And the Wind Whispered

[This post is my translation of an excellent short story by one of the most gifted storytellers of our time, O.V.Vijayan. The translation from Malayalam is a feeble effort, because such distant translations are not merely between languages, but cultures. The untranslatable expressions are marked with asterisks. Enjoy!]

Reached Kanjikad from Palghat by Coimbatore street. From there on, it was unpaved dirt road to the mountains. Even the rough taxi Jeep found that hard to take. This was Theyunni’s second trip here in the last ten years and he had no complaints about the roughness now.

Ditch ahead”, Driver said, glancing at the dirt road in front.

If you want to stop here, it’s okay”, Theyunni offered, “I can walk.

It’s about two miles from here. Accustomed as he was to the comfort of limousine rides between airports and star hotels, the prospect of the hard hike did not discourage Theyunni.

“Nah. We’ll go slow, sit tight.


The Jeep carefully negotiated the winding mountain road. Theyunni glanced at the wild valley as if for the first time. The sunshine cooled by the hillside, the east winds tunnelled through the mountain passes and roaring towards Palghat

The trees are all gone, aren’t they, Driver?”, Theyunni observed.

All downed. Was forests here till about five years ago. Elephants used to come down.

Sim, last time when he was here, there were huge trees on either side. Trees he didn’t know the names of. There were crickets all around carrying on with their shrill orchestra. Theyunni recalled that journey. He was coming back to Bombay after a European trip and his wife was at the airport. Ela disse, “There is a letter from home, looks like *Brother’s handwriting.

Wonder what is happening. Didn’t you open it, Phoebe?”

You know I don’t open your letters.

When the car was moving towards Juhu, Theyunni stole a glance at Phoebe’s face behind the wheel. Like a flawless marble sculpture with golden hair dancing in the wind. It was against her culture to open her husband’s letters. There were many things in her culture that attracted himher confident courage in kissing him in that garden few years ago, proclaiming, “I love you”. If the relationship were to turn sour in the years to come, the honesty and integrity that would make her say, “I do not love you any more, we have to get divorced”. These were the challenges that inspired him. He remembered the journey home to tell *Father that he was in love with Phoebe, his fellow-student at Stanford. Father did not say anything against it, just smiled his sweet, thoughtful smile. It was *Mother — “We had Devaki’s horoscope looked at…”

Devaki was a distant relative. The daughter of some in-land farmer. Hiding his contempt for horoscopes, Theyunni comforted Mother, “That is not much, Mother. We didn’t give our word.

Nobody said anything for a while. Then Mother said, “Isn’t understanding as big as word? It’s like Devaki has married you in her heart.

It’s the boy’s decision, Madhavi,” Father said, “Why do you want to say this and that?”

Mother withdrew herself, “I didn’t say anything…”

Don’t worry about Mother’s complaints, Kutta. Assim, do you like this Phoebe?”

Theyunni was a little embarrassed, “Yes.

Will an American girl like to live in this old family house of ours, Kutta?”, Mother inquired.

Why wouldn’t she?”

Father said, “It’s not as though they are going to come live here, is it?”

So Father and Son have decided that as well,” Mother said, “that they don’t want to live here?”

Wherever we live, we’ll come here first, Mother.

Theyunni saw Mother’s eyes well up. After blessing Phoebe and wishing Devaki well in her life, Mother said, “I won’t ask you to change your mind. Mas, will you look after Father, Kutta?”

Of course.

You remember how he used to be? His body is getting old…”

Father intervened again with his smile, “Madhavi, why do you say such things and make him unhappy? Don’t pay any attention to her, Kutta.

Even during the novelty of his love, Theyunni could feel *Devaki’s true meaning in his *rustic heartthe farmer bride who would sweep the floor and light the evening lamp. Mother said, “There was only one thing on my mindyour sister-in-law is not able-bodied. If it had been Devaki, there was a hope that she would look after your father in his old age…”

Theyunni didn’t say anything then. Even in the later years, he couldn’t say anything about that. Phoebe, who never opened her husband’s letters, drove skillfully through the streets of Juhu. When Father fell sick years after the marriage, Phoebe advised, “Your little town is actually a village. Why don’t we take him to a good hospital in a city? We can easily afford that.

What Father needed was nearness and touch to die peacefully. Theyunni came home alone with those and saw him off. Mother also died in the old family house. Phoebe was back at Stanford then. She sent a formal condolence telegram. *Devaki‘s meaning again filled his mind.

In Juhu, Theyunni read Brother’s letter. “I’m not doing too well, Kutta. Just to let you know. I won’t ask you to take time off your busy schedule and come by these forests. Just think of me, same effect as seeing. Didn’t even let Sreekumar know. I was worried that he might get anxious and take a tripnot easy to come here from Cambridge, is it? If only your sister-in-law had been aliveWeaknesses of an old heart…”

The Jeep continued it’s laborious journey negotiating an occasional ditch and gutter.

Sorry about the trouble, Driver,” Theyunni tried to comfort the driver.

“Nah, just doing my job.

Must be another mile from here. It was after his wife’s death that Brother decided to resign from service and move to the high lands. Theyunni vehemently opposed that decision. “Why are you moving to this god-forsaken land in Palghat among leopards and wild boars? Além disso, you could be in service for another 10 anos. Even after retiring, you know that a nuclear physicist can do so many things…”

Brother’s reply came, “There are debts that one owesto one’s country, one’s community, one’s family. I feel that I have repaid my dues to the best of my ability. There are some other obligations that I have to take care of. That’s is why I’m seeking refuge in these valleys.

Brother never mentioned what those obligations were. Theyunni didn’t inquire either.

The soft-spoken Brother took a decision only after much reasoning; it was not easy to make him go back on them. Mais tarde, Brother wrote about his camp-site: about four miles off the road, there were fertile lands lying just outside the woods. Brother built a house there, among coconut palms, vegetables, mango treesDirt walls, wooden ceiling and roofs of clay tiles. It was at some distance from anywhere. Contudo, there was a farmer, Ponnuswami, living in a hut nearby. Brother could ask Ponnuswami for help if needed. Apart from that, he was quite alone in that valley. Theyunni could not figure out the meaning of that penance and forgot about it. Years went by. But when Phoebe handed over that unopened letter, he suddenly felt that he should go there in a hurry.

“Bem, Phoebe, I’ll go and see what’s going on.

What is the name of that place? Kanjikad, isn’t it?”


Brother had invited me to go and see the mountains.

“Sim, I remember.

Must be a perfect place for get-away vacation. But it’s dangerous to get sick there. Why don’t you bring him here? We could have him treated at Jeslock or something.

Phoebe was repeating her suggestion on treatments. Theyunni remembered the last time the suggestion was offered and it made him uneasy.

We can’t get inside his mind, Phoebe. I’ll go there and see.

