flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

flat assembler > Heap > sleepsleep's vitally important things

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 193, 194, 195, 196  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Kedar



Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 14
fpissarra wrote:
Quote:
I don't think this is "energy"... MAYBE, the smallest thing in existence is a quark...


A Quark is a subatomic particle, i.e. a mass, which is logically made out of Energy (E = mc^2).

...sorry, but how do I quote without "Quote:" appearing when I didn't type that?
Post 16 Apr 2019, 06:42
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16511
Location: M87*
Quote:
...sorry, but how do I quote without "Quote:" appearing when I didn't type that?
Kedar wrote:
...sorry, but how do I quote without "Quote:" appearing when I didn't type that?
Put anything you want here wrote:
...sorry, but how do I quote without "Quote:" appearing when I didn't type that?
It's tricky, but it can be done.
Post 16 Apr 2019, 07:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Ali.Z



Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 205
sleepsleep wrote:
Furs wrote:
With that logic then any solid object composed of more than one atom constantly "uses energy" to hold itself together but that's not the case.

I would say, maybe, idk,
What cause those tiny things inside atom to keep on orbiting?

De-orbit one of those tiny thing inside an atom cause huge / more / expected energy to explode?

"What cause those tiny things inside atom to keep on orbiting?"

maybe earth's rotation? not sure, as it rotate or move it generates some kind of ... idk.

_________________
Asm For Wise Humans
Post 16 Apr 2019, 10:53
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
Kedar wrote:
A Quark is a subatomic particle, i.e. a mass, which is logically made out of Energy (E = mc^2).


In math '=' means equal. In physics '=' means equivalent... Mass isn't "made of" energy (it could be, nobody knows). The equation is named "Einstein's mass-energy equivalence" (see here).

Kedar wrote:
...sorry, but how do I quote without "Quote:" appearing when I didn't type that?


By adding ="name" to the "quote".
Post 16 Apr 2019, 13:08
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8125
Location: ˛                              ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣ Posts: 6699
Do we need some sort of control to maintain constant speed?

Let us imagine the things inside atom,
Orbiting at the speed of light? No accident?

Why am I going to create energy when all the things inside seems to orbit from eternal? No start no end?

Knocking h2o apart, protocol to combine must exists before combination is allowed? How the whole thing start without rules ahead?
Post 16 Apr 2019, 13:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
Ali.Z wrote:
What cause those tiny things inside atom to keep on orbiting?


One of the conceptualized primary forces of the universe: Nuclear weak force.
But, keep in mind that "orbiting" is not the correct term because even if the tradicional mathematical model for atoms is correct, there are several "kinds" of "orbits" (see here).

Ali.Z wrote:
maybe earth's rotation? not sure, as it rotate or move it generates some kind of ... idk.


Nope... gravity is one of the weakest forces of nature. It is not strong enough to keep an electron "orbiting" or protons "together" in the nucleus. I recomend the interesting book of Isaac Asimov (yep, the science fiction writer!) "Atom: Journey to subatomic cosmos".
Post 16 Apr 2019, 13:18
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
sleepsleep wrote:
Do we need some sort of control to maintain constant speed?

Let us imagine the things inside atom,
Orbiting at the speed of light? No accident?


I am enjoying very much such questions! The quest for knowledge is always a good thing to see (I'm not being sarcastic or condencending - it's sincere!).

The atomic structure is a mathematical model, nothing more... Nobody knows what an atom really looks like - even with electronic tunneling microscopes we can see only blured "lumps", not the nucleus and electrosphere...

There are other hypothesis for the structure of matter: String theory, for example.

So, the "speed" of electrons aren't, necessarily, the speed of light, since the Heinsenberg's uncertanty priciple prohibits us knowing both speed and position (or momentum).

sleepsleep wrote:
Why am I going to create energy when all the things inside seems to orbit from eternal? No start no end?


I think it is well stablished that energy isn't created or destroyed, isn't it?

If there is motion, there is energy "spent" or "consumed" (I don't like this terms!).

sleepsleep wrote:
Knocking h2o apart, protocol to combine must exists before combination is allowed? How the whole thing start without rules ahead?


But there are rules, as stated in a mathematical model... Again, how exactly this works, in reality, nobody knows... All knowledge is created by hypotesis and experimentation. It doesn't mean it is "real", but fit to the observable facts.
Post 16 Apr 2019, 13:30
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8125
Location: ˛                              ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣ Posts: 6699
Somehow saw this while repairing a pc inside client's office, guess these are guildelines when we need guidelines.

Image

fpissarra wrote:
I am enjoying very much such questions! The quest for knowledge is always a good thing to see (I'm not being sarcastic or condencending - it's sincere!).

There are lots of questions too (hopefully sound like such questions also) from page 1. Embarassed

Not sure if you watch this IBM atom boy movie before, please try if you haven't.
A Boy And His Atom: The World's Smallest Movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSCX78-8-q0

And that was published in year 2013, in year 2019, maybe they can do some photon boy by now? Laughing

afaik, by transfering more energy into atoms, things inside orbit faster and then break out thus cause ( explosion or etc ) de-orbit the things and cause things inside to form new orbit after release those extra energy, maybe energy inside each atom is kinda constant.


fpissarra wrote:
I think it is well stablished that energy isn't created or destroyed, isn't it?

