Monday, June 30, 2008
And this is just a wild thought, but maybe the sun is just a big hole whereby light/energy from another world, from heaven? or from another dimension is shining through to our dimension, our world. And the 'heaven' has unlimited amount of energy.... just a wild thought with no scientfic backing.....
Massless objects, those with pure energy will move at the speed of light. Those with mass will definitely be slower, and thus the speed of light is the limit of speed. Therefore, I think that it is simply a law of proportion, whereby the speed limit of an object is determine by its mass.
Please think carefully before you look at the solution.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
As proven by Einstein and co... time is different for different reference frame... frequency is simply the number of complete vibration per second or rather, per time period...
And now, since time is different for different refernce frames, will the frequency be different from different reference frame?????????
Friday, June 20, 2008
Albert Einstein, 1929
Friend's Friend's Dad has leukemia, urgently needs AB+ blood, pls call Caili (97838531), (Singapore)
Thursday, June 19, 2008
You know, we're always so sscared that the machines, the computers would have a mind of their own and rebel against us, their creators.
So i was thinking, perhaps we might be the computers and god or gods might be us..... And that we are serving some purposes or functions to them.... just a thought .. just a thought...
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
The optimist sees he doughnut, the pessimist the hole.
This quote is just damn funny lor.
Oh ya, and I think there are some movies that we die die have to watch.
- Dead Poet's Society
- Remember the titans
- Finding neverland
- Little miss sunshine
- Shawshank Redemption
The above is an excerpt from Arthur Schopenhauer. I find some of his writings quite interesting, but sometimes, I think all philosphers are too long-winded. Perhaps I didn't catch the essense of some parts hence I find them superflous. For instance, the above merely says that the author thinks that suffering is the purpose of our life in this world.
And this belief stems from the author's assumption that there has to be a purpose behind everything and hence since this world is full of suffering, it must be then the purpose in our life.
But then the argument will lead to nowhere if we question this assumption on why there must be a purpose behind everything? The kung fu panda said "There are no accidents!" But what if this world is an accident! Just like some kids are accidents, haha, ok, not funny, I get it, I am very lame. And hence, this is where faith comes in, there has to be a start somewhere and this start is always the faith to believe in one's assumptions, religions or beliefs.... hence the endless conflicts for no amount of logic could dislodge this faith because we are given a lack of information to find answer to the mystery of life.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Saturday, June 14, 2008
An interesting talk on the string theory. But sometimes I wonder, so what if we find the theory of everything, if one really exists... Einstein believed in a theory of everything... And I guess you could call that the absolute truth, the absolute law... And it's interesting too that how much of the world is govern by maths... Though I hate tedious maths working... And my maths is terribly poor...
But I was wondering, don't the scientists fear that one day there is nothing left to be discovered anymore? Where would they find the joy and motivation in life then?
And interestingly, yesterday 2 christians knocked on my door and I learn an interesting point of view from her which I've never thought of. I was saying if god is omnipotent, which he should be, and which the christians believe to be as well, then it means that when he created Adam he already knew that he would sin and the destruction of all the people except Noah etc... To which she said, well, god is indeed omnipotent, but he chooses not to use his power to see in the future because he gave us free will. Now I thought this was rather interesting.
But then I was reminded of the disasters, the Tsunamis, the earthquakes, all the sufferings and if god chooses not to use his power to prevent these disasters and sufferings ... ...
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Why are clouds white? Because of the presence of water vapour. But how? It has something to do with wavelenghth but I'm not sure of the exact explanation.
What is a polarizor made of and how actually does it work?
Hai..... (sigh), so confusing! So these light photons are absorbed by the electrons, and therefore when energy is absorbed, the electrons gain energy and therefore they will move to the outer shells of the atom. But, why at an instant later, these electrons will emit new photons????? And I can't visualise the last statement, and how can I link it to the law that incident angle = reflected angle???
Oh, and is there an answer to why the law of reflection states that reflected angle must = incident angle? And is there an answer to why mass attracts mass?
When we honestly ask ourselves which person in our lives means the most us, we often find that it is those who, instead of giving much advice, solutions, or cures, have chosen rather to share our pain and touch our wounds with a gentle and tender hand. The friend who can be silent with us in a moment of despair or confusion, who can stay with us in an hour of grief and bereavement, who can tolerate not knowing, not curing, not healing and face with us the reality of our powerlessness, that is a friend who cares.
