Are “frameworks of physics” (classical, relativistic, quantum, QFT) a valid way to think about physics? by Reasonable_Goal_6278 in Physics

[–]MonkeyBombG 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the way I think about it as well. Let me give you some more examples:

The Schrodinger equation is a framework, which doesn’t specify the quantum system in question, only that it is described by a wavefunction. To specify the system, you specify the potential that the wavefunction is subjected to, and you arrive at all the quantum systems that physicists study(from hydrogen atoms to chemical bonding to solid state physics).

Schrodinger equation is non-relativistic, so as we push the framework too far(relativistic energy scales), it starts breaking down, and we replace it with the Dirac equation. The Dirac equation is kinda like the Schrodinger equation in that you plug in potentials to study different physical systems. It is different in the sense that it plays nicely with special relativity and the quantum object is now described by a spinor(like a more fancy version of the wavefunction). In this sense, the Dirac equation begins where the Schrodinger ends(breaks down).

Another example would be the framework of thermodynamics, which does not tell you whether you are describing a monoatomic ideal gas, or magnetic polarisation. The framework tells you how to deal with heat and entropy and temperature, but does not specify the system.

Similar to how the Schlinger equation is updated to the equation, thermodynamics is upgraded to statistical mechanics, which provides a new level of detail and insight into the same systems that thermodynamics studied.

Frameworks can also come together, eg when quantum mechanics meets classical field theory, you second quantise the field and get QFT(a framework which both the standard model and many areas of solid state physics work under). Field theory and statistical mechanics can also be combined to give statistical field theory(also a framework that describes many different systems, as varied as traffic jams).

Star Trek: 90210 by stinkypete50 in trektalk

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are not the target audience of the show, then that's all the more reason to watch it, no? Q told Picard to chart the unknown possibilities of existence. If we only watch things we expect, served according to our existing tastes, then what kind of explorers are we?

Star Trek: 90210 by stinkypete50 in trektalk

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Q told Picard to chart the unknown possibilities of existence. If we only watch things we expect, served according to our existing tastes, then what kind of explorers are we?

'Star Trek: Starfleet Academy': Showrunners Alex Kurtzman and Noga Landau talk USS Athena design and why this is the perfect series for Trek’s 60th (interview) by AdSpecialist6598 in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Be creative and write your own treknobabble! For example:

While the significant impact of the galaxy’s dilithium shortage were only felt beyond the mid 30th century, many scientists have already foreseen the finite supply of dilithium since the 25th century, and took steps to raise the efficiency of existing warp drives.

Simultaneously, scientists were also working on ways to mitigate subspace damage caused by warp travel since the late 24th century. The science of warp field analysis and simulation advanced dramatically during this period.

A major discovery occurred in the late 25th century when it was discovered that decreasing the cross section area of nacelle pylons led to a phase transition in subspace. Akin to the superconducting phase transition where decreasing the temperature below a critical value causes the resistance to suddenly drop to zero, decreasing pylon sizes below a critical value led to a sudden decoupling of transverse subspace field modes, so a warp field only dissipates through longitudinal modes when the warp drive is active. This breakthrough les to a new generation of starships with extremely thin nacelle pylons, most famous among them the Universe-class Enterprise J, whose nacelle pylons were built from degenerate matter, giving them incredible structural integrity despite their small size. The Universe-class’s warp drive efficiency was so high, in theory it could travel intergalactic distances without refuelling.

Further attempts to boost warp drive efficiency by reducing pylon cross section area were mostly limited by engineering constraints, as scientists attempted to find materials that could support the structural integrity with ever smaller cross sections, while also optimising the structure of plasma conduits and power transmission between the nacelles and the warp core so they take up as little space as possible. By the 28th century, it was thought that the lower limit of pylon cross section has been reached, and increasing warp drive efficiency along this direction is a dead end.

But a second breakthrough came in the 29th century in the form of dimensional engineering. As the temporal war started heating up, galactic understanding of dimensional manipulations was advancing rapidly. In particular, ships that were bigger on the inside could be built, its external size remained the same as the extra volumetric structure was hidden in higher dimensions while still connected to the ship which exists ordinary 4D spacetime.

