After Trump’s NYC guilty felony verdict, Marjorie Taylor Greene hoped for a newly energized and sharply focused alarm from her Republican colleagues. Instead, she finds shocking indifference.
MTG on Bannon’s Warroom, 5 min excerpt with text, headline +my short excerpt:
__ __
“…unless the Speaker of the House has the balls to walk into the four corners meeting and walk into the White House and say, ‘I’m going to shut down the government unless you pass these bills.’
“That’s what our Speaker of the House needs to be doing right now because our country is gone. We are post-Constitution and that’s because the Democrats in New York, the state of New York, convicted President Trump for 34 felony counts that are fake charges and nothing but a political attack and lies. And I’m done.
“I came to Washington this week hoping and praying that I would see a new Republican conference, a Republican conference that understands the war that has happened in this party. A war where not a single shot has been fired. But this is a literal war.
“We have a Banana Republic. We’re no longer a serious country. But you know what they talked about in conference this morning? More tough talk and support for Israel. More tough talk and support for Taiwan. Talking about supporting and protecting other countries’ borders while our border is under invasion….
“People need to realize what this regime truly is. We are not a free country anymore. We are not a free people. We do not have free speech.”
Today, I am thinking about Beaches. Far away in France.
I have walked on those Beaches. Stood on Omaha, looking out to Sea, then turning around and looking at the Bluffs. Wondering just how they did it. You just stand in Awe over what they did. Then, go to the Cemetary overlooking the Beach. Seeing all the Graves. And you cry.
I’d like to talk. I spent clues to ten hours yesterday getting my replacement military ID. While waiting on line with all the others I met fascinating people from all over the world. It reminded me of the days I spent at the Federal building in San Diego trying to get my Japanese wife a green card. Now Pelosi and Schumer call me a ce xnophobe. How does this happen?
How is Marjorie Taylor Green’s talk any different from other Republican’s talk? IIRC she is just another member of the House. Acts, not words.
Recommended reading for D-Day anniversary:
No Mission Too Difficult!: Old Buddies of the 1st Division Tell All About World War II
Available on Amazon. Full disclosure: I am a coauthor — writer, interviewer editor, etc.
When I worked on this book I conducted numerous oral history interviews with 1st Inf. Division veterans who stormed ashore on Omaha Beach. This was some time ago, and they were, more the most hale and hearty and eager to share their experiences. I interviewed two men who both claimed to be the first to make it off the beach and up the bluff overlooking the landing area. There was a friendly rivalry between the two, and it is a rivalry that can and will never be resolved. The were a couple of other claimants, and there were probably men known but to God and history who might also lay claim to being the first. The truth is, on Omaha beach that day there were countless American boys doing what they supposed to do, fighting and working on their on initiative to get off the beach and at the Germans defending it.
They’re all gone now. Bless ’em all, remember them always. Requiscant in pace. You are all heroes.
D-Day. Should I watch Saving Private Ryan, The Longest Day, or Kelly’s Heroes?
SpaceX had a successful launch and soft splash landing of both Starship and its accompanying Super Heavy booster this morning. With a full stack of nearly 400 feet on the pad, this is the largest rocket humanity has ever launched and recovered.
well that opening to private ryan is too harrowing, so many who never made it off that beach,the longest day is more about the personal dynamics which set up the stakes, of the characters, kellys heroes is more a romp, ironically most eastwood and sutherland, were strongly antiwar, eastwood is much an everyman even in Where Eagles fly, where he plays a oss lieutenant, seconded to this mission, to retreive the bogus officer from the schloss adler,
the House continues to fund the bureau which takes down praying grandmothers, and racks upJ6 roundups like they were amusement park prizes, why do they do this what real purpose do we get from this, when every manner of scoundrel from four corners of the earth are let into this country,
The veterans of the Omaha Beach assault I interviewed were very impressed with the portrayal of the landings at Omaha in Saving Private Ryan. They did have some problems, however, with other aspects of that film.
IMO, The Longest Day is a fine movie, quite good in its time, but now outdated in terms of movie-making art. Still worth watching however. As for Kelly’s Hero’s, what can one say? Crackin’ good entertainment!
well its very old school ensemble players, its ironic how they all of a sudden ‘discovered’ the greatest generation, when two years before, they disdained a veteran of anzio and the po river, because he wasn’t cool, like the razorback scoundrel
miguel:
Who is the “they” your are referring to, and who is the Anzio/Po River veteran they disdained?
I have been saying that matter is just a form of energy – dense, highly concentrated packets of energy. I guess frozen light is just another way of saying the same thing.
so the j6 kangaroos obscure justice, and outright defame, but the one’s who get jail time are navarro and bannon, largely because they oppose xi and the blackrock agenda,
the world pays lipservice to the sacrifice of these brave men, but in truth, they disdain what they stood for, all those on stage, who approved the lockdowns, that ravaged their country men, and empowered a tiny elite of corporate overseers,
@Doug+Purdie:matter is just a form of energy
But energy is not “stuff”, it’s a property of systems. And you can change the amount of energy “in” a system at will by changing your coordinate system, but you can’t change the number of protons, neutrons, and electrons by doing that.
