provided all motion involved is uniform, we can translate motion perceived in one frame of reference to another frame of reference.
If we are on a platform, and we see a train move past us a 30 miles/hour. The train is a frame of reference moving uniformly to us on the platform. If there is man on the train walking in the train at 3 km/hr in the very same direction as the train is, then that man's speed in reference to the train is 3 miles/hour but in reference to us on the platform is 33km/hr. (Speed of train + speed of man).
The converse also holds true, where the man in the train if he walks at 3 miles/hour in the opposite direction as the motion of the train, then man's speed on the train
with reference to the person on the platform would be 27 miles/ hour.
(speed of train - speed of man)
In every day experience, this could be seen when we walk on an escalator as opposed to remaining still we reach the higher floor much faster.
Taking this one step ahead, lets say if I was driving a car at 50 miles/hour and you come by in a Ferrari at 75 miles/hour, with respect to me the Ferrari would be at 25miles/hour.
However, when we use a similar example with light, the laws of transformation do not hold ground. If the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second & if we are travelling in the same direction as light let say at 100,000 miles an hour, the light should be travelling faster at 286,000 miles/hour on account of the Newtonian Law of transformation that is compounded with our speed, but that is not so, light continues to travel at 186,000 miles/hour irrespective of our speed.
If we were travelling away form the source at 100,000 miles/ hour of light the relative speed does not decrease to 86,000 miles/hour , it still remain the same at 186,000 miles/hour.
To most of us, this contrariwise logic about the speed of light becomes difficult to grasp. And this reason is largely because we live our lives at speeds much slower than the speed of light. As such we get accustomed to such low speed where the laws of transformation hold good, or rather our senses get used to the limited environment we have.
If we would want to expand our understanding beyond the limitation of our environment it becomes necessary to rearrange our thoughts.
And this is what Einstein did, he was the first to see that it would require one to look at physics in a whole new light a whole new thought process. When he published his theory of Relativity in 1905, he was aware of the ambiguity of light and his thesis did show that light did behave in such a manner. The prevailing thought at that time was based on Newtonian Laws.
It would be important to note that Einstein did not get the Nobel Prize for the theory of Relativity, but the Nature of Light. He got the Nobel Prize to overcome the limitation of the environment, to rearrange his thoughts - he created that paradigm shift.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
fate
There is no such thing as an independent observer who can stand on the sidelines watching nature run its course without actually influencing it or being influenced by it.
What this means is, that even if one does not act on a course of events but just watches it, that act of watching alone can change the course of events.
This maybe difficult to believe in the first instance, and this is largely on account of the fact that our brains have been wired to look at our environment with a Newton's concepts of physics.
We believe on account of Newtons law's that if we know the beginning of an event then we can predict its end; even if there is an external force acting on the event, then if we have sufficient data on that external force we can extrapolate how it could affect a system and thus determine its end.
The Newtonian concept of physics have led us to believe things are all determined from the onset. Our presence or absence cannot change or alter the course of events.
Everything is determined.
But if this is true, then our presence is not required as events continue to unfurl irrespective of our presence or cognition. So if we were not required then to what would events unfurl to, rather if events are independent of us then what use of the events.
However this being not the case, our presence should necessarily amount to something for what need of a creation if it has no part to play in the events that play.
Which bring us back to square one where our presence can affect the course of fate.
This immediately puts the onus on us where we need to know how our presence does affect our fate.
What this means is, that even if one does not act on a course of events but just watches it, that act of watching alone can change the course of events.
This maybe difficult to believe in the first instance, and this is largely on account of the fact that our brains have been wired to look at our environment with a Newton's concepts of physics.
We believe on account of Newtons law's that if we know the beginning of an event then we can predict its end; even if there is an external force acting on the event, then if we have sufficient data on that external force we can extrapolate how it could affect a system and thus determine its end.
The Newtonian concept of physics have led us to believe things are all determined from the onset. Our presence or absence cannot change or alter the course of events.
Everything is determined.
But if this is true, then our presence is not required as events continue to unfurl irrespective of our presence or cognition. So if we were not required then to what would events unfurl to, rather if events are independent of us then what use of the events.
However this being not the case, our presence should necessarily amount to something for what need of a creation if it has no part to play in the events that play.
Which bring us back to square one where our presence can affect the course of fate.
This immediately puts the onus on us where we need to know how our presence does affect our fate.
film ideas
When Hollywood has run out of ideas to make films, it starts rendering films from books or makes films of super heroes from comic books.
When the Indian film industry runs out of ideas what it does is get inspiration from Hollywood films.
If that isn't heading anywhere we have a slew of remakes....
So given this scenario 2 Indian film directors are speaking about their proposed film venture.
Director 1: I am looking at re-making "Aag Hi Aag".
Director 2: What would you want to re-make your own film.
Director 1: Who else would do it? A flop at that.
When the Indian film industry runs out of ideas what it does is get inspiration from Hollywood films.
If that isn't heading anywhere we have a slew of remakes....
So given this scenario 2 Indian film directors are speaking about their proposed film venture.
Director 1: I am looking at re-making "Aag Hi Aag".
