amer
 
Reply Mon 21 Dec, 2009 06:46 pm
Hi

I am a professional accountant who started life as a physicist. I have a Bsc in Physics and spent 2 1/2 towards a PHd in theoretical physics.

I have always retained an interest in Physics and philosophy and would like to discuss various issues of interest.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,684 • Replies: 13
No top replies

 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Dec, 2009 08:16 pm
@amer,
Welcome. I look forward to learning from your background. I'm more from the humanities side. I love depth-psych, linguistic philosophy, German philosophy in general....
0 Replies
 
William
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Dec, 2009 08:26 pm
@amer,
amer;113361 wrote:
Hi

I am a professional accountant who started life as a physicist. I have a Bsc in Physics and spent 2 1/2 towards a PHd in theoretical physics.

I have always retained an interest in Physics and philosophy and would like to discuss various issues of interest.


Hello Amer and welcome. I am glad you are here and it would be interesting I think to observe what you think of Nassim Haramin's Unified Field Theory. Again, welcome.
William
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Dec, 2009 09:08 pm
@amer,
Do I sense the possibility that ones math ability has run afoul of ones moral integrity???
0 Replies
 
Theaetetus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 12:48 am
@amer,
Fido: Why don't you actually welcome the new member rather than bug them with stupid questions.

Anyway, welcome to the forum amer. Just ignore annoyances like Fido around here.
Deckard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 01:10 am
@Theaetetus,
Impressive resume. Welcome.
0 Replies
 
jgweed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 06:30 am
@amer,
I am sure your background in physics (and science in general) when applied to philosophical questions will be very welcome in the discussions here.
Welcome to Philforum!
Regards,
John
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 06:30 am
@Theaetetus,
Theaetetus;113466 wrote:
Fido: Why don't you actually welcome the new member rather than bug them with stupid questions.

Anyway, welcome to the forum amer. Just ignore annoyances like Fido around here.

I have a great library on Native Americans...One of these books with the Title: Captured by the Indians, I think, told of one young man captured by the Iroquois...It was one of those deals where the guy was intended to replace some family member through adoption...But; he showed up, and was run through a gauntlet, and pretty well knocked silly...He asked the guy who had caught him about it, and the guy said: Don't worry about that...That is just our way of saying: how do you do???

It might surprise you to know that some people think I am sociable...From my perspective I have zero social skills...I am terribly conscious of my inability to read people, and of how easy it is to give offense with an ill considered word...If I get through a social affair of some sort I breathe a sigh of relief, and vow to never do it again... It would help, if you would understand of me, that I am here with a purpose...I'm not here to make enemies or friends, and I am not here to make time with the girls, or boys for that matter...I want to get past the introductions and find out what people got on their minds...My experience has been that people in their first moments with anyone tell what is the most important fact in their lives...I presume no less of people in their introductions, though I will admit, sometimes people are more coy...

So; by way of a reply, I can tell you don't like me and I don't blame you a bit...I don't think anyone likes me, and usually with better reason than you have...I would tell you one thing...You think I am bad, but that is because you haven't smelled my breath, yet...

---------- Post added 12-22-2009 at 08:13 AM ----------

Hey; amer... How do you do???

---------- Post added 12-22-2009 at 08:16 AM ----------

jgweed;113496 wrote:
I am sure your background in physics (and science in general) when applied to philosophical questions will be very welcome in the discussions here.
Welcome to Philforum!
Regards,
John

Don't count on it... Physics like theology hs long departed from philosophy...Our problems are moral, and not physical, so leave the physics books on the self...And I say this as a reader of physics....It is fascinating, but not much help with our majorestist problems...
0 Replies
 
amer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 06:24 pm
@amer,
Hi guys,

Good to meet you all. Fido, you know I have come to realize that people who are so articulate about their shortcomings have quite often resolved their issues to everyone's satisfaction. JGweed - one of the reasons for joining a philosophy forum rather than a physics one is a desire to discuss and discover the embedded philosophy in physics in particular Quantum mechanics and General relativity.

In particular in relation to QM - only certain parts of the mathematics that is calculated (the superpositioned eigen vectors - remember that schrodingers cat paradox?) is ever observable (the collapsed eigenstate) - So, does QM already contain an embedded metaphysics element in it in the form of that unobservable superpositioned form? I always used to think that metaphysics is something we need to look for outside of mathematics and physics but perhaps it is here right now?

---------- Post added 12-22-2009 at 07:28 PM ----------

Hi phiforum and Thaett..(sorry guys spelling is not my forte) , William, Deckard...good to meet you guys.

---------- Post added 12-22-2009 at 07:48 PM ----------

Hi William....I must be getting out of touch...I have not heard of Nassim Haramin's Unified Field Theory. I will look it up though. As far as I know no one has a unified field theory yet because of the difficulties with quantizing gravity. So, in the standard model there is Electroweak, strong and gravity. String theory (M theory) has managed to create a class of unified theories including gravity in an 11 dimensional space-time) but as I said no specific solution has been found as The Theory of thhe universe- unfortunately, string theory allows for 10**500 yes 10 to the power of 500! possible solutions so the final solution may be some time away.