It’s true that there’s an equivalence of mass and energy, but they’re not “the same thing”. Maybe another, overly simple, way to put it is that energy has inertia, and photons with zero rest mass are still affected by gravity. Energy can be converted into mass and vice versa but that’s like saying a house can be converted into dollars by selling it, a house is not the “same thing” as the dollars you sold it for.
I guess frozen light is just another way of saying the same thing.
Light and energy are also not “the same thing”… but I’m not sure what we gain, except poetry, by calling matter “frozen light”. I don’t think “melting” and “freezing” are good analogies for the relationship between matter and light, but it’s complicated to go into why.
@IrishOtter49:Who is the “they” your are referring to, and who is the Anzio/Po River veteran they disdained?
The media talking heads who coined “Greatest Generation”, and the Anzio/Po River veteran was Bob Dole, less cool than Bill Clinton the “razorback scoundrel”.
miguel is somewhat cryptic, but a good guy for all that.
Niketas Choniates
I don’t think “melting” and “freezing” are good analogies for the relationship between matter and light
Am definitely not a scientist or such, but I think “Frozen Light” means the light is fixed, i.e., not a frozen liquid. Commenter physicsguy may know what they are talking about, but it’s over my head…
The video, 22 minutes in: “Vibratory processes.” “Potential being actualized.” “The world as a manifestation of intelligence.” “Quality of two-ness.” …
Pfui. Two blowhards. Just a lot of empty pomposity and blather. Mental masturbation.
Reminds me of Fritjof Capra’s The Tao of Physics, ably dispatched by Jeremy Bernstein in a ~1990 article, “A Cosmic Flow,” in The American Scholar (the Phi Beta Kappa journal).
Niketas Choniates:
Light and energy are also not “the same thing”… but I’m not sure what we gain, except poetry, by calling matter “frozen light”.
A good encapsulation of my view of current high energy physics – and cosmology for that matter.
Bombard an object of known mass with light until it heats up significantly. Does that object become more massive? If not….
Also: ‘forty days and forty nights’ means a long time and ‘three days’ means a short time. Understandable in first Genesis where it’s a description of the time before human observation and basically means stages. Not so much thereafter.
Like the ancient Hebrews couldn’t count or didn’t have words for long and short periods of time.
Change the meanings of words and you can define anything as whatever you want.
If ‘The speed of light is constant’ – then can it be “Frozen”?
Needless to say, halting light is not easy — you can’t just put in the freezer. Light is electromagnetic radiation that moves at 300 million meters per second.
Was already lost, and then they start talking about “light-based quantum memory” and a “more secure quantum communications over longer distances.” 😛
Here is another dose of the reality of today’s China by western vlogger on China Serpentza, and it ain’t pretty.*
@Karmi: I once got to meet the leader of one of the research teams that “froze light”, about 20 years ago. The description “freezing light” is a glib and misleading summary of what they’re doing. I have no cure to suggest for science journalism but it’s definitely getting worse. ChatGPT is more reliable…
Oligonicella:Bombard an object of known mass with light until it heats up significantly. Does that object become more massive?
There’s lots of empirical verification. For example, gold would not be gold-colored if it weren’t for relativistic mass effects, and a lead-acid battery would work no better than a tin-acid battery (a car battery would only produce 2 V instead of 12 V).
Most people don’t think of relativity in connection with chemistry, but it’s surprisingly important. And that’s the thing about physical laws: you can’t just knock one of them out and then expect everything else in the world to just stay the same. You’d have to come up with some other kind of physical law that convincingly explains why gold and lead behave the way they do but that relativistic mass isn’t there to explain it. And that new physical law you come up with will have lots of other knock-on consequences that won’t be unraveled until later. Probably while you’re in the middle of presenting your paper on it, or during the question period, and won’t that be awkward, when you can’t explain something you didn’t know was even connected because that’s not what you study.
And this is why science is not now the province of lone geniuses dreaming up things in their basements. There’s just too much to know, no one person has enough expertise to follow out all the implications of a new idea. It’s very much a collective exercise.
Funny but you can get lead acid batteries in 6V, 12V, 24V. Something about oxidation/reduction reactions, stacking cells until you get the desired output voltage, not relativity. But I could be wrong and it is oh so much more profound. 😉
Niketas – I would love to peruse an article on that. Could you perchance direct me to one?
from a query: Simply put, because it’s a very large atom, gold’s electrons move so fast that they exhibit relativistic contraction, shifting the wavelength of light absorbed to blue and reflecting the opposite color: golden yellow.
I don’t see how that’s ‘frozen’ light.
And this is why science is not now the province of lone geniuses dreaming up things in their basements.
Teams of people don’t guarantee accuracy either. string theory, the holographic universe, multiverses, etc…
I recall one physicist talking about time travel saying if you take a spinning disc of infinite mass, have an object of infinite mass traveling around it opposite the spin, you can travel through time.
I’ll bet there was a team involved with that.
Re: Frozen Light
I like Rupert Sheldrake as a maverick scientist, but he’s a biologist and the other guy is psychotherapist.
I’m not going to spend 40 minutes listening to them blather about radical ideas in physics.