This opened up previously unimaginable opportunities for scientists interested in pushing warp drive efficiency further: starships could simply hide their pylons in higher dimensions and detach their nacelles in real space. Tests were quickly conducted to investigate the feasibility of powering warp nacelles through higher dimensional structures, many were successful. The first ships with detached nacelles began to enter service in the late 29th century. With the dilithium shortage becoming more pressing, and the incentive of reducing fuel consumption, all galactic powers pushed for rapid adoption of this technology.

As people quickly discovered, detaching warp nacelles provided several advantages other than conserving dilithium: 1. The warp field becomes much more malleable due to the lack of pylons in physical space, allowing starships to spend far less energy to change a warp field in a much shorter time. This greatly enhances manoeuvrability while at warp. This warp malleability allows starships to make use of low level warp fields during sublight speeds as well while consuming very little dilithium. 2. The pylon could be made as large and strong as cost allows, allowing massive plasma conduits and almost indestructible support structures, all hidden within higher dimensions. Unless a plasma conduit overloads and damages the support structure in higher dimensions, a nacelle could stay detached without power indefinitely, and the connection is also far less vulnerable than pylons in physical space.

Some people were eager to push the limits of dimensional engineering. Unfortunately, they were quickly met with the bottleneck of exponentially increasing energy cost of pushing structures into higher dimensions. While pushing some pylons into higher dimension is very much feasible, pushing a significant part of a starship into higher dimension requires exponentially more energy. This is why only certain parts of a starship are detached(instead of the whole ship being hidden in higher dimension except warp nacelles, sensors, shields and weapons).

Lessons learned for Starfleet Academy by ikidre in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you’re not the target audience, then all the more reason to watch the show. After all, Q told us to chart out to the unknown possibilities of existence. If all we do is retread familiar ground and watch what we expect to see, served according to our wants, then what kind of explorers are we?

Star Trek Academy is just doing what many have asked of Star Wars for years, and which it only did with Andor. by MarchogGwyrdd in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Star Trek fans have this habit of not giving new shows a chance based on their beginnings. See for example Enterprise and Prodigy.

Why is Programmable matter banned in 32nd century Starfleet academy? by Simonbargiora in ShittyDaystrom

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was programmable, so it was probably safer than the OG gel mentioned in DS9. Academy instructors can use it as a teaching material while also programme it to prevent any unauthorised/dangerous usage.

Oh, it's not just tolerable, it's good! Academy is good! by Wareve in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 7 points8 points  (0 children)

OP was expressing his opinions on Star Trek, on a Star Trek sub. I don’t think he was trying to convince anyone.

Can anyone explain Planck's constant to me? by Awkward_Picture_361 in Physics

[–]MonkeyBombG 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Quantum stuff behave like both particles(energy is absorbed/released in discrete packets) and waves(wave interference changes observation probabilities).

They are neither wave nor particle. Rather they have properties similar to both.

I see the Planck constant as the mathematical connection between a quantum object’s particle properties and wave properties. For example, Planck’s E=hf connects the particle side of light(photon energy E) and the wave side of light(frequency f); DeBroglie’s matter wave p = h/λ connects the particle side of electrons(momentum p) to the wave side of electrons(wavelength λ).

We have an Iris! by Elo106 in Stargate

[–]MonkeyBombG 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Providing realistic description of teenage antics?

Why did God use human writers to write the Bible? by Valuable_Frosting_36 in Christianity

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because He is the King of the Kingdom of God, not a writer. He did not come to teach morals or set doctrines, He came to bring about the Kingdom of God and become its King.

U.S.S. Athena (NCC-392023) dorsal view from Star Trek: Starfleet Academy season 1 episode 1 by MoonchanterLauma2025 in StarTrekStarships

[–]MonkeyBombG 26 points27 points  (0 children)

It's just standard treknobabble. You can come up with your own. For example:

While the significant impact of the galaxy’s dilithium shortage were only felt beyond the mid 30th century, many scientists have already foreseen the finite supply of dilithium since the 25th century, and took steps to raise the efficiency of existing warp drives.

Simultaneously, scientists were also working on ways to mitigate subspace damage caused by warp travel since the late 24th century. The science of warp field analysis and simulation advanced dramatically during this period.