Director 2: What would you want to re-make your own film.
Director 1: Who else would do it? A flop at that.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
our ability to determine
Suppose that we put one gram of radium in a time vault & leave it there for 1600 years, when we return we will find that only half a gram of radium is left.
This phenomenon is termed by physicists as 'half life'. Radium atoms will naturally disintegrate such that only half of them would remain behind every 1600 years.
If we put that half gram back in the vault for another 1600 years, only 1/4 of the original would remain.
Every 1600 years half of the radium atoms would just disappear.
This is familiar to most of us, as this is what we have learned in high school.
We know this as a statistical fact, that every 1600 years, half of the original radium atoms would just disappear, but we don't know which half or which of the actual radium atoms would disappear.
We cannot pinpoint which would remain or which would disintegrate.
We can only state that half of them would disintegrate in 1600 years.
The curious thing is that if all radium of the original one gram atoms are similar what makes half of them to remain and the other half to disintegrate. As such they the radium atoms are all similar, which is why we can't determine which ones would remain and which would disintegrate.
The fact is that the study of quantum mechanics can only determine the end effect, but cannot determine which constituents would meet that end effect as explained in the example above. To that effect quantum mechanics provides us just statistical fact about the effect and not what actually caused the effect.
Ergo it ushers in the realm of probability. Since it is limited in determining which atom of radium in a gram would disintegrate, it states that every atom of radium in that 1 gram of radium has a 50% probability to disintegrate in 1600 years.
And so our knowledge about quantum mechanics - the most profound discovery in the 20th century is that it can gives us an ability to correlate observed phenomena with theory in aggregation but not in individual basis, as we don't know how each atom would act - that is to disintegrate or remain, but we do know as a whole 50% of the radium atoms would disintegrate.
This phenomenon is termed by physicists as 'half life'. Radium atoms will naturally disintegrate such that only half of them would remain behind every 1600 years.
If we put that half gram back in the vault for another 1600 years, only 1/4 of the original would remain.
Every 1600 years half of the radium atoms would just disappear.
This is familiar to most of us, as this is what we have learned in high school.
We know this as a statistical fact, that every 1600 years, half of the original radium atoms would just disappear, but we don't know which half or which of the actual radium atoms would disappear.
We cannot pinpoint which would remain or which would disintegrate.
We can only state that half of them would disintegrate in 1600 years.
The curious thing is that if all radium of the original one gram atoms are similar what makes half of them to remain and the other half to disintegrate. As such they the radium atoms are all similar, which is why we can't determine which ones would remain and which would disintegrate.
The fact is that the study of quantum mechanics can only determine the end effect, but cannot determine which constituents would meet that end effect as explained in the example above. To that effect quantum mechanics provides us just statistical fact about the effect and not what actually caused the effect.
Ergo it ushers in the realm of probability. Since it is limited in determining which atom of radium in a gram would disintegrate, it states that every atom of radium in that 1 gram of radium has a 50% probability to disintegrate in 1600 years.
And so our knowledge about quantum mechanics - the most profound discovery in the 20th century is that it can gives us an ability to correlate observed phenomena with theory in aggregation but not in individual basis, as we don't know how each atom would act - that is to disintegrate or remain, but we do know as a whole 50% of the radium atoms would disintegrate.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
the reserve
the federal reserve is not owned by the government of USA.
The federal reserve was enacted by an act of the Congress & reports to it, but is not owned by the government of USA.
It is an independent entity owned by members banks.
The member banks hold shares of the FED, making it an entity of the member bansk, as the FED themselves claim - no one in particular owns the FED.
The curious thing is are there any government banks in USA?.. as far as I know, they are all private. So if it is the private banks that are the member banks of the federal reserve & they hold control, the federal reserve would be pursuing private interests and not public.
the federal reserve states this tacitly as - "independent within the government"
The MOOT point is that the central bank of USA - the federal reserve is controlled by private bankers NOT by the government - which should immediately raise the question who interests does the FED serve.
Like any company or corporation, the firm serves the interests of the shareholders in this case the member banks which means private interests and not public interests.
In this light it makes sense why the fed is bailing out Fannie Mae and Feddie Mac, it is not public interests but private interests that are being insured.
Similarly across the continent; guess who owns the bank of England, ..yes private bankers again.
That makes 2 countries housing the financial capitals of the world - New York and London, both the venture of private banks.
This puts the private banker in a very powerful position, as the nations central banker, they have the right to print money too.
The connection between both these central bankers is that on account of the subprime crisis in US and UK, the respective central banks are being bailing out troubled banks. That puts land on which these bad mortguages stand written in favour of the central banker - directly or indirectly.
Could it be then that this sub prime crisis could have been actually manufactured, so as to lead to a subprime crisis leading to handing out property in the central bankers favour. The subprime that has affected UK and USA - could perhaps be the brain child of these very same private banks.
The 2 things you need in an economy: land and money, rest assured with these 2 you can own the world.
These member banks are trying to keep the wealth of the nations in just the hands of the few. That is in the hands of the private bankers themselves.