@Oligoncella:I would love to peruse an article on that.
This one is long but not behind a paywall. Mentions properties of gold as well as why mercury is liquid.
On the lead-acid battery, not the original but a more approachable summary. Note that it doesn’t say a 12 V lead-acid battery would be impossible, just that it would require many more cells than 12 V batteries are currently built with, if it weren’t for relativity affecting the chemistry.
I don’t see how that’s ‘frozen’ light.
Me either, which is why I didn’t think it added anything to call “matter” that. I can’t make any sense of that combination of words “frozen light”.
I recall one physicist talking about time travel saying if you take a spinning disc of infinite mass, have an object of infinite mass traveling around it opposite the spin, you can travel through time.
It’s a pretty disappointing time machine, you can’t travel to times when it wasn’t built.
Re: Frank Tipler
I enjoy Tipler too. His physics credentials are in order. Still he’s a wild man:
____________________________________
According to [Tipler], it is required, for the known laws of physics to be consistent, that intelligent life take over all matter in the universe and eventually force its collapse. During that collapse, the computational capacity of the universe diverges to infinity, and environments emulated with that computational capacity last for an infinite duration as the universe attains a cosmological singularity. This singularity is Tipler’s Omega Point. With computational resources diverging to infinity, Tipler states that a society in the far future would be able to resurrect the dead by emulating alternative universes. Tipler identifies the Omega Point with God, since, in his view, the Omega Point has all the properties of God claimed by most traditional religions.
Lately I’ve been watching a lot of Star Wars stuff trying to understand how Disney managed something as ghastly as “The Acolyte.” Leaving aside the woke nonsense, the show is written so incompetently that in one scene the Acolyte character (pronouns they/them) is wearing a space suit and putting out a fire burning in outer space.
The purpose of this scene is so they/them can have a PTSD flashback to they/them’s childhood when most of they/them’s space lesbian witch coven burned to death. Gripping stuff. (Sorry, I don’t have the hang of this pronoun business yet.)
So tonight I’m taking my own advice and watching “The Longest Day.” What an amazing epic movie! There are tons of characters, scenes and exposition, but it is all handled so expertly that one is never lost or bored. The visual compositions are magnificent.
In comparison “The Acolyte” is written by children. Hollywood has forgotten almost everything it ever knew.
Niketas Choniates
Confused. I was only talking about frozen light and other anomalous theories (with a small t). Interesting links though, many thanks. I have them bookmarked for when I have the time.
I think that was Frank Tipler’s paper. He’s the only author on it.
It’s a pretty disappointing time machine, you can’t travel to times when it wasn’t built.
I stand corrected on that and it explains why no one asked him “Where you gettin’ the infinite mass (x2)?”
Of course it’s disappointing, you not only can’t travel to before when it was built, you can’t even build it. No such thing as an Infinitely massive object or accelerating it to an infinite speed (mass increases with velocity so you can’t even move it). You can only do those things with imaginary math. But he and others act like those things can be realized (at least in that interview he did).
Another one from the same program has one physicist saying that if you run up against a wall an infinite number of times (there it is again) math says that all your pieces will line up with the vacancies in the wall and you’ll pass through.
huxley: All his credentials didn’t stop him from looking like a buffoon promoting that idea. Wild is not the adjective I’d use.
Tipler states that a society in the far future would be able to resurrect the dead by emulating alternative universes.
Exactly what I mean. Emulate != resurrect. Changing the meaning of words to make it sound like you’re right. By using resurrect, he avoids “emulate the dead” to which someone would point out “only so far as you can’t model his memories”.
He’s a sound byte chaser with tenure.
huxley – Lately I’ve been watching a lot of Star Wars stuff trying to understand how Disney managed something as ghastly as “The Acolyte.” Leaving aside the woke nonsense…
Unfortunately you cannot leave that aside as those are the people writing the scripts and they are ignorant as hell.
Ignore the pronoun crap, it’s nothing more than coercion. If it hurts their feefees to hear certain words, that’s just too bad.
On to a totally different topic — Wooooohoooo! Bing cherries are available now.
I bought eight pounds and in a week will get the necessary white rum and sugar to start dark cherry brandy.
Multiplying my ecstasy, my choke cherry tree is finally yielding a crop barring a heavy storm. Choke cherry is about 2x Bing in flavor. My last batch was seven friggin’ years ago and it’s consumed now. Unfortunately it takes a year to steep.
I do have some Elderberry though. 🙂
I have the patience. Hopefully I have the time.
On that note, it’s the anniversary of my dipping my toes in the Styx.
(Looking on the bright side, one could say that at least the dead are civic-minded….)
@Oligonicella: You can only do those things with imaginary math. But he and others act like those things can be realized
There’s two very good reasons to study solutions in the limit of infinity, and it’s not what you call “imaginary math”, it’s perfectly respectable math, first presented in Euclid’s Elements.
The first reason is that the solutions involving infinite quantities are often very simple to solve.
The second reason is that the solutions for the infinite quantities are very close to the solutions for real quantities under special conditions, and there are well-established and simple methods for correcting the infinite-quantity solution to better match the finite-quantity solution.