I was giving tuition and while my student was doing the questions, I came across the color triangle, and I happened to see that yellow is just a combination of red and green with absolutely, I repeat, absolutely no blue inside! And light dawned on me, yes, pure white light dawned on me! The mystery of the apparent yellow we see I think is because white light, on its way from the sun to the earth, would hit the dust particles in our atmosphere and thus caused most of the blue light to scatter. As for Reyliaugh's formula, I have no idea how he derived it and why is that a larger wavelength would have a much larger probability of being scattered. And since most of the blue light is scattered, what is left behind would be green and red and therefore, the sun rays appear yellow!
Monday, June 9, 2008
Haha, I just love this, love his words..... perhaps I feel for him, but of course, who am i to compare myself with the great Richard Feynman. And this reminds me of a piece in the little prince.
The fourth planet belonged to a businessman. This man was so much occupied that he did not even raise his head at the little prince's arrival.
"Good morning," the little prince said to him. "Your cigarette has gone out."
"Three and two make five. Five and seven make twelve. Twelve and three make fifteen. Good morning. FIfteen and seven make twenty-two. Twenty-two and six make twenty-eight. I haven't time to light it again. Twenty-six and five make thirty-one. Phew! Then that makes five-hundred-and-one million, six-hundred-twenty-two-thousand, seven-hundred-thirty-one."
"Five hundred million what?" asked the little prince.
"Eh? Are you still there? Five-hundred-and-one million--I can't stop . . . I have so much to do! I am concerned with matters of consequence. I don't amuse myself with balderdash. Two and five make seven . . ."
"Five-hundred-and-one million what?" repeated the little prince, who never in his life had let go of a question once he had asked it.
The businessman raised his head.
"During the fifty-four years that I have inhabited this planet, I have been disturbed only three times. The first time was twenty-two years ago, when some giddy goose fell from goodness knows where. He made the most frightful noise that resounded all over the place, and I made four mistakes in my addition. The second time, eleven years ago, I was disturbed by an attack of rheumatism. I don't get enough exercise. I have no time for loafing. The third time--well, this is it! I was saying, then, five-hundred-and-one millions--"
"Millions of what?"
The businessman suddenly realized that there was no hope of being left in peace until he answered this question.
"Millions of those little objects," he said, "which one sometimes sees in the sky."
"Oh, no. Little glittering objects."
"Oh, no. Little golden objects that set lazy men to idle dreaming. As for me, I am concerned with matters of consequence. There is no time for idle dreaming in my life."
"Ah! You mean the stars?"
"Yes, that's it. The stars."
"And what do you do with five-hundred millions of stars?"
"Five-hundred-and-one million, six-hundred-twenty-two thousand, seven-hundred-thirty-one. I am concerned with matters of consequence: I am accurate."
"And what do you do with these stars?"
"What do I do with them?"
"Nothing. I own them."
"You own the stars?"
"But I have already seen a king who--"
"Kings do not own, they reign over. It is a very different matter."
"And what good does it do you to own the stars?"
"It does me the good of making me rich."
"And what good does it do you to be rich?"
"It makes it possible for me to buy more stars, if any are discovered."
"This man," the little prince said to himself, "reasons a little like my poor tippler . . ."
Nevertheless, he still had some more questions.
"How is it possible for one to own the stars?"
"To whom do they belong?" the businessman retorted, peevishly.
"I don't know. To nobody."
"Then they belong to me, because I was the first person to think of it."
"Is that all that is necessary?"
"Certainly. When you find a diamond that belongs to nobody, it is yours. When you discover an island that belongs to nobody, it is yours. When you get an idea before any one else, you take out a patent on it: it is yours. So with me: I own the stars, because nobody else before me ever thought of owning them."
"Yes, that is true," said the little prince. "And what do you do with them?"
"I administer them," replied the businessman. "I count them and recount them. It is difficult. But I am a man who is naturally interested in matters of consequence."
The little prince was still not satisfied.
"If I owned a silk scarf," he said, "I could put it around my neck and take it away with me. If I owned a flower, I could pluck that flower and take it away with me. But you cannot pluck the stars from heaven . . ."
"No. But I can put them in the bank."
"Whatever does that mean?"
"That means that I write the number of my stars on a little paper. And then I put this paper in a drawer and lock it with a key."
"And that is all?"
"That is enough," said the businessman.