That was how Theyunni came here for the first time, ten years ago. Not only was he anxious about Brother’s health and solitary life, he also wanted to give Brother a piece of his mind about the untimely penance. When he took a taxi from Coimbatore airport to go to Kanjikad, his mind was filled with impatience and hard feelings towards Brother. The driver got discouraged by the sight of ditches and gutters in the dirt road. It didn’t take too much to provoke Theyunni.

I could break the axile if I drove up this way,” complained the driver who was Tamil.

How much does this stupid car of yours cost?”

“Sorry Sir, didn’t mean to…”

If your car breaks, let it break. I’ll give you what it costs. Drive.

When he got off the car, Theyunni saw Brother taking a walk in the fieldlooking bright and healthy.

Why did you come all this way, Kutta?”, Brother commented on the advisability of the trip.

You can say that. Living in the forests, writing letters about getting sick, how could I ignore it?”

Come in.Brother took him inside the house.

Theyunni looked around and found everything unsatisfactory. “Why do you punish yourself like this?”

Do I look as though this is punishment?”

Nobody said anything for a while. Then Theyunni inquired, “Who treated you while you were ill?”

Teat?! Nobody!”

What am I supposed to say about that?”

Brother smiled, “You don’t get it, Você, Kutta?”

What do you do for food?”

I have asked Ponnuswami’s wife to show up. To cook something for you. Me, this is all I eat.

He pointed to the husks of two young coconuts in the basket. “That was breakfast. Two more for dinner.

That is you diet?!”

Not just diet, medicine as well!”

When it got dark, Theyunni wanted to know, “Brother, what if some thieves show up?”

Brother laughed heartily, “Four white *mundu, four cotton shawls, two towels and some clay pots. That’s all this house holds. The thief is quite peaceful by nature, it’s our avarice that makes him do this and that!”

After dinner, they laid down to sleep — on the floor, on sleeping mats. For Theyunni, it was the first time in a long while without the air conditioner. The winds roared outside the house. Through the mountain passes, like the loud waves in an uptide.


“Sim, Brother?”

You hear that?”

The winds, direito?”

“Sim, but to you hear them?”

“Sim, Faço. Why do you ask?”

Brother was silent for a while in the darkness. Then he said, “Não, you don’t hear them.

It was with the same dissatisfaction at Brother’s life in the wilderness that Theyunni went back to Bombay. Brother said, seeing him off, “It was a mistake, Kutta. A weakness. Felt like writing to you when I was ill; I won’t bother you like this again. There aren’t any illnesses that these valleys can’t cure. And if there are, do humans have medicines for them?”

Agora, it was ten years after those words that Theyunni was coming back. Phoebe was not with him any more. She showed her natural honesty and told him that the love between them had dried out. Theyunni did not fly from Bombay. He took the train to Palghat along with numerous other people. Like in his childhood, in second class. Two day journey. Hills and woods and rivers and villages slowly went by in the window as the train ambled towards Palghat. The old family house was no longer there. So he rested in a hotel and set out for Kanjikad the next morning. His gruffiness during the last journey ten years ago had disappeared now. Theyunni felt that his peacefulness was spreading to the fellow passengers and even the landscapes.

The Jeep driver also was friendliness personified.

Hard trip, isn’t it, Driver?”

“Nah, we are quite used to these. A little worried about your trouble, that is all.

Brother’s fences and steps appeared at a distance.

Over there, Driver.

Isolated house, isn’t it, Sir?”


Ponnuswami was waiting by the house. He stepped down to welcome Theyunni. They looked at each other; Ponnuswami wiped his tears.

He had asked me not to telegram, that is why I wrote a letter instead.Ponnuswami said, “I am sorry.

Not at all, you were respecting Brother’s wishes. I understand.

Ponnuswami walked over to the backyard. There was a small plot where a Thulasi plant was beginning to take root. Ash remnants of the pyre around it.

This is it,” Ponnuswami said. “The bones were dropped in the Peroor river. If there are some other rituals you want to do… Mas,…”

“Sim, Ponnuswami?”

He said that no rituals were necessary. That he had uprooted the rituals. I am not educated, just thought that he was talking about some sacred state.

That must be what he meant.

Is Sreekumar coming up?”

I had telephoned him from Bombay. He is not coming. He had told me one thingthat this land and house are for you.

Ponnuswami had gone beyond such earthly things. “He also had told me the same thing; I didn’t want to tell you. Mas, I don’t need any of this. You or Sreekumar could sell these…”

Brother’s wishes, Ponnuswami. We must respect them.

“Bem, if you insist.

How many children do you have?”


“Bem, this will be a good place for them to grow up in.

Ponnuswami bowed once again, “If you ever want to come back and live here, my family and I will get out of here for you.

That won’t be necessary, Ponnuswami.

I don’t deserve to live here, Theyunni said to himself. They got back into the house.

You take rest. I will get you a young coconut from the fields.

The driver is waiting in the Jeep outside. Ask him to come inside and have something to drink.

When Ponnuswami brought the young coconuts, Theyunni said, “You can go home now, if you like. I’m fine.

Ponnuswami left. Theyunni said to the driver. “Do you think you can stay here overnight?”

The driver expressed his disagreement through silence.

Didn’t plan that way when we set out,” Theyunni said. “This is Brother’s house. I came here because he died, couldn’t get here before.

The driver turned attentive. Theyunni continued, “Feel like sleeping here for a night.

The driver’s disagreement melted away silently. “I can stay.

I can pay you whatever you want for staying.

That won’t be necessary.

Time turned red and went down on the hilltops. Theyunni went inside and went through Brother’s wooden box. Three white mundu’s, laundered, three cotton shawls and two towels. Theyunni’s sadness dripped into them. When he went to bed, he was not sad any more, a kind of gratified grief. A fulfillment of love and traditions. He slept with the childhood dreams of fairy tales. Late in the night, he woke up. He listened to the music of the winds. After this night, it would be the trip back to the city. Theyunni could feel Brother’s kindness in the winds. The winds muttered the unknown *Manthras that marked the end of that kindness and life, alguns *distant baby voicesA night full of sacred whispers, this was the *justification of lifetime.

Theyunni listened to the whispers and slept, awaiting the morning.

The Story So Far

In the early sixties, Santa Kumari Amma decided to move to the High Ranges. She had recently started working with KSEB which was building a hydro-electric project there.The place was generically called the High Ranges, even though the ranges weren’t all that high. People told her that the rough and tough High Ranges were no place for a country girl like her, but she wanted to go anyways, prompted mainly by the fact that there was some project allowance involved and she could use any little bit that came her way. Her family was quite poor. She came from a small village called Murani (near a larger village called Mallappalli.)

Around the same time B. Thulasidas (better known as Appu) also came to the High Ranges. His familty wasn’t all that poor and he didn’t really need the extra money. But he thought, hey rowdy place anyway, what the heck? Bem, to make a long story short, they fell in love and decided to get married. This was some time in September 1962. A year later Sandya was born in Nov 63. And a little over another year and I came to be! (This whole stroy, a propósito, is taking place in the state of Kerala em Índia. Bem, that sentence was added just to put the links there, just in case you are interested.) There is a gorgeous hill resort called Munnar (meaning three rivers) where my parents were employed at that time and that’s where I was born.