Being the richest banks is not enough, being the banks that control every industry on earth is what these private bankers are venturing to achieve...
In contrast the central bank of India is owned by the government.
The federal reserve was enacted by an act of the Congress & reports to it, but is not owned by the government of USA.
It is an independent entity owned by members banks.
The member banks hold shares of the FED, making it an entity of the member bansk, as the FED themselves claim - no one in particular owns the FED.
The curious thing is are there any government banks in USA?.. as far as I know, they are all private. So if it is the private banks that are the member banks of the federal reserve & they hold control, the federal reserve would be pursuing private interests and not public.
the federal reserve states this tacitly as - "independent within the government"
The MOOT point is that the central bank of USA - the federal reserve is controlled by private bankers NOT by the government - which should immediately raise the question who interests does the FED serve.
Like any company or corporation, the firm serves the interests of the shareholders in this case the member banks which means private interests and not public interests.
In this light it makes sense why the fed is bailing out Fannie Mae and Feddie Mac, it is not public interests but private interests that are being insured.
Similarly across the continent; guess who owns the bank of England, ..yes private bankers again.
That makes 2 countries housing the financial capitals of the world - New York and London, both the venture of private banks.
This puts the private banker in a very powerful position, as the nations central banker, they have the right to print money too.
The connection between both these central bankers is that on account of the subprime crisis in US and UK, the respective central banks are being bailing out troubled banks. That puts land on which these bad mortguages stand written in favour of the central banker - directly or indirectly.
Could it be then that this sub prime crisis could have been actually manufactured, so as to lead to a subprime crisis leading to handing out property in the central bankers favour. The subprime that has affected UK and USA - could perhaps be the brain child of these very same private banks.
The 2 things you need in an economy: land and money, rest assured with these 2 you can own the world.
These member banks are trying to keep the wealth of the nations in just the hands of the few. That is in the hands of the private bankers themselves.
Being the richest banks is not enough, being the banks that control every industry on earth is what these private bankers are venturing to achieve...
In contrast the central bank of India is owned by the government.
irony
Two instances of news caught my attention.
The first being that we have been granted access by the NSG(Nuclear Material Supply Group) to fissile material. This material would be used to meet civilian energy needs vide nuclear power generation.
The irony is the the NSG was formed in 1974, when India detonated a nuclear device sounding off to the world that India is nuclear capable. To join the NSG you ought to be a signatory of the CTBT(comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) and NPT(Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
India is not a signatory to either treaties but has been granted access to Nuclear Fissile Material.
The irony is that the NSG, the clique formed to keep India at bay in 1974, is the very same clique we have been granted entry to.
The second instance of news is the Tata NANO project; work at the site has been stalled by the opposing party (TC - Tinamool Congress) of the state (West Bengal) on the pretext that the ruling party in the state (CPI-Communist party of India) had granted about 800 acres of land owned by farmers to the Tata to put up the NANO project much against farmer's wishes and rights.
The communist party (CPI) is known to have shut down a lot of private enterprises in that state with their strikes in private enterprises. The very same CPI had a change of heart and had invited private enterprises back into the state.
The irony here is a communist state government had invited a private capitalist company for investments in the state, but the private company (TATA) shelved their project in the state by the opposing party on account of strikes and blockades, methods used by the opposing party that were once used by the communists party of India driving away private enterprises from the state.
I guess politics is all about conveniences at the whim and whit of politicians.
The first being that we have been granted access by the NSG(Nuclear Material Supply Group) to fissile material. This material would be used to meet civilian energy needs vide nuclear power generation.
The irony is the the NSG was formed in 1974, when India detonated a nuclear device sounding off to the world that India is nuclear capable. To join the NSG you ought to be a signatory of the CTBT(comprehensive Test Ban Treaty) and NPT(Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
India is not a signatory to either treaties but has been granted access to Nuclear Fissile Material.
The irony is that the NSG, the clique formed to keep India at bay in 1974, is the very same clique we have been granted entry to.
The second instance of news is the Tata NANO project; work at the site has been stalled by the opposing party (TC - Tinamool Congress) of the state (West Bengal) on the pretext that the ruling party in the state (CPI-Communist party of India) had granted about 800 acres of land owned by farmers to the Tata to put up the NANO project much against farmer's wishes and rights.
The communist party (CPI) is known to have shut down a lot of private enterprises in that state with their strikes in private enterprises. The very same CPI had a change of heart and had invited private enterprises back into the state.
The irony here is a communist state government had invited a private capitalist company for investments in the state, but the private company (TATA) shelved their project in the state by the opposing party on account of strikes and blockades, methods used by the opposing party that were once used by the communists party of India driving away private enterprises from the state.
I guess politics is all about conveniences at the whim and whit of politicians.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
internet service
my internet had chocked this afternoon; so I had got on the phone to place a complain. The personnel mentioned to me that I could now place my complains or request online too.
well buddy if I don't have the internet working, how do I place a complain on-line...
I hope it gets the genius at the internet company to rethink on service support.
well buddy if I don't have the internet working, how do I place a complain on-line...
I hope it gets the genius at the internet company to rethink on service support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