"It is entertaining," thought the little prince. "It is rather poetic. But it is of no great consequence."
On matters of consequence, the little prince had ideas which were very different from those of the grown-ups.
"I myself own a flower," he continued his conversation with the businessman, "which I water every day. I own three volcanoes, which I clean out every week (for I also clean out the one that is extinct; one never knows). It is of some use to my volcanoes, and it is of some use to my flower, that I own them. But you are of no use to the stars . . ."
The businessman opened his mouth, but he found nothing to say in answer. And the little prince went away.
"The grown-ups are certainly altogether extraordinary," he said simply, talking to himself as he continued on his journey.
Bohr: (summarized by Aage Peterson, his assistant)
"There is no quantum world. There is only an abstract quantum physcial description. It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. physics concerns what we can say about nature."
It isn't very clear to me, just from this summary alone, but perhaps if you've read the pre text, it's saying that "Observations not only disturb what has to be measured, they produce it", by choosing your frame of refernce, for instance how to measure or from which perspective you are measuring or observing, it will determine what kind of results you get. Before measuring, everything just exists in a state of possibilities and probabilities.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
How I wonder what you are.
Up above the world so high,
Like a diamond in the sky.
Twinkle, twinkle, little star,
How I wonder what you are!
My friend asked my why do stars twinkle? And I was stupefied by the question, why haven't I actually thought of that before? I thought about that and couldn't come up with an answer, this shows that my brain is too rigid!
Stars twinkle because of turbulence in the atmosphere of the Earth. As the atmosphere churns, the light from the star is refracted in different directions. This causes the star's image to change slightly in brightness and position, hence "twinkle."
Saturday, June 7, 2008
What is space??? Where is the boundary of space? And what is it? Is space filled with electromagnetic field lines? Is that how space is defined? So when there are no electromagnetic field lines, then that is the end, that is the boundary of space???
And I was wondering as well, the use of the alarm clock. When we are sleeping and dreaming in our minds, which i call the electromagnetic world because when we are dreaming, we are purely using our minds to send electromagnetic signals to dream up things..... Then the sound in the physical particle atomic world hits us and we wake, this waking is what tells our mind the difference between conscious and unconscious... So I was amazed, haha, maybe you are not, but I really am.... Sound, or touch, particles in the particle world are what that seperates our conscious from the unconscious...... And I guess these are the fabric of the 3d world, atoms, particles..... in the 4th dimension or higher, the fabric should be the electromagnetic field lines.....
Another question I was wondering, we see blue because blue light is reflected from the object.... and this means that red light and green light is absorbed by the object.... (talking only about the 3 primary colors because if i'm not wrong, these are the pure sin waves, the basic building blocks of all colors). And now perhaps I see the light, haha, so perhaps red light which carries a certain frequency say F1 and green light say F2 will be absorbed because the energy band gap of the object has a level at F1 and a level at F2, and thus, red and green will be absorbed (meaning the energy from light will be absorbed by the atoms and the electrons would now posses enough energy to make the jump from one discrete energy level to the next (one shell to another shell).
Friday, June 6, 2008
"The first challenge in writing about colors is that they don't really exist. Or rather, they do exist, but only because our minds create them as an interpretation of vibrations that are happening around us. Everything in the universe - whether it is classified as 'solid' or 'liquid' or 'gas' or even 'vacuum' - is shimmering and vibrating and constantly changing. But our brains don't find that a very useful way of comprehending the world. So we translate what we experience into concepts like 'objects' and 'smells' and 'sounds' and, of course, 'colours', which are altogether easier for us to understand.
The universe is pulsating with an energy that we call electromagnetic waves. The frequencey range of electromagnetic waves is huge - from radio waves, which can sometimes have .... (Haha, I just realised it is so infinitely long, so i'll just highlight the interesting parts...)
When our eyes see the whole range of visible light together, they read it as 'white'. When some of the wavelengths are missing, they see it as 'coloured'.
So when we see 'red', what we are actually seeing is that portion of the electromagnetic spectrum with a wavelength of about 0.0007 mm in a situation where the other wavelengths are absent. It is our brains (and our language) which inform us it is 'red' ......
These chemical colors appear because they absorb some of the white light and reflect the rest. So the green glass on the book cover is simply absorbing the red and orange wavelengths from the white light around it, and is rejecting the green - so that is what we 'see'. but the big question is why? Why should some substances absorb red light and some absorb blue? And why should others - 'white' ones - not absorb very much light at all?