 [casual picture] Just before 1970, they (and me, which makes it we I guess) moved to Trivandrum, the capital city of Kerala. I lived in Trivandrum till I was 17. Lots of things happened in those years, but since this post is still (and always will be) work in progress, I can’t tell you all about it now.

Em 1983, I moved to Madras, to do my BTech in Electronics and Communication at IIT, Madras. (They call the IITs the MIT of India, only much harder to get in. In my batch, there were about 75,000 students competing for about 2000 places. I was ranked 63 among them. I’m quite smart academically, you see.) And as you can imagine, lots of things happened in those four years as well. But despite all that, I graduated in August 1987 and got my BTech degree.

Em 1987, after finishing my BTech, I did what most IITians are supposed to do. I moved to the states. Upstate New York was my destination. I joined the Physics Department de Universidade de Syracuse to do my PhD in High Energy Physics. And boy, did a lot of things happen during those 6 anos! Half of those 6 years were spent at Cornell University in Ithaca.

That was in Aug. 1987. Then in 1993 Sete, the prestigious French national research organization ( CNRS – “Centre national de la recherche scientifique”) hired me. I moved to França to continue my research work at ALEPH, CERN. My destination in France was the provencal city of Marselha. My home institute wasCentre de Physique des Particules de Marseille” ou CPPM. Claro, I didn’t speak a word of French, but that didn’t bother me much. (Before going to the US in 1987, I didn’t speak much English/Americanese either.)

End of 1995, on the 29th of Dec, I got married to Kavita. In early 1996, Kavita also moved to France. Kavita wasn’t too happy in France because she felt she could do much more in Singapore. She was right. Kavita is now an accomplished entrepreneur with two boutiques in Singapore and more business ideas than is good for her. She has won many awards and is a minor celebrity with the Singapore media. [Wedding picture]

Em 1998, I got a good offer from what is now the Instituto de Pesquisas Infocomm and we decided to move to Singapore. Among the various personal reasons for the move, I should mention that the smell of racisim in the Marseilles air was one. Although every individual I personally met in France was great, I always had a nagging feeling that every one I did not meet wanted me out of there. This feeling was further confirmed by the immigration clerks at the Marignane airport constantly asking me toMettez-vous a cote, cavalheiro” and occassionally murmuringles francais d’abord. [Anita Smiles]

A week after I moved to Singapore, on the 24rth of July 1998, Anita was born. Incredibly cute and happy, Anita rearranged our priorities and put things in perspective. Five years later, on the 2nd of May 2003, Neil was born. He proved to be even more full of smiles.  [Neil Smiles more!]

Em Cingapura, I worked on a lot of various body-based measurements generating several patents and papers. Towards the end of my career with A-Star, I worked on brain signals, worrying about how to make sense of them and make them talk directly to a computer. This research direction influenced my thinking tremendously, though not in a way my employer would’ve liked. I started thinking about the role of perception in our world view and, consequently, in the theories of physics. I also realized how these ideas were not isolated musings, but were atriculated in various schools of philosophy. This line of thinking eventually ended up in my book, O Unreal Universo.

Towards the second half of 2005, I decided to chuck research and get into quantitative finance, which is an ideal domain for a cash-strapped physicist. It turned out that I had some skills and aptitudes that were mutually lucrative to my employers and myself. My first job was as the head of the quantitative analyst team at OCBC, a regional bank in Singapore. Este trabalho de middle office, envolvendo a gestão de riscos e reduzindo os comerciantes efervescente, gave me a thorough overview of pricing models and, perhaps more importantly, perfeita compreensão da aplicação orientada por conflito do apetite de risco do banco.

 [Dad] Posteriormente, em 2007, I moved to Standard Chartered Bank, as a senior quantitative professional taking care of their in-house trading platform, which further enhanced my "big picture" outlook and inspired me to write Princípios de Desenvolvimento Quantitative. I am rather well recognized in my field, and as a regular columnist for the Wilmott Revista, I have published several articles on a variety of topics related to quants and quantitative finance, which is probably why John Wiley & Sons Ltd. asked me to write this book.

Despite these professional successes, on the personal front, 2008 has been a year of sadness. I lost my father on the 22nd of October. O death of a parent is a rude wake-up call. It brings about feelings of loss and pain that are hard to understand, and impossible to communicate. And for those of us with little gift of easy self-expression, they linger for longer than they perhaps should.

Universo – Tamanho e Idade

Eu postei esta pergunta que estava me incomodando quando li que eles descobriram uma galáxia a cerca de 13 bilhão de anos-luz de distância. O meu entendimento de que a declaração é: A uma distância de 13 bilhão de anos-luz, houve uma galáxia 13 bilhões de anos atrás, para que possamos ver a luz de agora. Não quer dizer que o universo é, pelo menos, 26 bilhões de anos? Deve ter levado a galáxia sobre 13 bilhões de anos para chegar onde parece ser, ea luz deve tomar outro 13 bilhões de anos para chegar até nós.

Ao responder a minha pergunta, Martin e Swansont (que suponho que são phycisists acadêmicos) apontar meus equívocos e essencialmente me perguntar para saber mais. Todos devem ser respondidas quando estou assimilado, parece! 🙂

Este debate é publicado como um prelúdio para o meu post sobre a teoria do Big Bang, chegando em um ou dois dias.

Mowgli 03-26-2007 10:14 PM

Universo – Tamanho e Idade
I was reading a post in stating that they found a galaxy at about 13 bilhão de anos-luz de distância. Estou tentando descobrir o que isso significa instrução. Para mim, isso significa que 13 bilhões de anos atrás, esta galáxia era onde nós vê-lo agora. Não é isso que 13b LY distância significa é? Se assim, não quer dizer que o universo tem que ser pelo menos 26 bilhões de anos? Quero dizer, todo o universo começou a partir de um ponto singular; como isso poderia ser galáxia onde foi 13 bilhões de anos atrás a menos que tivesse, pelo menos, 13 bilhões de anos para chegar lá? (Ignorando a fase inflacionária para o momento…) Já ouvi pessoas explicam que o próprio espaço está se expandindo. O que diabos isso significa? Não é apenas uma maneira extravagante de dizer que a velocidade da luz é menor, há algum tempo?
swansont 03-27-2007 09:10 AM


Postado Originalmente por Mowgli
(Mensagem 329204)
Quero dizer, todo o universo começou a partir de um ponto singular; como isso poderia ser galáxia onde foi 13 bilhões de anos atrás a menos que tivesse, pelo menos, 13 bilhões de anos para chegar lá? (Ignorando a fase inflacionária para o momento…)

Ignorando todo o resto, como é que isso significa que o universo é 26 bilhões de anos?