For example, the electric field from an infinitely large charged plate is very simple to calculate. No one can build an infinitely large charged plate, nor charge it up. But what they can do is get close to the center of finite charged plate, and the closer you get the closer the solutions agree. If you need to move farther from the center of the finite plate you can calculate a correction to the solution for the infinite plate, and that will likely be simpler than starting with a finite plate and doing the calculation.
This strategy to approaching problems has a long history and is so widely used that no one bothers any longer to explain why they are using infinite quantities to solve something when everyone knows there aren’t infinite things. Tipler’s cylinder does not have to be infinite, it just has to be big enough that you can stay close to the center.
well it would be hard to have an object of even near infinite mass, it wouldn’t move that would be the weight of most of the known universe, I mean if you leave out that stipulation welll then it’s all gravy,
I think the physics of interstellar travel, were lightly broached in most fiction, warp speed involved creating a field where objects move around it,
Niketas Choniates –
Please don’t remove the context of my use of “imaginary”. Not talking about sqrt -2. It was aimed specifically at “those things” (taking two infinite masses and moving them at infinite velocities). Explain how that is anything but imaginary.
If your universe is imaginary, so is the math you use describing it. Believing that math applied to imaginary and unachievable concepts begets non-imaginary results is how you get people insisting we’re in a holographic universe, etc ’cause ‘the math’.
Or “assume a spherical cow” squared.
one might say theoretical construct, but again you run into the same problem even if one considered only the mass inside a solar system, that would require an incalculable amount of energy to move it,
Never said you were, nor did I strip any context. I contrasted “imaginary math” with “respectable math” not with “real number math”. I took “imaginary math” to mean math you think it’s illegitimate to use for some reason, and I assured you of it’s legitimacy. You don’t believe me, but I’m just some random guy leaving comments on a blog, right, so that’s understandable.
Explain how that is anything but imaginary.
It is an idealized situation, easier to solve mathematically than the real situation, that under certain conditions may closely approximate a real situation. Studying the idealized situation gives you important clues about what is most important to know in order to understand the real situation and also tells you under what conditions the real situation is likely to deviate greatly from it.
Believing that math applied to imaginary and unachievable concepts begets non-imaginary results is how you get people insisting we’re in a holographic universe, etc ’cause ‘the math’.
That is not how those people arrived at those kinds of conclusions. By declaring some kinds of mathematical approaches just automatically out of bounds because you have an impression they are associated with some people whose work you don’t like, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
The approach I am describing has been used with enormous success over hundreds of years to solve all kinds of practical problems, and for most of that time was the only practical approach to solve some kinds of problems since they didn’t have computers. Your daily life in the world since 1900 hinges on all sorts of math and assumptions you may not know anything about, and you may not be aware of the connections between apparently unrelated phenomena. You saw that with relativistic mass.
Totally understandable, no one can be expert in every possible thing, and if you’re not expert you have to rely on some kind of clue or other that whoever’s presenting something to you would be in a position to know. Not gonna happen on anonymous blog comments.
Niketas Choniates: “Explain how that is anything but imaginary.”
It is an idealized situation,
i·de·al 1. satisfying one’s conception of what is perfect; most suitable:
2. existing only in the imagination; desirable or perfect but not likely to become a reality:
ie: imaginary, like the spherical cow.
You can apply math (the approach) to anything. The problem is, unlike your example of the plate, there is no corresponding reality check for his theoretical, rendering it no more than a thought bubble regardless of his math.
The humorous spherical cow metaphor was not used by the outside communities against the theoretical physicists, it originated from within, mocking the tendency to reduce a problem to the simplest form imaginable in order to make calculations more feasible, even if the simplification hinders the model’s application to reality.
I invite you to provide any feasible application of his theoretical to reality.
It’s the premise (time travel) and approach, not the math. Science requires confirmation in reality, math does not.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
After Trump’s NYC guilty felony verdict, Marjorie Taylor Greene hoped for a newly energized and sharply focused alarm from her Republican colleagues. Instead, she finds shocking indifference.
MTG on Bannon’s Warroom, 5 min excerpt with text, headline +my short excerpt:
“Marjorie Taylor Greene: We’re In A ‘Post-Constitution” America And The Republican Party Is Doing Nothing”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/06/04/marjorie_taylor_greene_were_in_a_post-constitution_america_and_the_republican_party_is_doing_nothing.html
4Jun24
__ __
“…unless the Speaker of the House has the balls to walk into the four corners meeting and walk into the White House and say, ‘I’m going to shut down the government unless you pass these bills.’
“That’s what our Speaker of the House needs to be doing right now because our country is gone. We are post-Constitution and that’s because the Democrats in New York, the state of New York, convicted President Trump for 34 felony counts that are fake charges and nothing but a political attack and lies. And I’m done.
“I came to Washington this week hoping and praying that I would see a new Republican conference, a Republican conference that understands the war that has happened in this party. A war where not a single shot has been fired. But this is a literal war.
“We have a Banana Republic. We’re no longer a serious country. But you know what they talked about in conference this morning? More tough talk and support for Israel. More tough talk and support for Taiwan. Talking about supporting and protecting other countries’ borders while our border is under invasion….