What is important to remember about 'chemical' colouring is that the light actually does affect the object. When light shines on an object, it actually causes it to rearrange its electrons, in a proces called 'transition'. ...
Imagine a soprano singing a high C and shattering a wineglass, because she catches its natural vibration. Something similar happens with the electrons, if a portion of the light happens to catch their natural vibration. It shoots them to another energy level and that relevant bit of light, that glass-shattering 'note', is used up and absorbed. The rest is reflected out, and our brains read it as 'colour'.
The atoms in a ripe tomato are busy shivering - or dancing or singing - in such a way that when white light light falls on them they absorb most of the blue and yellow light and reject the red.
~ Victoria Finlay
If we know not what bitter is, do we know what is sweet?
If we know not what sorrow is, do we know what is joy?
If we know not what ugly is, do we know what is beauty?
If we know not what hate is, do we know what is love?
If we know not what pain is, do we know what is pleasure?
If we know not what death is, do we know what is life?
Inspired from Shakespeare's shylock,
Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subjectto the same diseases, healed by the same means,warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, asa Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
Thursday, June 5, 2008
If there is karma in this world, does it mean all who suffer have sinned, or did something bad and it is the bad karma that is coming back to haunt them? (perhaps through devices like natural disasters or acts of terrorism or serial killings or even innoucuous innocent deaths like bizarre accidents)
When you are one of the few survivors in a natural disaster, do you thank the creator for keeping you alive or do you curse him for taking away the lives of so many others? Or is it again, karma at play?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
I believe that there is an absolute truth that we must find for ourselves... and there are many paths to getting there. Now I thought well what do people believe in the most generic of terms possible: either there is an afterlife (some sort of heaven) or we just die. To me, the earth being the end-all-be-all to the meaning of our existence (Atheism) seems just so limited when you really look at how amazing life itself is and how in the grand scheme of this galaxy/universe we live in, if things had been just perfect we wouldn't all be here... there's a design. That is my opinion but just like my friend I just don't see how there cannot be a creator... Random luck? Naw, I've seen karma at play too many times to believe in pure random luck.
Now if there is some higher power, then there is probably some sort of heaven or afterlife (though Agnostics might just think there is a high power but we still die and the end). As for all the other religions, I believe they are just different paths to same end: absolute truth...
The universal truth that we will all come to find when we die. There is one but it's a constant journey toward it through some sort of means of truth you believe is right. For me I'm Christian (Catholic to be specific) because for me that is the absolute truth I have found.
That doesn't mean I can judge whether or not you will go to "Heaven", nor does it mean either of our paths to truth are "wrong" (esp. to the point of needing to threaten me). It is what I believe is right and I will tell you about my beliefs, but you have the freewill to take it or leave it.
While it all is a mystery, there is a logic to it that gives my life stability. With relativity (ie. you're right and I'm right and he's right...etc) there is nothing stable to believe in... because if everyone is right we are just contradicting our own belief. That is why I believe in absolute truth.
One thing though... if you ever take a good hard look at each religion... there are underlying themes that bring peace to people's lives that are all the same. I think there is a connection to these philosophical principles that would keep us from being so divided. Another friend in the same class... his belief was that Religion divides and racism will always exist... I don't think its religion that divides i think it is ignorance (because if we were truly following a christian, hindu, muslim, or jewish... etc life then we would understand the principle of do unto others, sacrificing love... we are to judge for ourselves not for others... etc. Disrespect, hatred, causing physical harm to those who don't think or look like us... are all preached against in every faith and yet it never occurs to anyone that they are contradicting their own beliefs).
Just somethings I've been thinking about... I wouldn't mind someone playing devils advocate and giving me a good argument as to why there is no absolute truth. I'm up for philosophical, or musical, or cinematic-al or just plain random discussion any day... Ramble away (or rather Ramble on...)
Sunday, June 1, 2008
I was telling this to my friend "Ah Beng" and he said he was interested in this topic, but then again, he is interested in everything, and so I will post the comments which I wrote on that interesting blog here.
Here's a small part of what the author said,"
"Now I thought well what do people believe in the most generic of terms possible: either there is an afterlife (some sort of heaven) or we just die. To me, the earth being the end-all-be-all to the meaning of our existence (Atheism) seems just so limited when you really look at how amazing life itself is"
Me: Since life is so amazing, it's enough just to have experience this life on earth alone and perhaps an afterlife is not needed? True there may be a design but perhaps the design merely ends here and there is no after life, so perhaps the creator thought it sufficient for us just to live once through this beautiful world.
