talking about, stop pretending.

You should certainly smoke something or drink something and reflect on just how egotistical that statement is. For you to make a statement about my condition without knowing the initial conditions is breaking your own laws and certainly would bring question to all your other statements.

I am simply saying there are many views on things that oppose each other. The universe being the greatest one of all and it would not be the first time that our current understanding of math has limited ones ability to explain it.

Second, if you have all the knowledge then lets see it. Why don't you stop making short sided statements and provide some better evidence to your theory of the universe.

leonard · Post by **leonard** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:23 pm

Tone Deft wrote:I listened to 20 minutes of this guy and he clearly made a mistake. nobody's really said anything about the guy's theory, it's comments about comments.

i listened to +20 minutes, and realised he didn't actually say a damn thing.
thats as far as i got.

proof or gtfo.

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:29 pm

if I sound cocky it's out of frustration that you're clueless. I keep stating a fundamental point about dimensions and calculus which is basic stuff, but if you've never taken a class on it, you wouldn't know. 1+1=2, this guy's saying 1+1=83 and you're buying it but won't and can't understand why.

Moody wrote:You should certainly smoke something or drink something and reflect on just how egotistical that statement is. For you to make a statement about my condition without knowing the initial conditions is breaking your own laws and certainly would bring question to all your other statements.

now you're using linguistics to argue against my point on math, red herring, bad form. you really don't know what you're talking about.

I am simply saying there are many views on things that oppose each other. The universe being the greatest one of all and it would not be the first time that our current understanding of math has limited ones ability to explain it.

this is the same simpleton line of thinking as "the universe is huge therefore there's a god."

Second, if you have all the knowledge then lets see it. Why don't you stop making short sided statements and provide some better evidence to your theory of the universe.

look, ya argumentative little fuck... I'll state it a third time.
FACT: you cannot translate information from one dimension to another without initial conditions. that's a fact that this guy ignores. said initial conditions are an impossibly HUGE set of information. many of those variables change just by observing them.

you're saying nothing of substance, just arguing with me. I've put up facts, I've stated where his theory falls apart, you haven't said a damn thing about this guy's theory, you're just defending.

Moody, you're an ass. seriously, fuck you for just arguing with me and not even using facts from the guy's lecture to back your points up. this isn't about the guy's lecture this is about you attacking me.

reality check, look at the crap you're defending?!?!?! explain this guy's theory to me, keep it short and to the point.

Tone Deft · Post by **Tone Deft** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:33 pm

leonard wrote:
Tone Deft wrote:I listened to 20 minutes of this guy and he clearly made a mistake. nobody's really said anything about the guy's theory, it's comments about comments.
i listened to +20 minutes, and realised he didn't actually say a damn thing.
thats as far as i got.

proof or gtfo.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GODDAMN YOU GUYS!!!!

I posted the same thing 4 times now. initial conditions and moving through dimensions, blah blah blah blah.

did any of you fucks go to school??!?!!!

I know, I know, fuck school when you've got music, different community, respect to the non-math geek path in life.

edit - I should change my reply to Moody to "if I seem a little cocky it's because I'm very cocky, deal with it."

where the fuck are you two putting up anyway?? nothing but billshit from you two. BRING IT ON BITCHES!!!

/meh, this is pretty lame, PhatCon was just sharing an idea, so it didn't go over too well, so what...

Moody · Post by **Moody** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:47 pm

Tone Deft wrote:if I sound cocky it's out of frustration that you're clueless. I keep stating a fundamental point about dimensions and calculus which is basic stuff, but if you've never taken a class on it, you wouldn't know. 1+1=2, this guy's saying 1+1=83 and you're buying it but won't and can't understand why.

Moody wrote:You should certainly smoke something or drink something and reflect on just how egotistical that statement is. For you to make a statement about my condition without knowing the initial conditions is breaking your own laws and certainly would bring question to all your other statements.
now you're using linguistics to argue against my point on math, red herring, bad form. you really don't know what you're talking about.

I am simply saying there are many views on things that oppose each other. The universe being the greatest one of all and it would not be the first time that our current understanding of math has limited ones ability to explain it.
this is the same simpleton line of thinking as "the universe is huge therefore there's a god."

Second, if you have all the knowledge then lets see it. Why don't you stop making short sided statements and provide some better evidence to your theory of the universe.
look, ya argumentative little fuck... I'll state it a third time.
FACT: you cannot translate information from one dimension to another without initial conditions. that's a fact that this guy ignores. said initial conditions are an impossibly HUGE set of information. many of those variables change just by observing them.

you're saying nothing of substance, just arguing with me. I've put up facts, I've stated where his theory falls apart, you haven't said a damn thing about this guy's theory, you're just defending.

Moody, you're an ass. seriously, fuck you for just arguing with me and not even using facts from the guy's lecture to back your points up. this isn't about the guy's lecture this is about you attacking me.

reality check, look at the crap you're defending?!?!?! explain this guy's theory to me, keep it short and to the point.

I never defended his theory. I defended the idea of questioning current ideas so we can find new and better ideas. Sometimes it takes a whack job (which most of the past great minds where considered to be) to break the mold. That is all and I am sorry if the text on your screen did not convey that. If you follow my posts in this thread you will find I have not defended him but, I did say that he is not dangerous to those who would use Reason and Logic (not the software versions) to evaluate his ideas. I do agree his lectures seem to be filled with rheteric and for me personally it is difficult to even understand him because of his accent but, lets not dismiss that we need this in our world to go forward into new ideas. What I have asked is that if you have such vast knowledge, then give us more. I will always argue to get more out of someone. It seems to be one of the greatest tools there is for learning.

Second I have studied some calculus but, it has little applicability to my daily life currently so quoting laws and theories off the top of my head is certainly not a strong point for me. Lingustics does seem to be a better one.

How about this.... a simple link to oppose his first idea that made you stop watching it. I am guessing you did not get much further because of that. So, you missed out on some cool pictures.