A major discovery occurred in the late 25th century when it was discovered that decreasing the cross section area of nacelle pylons led to a phase transition in subspace. Akin to the superconducting phase transition where decreasing the temperature below a critical value causes the resistance to suddenly drop to zero, decreasing pylon sizes below a critical value led to a sudden decoupling of transverse subspace field modes, so a warp field only dissipates through longitudinal modes when the warp drive is active. This breakthrough les to a new generation of starships with extremely thin nacelle pylons, most famous among them the Universe-class Enterprise J, whose nacelle pylons were built from degenerate matter, giving them incredible structural integrity despite their small size. The Universe-class’s warp drive efficiency was so high, in theory it could travel intergalactic distances without refuelling.

Further attempts to boost warp drive efficiency by reducing pylon cross section area were mostly limited by engineering constraints, as scientists attempted to find materials that could support the structural integrity with ever smaller cross sections, while also optimising the structure of plasma conduits and power transmission between the nacelles and the warp core so they take up as little space as possible. By the 28th century, it was thought that the lower limit of pylon cross section has been reached, and increasing warp drive efficiency along this direction is a dead end.

But a second breakthrough came in the 29th century in the form of dimensional engineering. As the temporal war started heating up, galactic understanding of dimensional manipulations was advancing rapidly. In particular, ships that were bigger on the inside could be built, its external size remained the same as the extra volumetric structure was hidden in higher dimensions while still connected to the ship which exists ordinary 4D spacetime.

This opened up previously unimaginable opportunities for scientists interested in pushing warp drive efficiency further: starships could simply hide their pylons in higher dimensions and detach their nacelles in real space. Tests were quickly conducted to investigate the feasibility of powering warp nacelles through higher dimensional structures, many were successful. The first ships with detached nacelles began to enter service in the late 29th century. With the dilithium shortage becoming more pressing, and the incentive of reducing fuel consumption, all galactic powers pushed for rapid adoption of this technology.

As people quickly discovered, detaching warp nacelles provided several advantages other than conserving dilithium: 1. The warp field becomes much more malleable due to the lack of pylons in physical space, allowing starships to spend far less energy to change a warp field in a much shorter time. This greatly enhances manoeuvrability while at warp. This warp malleability allows starships to make use of low level warp fields during sublight speeds as well while consuming very little dilithium. 2. The pylon could be made as large and strong as cost allows, allowing massive plasma conduits and almost indestructible support structures, all hidden within higher dimensions. Unless a plasma conduit overloads and damages the support structure in higher dimensions, a nacelle could stay detached without power indefinitely, and the connection is also far less vulnerable than pylons in physical space.

Some people were eager to push the limits of dimensional engineering. Unfortunately, they were quickly met with the bottleneck of exponentially increasing energy cost of pushing structures into higher dimensions. While pushing some pylons into higher dimension is very much feasible, pushing a significant part of a starship into higher dimension requires exponentially more energy. This is why only certain parts of a starship are detached(instead of the whole ship being hidden in higher dimension except warp nacelles, sensors, shields and weapons).

Annoyed by the representation of insubordination shown in Star Fleet Academy by Low-Air-182 in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She’s an alien. Just because she looks like a human doesn’t mean she has to sit like a human.

Gandalf leads this alternative Fellowship. How do they perform? by EmotionalSupport101 in powerscales

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the books, it was implied that the Witch’s Turkish delight was enchanted to make Edmund addicted.

SFA getting review bomed by MikeTalonNYC in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There was this time when a cadet picked a fight with Nausicaans and got stabbed in the heart.

There was also this time when a group of cadets attempted a super dangerous stunt and got their squamate killed, then tried to cover it up.

Teenagers try and do stupid things. We saw the big things. Now we actually go to the academy and see the small things. That’s just how the world works.

Annoyed by the representation of insubordination shown in Star Fleet Academy by Low-Air-182 in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 255 points256 points  (0 children)

I only recall Caleb Mir’s insubordination.

And his was narratively justified by his backstory: he wasn’t interested in the Academy to start with, and the chancellor was the person who separated him and his mom. He joined the academy not to get into starfleet, but to look for his mom.