Why do you think that with a higher power around, there should be a heaven or after life?
The whole world is a mystery and perhaps that is what the creator meant it to be, a mystery and our purpose is to admire and enjoy this mystery. Perhaps the purpose of this life is to discover there really is no purpose. However, innately, we all have a need for stability and it might be a reason for the existence of religions. (Haha, I think sometimes I'm very long-winded)
"While it all is a mystery, there is a logic to it that gives my life stability. With relativity (ie. you're right and I'm right and he's right...etc) there is nothing stable to believe in... because if everyone is right we are just contradicting our own belief. That is why I believe in absolute truth."
Long-winded old man:
It's true that you say with relativity, everyone is right.
(Warning: This part is damn boring and an old cliche example but can't help it, it's too good an example)
Certainly there are absolutes in this world, for instance, killing is definitely wrong. However, that is if we examine from the perspective of the act of killing itself. However, if we see it from the point of view that perhaps the doctor killed the patient to relieve him of more sufferings, mercy killing, then killing wouldn't be an act of evil.
The essense of relativity is that people view things from different perspective and different point of views.
(Very dry theory)
The world is so complicated, there are so many factors we have to consider. True there are many absolutes, but most of the times these absolutes contradict with each other and hence we have dilemmas. for instance in the above example, the absolute of helping others relieve their suffering contradicts with the absolute of not killing. Therefore, relativity comes in when people see this from different frames of references or points of view. It's identical to the Einstein's theory of relativity, (haha, super interesting!). If we were all to see it from the same perspective, then we would all arrive at the same conclusion.
For instance, you said that you believe that all religions all lead to the same path, absolute truth. So you're saying that Hinduism is right, christanity is right, buddhism is right, taosim is right. But how can that be? just compare buddhism and christanity, in buddhism there is no god, in christanity, there is only one true god and all the other religions are false. (Pardon me if I'm wrong)
However, what you said was right too if we examine from your perspective, that is all the religions are just different paths to getting to the afterlife.
"Change is the only constant in life" But this statement means that nothing is constant, except change, which again requires relativity, a frame of reference to judge this. There is nothing absolute about this statement until you define you r frame of reference, so if you are getting a headache, that is because you have yet to define your frame of reference. If you view change as an object, then it is a constant. If you view change as change, that the statement means nothing is constant. It's the same in this world, till you define your frame of reference, you can't say anything is absolute.
If you study quantum physics, there is law and order in uncertainty. So what is absolute here? uncertainty? but how can uncertainty be an absolute?
The only certainty I've learnt in this world is there nothing is for sure and it's true we must have a stand and belief, but we have to leave perhaps some space for error otherwise there is no point in human communication for if everyone believes they are 100 percent right, than nothing will get through to the other person.
Must there be an absolute to everything? just like what George Bush said, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror.", isn't the idea of an absolute absolute dangerous? Because it's when both parties think they are absolutely right and that the other party is wrong and that's when the fighting starts.
Cool, something about the writing intrigues me, I can't really say it, but it's something to do with the way the author says it in such a matter of fact way...
And I wonder how true it is? That's why (My keyboard has xroblems, the x, is malfunctioning, and I can't even close the bracket as well.... they say that xlian looking girls usually have beautiful friends, because the beautiful girls feel good around the xlain looking girls.
And xerhaxs, the xlian looking girl could be more 'visible' with a beautiful friend and thus a 'win win' relationshix?
Hmm.... words from a true cycnic man, of course, there's no absolute in this world man.... But somehow, George Bush doesn't know this, "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."
It's like saying to a girl, you either love me or hate me... Oh come on, what logic is this man? The oxxosite of love is not hate, it is indifference.... Haha, issit? I'm not too sure about that... Then the oxxosite of hate is also indifference then.... It all depends from which perspective you are looking at it and hey, surprise surprise, the PPPPPPP is back!!!! Mircaculous.... Oh ya, as I was saying, it all depends on perspective which goes to further emphasize my point that nothing is absolute, this world is not just black and white, or good and evil, or rich and poor or beautiful and ugly... This world is never this simple, it is much more complicated than we can ever imagine...