Its actually much more impressive then it sounds, since atoms and stuff have very low mass. It takes a very large amount of energy to move something the mass of a mosquito compared to moving something at the same speed if it has a mass of an atom.

04:49, 12 April 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel%27s_Horn

The inside is bigger than the outside.

If a scientist wants to know how old a tree is, he would have to count the rings outside the bark!

16:47, 12 April 2010

Well the surface area (infinite) is bigger then the volume, which is a bit different then saying the inside is bigger than the outside. Still weird paradox, however theres lots of weird things when you consider idealized mathamatical objects. (If it existed in real world...)

20:45, 13 April 2010

The paradox is based on a portion of the equation Y=1/x, and is infinite as you say.

Check this out.

Man=Man

1=Man*1/Man

Lat Man = x

1=x *1/Man

Lat 1/Man=Y

1=x*y

y=1/x

The infinite surface area fits inside a Man.

14:58, 14 April 2010

wtf is lat in you equation? (not to mention there are several other problems with your reasoning, but I'll start there).

15:10, 14 April 2010

Sorry about that, my eyesight is not very good.

Lat is a typo.

It should be 'Let'

21:00, 14 April 2010

It is a known fact everything in the universe vibrates.

The Barkhausen condition for oscillation is Y=1/x

Light for example is an oscillation F=1/t

Einstein was searching for a simple universal equation to describe everything in the universe.

Man=Man Dog=Dog Apple=Apple Rock=Rock ...etc. can all be described by the same equation.

If it exists, it oscillates.

Distance is an oscillator.

Relativity says, it is not always the same length.

21:22, 14 April 2010

Edited by author.
Last edit: 00:15, 15 April 2010

So you're saying Let Man = x y=1/x therefore man satisfies the inequality: ${\displaystyle Man\leq 2\pi \int _{1}^{\infty }{\frac {\sqrt {1+{\frac {1}{x^{4}}}}}{x}}\mathrm {d} x}$

?

At best thats a misunderstanding of how math works. (Man is not a function..., well at least not in this sense of the word). (Although i suppose you could argue that an infinite 2 dimensional surface fits inside a 3 dimensional object, [if you fold it well enough i geuss], that seems misleading)

23:48, 14 April 2010

I wonder who's the one who should review their high school math...

23:58, 14 April 2010

I am using an equation right out of the bible.

In Boolean algebra the 'AND' is for multiplication and the'OR' is used for addition.

Book Revelations Chapter 22

13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Using Christ's words, Alpha*Omega is a multiplication operation.

Let Alpha=x Let Omega=y

x*y

Book Zecharia Chapter 14

9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

God=1

Therefore x*y=1

This is a universal equation. Without it, nothing can exist, not even the big bang.

This equation is a prerequisite, the golden number Phi makes it perpetual motion.

Together they are saying the universe was already assembled before the big bang.

This agrees with the second law of thermo dynamics. Entropy increases going forward in time and decreases going backward in time. At the time of the big bang the entropy is zero. The universe already has to be assembled before the bang.

19:14, 15 April 2010

Where in the world is your basis for this "logic?" Who said this is Boolean algebra? "And" normally implies the operation of addition.

Mr. Boole lived 1816-1864. The Book of Revelations was written between 95 and 202 AD. I would think a concept not even existence would not take precedence (like my grammar there?).

And because of the idea of the Holy Trinity, you're going to say, "since God = 1 and God = 3, therefore 1 = 3?"

22:57, 15 April 2010

I have a background in electrical engineering. Circuits designed with 'AND' gates are multiplication, and 'OR' gates are addition. The point you raise, is the point I am trying to show show you. Exactly when was the bible written? Using known information, we can create a time line. I want to show you several examples as one can be very misleading

Here is just one exmple showing repeating phrases as a method of encryption. This technique of encryption is very common in the bible. Leonardo Fibonacci published his sequense circa 1202 A.D.

1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,...

The same phrase is found in Fibonacci chapters 2,3,5,8

Book Song of Songs Chapter 2

7 I charge you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, ...

Book Song of Songs Chapter 3

5 I charge you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, ....

Book Song of Songs Chapter 5

8 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, ...

Book Song of Songs Chapter 8

4 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem, ...

Pascal's probability triangle also can be used to produce the Fibonacci sequence. The Fibonacci sequence converges to Phi=1.618...

8/5=1.6

13/8=1.625

21/13=1.615

34/21=1.619

55/34=1.617

89/55=1.618

144/89=1.618

The bible contains Phi directly and indirectly many times. I just gave you one small example.

23:41, 15 April 2010

Um, The bible is a collection of books. The books you cite are older than the concept. Have you taken a hint yet?

00:30, 16 April 2010

This is the point I am trying to make. Before the Middle ages was a long period called the Dark ages where there was no bible, or Fibonacci numbers. Books in the hands of people are only as reliable as the people handling these books. As for Brian's other question, if two can be one, why can't three be one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

01:17, 16 April 2010

The fall of Rome was in the late 5th century AD. The Book of Revelations written in 95, well before the start of the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages were the bulk of the Middles Ages, lasting from the 5th century to the 15th century. The Dark Ages is a concept of humanist Petrach. The Bible was composed between the 14th and 5th centuries BC, well before the 5th century AD. The New Testament of the Bible was between 117 AD and 138 AD also before 400 AD. Get your history right.

03:10, 16 April 2010

I an trying to get my history right, but there are too many anachronisms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daric

The Daric coin anachronism also contains Blaise Pascal's probability triangle used to derive Fibonacci numbers, hence Phi.

Book 1 Chronicles Chapter 29 7 And gave for the service of the house of God five thousand talents and ten thousand drams of gold, and ten thousand talents of silver, and eighteen thousand talents of bronze, and one hundred thousand talents of iron.

These numbers can produce Blaise Pascal's probability triangle.

        1
1     1
1   2     1
1   3    3    1
1   4    6     4    1


Diagonal 1 = 1+1+1+1+1=5

Diagonal 2 = 1+2+3+4=10

Diagonal 3 = 1+3+6=10

Cross (row 2 * center column)= (1+1)*(1+2+6)=18

Diagonal 2 * Diagonal 3 =10*10=100

Multiply everything by 1000

5000, 10000, 10000, 18000, 100000

If the an anachronistic coin can appear in the bible, why can't the anachronistic Hubble telescope or Boolean logic?

Book Acts Chapter 19 35 And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter?

An image did come down from Jupiter. It was the Shoemaker Levi 9.

This raises the question of when was the bible written? The data I presented so far in these discussions gives us the following points on our time line.

Exact Oslo Accord

Exact Millennium

Exact Shoemaker Levi 9

Circa Daric coin anachronism

Circa Fibonacci numbers - Leonardo Fibonacci's life time or later

Circa Pascal's triangle - Blaise Pascal's life time or later

Circa Boolean logic - Boole's life time or later

Circa Pi

Circa Phi

People are on the assumption time is linear. If you walk a straight line the simplified equation for distance becomes, s = (1/2) *a*t^2.

If we don't care about acceleration the characteristic of the equation is (t^2)/2. Since time keeps on ticking all around multiply by 2*pi.

This gives us Pi*t^2 which is the area of a circle telling us the horizontal portion of the 3D anamorphic art is the time domain. What goes around comes around.

20:19, 16 April 2010