Postado Originalmente por Mowgli
(Mensagem 329204)
Já ouvi pessoas explicam que o próprio espaço está se expandindo. O que diabos isso significa? Não é apenas uma maneira extravagante de dizer que a velocidade da luz é menor, há algum tempo?

A velocidade da luz é uma parte inerente da estrutura atômica, na constante de estrutura fina (alfa). Se c estava mudando, em seguida, os padrões de espectros atómica teria que mudar. Não houve quaisquer dados confirmaram que mostra que alpha mudou (houve o papel ocasional alegando que, mas você precisa de alguém para repetir as medições), e tudo o resto é consistente com nenhuma mudança.

Martin 03-27-2007 11:25 AM

Para confirmar ou reforçar o que disse swansont, há especulações e algumas franjas ou fora do padrão cosmologias que envolvem c mudando ao longo do tempo (ou alfa mudar ao longo do tempo), mas a mudança constantes de coisa só fica mais e mais out.I've governou assistido por mais de 5 anos e quanto mais as pessoas olham e estudar evidência a menos provável, parece que há alguma mudança. Eles descartá-la mais e mais precisamente com a sua data.So provavelmente é melhor ignorar o “variando a velocidade da luz” cosmologias até que um seja completamente familiarizado com a cosmologia padrão dominante.Você tem equívocos Mowgli

  • Relatividade Geral (o 1915 teoria) trunfos Especial Rel (1905)
  • Eles realmente não contradiz, se você entendê-los corretamente, SR porque tem apenas um local de aplicabilidade muito limitada, como para a passagem da nave espacial por:-)
  • Onde quer GR e SR parecem contradizer, acredito GR. É a teoria mais abrangente.
  • O GR não tem um limite de velocidade na taxa que distâncias muito grandes pode aumentar. o único limite de velocidade é em coisas LOCAL (você não pode alcançar e passar um fóton)
  • Então nós podemos fazer e observar o material que está se afastando de nós mais rápido que c. (É longe, SR não se aplica.)
  • Isto foi explicado em um artigo Sci Am Eu acho que no ano passado
  • Google o nome do autor Charles Lineweaver e Tamara Davis.
  • Nós sabemos sobre a abundância de material que é, actualmente, mais de 14 bilhões LY longe.
  • Você precisa aprender algumas cosmologia para que você não fique confuso com essas coisas.
  • Também um “singularidade” não significa um único ponto. isso é um erro popular porque as palavras têm o mesmo som.
  • A singularidade pode ocorrer ao longo de toda uma região, mesmo uma região infinito.

Além disso, o “Big Bang” modelo não se parece com uma explosão de matéria zunindo longe de algum ponto. Ele não deve ser imaginado como aquele. O melhor artigo que explica os erros mais comuns que as pessoas têm é essa coisa Lineweaver e Davis em Sci Am. Acho que foi Janeiro ou fevereiro 2005 mas eu poderia ser um ano de folga. Google. Obtê-lo a partir de sua biblioteca local ou encontrá-lo on-line. O melhor conselho que eu posso dar.

Mowgli 03-28-2007 01:30 AM

Para swansont sobre isso que eu pensei 13 b LY implícita uma idade de 26 b anos:Quando você diz que não é uma galáxia em 13 b LY longe, Eu entendo que ele quer dizer que 13 bilhões de anos atrás o meu tempo, a galáxia estava no ponto onde eu vejo agora (que é 13 b LY longe de mim). Sabendo-se que tudo o que começou a partir do mesmo ponto, ele deve ter tomado a galáxia pelo menos 13 b anos para chegar onde estava 13 b anos atrás. Assim 13+13. Tenho certeza de que deve ser wrong.To Martin: Você está certo, Eu preciso aprender um pouco mais sobre cosmologia. Mas um par de coisas que você mencionou me surpreende — como podemos observar o material que está se afastando de como FTL? Quero dizer, não seria o relativista Doppler fórmula mudança dar imaginário 1 z? E as coisas para além 14 b LY longe – são eles “fora” o universo?Eu certamente olhar para cima e ler os autores que você mencionou. Graças.
swansont 03-28-2007 03:13 AM


Postado Originalmente por Mowgli
(Mensagem 329393)
Para swansont sobre isso que eu pensei 13 b LY implícita uma idade de 26 b anos:Quando você diz que não é uma galáxia em 13 b LY longe, Eu entendo que ele quer dizer que 13 bilhões de anos atrás o meu tempo, a galáxia estava no ponto onde eu vejo agora (que é 13 b LY longe de mim). Sabendo-se que tudo o que começou a partir do mesmo ponto, ele deve ter tomado a galáxia pelo menos 13 b anos para chegar onde estava 13 b anos atrás. Assim 13+13. Tenho certeza de que deve estar errado.

Isso vai depender de como você faz a sua calibração. Olhando apenas para um efeito Doppler e ignorando todos os outros fatores, se você sabe que a velocidade se correlaciona com a distância, você tem um certo redshift e você provavelmente calibrar isso para dizer 13b LY se que foi a distância real. Aquela luz seria 13b anos.

Mas, como Martin apontou, espaço está se expandindo; o desvio para o vermelho cosmológico é diferente do efeito Doppler. Uma vez que o espaço intermédio tenha expandido, AFAIK a luz que chega até nós de uma galáxia 13b LY distância não é tão antiga, porque era mais perto, quando a luz foi emitida. Gostaria de pensar que tudo isso é levado em conta nas medidas, de modo que, quando a distância é dada ao Galaxy, é a distância real.

Martin 03-28-2007 08:54 AM


Postado Originalmente por Mowgli
(Mensagem 329393)
Eu certamente olhar para cima e ler os autores que você mencionou.

Este post tem 5 ou 6 links para esse artigo Sci Am por Lineweaver e Davis…965#post142965

É pós #65 na Astronomia liga linha pegajosa

Acontece que o artigo foi em março 2005 questão.

Eu acho que é relativamente fácil de ler—bem escrito. Por isso, deve ajudar.

Quando você leu o artigo Sci Am, mais perguntas—suas perguntas poderia ser divertido para tentar responder:-)

Paradoxo dos Gêmeos – Leve 2

O Paradoxo dos Gêmeos é geralmente explicado argumentando que o gêmeo viajante sente o movimento por causa de sua aceleração / desaceleração, e, portanto, as idades mais lentas.

Mas o que acontecerá se os gêmeos tanto acelerar simetricamente? Isso é, eles começam a partir do repouso de um ponto do espaço com relógios sincronizados, e voltar ao mesmo ponto do espaço em repouso, acelerando longe um do outro por algum tempo e desaceleração no caminho de volta. Pela simetria do problema, parece que, quando os dois relógios são agrupadas no final da viagem, no mesmo ponto, e em repouso em relação uns aos outros, eles têm que concordar.