“People need to realize what this regime truly is. We are not a free country anymore. We are not a free people. We do not have free speech.”
MTGs full 20 minutes starts at 7m in, here
https://listen.warroom.org/episode-3658-impeach-joe-biden-over-invasion-of-border
Today, I am thinking about Beaches. Far away in France.
I have walked on those Beaches. Stood on Omaha, looking out to Sea, then turning around and looking at the Bluffs. Wondering just how they did it. You just stand in Awe over what they did. Then, go to the Cemetary overlooking the Beach. Seeing all the Graves. And you cry.
I’d like to talk. I spent clues to ten hours yesterday getting my replacement military ID. While waiting on line with all the others I met fascinating people from all over the world. It reminded me of the days I spent at the Federal building in San Diego trying to get my Japanese wife a green card. Now Pelosi and Schumer call me a ce xnophobe. How does this happen?
Autocorrect
D-Day, continued:
The Daily Mail has a whole slough of articles on this the 80 anniversary…
“How D-Day Unfolded” [with plenty of pretty amazing visuals]—
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13497447/How-D-Day-unfolded-hour-hour-80th-anniversary-Operation-Overlord-MailOnlines-scintillating-visualisations-recount-daring-mission-liberate-Nazi-occupied-Europe-forensic-detail.html
A sampling…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13476569/The-secret-plan-D-Day-Two-Normandy-landings-failed-SAS-team-led-one-armed-Frenchman-parachuted-Nazi-held-Brittany-night-June-6-1944-seize-port-enable-Allies-invade-reveals-historian-DAMIEN-LEWIS.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13500595/WW2-codebreaker-100-brought-nation-tears-salute-fallen-comrades-Bayeux-Cemetery-great-grandfather-Normandy-80th-anniversary-D-day.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13501457/D-Day-anniversary-veterans-tears-Normandy-service-Queen-Camilla-rose.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13501457/D-Day-anniversary-veterans-tears-Normandy-service-Queen-Camilla-rose.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-13476623/Princess-Elizabeth-D-Day-Hitler-Operation-Overlord.html
How is Marjorie Taylor Green’s talk any different from other Republican’s talk? IIRC she is just another member of the House. Acts, not words.
Recommended reading for D-Day anniversary:
No Mission Too Difficult!: Old Buddies of the 1st Division Tell All About World War II
Available on Amazon. Full disclosure: I am a coauthor — writer, interviewer editor, etc.
When I worked on this book I conducted numerous oral history interviews with 1st Inf. Division veterans who stormed ashore on Omaha Beach. This was some time ago, and they were, more the most hale and hearty and eager to share their experiences. I interviewed two men who both claimed to be the first to make it off the beach and up the bluff overlooking the landing area. There was a friendly rivalry between the two, and it is a rivalry that can and will never be resolved. The were a couple of other claimants, and there were probably men known but to God and history who might also lay claim to being the first. The truth is, on Omaha beach that day there were countless American boys doing what they supposed to do, fighting and working on their on initiative to get off the beach and at the Germans defending it.
They’re all gone now. Bless ’em all, remember them always. Requiscant in pace. You are all heroes.
D-Day. Should I watch Saving Private Ryan, The Longest Day, or Kelly’s Heroes?
SpaceX had a successful launch and soft splash landing of both Starship and its accompanying Super Heavy booster this morning. With a full stack of nearly 400 feet on the pad, this is the largest rocket humanity has ever launched and recovered.
Related:
“ORDEAL OF OMAHA BEACH”—
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/06/ordeal-of-omaha-beach-2.php
Contains many recommendations.
well that opening to private ryan is too harrowing, so many who never made it off that beach,the longest day is more about the personal dynamics which set up the stakes, of the characters, kellys heroes is more a romp, ironically most eastwood and sutherland, were strongly antiwar, eastwood is much an everyman even in Where Eagles fly, where he plays a oss lieutenant, seconded to this mission, to retreive the bogus officer from the schloss adler,
the House continues to fund the bureau which takes down praying grandmothers, and racks upJ6 roundups like they were amusement park prizes, why do they do this what real purpose do we get from this, when every manner of scoundrel from four corners of the earth are let into this country,
New posts:
Some D-Day links
https://chicagoboyz.net/archives/71051.html
The great Communist propagandist Willi Munzenberg and the persistence of his methods:
https://chicagoboyz.net/archives/71040.html
windbag:
The veterans of the Omaha Beach assault I interviewed were very impressed with the portrayal of the landings at Omaha in Saving Private Ryan. They did have some problems, however, with other aspects of that film.
IMO, The Longest Day is a fine movie, quite good in its time, but now outdated in terms of movie-making art. Still worth watching however. As for Kelly’s Hero’s, what can one say? Crackin’ good entertainment!
well its very old school ensemble players, its ironic how they all of a sudden ‘discovered’ the greatest generation, when two years before, they disdained a veteran of anzio and the po river, because he wasn’t cool, like the razorback scoundrel
miguel:
Who is the “they” your are referring to, and who is the Anzio/Po River veteran they disdained?