All the best. Amer
0 Replies
 
amer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 04:41 pm
@William,
Hi William,

I spent a little time reading Nassims Unified theory - It was fascinating but I had a number of questions after reading it. Below is my email to that website asking for clarification. Irrespective of the answers the thinking involved is quite brilliant and very radical. If I get a reply I will post again:

Nassim,
I throughly enjoyed reading your Unification paper. It left me with some questions though.

1. Are you saying that both the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are replaced with Schwartz black hole - vacuum enery renormalized/rescaled interaction? Are we now left with the General relativity topology above and Electromagnetism only? i.e. only 2 forces left?
2. The standard model - Electroweak, QCD predict the standard model particles. How are these captured in your theory?

I guess I am trying to understand whether your model is replacing the standard model completely? If partially then what is left and how is the standard model modified?

rgds

Amer

---------- Post added 12-24-2009 at 05:43 PM ----------

William;113376 wrote:
Hello Amer and welcome. I am glad you are here and it would be interesting I think to observe what you think of Nassim Haramin's Unified Field Theory. Again, welcome.
William

Hi William,

I spent a little time reading Nassims Unified theory - It was fascinating but I had a number of questions after reading it. Below is my email to that website asking for clarification. Irrespective of the answers the thinking involved is quite brilliant and very radical. If I get a reply I will post again:

Nassim,
I throughly enjoyed reading your Unification paper. It left me with some questions though.

1. Are you saying that both the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are replaced with Schwartz black hole - vacuum enery renormalized/rescaled interaction? Are we now left with the General relativity topology above and Electromagnetism only? i.e. only 2 forces left?
2. The standard model - Electroweak, QCD predict the standard model particles. How are these captured in your theory?

I guess I am trying to understand whether your model is replacing the standard model completely? If partially then what is left and how is the standard model modified?

rgds

Amer
0 Replies
 
William
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 05:20 pm
@amer,
Thank you Amer. I am not a physics nut but when I became familiar with him and and I have tried to follow all that this man was offering, it made an enormous amount of sense to me in his proposal of infinity in both directions micro and macro. Much of what we assumed to be wrong because of the finite limits we put on te micro side and infinity on the macro and the imbalance of that; when all we see in nature has a balance to it. Did you watch CROSSING THE EVENT HORIZON? It's available on youtube. His demeanor is rather astonishing and simple with a sense of humor one rarely finds in the scientific academic community.

William

---------- Post added 12-24-2009 at 06:56 PM ----------

Btw that video is available here in the video section.

William
amer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 06:40 pm
@William,
William;114105 wrote:
Thank you Amer. I am not a physics nut but when I became familiar with him and and I have tried to follow all that this man was offering, it made an enormous amount of sense to me in his proposal of infinity in both directions micro and macro. Much of what we assumed to be wrong because of the finite limits we put on te micro side and infinity on the macro and the imbalance of that; when all we see in nature has a balance to it. Did you watch CROSSING THE EVENT HORIZON? It's available on youtube. His demeanor is rather astonishing and simple with a sense of humor one rarely finds in the scientific academic community.

William

---------- Post added 12-24-2009 at 06:56 PM ----------

Btw that video is available here in the video section.

William

Hi Willam, What impressed me was the original thinking (whether the theory ultimately turns out to be right or wrong) but as I wrote there are some basic questions which I am puzzled about. The idea to use blackholes as the as the single unified concept that threads through from micro to macro is quite brilliant but I still need to understand how this impacts the Standard Model.

I have not seen the Youtube video. I will check that out too. Thanks. All thhe best
longknowledge
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jan, 2010 06:38 pm
@amer,
Hello Amer,

Welcome to the Forum!

Maybe you guys haven't heard of Monsanto's Unified Field Theory. It seems that if you grow a crop in a field next to a field where another farmer is growing a crop using Monsanto's genetically engineered seeds, and some of your crop becomes geneticallly impregnated with DNA from their crop, then your crop beomes theirs and this way the fields become unified.:bigsmile:

Have fun!

longknowledge

:flowers:
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jan, 2010 06:59 pm
@amer,
You remind me of the guy who had a job as a human cannonball...He went to the boss and said: I'm tired of getting shot out of a cannon four days a week, and twice on Saturday..
And the Boss said: You can't quit me; Where am I going to find another man of your caliber???
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Infinity has no hold on me, or does it? - Discussion by mark noble
Something to think about. . . - Discussion by CeylanaLotus
Functions in predicate logic. - Discussion by narwhol
If Pinocchio said "My nose will now grow" - Discussion by avidkat21
Interview with platorepublic - Discussion by platorepublic
cant find original articles - Discussion by student-of-life
logic: proof problem - Discussion by Sasqi
Interview with Amperage - Discussion by Amperage
Young Philosophers Forum - Discussion by Deckard
Interview with sometime sun - Discussion by sometime sun
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Hello
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/27/2022 at 08:58:00