Então, novamente, durante toda a viagem, cada relógio está em movimento (ou não acelerada) com respeito à outra. Em SR, cada relógio que está em movimento em relação ao relógio de um observador é suposto ficar mais lento. Ou, relógio do observador é sempre o mais rápido. Assim, para cada gêmeo, o outro relógio deve estar em execução mais lenta. Contudo, quando eles voltam juntos no final da viagem, eles têm que concordar. Isso só pode acontecer se cada gêmeo vê o relógio do outro a correr mais rápido em algum momento durante a viagem. O que o SR dizem que vai acontecer nesta viagem imaginária?

(Note-se que a aceleração de cada um dos gémeos pode ser constante. Já os gémeos cruzam a uma alta velocidade a uma desaceleração linear constante. Eles vão cruzar novamente um ao outro na mesma velocidade depois de algum tempo. Durante os cruzamentos, os relógios podem ser comparados.)

Unreal Time

Farsight wrote:Time is a velocity-dependent subjective measure of event succession rather than something fundamental – the events mark the time, the time doesn’t mark the events. This means the stuff out there is space rather than space-time, and is an “aether” veiled by subjective time.

I like your definition of time. It is close to my own view that time is “unreal.” It is possible to treat space as real and space-time as something different, as you do. This calls for some careful thought. I will outline my thinking in this post and illustrate it with an example, if my friends don’t pull me out for lunch before I can finish. :)

The first question we need to ask ourselves is why space and time seem coupled? The answer is actually too simple to spot, and it is in your definition of time. Space and time mix through our concept of velocity and our brain’s ability to sense motion. There is an even deeper connection, which is that space is a cognitive representation of the photons inputs to our eyes, but we will get to it later.

Let’s assume for a second that we had a sixth sense that operated at an infinite speed. Isso é, if star explodes at a million light years from us, we can sense it immediately. We will see it only after a million years, but we sense it instantly. Eu sei, it is a violation of SR, cannot happen and all that, but stay with me for a second. Agora, a little bit of thinking will convince you that the space that we sense using this hypothetical sixth sense is Newtonian. Aqui, space and time can be completely decoupled, absolute time can be defined etc. Starting from this space, we can actually work out how we will see it using light and our eyes, knowing that the speed of light is what it is. It will turn out, claramente, that we seen events with a delay. That is a first order (or static) efeito. The second order effect is the way we perceive objects in motion. It turns out that we will see a time dilation and a length contraction (for objects receding from us.)

Let me illustrate it a little further using echolocation. Assume that you are a blind bat. You sense your space using sonar pings. Can you sense a supersonic object? If it is coming towards you, by the time the reflected ping reaches you, it has gone past you. If it is going away from you, your pings can never catch up. Em outras palavras, faster than sound travel is “forbidden.” If you make one more assumption – the speed of the pings is the same for all bats regardless of their state of motion – you derive a special relativity for bats where the speed of sound is the fundamental property of space and time!

We have to dig a little deeper and appreciate that space is no more real than time. Space is a cognitive construct created out of our sensory inputs. If the sense modality (light for us, sound for bats) has a finite speed, that speed will become a fundamental property of the resultant space. And space and time will be coupled through the speed of the sense modality.

Este, claro, is only my own humble interpretation of SR. I wanted to post this on a new thread, but I get the feeling that people are a little too attached to their own views in this forum to be able to listen.

Leo escreveu:Minkowski spacetime is one interpretation of the Lorentz transforms, but other interpretations, the original Lorentz-Poincaré Relativity or modernized versions of it with a wave model of matter (LaFreniere or Close or many others), work in a perfectly euclidean 3D space.

So we end up with process slowdown and matter contraction, but NO time dilation or space contraction. The transforms are the same though. So why does one interpretation lead to tensor metric while the others don’t? Or do they all? I lack the theoretical background to answer the question.

Hi Leo,

If you define LT as a velocity dependent deformation of an object in motion, then you can make the transformation a function of time. There won’t be any warping and complications of metric tensors and stuff. Actually what I did in my book is something along those lines (though not quite), as you know.

The trouble arises when the transformation matrix is a function of the vector is transforming. Assim, if you define LT as a matrix operation in a 4-D space-time, you can no longer make it a function of time through acceleration any more than you can make it a function of position (as in a velocity field, por exemplo.) The space-time warping is a mathematical necessity. Because of it, you lose coordinates, and the tools that we learn in our undergraduate years are no longer powerful enough to handle the problem.

Of Rotation, LT and Acceleration

No “Philosophical Implications” forum, there was an attempt to incorporate acceleration into Lorentz transformation using some clever calculus or numerical techniques. Such an attempt will not work because of a rather interesting geometric reason. I thought I would post the geometric interpretation of Lorentz transformation (or how to go from SR to GR) aqui.

Let me start with a couple of disclaimers. First of, what follows is my understanding of LT/SR/GR. I post it here with the honest belief that it is right. Although I have enough academic credentials to convince myself of my infallibility, who knows? People much smarter than me get proven wrong every day. E, if we had our way, we would prove even Einstein himself wrong right here in this forum, wouldn’t we? :D Em segundo lugar, what I write may be too elementary for some of the readers, perhaps even insultingly so. I request them to bear with it, considering that some other readers may find it illuminating. Thirdly, this post is not a commentary on the rightness or wrongness of the theories; it is merely a description of what the theories say. Ou melhor, my version of what they say. With those disclaimers out of the way, let’s get started…

LT is a rotation in the 4-D space-time. Since it not easy to visualize 4-D space-time rotation, let’s start with a 2-D, pure space rotation. One fundamental property of a geometry (such as 2-D Euclidean space) is its metric tensor. The metric tensor defines the inner product between two vectors in the space. In normal (Euclidean or flat) spaces, it also defines the distance between two points (or the length of a vector).

Though the metric tensor has the dreaded “tensor” word in its name, once you define a coordinate system, it is only a matrix. For Euclidean 2-D space with x and y coordinates, it is the identity matrix (two 1’s along the diagonal). Let’s call it G. The inner product between vectors A and B is A.B = Trans(A) G B, which works out to be a_1b_1+a_2b_2. Distance (or length of A) can be defined as \sqrt{A.A}.

So far in the post, the metric tensor looks fairly useless, only because it is the identity matrix for Euclidean space. SR (or LT), por outro lado, uses Minkowski space, which has a metric that can be written with [-1, 1, 1, 1] along the diagonal with all other elements zero – assuming time t is the first component of the coordinate system. Let’s consider a 2-D Minkowski space for simplicity, with time (t) and distance (x) axes. (This is a bit of over-simplification because this space cannot handle circular motion, which is popular in some threads.) In units that make c = 1, you can easily see that the invariant distance using this metric tensor is \sqrt{x^2 - t^2}.


O Unreal Universo — Discussão com Gibran

Hi again,You raise a lot of interesting questions. Let me try to answer them one by one.

You’re saying that our observations of an object moving away from us would look identical in either an SR or Galilean context, and therefore this is not a good test for SR.

