Laymen question about relativity

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Doctor Dread, Oct 6, 2017.

  1. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    Perhaps you are right; I should have not relied on such subtleties in your wording, because you often use terms in non-standard ways that you do not explain upfront.

    I don't want to accuse you of anything, but it's you who is bringing up all kinds of irrelevant things.
    Also, if you think I'm waylaying this discussion on purpose, please contact the moderation staff about it.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. phyti Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    259
    NotEinsein #21
    The first humans were exposed to a multitude of things in varying quantities.
    The formal definition of a number system came later, building on the unit (1).
    It depends on the context/circumstances.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    For the record, you are quoting post #58, not #21.

    Sure, but when the first number(s) was/were introduced, was it the number 2, the number 1, or both (and possibly included others)? That was what I was talking about, not the formal definition that came later.

    You've missed the context in which this was brought up. At that point in the discussion, Write4U was claiming that a pair of scratches has meaning, but a single scratch doesn't; see post #42: "A scratch on a piece of wood has not intrinsic meaning, but two scratches is arithmetic and a series of scratches show a chronology." However, you seem to say (as do I) that a single scratch can have meaning, in post #57: "The prisoner starts marking his days with a '/'. "
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    When where prisons invented? And if the prison does not have windows, how could you tell night from day? Context does matter.

    Actually my introduction of the number "two" was in context of the first recognition and given a symbolic cypher of a plurality, a recurring pair pattern. But that was overlooked .
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017 at 11:10 PM
  8. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    If the prison doesn't have windows and it is impossible to tell night from day, then you have just destroyed your own argument from post #60:
    "Not as a single symbol to indicate a plurality except perhaps for a prisoner making 1 scratch to indicate a day/night cycle (24 hr) because for a prisoner that's all there is when serving his time."

    The problem with that is that plurality doesn't equal to the number 2, but to "2 or more"/"more than 1". There's no inherent two-ness in plurality. So if some symbolic cypher was assigned to "plurality", that cannot be said to be the discovery/invention of the number 2.
     
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    Yes, but that was before I recalled the movie Count of Monte Cristo where the hero is locked up in a prison without windows....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Perhaps the days were counted by the bowl of slop fed once per day...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    So, you have just indicated the dividing line between cognition of quantities as more or less and counting of specific quantities based on the most common observable pair patterns or sets of 2 opposites or mirror images.

    Keep in mind the time frame we are looking at. The appearance of early humans fom a common hominoid ancestor and their more sophisticated brains. The cave dwellers who already showed artistry (colored drawings) from observation and the use of ritual practices such as burials.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2017 at 8:28 AM
  10. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    (No comment.)

    Erm, I've brought up this dividing line before?

    How is this relevant to the discussion at hand?
     
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    evolution in brain neural networks and specialization to allow for complex or abstract thinking?
    I would guess the Einsteins in those days would be the elders with the most experience.
     
  12. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    Sure, but why are you bringing this up?
     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    Because it is the OP subject? Relativity is the ability to observe reality from 2 frames of observation..
     
  14. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    Erm, the OP is quite clearly about the theory of relativity in physics. How is your post related to the theory of relativity in physics?
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    What makes you assume that we are we talking about GR and not SR which is much simpler to understand for a layman as myself, but lays the foundation for the concept of how events appear to happen from different (relative) perspectives.
     
  16. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    I didn't specify which theory, so it's you making the assumption. But let's have it your way: explain how your post is related to the special theory of relativity?
     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    Because you need two frames of reference for comparison.
     
  18. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    Explain to my what the special theory of relativity has to do with:

     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    It's all related, no? And anticipating your next question: At that time no one had any concept of SR, but the phenomena in SR did exist before Einstein formalized it into scientif language. no?
     
  20. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    Explain how.

    What phenomena exactly? And please be precise.
     
  21. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    Wave compression and expansion. Not that people in those days had any idea this phemomena existed. But waves and their behavior patterns are observable, especially at coastlines, where some very early humans lived.
    Waves come rolling in (short wavelengths), but gliding out (long wavelengths). Fishermen would be very familiar with that phenomena and its dangers and benefits, without realizing its causalities. To them it might have been the breathing in and out by the gods of the sea.
     
  22. NotEinstein Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    545
    I see you've decided to "forget" to answer the first part of my post.

    Utterly unrelated to the theory of special relativity.

    Utterly unrelated to the theory of special relativity. At best, related to the theory of general relativity through the universal expansion, but you explicitly said you were talking about the theory of special relativity.

    Totally depends on the definition of expansion. The expansion of the universe; sure! The expansion of a pregnant woman's belly; I'm quite sure even cavemen can notice that.

    Sure, but how is this a phenomena from the theory of special relativity?

    Utter non-sense.

    Utterly unrelated to the theory of special relativity.
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,080
    Ok, lets take the mind of a 5 or six year old child. Rather than accepting things as they are, they are beginning to ask "why this' and "why that" , the first sign of trying to connect events with other events and why . This is were the early mind of the recently evolved human mind was at one time, maybe 50,000 years ago.
    The transition stage of asking questions about their environment. The appearance of the concept of gods.
    The unseen movers and shakers of the world around them.
    The Doppler effect is not SR?
    The Doppler effect. You are trying to place everything in context of today.
    Right, the miracle of pregnacy, and the invention of the spear, the flaking of special stones, which yielded sharp edges.
    Building fires for warmth, cooking. Little refinements of the everyday tools. inventing new ways of doing things. Tool making.
    because the Doppler effect is part of SR. The compression and expansion of sound waves which yield different sounds to different observers (although this may have come later) . But
    Of course, to a mature modern mind it is. To a child'smind these these things are wonders.
    Of course, all current scientific theories were non existent and came maybe 50,000 years later. But the question of why and how were beginning to appear. The brain was beginning to consciously learn things from obervation.
    Pattern recognition in the heavens and the concept of time and regularly occurring things which had never been questioned before.

    Forget modern day science. Instead place yoursel in the brain of a child asking questions about what adults take for granted. Try to think from the perspective of 100,000 to 50,000 years ago.
    Today we can see early humans in the slower evolved brains of Cimpanzees who already use rudimentary tools, sea otters selecting just the right stones to use as an anvil and hammer. Intuitive recognition of more and less as seen in Lemurs. The evolution and refinement of using sonar in bats and whales.

    This is the time frame when huma brain development began to think in more sophisticated ways than prior species and began to use the brain as a volitional tool in homo habilis and later in homo sapiens.
    Octopi and cuttle fishes are advanced mollusks, slugs. Big difference.

    The evolutionary growth of ever greater sophistication in the brain's mirror neural network .
    This is the time I am trying to envision.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2017 at 10:19 PM

Share This Page