I have been saying that matter is just a form of energy – dense, highly concentrated packets of energy. I guess frozen light is just another way of saying the same thing.
so the j6 kangaroos obscure justice, and outright defame, but the one’s who get jail time are navarro and bannon, largely because they oppose xi and the blackrock agenda,
the world pays lipservice to the sacrifice of these brave men, but in truth, they disdain what they stood for, all those on stage, who approved the lockdowns, that ravaged their country men, and empowered a tiny elite of corporate overseers,
@Doug+Purdie:matter is just a form of energy
But energy is not “stuff”, it’s a property of systems. And you can change the amount of energy “in” a system at will by changing your coordinate system, but you can’t change the number of protons, neutrons, and electrons by doing that.
It’s true that there’s an equivalence of mass and energy, but they’re not “the same thing”. Maybe another, overly simple, way to put it is that energy has inertia, and photons with zero rest mass are still affected by gravity. Energy can be converted into mass and vice versa but that’s like saying a house can be converted into dollars by selling it, a house is not the “same thing” as the dollars you sold it for.
I guess frozen light is just another way of saying the same thing.
Light and energy are also not “the same thing”… but I’m not sure what we gain, except poetry, by calling matter “frozen light”. I don’t think “melting” and “freezing” are good analogies for the relationship between matter and light, but it’s complicated to go into why.
@IrishOtter49:Who is the “they” your are referring to, and who is the Anzio/Po River veteran they disdained?
The media talking heads who coined “Greatest Generation”, and the Anzio/Po River veteran was Bob Dole, less cool than Bill Clinton the “razorback scoundrel”.
miguel is somewhat cryptic, but a good guy for all that.
Niketas Choniates
Am definitely not a scientist or such, but I think “Frozen Light” means the light is fixed, i.e., not a frozen liquid. Commenter physicsguy may know what they are talking about, but it’s over my head…
The video, 22 minutes in: “Vibratory processes.” “Potential being actualized.” “The world as a manifestation of intelligence.” “Quality of two-ness.” …
Pfui. Two blowhards. Just a lot of empty pomposity and blather. Mental masturbation.
Reminds me of Fritjof Capra’s The Tao of Physics, ably dispatched by Jeremy Bernstein in a ~1990 article, “A Cosmic Flow,” in The American Scholar (the Phi Beta Kappa journal).
Niketas Choniates:
Light and energy are also not “the same thing”… but I’m not sure what we gain, except poetry, by calling matter “frozen light”.
A good encapsulation of my view of current high energy physics – and cosmology for that matter.
Bombard an object of known mass with light until it heats up significantly. Does that object become more massive? If not….
Also:
‘forty days and forty nights’ means a long time and ‘three days’ means a short time. Understandable in first Genesis where it’s a description of the time before human observation and basically means stages. Not so much thereafter.
Like the ancient Hebrews couldn’t count or didn’t have words for long and short periods of time.
Change the meanings of words and you can define anything as whatever you want.
If ‘The speed of light is constant’ – then can it be “Frozen”?
July 25, 2013 – Scientists ‘freeze’ light for an entire minute
Was already lost, and then they start talking about “light-based quantum memory” and a “more secure quantum communications over longer distances.” 😛
Here is another dose of the reality of today’s China by western vlogger on China Serpentza, and it ain’t pretty.*
* See “China’s Hidden Misery” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38EHMvkKZzA
Caroline Glick Show, “Israel/Hezbollah and the Obstacles to Victory”, (premier started 31 mins ago): https://youtu.be/NU055KPKXUs?si=jyQYNKaWL3fhkDLl
Very clear-eyed truths, hard stuff to take, yet necessary.
Snow on Pine: China’s Hidden Misery video was great!
@Karmi: I once got to meet the leader of one of the research teams that “froze light”, about 20 years ago. The description “freezing light” is a glib and misleading summary of what they’re doing. I have no cure to suggest for science journalism but it’s definitely getting worse. ChatGPT is more reliable…
Oligonicella:Bombard an object of known mass with light until it heats up significantly. Does that object become more massive?
There’s lots of empirical verification. For example, gold would not be gold-colored if it weren’t for relativistic mass effects, and a lead-acid battery would work no better than a tin-acid battery (a car battery would only produce 2 V instead of 12 V).
Most people don’t think of relativity in connection with chemistry, but it’s surprisingly important. And that’s the thing about physical laws: you can’t just knock one of them out and then expect everything else in the world to just stay the same. You’d have to come up with some other kind of physical law that convincingly explains why gold and lead behave the way they do but that relativistic mass isn’t there to explain it. And that new physical law you come up with will have lots of other knock-on consequences that won’t be unraveled until later. Probably while you’re in the middle of presenting your paper on it, or during the question period, and won’t that be awkward, when you can’t explain something you didn’t know was even connected because that’s not what you study.
And this is why science is not now the province of lone geniuses dreaming up things in their basements. There’s just too much to know, no one person has enough expertise to follow out all the implications of a new idea. It’s very much a collective exercise.
Funny but you can get lead acid batteries in 6V, 12V, 24V. Something about oxidation/reduction reactions, stacking cells until you get the desired output voltage, not relativity. But I could be wrong and it is oh so much more profound. 😉
Niketas – I would love to peruse an article on that. Could you perchance direct me to one?
from a query:
Simply put, because it’s a very large atom, gold’s electrons move so fast that they exhibit relativistic contraction, shifting the wavelength of light absorbed to blue and reflecting the opposite color: golden yellow.
