...And nothing of value was lost.

>Go see some horror movie years ago with a friend at midnight.
>Theater is empty except for some black woman up front.
>she starts yelling
>"NAW DON'T GO IN THERE"
>"WHY YOU DO THAT"
> I yell back "TELL HER"
>"YEAH SEE THIS BOI GETS IT"
>"YEAH I GET IT"
>later, a person dies from being decapitated, the woman screams
>"OOOOH DAYUM"
>I yell back "DO YOU THINK SHE'S DEAD"
>"HOW THE FUCK YOU GON LIVE WITH NO HEAD"
>"I DON'T KNOW MAYBE AN AMBULANCE WILL COME"
>"THEY IN THE FUCKIN' WOODS"

Yeah.

I remember having a debate with what appeared to be a radical Muslim. He went on and on about how peaceful his religion is, and when I proved him wrong he started wishing for my death. And they wonder why people have a general distaste for Islam?

If what she was convicted of was true, then serves her right.

YOU BROKE IT

no

Hear me out here guys. I hate it but I'm about to sound like a crackpot.

A scientific law is a verifiable statement about regularities in behavior of some aspect of existence. Clear?

 Essentially, what we do when we do physics is we partition off some aspect of existence and study and try to describe it in a mathematically precise way, if we don't make this partition we quickly become bogged down due background and interference.  Its physics in a box. Locally this is fine but maybe thinking that this applies globally is fallacious. There's, to my knowledge, no particular reason laws should be eternally unchanging as most people conceive them to be. The math we use to describe them doesn't change, is eternal, but I'm not the Platonist I used to be.

Wait a minute, what about relativity? How can laws change if there is no globally agreed upon sense of simultaneity which can be referenced, no flow of time as it were. If you know anything about the conception of time in general relativity you know that it is essentially a complex-valued dimension. This gives you a block universe, complete determinism. This complete determinism could in some interpretations violate causality. . .
   ie. The reaction didn't happen because the action caused it, it happened because it was just the next part in the previously determined sequence.

This brings me to a new classical theory of gravity that may very well be more fundamental than GR and prove to be more amenable to quantization. This theory is called shape dynamics, it's been developed and worked on by several groups of theoretical physicists including Lee Smolin.

WARNING: What follows is a rundown of my very incomplete understanding of a difficult theory, bring your salt shaker.

It's in agreement with the ADM formulation of GR when it comes to experimental tests(so far, phenomenologists should be hard at work)but allows for some space times that GR doesn't and vice versa. Especially enticing is that it allows for singularities found in GR to be smoothed out, in which case they become wormholes(including the one we run into in the early universe). This is achieved by trading global relativity of simultaneity for conformal invariance(relativity of size) in which case Lorentz invariance should emerge. While the phenomenon of time dilation should be locally preserved this should allow for, at least in some sense, a globally preferred time.

OK that, possibly solves the issue of the absence of a needed a flow of time when it comes to laws that can change. How might they change. . .I don't fucking know, but I think Lee Smolin's idea of cosmological natural selection is on the right track. Essentially posits that every black hole spawns a baby spacetime(remember those wormholes from earlier and yes I'm intentionally avoiding the term universe). When this happens perhaps the laws in the resultant spacetime can mutate or change from the ones in the parent. Spacetimes that make more backholes produce more offspring, making it statistically likely that most of the spacetimes in existence are right for maximal backholes production(fun fact, this could explain the fine tuning problem w/o reference to anthropic principle because as far as we can tell our universe fit for maximal backholes production which coincidentally makes good at producing life).

How those laws change, I don't know. . .you could posit metalaws but then you run into the same question of "why should this metalaw be unchanging?"

I am of course ever aware of the fact that I could be totally full of shit here.

I think I got the jist of that. Damn, the universe is crazy.

There are more stars in the galaxy than there are atoms in the universe

There are more galaxies in the star than there are universes in the atom

Shut up Jaden.

how come the sky is the ground and the ground is the sky

Hey! I'm not a beta.

I had sex once.

haha it funny cus ur azn

Quote from: Nexus on January 16, 2015, 02:02:14 PM

Quote from: PSU on January 16, 2015, 01:53:26 PM

P.E.? You mean the most important subject in high school?

You mean art.

You mean creative writing.

You mean liberal arts