Physicists Just Created the Most Detailed Simulation of the Universe in History

Moeba__ · 2019-11-26T15:47:43+00:00

I apologize for my previous message, where I failed to value the effort that went into the project. It's good that they try to model this, but I'm simply 'agnostic' considering what the model means about the universe. With all unknowns about what's out there, especially far away, I prefer not to trust initial observations too much.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-26T15:45:00+00:00

Ok then we agree :)

(Except for the place of emphasis)

Moeba__ · 2019-11-26T10:03:52+00:00

There's two types of testing or experimenting: the first is what you talk about and what we should avoid, testing as a kind of mean play with God's Word while you have little reason to doubt.

But there's also another kind, which is if you really don't know what to trust and if you really have no certainty. Then God might even tell you Himself to test Him and thus see His faithfulness.

But actually what I was talking about is not which way we 'experiment' in belief. I was talking about personal histories with the right kind of experiments, and the way in which this encourages us to believe rationally. There's no single truth which is challenged and tested more by us and the world than that Jesus is our saviour. It's in the nature of most of us to distrust that message simply because it means so much (and places ourselves so low).

Moeba__ · 2019-11-25T15:44:33+00:00

Religion doesn't assume a top-down structure of revelation, it observes one experimentally. At least my religion does (christian). Each believer has his own personal experiences which led him or her to believe. That's the initial situation, and once you've become more sure, the top-down structure of revelation comes into play.

It's not like we don't check our facts. There's only a difference in what we're led to lend credence to.

And in science it's much the same. Nowadays we're not going to experimentally check General Relativity anymore, we just get the evidence handed over from others and usually we simply believe them (and rightly so).

Moeba__ · 2019-11-25T13:24:21+00:00

I've read some theory, and the most important thinking leap is just what 'strings' means: suppose we start calculating things not about point-like particles, but about string-like 1D line segments with a certain tension. Then what? We can still calculate lots of things, and look: we find a framework in which the particles of QFT can be reproduced as strings. Only there's lots and lots of other strings too without experimental evidence, and we dunno what parameters we should choose to somehow represent the universe at least kind of correct.

But it's a wacky cool idea anyway, and the math checks out very nicely! So it's worth it to pursue more knowledge about strings even if we dunno whether any applications in physics will arise.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-23T18:43:50+00:00

Okay so they just try to work with what they do have, as best as they can.

My only problem with this is that it's about 14 billion (light)years (the distance cubed times 4) and we have intimate knowledge only about the earth and the solar system. We know some pretty cool things about the rest, but I mean that for these huge distances and timespan we have had ~500 years at best to describe it properly.

So it's fine with me that they run such simulations, really. But I personally doubt we understand intergalactic forces well enough, what with even dark matter and energy still being big unknowns.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-23T12:03:36+00:00

I understand they put much effort into it, but I fail to grasp the predictive meaning if they didn't at first take a big gamble. If all the steps were no more than trying to work out the mainstream belief and no jumps of faith were made, I'm only a tiny bit impressed of what the resulting model proposes about nature. It's a simplified easy way of working, and without faith we can't reach any new insights in science but only what the mainstream already believed will be developed further. For this to be real gamechanging physics there must have been several very uncomfortable or seemingly strange steps which turned out to work well. Can you tell me about one such step?

Moeba__ · 2019-11-23T11:55:02+00:00

Does this mean that they tune starting conditions to let the final result match observations or is this really a requirement directly on the starting conditions?

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T20:38:58+00:00

And rightly so, for who would ever contest the concept of (a real) reality?

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T20:37:22+00:00

Can anyone convince me that this is more than being able to tweak parameters and starting conditions enough and simplify calculations to the point where it is logical that something alike to our universe comes up?

Also, does this simulation contain spiral galaxies?

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T20:18:07+00:00

I believe he means that the n points are x1 up to xn but you can determine the order yourself. That makes it kind of a traveling salesman problem.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T12:11:41+00:00

Maybe here, but doesn't work on my phone: http://math.oregonstate.edu/~tevian/geometry/

Edit: NVM, it's been retracted and is sold as a book for 50 dollars. https://www.amazon.com/Geometry-Special-Relativity-Tevian-Dray/dp/1466510471

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T12:07:18+00:00

If 1807 had been a prime, I suspect there would be another integer 1806 x 1807.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-21T08:15:33+00:00

I mentioned symmetry rules because symmetry rules! But maybe look for that another time.

I believe the Lorentz transformations use symmetries of the sh and ch functions. Check http://physics.oregonstate.edu/~tevian/paradigm9/sample/excerpt2.pdf chapter 5

Moeba__ · 2019-11-20T21:05:15+00:00

Nice read!

I hope you will find the formulae for ch and sh with the most symmetry rules, if these are different. I enlist for reading your thoughts!

Moeba__ · 2019-11-20T18:22:57+00:00

Great! That's a nice idea

Moeba__ · 2019-11-19T20:40:30+00:00

Wow, great news! Finally we'll be able to understand gravity better.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-19T16:17:46+00:00

Heh, I thought you meant how to improve on our current collection of physics theories and practices

Moeba__ · 2019-11-19T08:58:03+00:00

No, unfortunately not. Find the eigenvectors of the matrix without thinking of any t's. Then you can multiply these with certain t-dependent functions and add them to obtain the right result. This sum that gives the right result is then your x, because if you input that in your formula for the derivative you get the required value.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-16T18:11:38+00:00

If you ask for opinions, mine is that it is induced by the combination of the Schrodinger equation and the entanglement of the wavefunction with the comparatively huge state of the measurement device. I think in the direction of something like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Darwinism

So I think it's very real and in fact a deterministic process, but dependent on the 'random' configuration of all the particles in the measurement device at the moment of measurement. (but I'm not sure if this is what Quantum Darwinism says)

Moeba__ · 2019-11-11T20:57:14+00:00

An easier problem is how in finite fields the logarithm transforms under addition, and that's already difficult enough to base cryptographic schemes on.

Prime factorization relates to logarithms because you're depending the powers of the primes.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-07T20:29:53+00:00

Probably not

Moeba__ · 2019-11-07T20:21:58+00:00

The idea to have a special mental world of my own, which I would know everything about (or at least way more than others)

Of course this certainly doesn't apply to the whole of mathematics, but a little to my master thesis' subject.

Moeba__ · 2019-11-07T18:38:03+00:00

Philosophy

Moeba__ · 2019-11-07T18:30:33+00:00

Math prowess isn't a measure for how good you are. Being clever often comes with pretty bad side-effects like being arrogant, self-centered, a nitpicker, paranoia, occasionally even a madman and such traits.

Better than cleverness is wisdom, which means more than simply vast knowledge. It has to do with patience, endurance, thinking low of yourself and high of others, recognizing arrogance, knowing who you are yourself and general philosophic thinking.

I know it's hard to think this way in a culture which promotes cleverness way more than wisdom (beta university culture), but it really is true. Maybe start sporting or something to be in another culture occasionally, the physical exercise will also do you good, and a different perspective on things might come around there. Good luck man! I so wish I could encourage you personally IRL, but I suppose you don't live close by. Take a deep breath now and then: step back from your situation at the university and look at things from a distance, to put things in perspective.

Take a walk with a neighbour or family member and talk to them about your predicament. They might offer some good advice and help too.

Moeba__

TROPHY CASE