I don’t see how that’s ‘frozen’ light.
And this is why science is not now the province of lone geniuses dreaming up things in their basements.
Teams of people don’t guarantee accuracy either. string theory, the holographic universe, multiverses, etc…
I recall one physicist talking about time travel saying if you take a spinning disc of infinite mass, have an object of infinite mass traveling around it opposite the spin, you can travel through time.
I’ll bet there was a team involved with that.
Re: Frozen Light
I like Rupert Sheldrake as a maverick scientist, but he’s a biologist and the other guy is psychotherapist.
I’m not going to spend 40 minutes listening to them blather about radical ideas in physics.
@Oligoncella:I would love to peruse an article on that.
This one is long but not behind a paywall. Mentions properties of gold as well as why mercury is liquid.
On the lead-acid battery, not the original but a more approachable summary. Note that it doesn’t say a 12 V lead-acid battery would be impossible, just that it would require many more cells than 12 V batteries are currently built with, if it weren’t for relativity affecting the chemistry.
I don’t see how that’s ‘frozen’ light.
Me either, which is why I didn’t think it added anything to call “matter” that. I can’t make any sense of that combination of words “frozen light”.
I recall one physicist talking about time travel saying if you take a spinning disc of infinite mass, have an object of infinite mass traveling around it opposite the spin, you can travel through time.
I’ll bet there was a team involved with that.
I think that was Frank Tipler’s paper. He’s the only author on it.
It’s a pretty disappointing time machine, you can’t travel to times when it wasn’t built.
Re: Frank Tipler
I enjoy Tipler too. His physics credentials are in order. Still he’s a wild man:
____________________________________
According to [Tipler], it is required, for the known laws of physics to be consistent, that intelligent life take over all matter in the universe and eventually force its collapse. During that collapse, the computational capacity of the universe diverges to infinity, and environments emulated with that computational capacity last for an infinite duration as the universe attains a cosmological singularity. This singularity is Tipler’s Omega Point. With computational resources diverging to infinity, Tipler states that a society in the far future would be able to resurrect the dead by emulating alternative universes. Tipler identifies the Omega Point with God, since, in his view, the Omega Point has all the properties of God claimed by most traditional religions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler
Lately I’ve been watching a lot of Star Wars stuff trying to understand how Disney managed something as ghastly as “The Acolyte.” Leaving aside the woke nonsense, the show is written so incompetently that in one scene the Acolyte character (pronouns they/them) is wearing a space suit and putting out a fire burning in outer space.
The purpose of this scene is so they/them can have a PTSD flashback to they/them’s childhood when most of they/them’s space lesbian witch coven burned to death. Gripping stuff. (Sorry, I don’t have the hang of this pronoun business yet.)
So tonight I’m taking my own advice and watching “The Longest Day.” What an amazing epic movie! There are tons of characters, scenes and exposition, but it is all handled so expertly that one is never lost or bored. The visual compositions are magnificent.
In comparison “The Acolyte” is written by children. Hollywood has forgotten almost everything it ever knew.
Niketas Choniates
Confused. I was only talking about frozen light and other anomalous theories (with a small t). Interesting links though, many thanks. I have them bookmarked for when I have the time.
I think that was Frank Tipler’s paper. He’s the only author on it.
It’s a pretty disappointing time machine, you can’t travel to times when it wasn’t built.
I stand corrected on that and it explains why no one asked him “Where you gettin’ the infinite mass (x2)?”
Of course it’s disappointing, you not only can’t travel to before when it was built, you can’t even build it. No such thing as an Infinitely massive object or accelerating it to an infinite speed (mass increases with velocity so you can’t even move it). You can only do those things with imaginary math. But he and others act like those things can be realized (at least in that interview he did).
Another one from the same program has one physicist saying that if you run up against a wall an infinite number of times (there it is again) math says that all your pieces will line up with the vacancies in the wall and you’ll pass through.
huxley: All his credentials didn’t stop him from looking like a buffoon promoting that idea. Wild is not the adjective I’d use.
Tipler states that a society in the far future would be able to resurrect the dead by emulating alternative universes.
Exactly what I mean. Emulate != resurrect. Changing the meaning of words to make it sound like you’re right. By using resurrect, he avoids “emulate the dead” to which someone would point out “only so far as you can’t model his memories”.
He’s a sound byte chaser with tenure.
huxley –
Lately I’ve been watching a lot of Star Wars stuff trying to understand how Disney managed something as ghastly as “The Acolyte.” Leaving aside the woke nonsense…
Unfortunately you cannot leave that aside as those are the people writing the scripts and they are ignorant as hell.
Ignore the pronoun crap, it’s nothing more than coercion. If it hurts their feefees to hear certain words, that’s just too bad.
On to a totally different topic — Wooooohoooo! Bing cherries are available now.
I bought eight pounds and in a week will get the necessary white rum and sugar to start dark cherry brandy.