What I’m saying is slightly different. The coordinate transformation in SR is derived considering only receding objects and sensing it using radar-like round trip light travel time. It is then suposto that the transformation laws thus derived apply to all objects. Because the round trip light travel is used, the transformation works for approaching objects as well, but not for things moving in other directions. But SR assumes that the transformation is a property of space and time and asserts that it applies to all moving (inertial) frames of reference regardless of direction.

We have to go a little deeper and ask ourselves what that statement means, what it means to talk about the properties of space. We cannot think of a space independent of our perception. Physicists are typically not happy with this starting point of mine. They think of space as something that exists independent of our sensing it. And they insist that SR applies to this independently existing space. I beg to differ. I consider space as a cognitive construct based on our perceptual inputs. There is an underlying reality that is the cause of our perception of space. It may be nothing like space, but let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that the underlying reality is like Galilean space-time. How would be perceive it, given that we perceive it using light (one-way travel of light, not two-way as SR assumes)? It turns out that our perceptual space would have time dilation and length contraction and all other effect predicted by SR. So my thesis is that the underlying reality obeys Galilean space-time and our perceptual space obeys something like SR. (It is possible that if I assume that our perception uses two-way light travel, I may get SR-like transformation. I haven’t done it because it seems obvious to me that we perceive a star, por exemplo, by sensing the light from it rather than flashing a light at it.)

This thesis doesn’t sit well with physicists, and indeed with most people. They mistake “perceptual effects” to be something like optical illusions. My point is more like space itself is an illusion. If you look at the night sky, you know that the stars you see are not “reais” in the sense that they are not there when you are looking at them. This is simply because the information carrier, namely light, has a finite speed. If the star under observation is in motion, our perception of its motion is distorted for the same reason. SR is an attempt to formalize our perception of motion. Since motion and speed are concepts that mix space and time, SR has to operate on “space-time continuum.” Since SR is based on perceptual effects, it requires an observer and describes motion as he perceives it.

But are you actually saying that not a single experiment has been done with objects moving in any other direction than farther away? And what about experiments on time dilation where astronauts go into space and return with clocks showing less elapsed time than ones that stayed on the ground? Doesn’t this support the ideas inherent in SR?

Experiments are always interpreted in the light of a theory. É always a model based interpretation. I know that this is not a convincing argument for you, so let me give you an example. Scientists have observed superluminal motion in certain celestial objects. They measure the angular speed of the celestial object, and they have some estimate of its distance from us, so they can estimate the speed. If we didn’t have SR, there would be nothing remarkable about this observation of superluminality. Since we do have SR, one has to find an “explanation” for this. The explanation is this: when an object approaches us at a shallow angle, it can appear to come in quite a bit faster than its real speed. Thus the “reais” speed is subluminal while the “aparente” speed may be superluminal. This interpretation of the observation, na minha opinião, breaks the philosophical grounding of SR that it is a description of the motion as it appears to the observer.

Agora, there are other observations of where almost symmetric ejecta are seen on opposing jets in symmetric celestial objects. The angular speeds may indicate superluminality in both the jets if the distance of the object is sufficiently large. Since the jets are assumed to be back-to-back, if one jet is approaching us (thereby giving us the illusion of superluminality), the other jet has bet receding and can never appear superluminal, a não ser que, claro, o movimento subjacente é superluminal,,en,A interpretação desta observação é que a distância do objecto é limitada pela,,en,facto,,en,que o movimento real não pode ser superluminal,,en,Isto é o que eu quero dizer com experiências que estão sendo abertas a teoria ou modelo baseado interpretações,,en,No caso do movimento relógios sendo mais lento,,en,nunca é uma experiência SR puro, porque você não consegue encontrar espaço sem gravidade,,en,um relógio tem de ser acelerado ou desacelerado e GR aplica,,en,o paradoxo dos gêmeos de velhice se aplicaria,,en,Eu sei que tem havido algumas experiências feitas para apoiar as teorias de Einstein,,en,como a curvatura da luz devido à gravidade,,en,mas você está dizendo que todos eles podem ser consistentemente re-interpretados de acordo com a sua teoria,,en,Se isto é assim,,en,é represar surpreendente,,en,sem ofensa para você,,en. The interpretation of this observation is that the distance of the object is limited by the “fact” that real motion cannot be superluminal. This is what I mean by experiments being open to theory or model based interpretations.

In the case of moving clocks being slower, it is never a pure SR experiment because you cannot find space without gravity. Além, one clock has to be accelerated or decelerated and GR applies. Caso contrário, the age-old twin paradox would apply.

I know there have been some experiments done to support Einstein’s theories, like the bending of light due to gravity, but are you saying that all of them can be consistently re-interpreted according to your theory? If this is so, it’s dam surprising! Quero dizer, no offense to you – youâ € ™ re, obviamente, um indivíduo muito brilhante,,en,e você sabe muito mais sobre essas coisas do que eu,,en,mas Iâ € ™ d tem que questionar como algo assim deslizou para a direita através físicos,,en,dedos para,,en,Estes são relacionados gravidade perguntas e cair sob GR,,en, doesnâ € ™ t tentar reinterpretar GR ou gravidade em tudo,,en,I colocar a teoria em aspas invertidas porque,,en,É uma observação bastante óbvio que há uma distinção entre o que vemos e as causas subjacentes da nossa percepção,,en,A álgebra envolvido é bastante simples para os padrões de física,,en,Supondo que youâ € ™ re certo em que espaço e tempo são realmente Galileu,,en,e que os efeitos de SR são artefatos de nossa percepção,,en,Como, então, são os resultados dos experimentos de Michelson-Morley explicou,,en, and you know much more about this stuff than I do, but I’d have to question how something like this slipped right through physicists’ fingers for 100 anos.

These are gravity related questions and fall under GR. Meu “teoria” doesn’t try to reinterpret GR or gravity at all. I put theory in inverted quotes because, para mim, it is a rather obvious observation that there is a distinction between what we see and the underlying causes of our perception. The algebra involved is fairly simple by physics standards.

Supposing you’re right in that space and time are actually Galilean, and that the effects of SR are artifacts of our perception. How then are the results of the Michelson-Morley experiments explained? Sinto muito se você me explicar isso em seu livro,,en,mas deve ter voado para a direita sobre a minha cabeça,,en,Ou será que estamos deixando isso como um mistério,,en,uma anomalia para os teóricos futuros para descobrir,,en,Eu não explicou completamente MMX,,en,mais ou menos deixá-lo como um mistério,,en,Eu acho que a explicação depende de como a luz é refletida por um espelho em movimento,,en,que eu indiquei no livro,,en,Suponha que o espelho está se movendo para longe da fonte de luz a uma velocidade de v em nosso quadro de referência,,en,Luz atinge-lo a uma velocidade de c-v,,en,Qual é a velocidade da luz refletida,,en,Se as leis da reflexão deve segurar,,en,não é imediatamente óbvio que deveriam,,en,em seguida, a luz reflectida tem que ter uma velocidade de c-v, bem,,en,Isto pode explicar porque MMX dá resultado nulo,,en, but it must have flown right over my head. Or are we leaving this as a mystery, an anomaly for future theorists to figure out?

