 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like a 'grit in the pearl' theory, Grecch ....
I sometimes wonder if the big bang is simply a metaphor for a multidimensional extrapolation. I mean you can say it all emanated from a big bang. Or you can say there are infinite dimensions that each are the centre of everything, any one of which could be traced back to an 'event'.
But then, there IS all that empirical evidence from astrophyz, that real stuff is flying out from a real event.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 30, 2015 - 3:17 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
LeHah
(Member)
|
The Dalai Lama said in the Glastonbury interview with Alan Yentob that the great challenge for western education systems is to start teaching 'some kind of mind education', i.e. philosophy, psychology, transcendentalism, and even semantics etc., earlier.
It's been said by many educationalists that we need to teach things like economics to children, and philosophy fits that too.
We patronise kids far too much, assuming they can't hold these things. The result is that as adults, they have no entry point into self-awareness, because they never got the openings. Why shouldn't kiddies speculate on cosmology?
I agree completely on this.
Except teaching kids economics. Nothing good ever comes from people who end up as bean counters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 1, 2015 - 2:49 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
TomD
(Member)
|
But I'm not sure this is anything more than a theory. Here's the paradox. If you took off in a spacehip and go close to the speed of light, (after building up the momentum) and looked back, you would see yourself catching up to yourself.
There are no paradoxes in special relativity, as long as one doesn't switch frames of reference in mid-discussion. Specifically, the so-called "twin paradox" is not a real paradox, just an outcome that is different from our non-relativistic expectations.
I disagree that you could ever see yourself catching up with yourself, because light is observed to travel at the speed of light (a universal constant in Maxwell's equations), no matter how fast the source of the light or the observer is moving. (Note that this is a big violation of our expectations.) Therefore, a spaceship can never catch up to and pass light that it has emitted, no matter what its speed (and it can't go faster than the speed of light). This is demonstrated in practice when observing double stars, where we only see a rapidly moving star at one point in its orbit at any given time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
