Jump to content

About This Sound Room

ξ = Ø and other fun stuff

  1. What's new in this room
  2. A friend of mine worked on the (short lived) Superconducting Supercollider; it cost more to shut down than it would have to complete.
  3. Yep......although I remember a former me used to say "I'll sleep when I'm dead'
  4. Another way to look at it, some decades later, that may blow your mind, again
  5. I'm more involved in the nature of doing nothing.
  6. Sk1Bum


    That must be a metric measure of time.
  7. Budding loudspeaker designers may have an interest:
  8. RichP714

    Not common sense compatible

    This may more clearly demonstrate that trying to square peg Euclidian attributes into the round hole of space-time doesn't work.
  9. A walk back to a key principle, which may help in understanding non-Euclidian space; or at least help one understand that trying to apply Euclidian characteristics to space-time doesn't work.
  10. Let's unmix that paint (or reveal the sinusoids in a composite signal)
  11. RichP714


    remember the Aphex demon face? http://www.bastwood.com/?page_id=10
  12. RichP714

    merovingian knot

    Looks like your tie is wearing a tie For fans of the Matrix movies
  13. RichP714

    merovingian knot

    For fans of the Matrix; the Merovingian (or edeity) knot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM7WcIjDAdg
  14. Well, maybe not from the beginning, but as soon as possible.....If cable manufacturers get a hold of this, get ready for the next big thing; quantum distortion erasers!
  15. RichP714

    Not common sense compatible

    Well, I'm not counting, but those that do say it's about 46 billion light years. (remember when you were a kid, and there was evidence for stars within the universe being older than the universe itself? funny in hindsight). I might be missing something, but I don't see the connection to whether the existence of a horizon is evidence of flat space I'm confused again; the Universe is, as far as is known, larger than we can 'see'; by that logic, 'larger than we can see' implies a horizon, and a horizon (in intrinsic space) implies curvature. The statement quoted reads as "It's flat because it's curved." It's likely best to think in terms if extrinsic space, rather than attempt to force a characteristic of intrinsic space upon it. Not necessarily; e.g. if you stand at the event horizon of a black hole, light waves curve such that you can see the back of your own head. That's not a small perturbation of space. From a distance, you (according to some research) can see the portion of the accretion disc that is behind the black hole. Gravitational lensing let's us see things that aren't even there; and both are not small phenomenon.
  16. Nahash5150

    Not common sense compatible

    Yes, but the local distortions are tragically small compared to the whole, not unlike hills and valleys on the surface of the earth, although far smaller a ratio by comparison. It's flat as far as we know, because if it is curved, then the universe would be much larger than we can see, and I don't think anyone has discounted that. For all practical purposes, the observable universe is flat, and that's 13.8 billion light years in every direction. Distortion everywhere indeed. The universe has a tube transfer function.
  17. RichP714

    Not common sense compatible

    dynamic horizons typically indicate curvature, yes, but the universe (commonly agreed upon as being 'flat') has a limit to it's observable contents; which is a type of horizon. Some of the universe is now far enough distant from us that its light will never reach us, even though it's said to be flat. Local and global geometry at play. e.g. when mass interacts with space it distorts it (gravitational lensing) so space can be locally curved, yet globally flat. Those lumps in the CBR? distortion!
  18. Optimized for my backyard at 10PM, but applicable to night time in the midwest