I haven’t completely explained MMX, more or less leaving it as a mystery. I think the explanation hinges on how light is reflected off a moving mirror, which I pointed out in the book. Suppose the mirror is moving away from the light source at a speed of v in our frame of reference. Light strikes it at a speed of c-v. What is the speed of the reflected light? If the laws of reflection should hold (it’s not immediately obvious that they should), then the reflected light has to have a speed of c-v as well. This may explain why MMX gives null result. Eu não tenho trabalhado para fora a coisa toda embora,,en,eu vou,,en,uma vez eu parei meu trabalho do dia e dedicar a minha vida a pensar em tempo integral,,en,Minha idéia não é uma teoria de substituição para todos as teorias de Einstein,,en,É apenas uma reinterpretação de uma parte do SR,,en,Desde o resto do edifício de Einstein é construído sobre esta transformação de coordenadas parte,,en,Tenho certeza de que haverá alguma reinterpretação do resto do SR e GR também com base na minha ideia,,en,este é um projeto para mais tarde,,en,Meu reinterpretação não é uma tentativa de provar teorias de Einstein errado,,en,Quero apenas salientar que se aplicam à realidade como nós a percebemos,,en,valeu a pena o,,en,eu paguei,,en,Obrigado pela boa leitura,,en,Não tome minhas perguntas como um ataque à sua proposta,,en. I will, once I quit my day job and dedicate my life to full-time thinking. :-)

My idea is not a replacement theory for all of Einstein’s theories. It’s merely a reinterpretation of one part of SR. Since the rest of Einstein’s edifice is built on this coordinate transformation part, I’m sure there will be some reinterpretation of the rest of SR and GR also based on my idea. Mais uma vez, this is a project for later. My reinterpretation is not an attempt to prove Einstein’s theories wrong; I merely want to point out that they apply to reality as we perceive it.

Overall, it was worth the $5 I payed. Thanks for the good read. Don’t take my questions as an assault on your proposal – Estou honestamente no escuro sobre essas coisas e eu absolutamente anseiam luz,,en,ele Ele,,en,Se dignasse responder-lhes no seu tempo livre,,en,Eu adoraria compartilhar mais idéias com você,,en,É bom para encontrar um companheiro pensador para trocar idéias legais como este fora de,,en,Vou PM-lo novamente uma vez que eu estou totalmente feito o livro,,en,foi uma leitura muito satisfatório,,en,Eu estou contente que você gosta de minhas idéias e minha escrita,,en,Eu não me importo crítica em tudo,,en,Espero ter respondido a maioria de suas perguntas,,en,ou se você quiser discordar de minhas respostas,,en,fique à vontade para escrever de volta,,en,Sempre um prazer para conversar sobre essas coisas, mesmo se nós não concordamos uns com os outros,,en,Cumprimentos,,en,No fórum Daily Mail,,en,um participante,,en,O que há em um nome,,en,começou a falar sobre,,en,em julho,,en,Ele foi atacado bastante violentamente no fórum,,en (he he). If you could kindly answer them in your spare time, I’d love to share more ideas with you. It’s good to find a fellow thinker to bounce cool ideas like this off of. I’ll PM you again once I’m fully done the book. Mais uma vez, it was a very satisfying read.

Graças! I’m glad that you like my ideas and my writing. I don’t mind criticism at all. Hope I have answered most of your questions. Se não, or if you want to disagree with my answers, feel free to write back. Always a pleasure to chat about these things even if we don’t agree with each other.

– Best regards,
– Mãos

Anti-relatividade e Superluminality

Leo escreveu:Eu tenho alguns problemas com a parte introdutória embora, quando você enfrentar os efeitos de viagem luz e transformações relativistas. Você corretamente afirmar que todas as ilusões de percepção foram removidos na concepção da Relatividade Especial, mas você também dizer que essas ilusões de percepção permaneceu como base subconsciente para o modelo cognitivo da Relatividade Especial. Eu entendo o que você quer dizer ou eu entendi errado?

Os efeitos perceptivos são conhecidas na física; eles são chamados de efeitos de luz Tempo de viagem (LTT, para cozinhar até uma sigla). Estes efeitos são considerados uma ilusão de ótica sobre o movimento do objeto em observação. Depois de tirar os efeitos LTT, você começa a “reais” movimento do objecto . Este movimento real é suposto obedecer SR. Esta é a interpretação atual da SR.

Meu argumento é que os efeitos LTT são tão semelhantes às SR que devemos pensar de SR como apenas uma formalização de LTT. (De fato, uma formalização ligeiramente errada.) Muitas razões para esse argumento:
1. Não podemos disentagle o “ilusão de ótica” porque muitas configurações subjacentes dar lugar à mesma percepção. Em outras palavras, indo do que vemos o que está causando a nossa percepção é um problema para muitos.
2. SR transformação de coordenadas é parcialmente baseado em efeitos LTT.
3. LTT efeitos são mais fortes que os efeitos relativísticos.

Provavelmente, por estas razões, o SR faz é para dizer que o que vemos é o que é realmente gosto. Em seguida, ele tenta descrever matematicamente o que vemos. (Isto é o que eu quis dizer com um formaliztion. ) Posteriormente, quando se descobriu que os efeitos LTT não combinam muito bem com SR (como na observação de “aparente” movimento superluminal), pensávamos que tínhamos para “tirar” os efeitos LTT e depois dizer que o movimento subjacente (ou espaço e tempo) SR obedeceu. O que eu estou sugerindo que no meu livro e artigos é que nós devemos apenas adivinhar o que o espaço subjacente e tempo são como e descobrir o que a nossa percepção do que vai ser (porque ir para o outro lado é um problema mal colocado one-to-many). Meu primeiro palpite, naturalmente, Galileu foi o espaço-tempo. Esta suposição resultados em explantions sim puro e simples de GRBs e DRAGNs como booms luminais e suas consequências.

Discussão sobre o Daily Mail (Reino Unido)

On the Daily Mail forum, one participant (chamado “whats-in-a-name”) started talking about O Unreal Universo on July 15, 2006. It was attacked fairly viciously on the forum. Aconteceu de eu vê-lo durante uma pesquisa na Web e decidiu intervir e defendê-la,,en,o que está-em-um-nome,,en,bolo,,tr,você me deu um motivo a mais para se distrair do que eu deveria estar fazendo,,en,e posso dizer-lhe que este é mais interessante no momento,,en,Eu estive tentando formular algumas ideias e há uma vinda,,en,mas eu vou ter que dar a você em bits,,en,Eu não quero mergulhar em pseudociência ou tomar o caminho woo-ish que diz que você pode explicar tudo com a teoria quântica,,en,mas tente começando aqui,,en,,,en,Artigo de jornal,,en,link na parte inferior toca em alguns dos pontos que discutimos em outros lugares,,en,Ele vai um pouco off-topic,,en,mas você também pode encontrar o,,en,link na parte superior esquerda interessante,,en,patopreto em,,en.

