Sunday, July 18, 2010

Equality is highly overrated part 2

Anonymous said...

Calculus seems analog, not digital. It is the mathematics of limits. The entire foundation of calculus is the study of what happens when we take something discrete and push the intervals to the infinitesimal.

DNA seems digital, not analog. There are a finite number of bases arranged in a finite number of pairs. In what way is that analog?

And as to equality, you offered some examples of how everyday things aren't equal, but can you offer any concrete examples of where physics goes wrong in assuming equality when it shouldn't?

I will again start from the bottom and work to the top. Concrete examples are easy to find. 

The most simple example of everyday things are not equal is Einstein's work. 

Energy (a field) cannot equal a scalar * a vector squared. When you square a vector your result will be a vector. Multiplying a vector by a scalar again leaves a vector. Thus E does not equal mc^2, ever.
Newton's Gravity cannot produce results for n bodies. The reason this occurs is because mass is a one dimensional object. One dimensional objects cannot represent any 3 dimensional object. There is just not enough information in mass to describe how gravity and magnetism interact. 
Fourier's Law of heat conduction.
Fourier's Law states that heat flows always travel from hot to cold. If you take a steel bar and bend it into a square u shape, then place one end into liquid nitrogen and the torch the other end to the exact temperature change in the positive direction, you will see that cold flows to hot and hot flows to cold. You will see the frost on the bar exceed the midpoint of the bar. This problem has more to do with capacitance and conductivity of the baryons.
Lets look at that DNA problem. The data in DNA is digital. The motion of that data from molecule to molecule is analog. Analog to Digital and Digital to Analog conversion is required for motion of data. Until that last statement is fundamentally understood it will be impossible to describe the structure, motion and interactions of Z bosons. This is even true for computers. For a processor to send data to RAM it needs to send the data through a series of conversions to get the data to the memory and reverse the conversion to return the data back to the processor.

I am not prepared to describe Z boson analog motion any more than I already have in this blog. I am tired of being paid to be a disabled epileptic. $13500 per year is not enough to live on. I cannot afford to seek the treatment I need. I can barely run one computer let alone my whole system. I would like to produce experiments that prove what I am saying is true/false, but I lack the resources to build these simple systems or to be of benefit to society. 
If we understood fractals and non-linear equations we would see that calculus does not describe interactions. Calculus requires a universal time clock, this is not found in the universe. dt binds the equation to a standard time. This is not to say Calculus is not useful, it is just not useful in describing interactions of analog or non-related data. I really should have never brought up the issue with calculus, this discussion will only bring up disdain in readers.

Thanks for reading my work.
Aaron Guerami 
Post a Comment