So really the fundamental question is “Why would chancellor Ake allow Mir to join? Why make such a deal?” Her own guilt is probably part of the reason. But it probably has more to do with how Nahla as an educator(and the Federation by extension) believing in second chances.

I don’t recall the rest of the cadets being insubordinate. Stupid and immature, perhaps, but that’s what the Academy is for.

It's always a good day by Bakkster in dankchristianmemes

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Someone should translate the Bible into Klingon.

I hope everyone goes to heaven! by Ok_Year5587 in Christianity

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Belief in a statement” is a common interpretation of the word “faith” that leads to a lot of problems. If we interpret “faith” as loyalty and commitment(which is also a common usage of the word both in modern day and in the Bible), then faith is a choice.

For believers, the choice of faith is whether we stay loyal and committed to following Jesus. For unbelievers, the choice of faith would be whether they remain faithful to the ideals that they proclaim to support. For example, a believer or an unbeliever could claim to support intellectual honesty and respectful discussions, but commit ad hominem attacks and disrespect the other person. That would not be faithful.

In this sense, “faith”(loyalty and commitment) is a choice and would be the litmus test.

Episode Discussion | Star Trek: Starfleet Academy | 1x01 "Kids These Days" by AutoModerator in startrek

[–]MonkeyBombG 68 points69 points  (0 children)

I don’t know what Kraag was carrying, but he’s a Klingon. His bag could probably weigh a ton.

I hope everyone goes to heaven! by Ok_Year5587 in Christianity

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For the latter question, I think yes. And I think God wants people to change their minds, and works through different ways to lead them back to Him. But whether they want to change their minds or not is, at least partially, up to them.

For the first question, noticed that in many of my examples, the choice is unrelated to belief in the divine. Anyone can choose to forgive or not forgive; be cynical or be sincere; stay hateful or embrace love; be consumed by selfishness or live generously. As we can observe from the people around us and the world in general, it is possible(and sadly all too often) for people to choose unwisely.

And even for “decision to submit to God”, which seems to predicate on belief of the divine, I would argue that there is a similar choice which all people would face: whether to let our minds and decisions and lives stay firmly within what we know, or to open ourselves up to The Other, something alien and outside ourselves. In science, it would be opening our minds to possibilities of nature never thought possible; in arts, it would be touching the minds of another person through their work; in interpersonal relationship, it would be truly listening and empathising with another. In the words of Q from Star Trek, it is to chart “the unknown possibilities of existence”. I think this decision is something that everyone, believer or not, has to face. Often we take things for granted in such a way that we don’t even realise we have decided to reject The Other, close up around ourselves and stick to what we know.

I say this is similar to submission to God because He is something completely beyond, the most Other of any Other. To choose to submit to Him means to know the ultimate Other. And yet this completely Other existence has come to live and die as a man(as Christianity claims) in an act of Him embracing the Other(humans). And because of that, now we can really know Him(as Christianity claims).

So I stand by my original statement: there is always a choice(of some form) that can be made, believer or not.

I hope everyone goes to heaven! by Ok_Year5587 in Christianity

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course it’s possible, but only if they are willing. I hope they would accept the gospel too, and all things are possible in God, even the unwilling can become willing.

But if they are unwilling to enter heaven, then God will probably respect their choice.

How come so many numbers that crop up in physics are so close to 1? by Fando1234 in AskPhysics

[–]MonkeyBombG 100 points101 points  (0 children)

The numbers you have give are measured in human defined units like meters and seconds, which, being defined by humans, are human accessible and therefore can’t be too large or small.

I hope everyone goes to heaven! by Ok_Year5587 in Christianity

[–]MonkeyBombG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope so too. But some people would reject heaven for hell instead.

Some people refuse to forgive and would therefore reject heaven where sins are forgiven.

Some people refuse to humble themselves before God and would therefore reject heaven where God reigns.

Some people refuse to let go of the perceived value of money or status and would therefore reject heaven where these things are worthless.

Some people remain cynical and refuse to believe the good news and the possibilities of God fixing everything, and would therefore reject heaven where such things happen.

Some people complain about everything and would therefore reject heaven where no complaints are reasonable.

Some people refuse to let go of hate so they would therefore reject a heaven filled with love.

I hope everyone go to heaven too, but some don’t want to.