15 Julho, 2006

Postado por: whats-in-a-name on 15/07/06 em 09:28 AM

De, Kek, you’ve given me a further reason to be distracted from what I should be doing- and I can tell you that this is more interesting at the moment.I’ve been trying to formulate some ideas and there’s one coming- but I’ll have to give it to you in bits.I don’t want to delve into pseudoscience or take the woo-ish road that says that you can explain everything with quantum theory, but try starting here:

O “Journal Article” link at the bottom touches on some of the points that we discussed elsewhere. It goes slightly off-topic, but you might also find the “Filosofia” link at the top left interesting.

Postado por: patopreto on 15/07/06 em 06:17 PM

Em relação a esse site wian.One não precisa ead passado esta frase,,en,Sabendo que os nossos sentidos todo o trabalho usando a luz como um intermediário,,en,é uma surpresa que a velocidade da luz é de fundamental importância na nossa realidade,,en,para perceber que tis Web site estiver concluído hokum ignorante,,en,Parei nesse ponto,,en,Iâ € ™ ve sido apenas voltar ao ler que pouco mais de cuidado,,en,I donâ € ™ t sabe por que o escritor expressou assim, mas certamente o que ele quis dizer foi,,en,Nossa percepção do que é real é criado a partir das leituras de nossos sentidos.,,en, Eu acho que a maioria dos físicos wouldnâ € ™ t argumentar com que eles,,en,Ao nível da realidade quântica como a entendemos doesnâ € ™ t existem,,en,você só pode dizer que as partículas têm mais de uma tendência para existir em um lugar ou estado do que o outro,,en –

As teorias da física são uma descrição da realidade. A realidade é criada a partir das leituras dos nossos sentidos. Knowing that our senses all work using light as an intermediary, is it a surprise that the speed of light is of fundamental importance in our reality?

to realise that tis web site is complete ignorant hokum. I stopped at that point.

16 Julho, 2006

Postado por: whats-in-a-name on 16/07/06 em 09:04 AM

I’ve just been back to read that bit more carefully. I don’t know why the writer phrased it like that but surely what he meant was:(Eu) “Our perception of what is real is created out of the readings from our senses.” I think that most physicists wouldn’t argue with that would they? At the quantum level reality as we understand it doesn’t exist; you can only say that particles have more of a tendency to exist in one place or state than another.(ii,,en,A informação que nós pegar a partir de telescópios ópticos ou de rádio,,en,raios gama detectores e similares,,en,mostra o estado de objectos distantes, que foram no passado,,en,devido ao tempo de trânsito da radiação,,en,Aprofundando espaço, portanto, permite-nos olhar mais para trás na história do universo,,en,É uma maneira incomum para expressar o ponto,,en,mas não desvalorizar a outras informações sobre lá,,en,Em particular, há links para outros papéis que entram em um pouco mais detalhe,,en,mas eu queria começar com algo que ofereceu uma visão mais geral,,en,Tenho a impressão de que o estudo da física é um pouco mais avançado do que o meu,,en,como eu disse anteriormente Sou apenas um amador,,en,embora eu provavelmente tomado o meu interesse um pouco mais do que a maioria,,en) The information that we pick up from optical or radio telescopes, gamma-ray detectors and the like, shows the state of distant objects as they were in the past, owing to the transit time of the radiation. Delving deeper into space therefore enables us to look further back into the history of the universe.It’s an unusual way to express the point, I agree, but it doesn’t devalue the other information on there. In particular there are links to other papers that go into rather more detail, but I wanted to start with something that offered a more general view.

I get the impression that your study of physics is rather more advanced than mine- as I’ve said previously I’m only an amateur, though I’ve probably taken my interest a bit further than most. Estou feliz em ser corrigido se algum de meu raciocínio é falho,,en,embora o que eu disse até agora é coisa bastante básico,,en,As idéias que eu estou tentando expressar em resposta ao desafio de Keka são minhas e de novo,,en,Estou muito preparado para ter você ou qualquer outra pessoa derrubá-los,,en,Eu ainda estou formulando meus pensamentos e eu queria começar por considerar o modelo que os físicos usam da natureza da matéria,,en,indo para a estrutura granulada do espaço-tempo na distância Plank e incerteza quântica,,en,Vou ter de voltar a este em um ou dois dias,,en,mas, entretanto, se você ou qualquer outra pessoa quer oferecer uma visão contrária,,en,por favor faça,,en,Eu acho que a escrita é parar clara,,en,Wian,,jw,você re-escrito o que ele diz para significar algo diferente,,en,O escritor é bastante clara,,en, though what I’ve said so far s quite basic stuff.

The ideas that I’m trying to express in response to Keka’s challenge are my own and again, I’m quite prepared to have you or anyone else knock them down. I’m still formulating my thoughts and I wanted to start by considering the model that physicists use of the nature of matter, going down to the grainy structure of spacetime at the Plank distance and quantum uncertainty.

I’ll have to come back to this in a day or two, but meanwhile if you or anyone else wants to offer an opposing view, please do.

Postado por: patopreto on 16/07/06 em 10:52 AM

I don’t know why the writer phrased it like that but surely what he meant was:

I think the write is quit clear! WIAN – you have re-written what he says to mean something different.

The writer is quite clear – “Uma vez que aceitamos que o espaço eo tempo são uma parte do modelo cognitivo criado pelo cérebro,,en,e que a relatividade especial se aplica ao modelo cognitivo,,en,podemos refletir sobre as causas físicas por trás do modelo,,en,a própria realidade absoluta.,,en,UMA ,,en,Blá blá blá,,en,O escritor,,en,é um empregado do banco OCBC em Cingapura e auto-descrito,,en,O que é que ele escreve parece ser nada mais do que uma filosofia solipsista religiosamente influenciado,,en,Solipsismo é interessante como um ponto de vista filosófico, mas rapidamente se desfaz,,en,Se Manoj pode começar seus argumentos a partir de tais motivos instável sem explicação,,en,então eu realmente não tenho outro curso para tirar do que aceitar suas descrições de si mesmo como,,en,amador,,en,Talvez volta para MEQUACK,,en,Este post é uma discussão email longa que tive com meu amigo Ranga,,en, and that special relativity applies to the cognitive model, we can ponder over the physical causes behind the model, the absolute reality itself.”

Blah Blah Blah!

The writer, Mãos Thulasidas, is an employee of OCBC bank in Singapore and self-described “amateur philosopher”. What is he writes appears to be nothing more than a religiously influenced solipsistic philosophy. Solipsism is interesting as a philosophical standpoint but quickly falls apart. If Manoj can start his arguments from such shaky grounds without explanation, then I really have no other course to take than to accept his descriptions of himself as “amateur”.

Maybe back to MEQUACK!