Multiplying my ecstasy, my choke cherry tree is finally yielding a crop barring a heavy storm. Choke cherry is about 2x Bing in flavor. My last batch was seven friggin’ years ago and it’s consumed now. Unfortunately it takes a year to steep.
I do have some Elderberry though. 🙂
I have the patience. Hopefully I have the time.
On that note, it’s the anniversary of my dipping my toes in the Styx.
‘Night all.
“…resurrect the dead…”
“334 Michiganders Registered To Vote After Their Deaths, Group Tells Court”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/334-michiganders-registered-vote-after-their-deaths-group-tells-court
Only 334, eh?
Only Michigan, eh?
(Looking on the bright side, one could say that at least the dead are civic-minded….)
@Oligonicella: You can only do those things with imaginary math. But he and others act like those things can be realized
There’s two very good reasons to study solutions in the limit of infinity, and it’s not what you call “imaginary math”, it’s perfectly respectable math, first presented in Euclid’s Elements.
The first reason is that the solutions involving infinite quantities are often very simple to solve.
The second reason is that the solutions for the infinite quantities are very close to the solutions for real quantities under special conditions, and there are well-established and simple methods for correcting the infinite-quantity solution to better match the finite-quantity solution.
For example, the electric field from an infinitely large charged plate is very simple to calculate. No one can build an infinitely large charged plate, nor charge it up. But what they can do is get close to the center of finite charged plate, and the closer you get the closer the solutions agree. If you need to move farther from the center of the finite plate you can calculate a correction to the solution for the infinite plate, and that will likely be simpler than starting with a finite plate and doing the calculation.
This strategy to approaching problems has a long history and is so widely used that no one bothers any longer to explain why they are using infinite quantities to solve something when everyone knows there aren’t infinite things. Tipler’s cylinder does not have to be infinite, it just has to be big enough that you can stay close to the center.
well it would be hard to have an object of even near infinite mass, it wouldn’t move that would be the weight of most of the known universe, I mean if you leave out that stipulation welll then it’s all gravy,
I think the physics of interstellar travel, were lightly broached in most fiction, warp speed involved creating a field where objects move around it,
Niketas Choniates –
Please don’t remove the context of my use of “imaginary”. Not talking about sqrt -2. It was aimed specifically at “those things” (taking two infinite masses and moving them at infinite velocities). Explain how that is anything but imaginary.
If your universe is imaginary, so is the math you use describing it. Believing that math applied to imaginary and unachievable concepts begets non-imaginary results is how you get people insisting we’re in a holographic universe, etc ’cause ‘the math’.
Or “assume a spherical cow” squared.
one might say theoretical construct, but again you run into the same problem even if one considered only the mass inside a solar system, that would require an incalculable amount of energy to move it,
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/michael-rapaport-comedy-vault-shows-death-threats/
@Oligonicalla:Not talking about sqrt -2.
Never said you were, nor did I strip any context. I contrasted “imaginary math” with “respectable math” not with “real number math”. I took “imaginary math” to mean math you think it’s illegitimate to use for some reason, and I assured you of it’s legitimacy. You don’t believe me, but I’m just some random guy leaving comments on a blog, right, so that’s understandable.
Explain how that is anything but imaginary.
It is an idealized situation, easier to solve mathematically than the real situation, that under certain conditions may closely approximate a real situation. Studying the idealized situation gives you important clues about what is most important to know in order to understand the real situation and also tells you under what conditions the real situation is likely to deviate greatly from it.
Believing that math applied to imaginary and unachievable concepts begets non-imaginary results is how you get people insisting we’re in a holographic universe, etc ’cause ‘the math’.
That is not how those people arrived at those kinds of conclusions. By declaring some kinds of mathematical approaches just automatically out of bounds because you have an impression they are associated with some people whose work you don’t like, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
The approach I am describing has been used with enormous success over hundreds of years to solve all kinds of practical problems, and for most of that time was the only practical approach to solve some kinds of problems since they didn’t have computers. Your daily life in the world since 1900 hinges on all sorts of math and assumptions you may not know anything about, and you may not be aware of the connections between apparently unrelated phenomena. You saw that with relativistic mass.
Totally understandable, no one can be expert in every possible thing, and if you’re not expert you have to rely on some kind of clue or other that whoever’s presenting something to you would be in a position to know. Not gonna happen on anonymous blog comments.
Niketas Choniates:
“Explain how that is anything but imaginary.”
It is an idealized situation,
i·de·al
1. satisfying one’s conception of what is perfect; most suitable:
2. existing only in the imagination; desirable or perfect but not likely to become a reality:
ie: imaginary, like the spherical cow.
You can apply math (the approach) to anything. The problem is, unlike your example of the plate, there is no corresponding reality check for his theoretical, rendering it no more than a thought bubble regardless of his math.
The humorous spherical cow metaphor was not used by the outside communities against the theoretical physicists, it originated from within, mocking the tendency to reduce a problem to the simplest form imaginable in order to make calculations more feasible, even if the simplification hinders the model’s application to reality.
I invite you to provide any feasible application of his theoretical to reality.
It’s the premise (time travel) and approach, not the math. Science requires confirmation in reality, math does not.