My issue with such statement is, it somehow conflicted with the expanding universe idea.

fpissarra wrote:
But there are rules, as stated in a mathematical model... Again, how exactly this works, in reality, nobody knows...

Then perhaps such rules equal these whole rules are created, or does random could evolve into rules? I don't think so, but who knows Laughing

Even the idea of random is already some sort of rules.
Post 16 Apr 2019, 20:04
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Ali.Z



Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 205
sleepsleep wrote:
Even the idea of random is already some sort of rules.

exactly, because there is nothing random at all.

_________________
Asm For Wise Humans
Post 16 Apr 2019, 20:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
sleepsleep wrote:
Not sure if you watch this IBM atom boy movie before, please try if you haven't.


Yes, I did, at the time... notice you cannot see the electrons and protons, just lumps, as I said.

sleepsleep wrote:
afaik, by transfering more energy into atoms, things inside orbit faster and then break out thus cause ( explosion or etc ) de-orbit the things and cause things inside to form new orbit after release those extra energy, maybe energy inside each atom is kinda constant.


That's what experiments show... But, usually, "explosions" occurs when nucleae are "dismantled" by colision (fission). If you give more energy (heat, for instance) to an atom you'll get electrons going faster (or vibrating faster) and, maybe, getting free from their "orbits". That's what you can see in a incandescent lamp bulb, for instance... The light you see in the filament is electrons bombarding your retina.

Yep... energy inside an atom is constant, it is called the "energy conservative principle".

sleepsleep wrote:
fpissarra wrote:
I think it is well stablished that energy isn't created or destroyed, isn't it?

My issue with such statement is, it somehow conflicted with the expanding universe idea.


"Somehow", how?

sleepsleep wrote:
fpissarra wrote:
But there are rules, as stated in a mathematical model... Again, how exactly this works, in reality, nobody knows...

Then perhaps such rules equal these whole rules are created, or does random could evolve into rules? I don't think so, but who knows Laughing


I don't follow "such rules equais these (what?) rules"? And random don't "evolve", but statistically speaking, after too much transformations, the effects of randomness becomes more predictable... If you toss a coin millions of times a pattern emerges (maybe because of one side is a little bit heavier then the other - maybe the way you toss, maybe because the coin is not perfectly balanced, who knows?)...

sleepsleep wrote:
Even the idea of random is already some sort of rules.

The idea of random, of course. That doesn't mean there is nothing really random, unpredictable...
Post 16 Apr 2019, 23:57
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Kedar



Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 14
fpissarra wrote:
In math '=' means equal. In physics '=' means equivalent... Mass isn't "made of" energy (it could be, nobody knows).

I get the Tower of Babel issue...in Programming '==' means Equivalence, and '=' means Assignment, so I’m asserting that the correct understanding of E = mc^2 is that I am assigning the value of mc^2 to E, which is supported by the Decrease (breaking down) of mass accompanied by the Release of Energy in a Nuclear Fission reaction (see Halliday, D., & Resnick, R., (1981). Fundamentals of Physics (Second Edition Extended Version). USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.)

Further, I’m asserting the Reason that Energy cannot be Destroyed is because there is nothing smaller for Energy to be broken down into == Smallest Thing.

[...to be fair, I did fail Physics in 1984 (although I did pass Joust and Q*bert), and never cared enough to do any Physics papers since...I have since read and thought some stuff though...]

fpissarra wrote:
By adding ="name" to the "quote".

Thanks for How to do the trick.
Post 17 Apr 2019, 01:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 479
Ask revō, why would she complicate, not answering the question?
Post 17 Apr 2019, 06:48
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 479
After years of beta-testing, final release of GULAG 2.0
https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-duma-approves-sovereign-internet-bill/29883847.html
Post 17 Apr 2019, 07:48
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DimonSoft



Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Posts: 505
Location: Belarus
Kedar wrote:
in Programming '==' means Equivalence, and '=' means Assignment

As a side note, C-based programming languages are hardly even 1/4th of programming, so the whole ===== operators craziness shouldn’t be used for any sane reasoning.
Post 17 Apr 2019, 09:12
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 7238
Location: Kraków, Poland
DimonSoft wrote:
As a side note, C-based programming languages are hardly even 1/4th of programming, so the whole ===== operators craziness shouldn’t be used for any sane reasoning.
+1
Post 17 Apr 2019, 10:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Furs



Joined: 04 Mar 2016
Posts: 1403
DimonSoft wrote:
Kedar wrote:
in Programming '==' means Equivalence, and '=' means Assignment

As a side note, C-based programming languages are hardly even 1/4th of programming, so the whole ===== operators craziness shouldn’t be used for any sane reasoning.
At least it's much better than the extremely ugly assignment like := or <- is in some languages.

Now whether == should be equivalence or not is a different matter, but assignment should be a simple = because it just looks better, also provides stuff like += -= >>= and so on.

I'm guessing it's those other non-C-like languages' fault that we even have the crappy AT&T reversed syntax for asm in the first place. Since now "mov eax, ebx" is really just eax = ebx and is very easy to read. "add eax, ebx" is just eax += ebx and is similarly easy to read.

The other way is like writing "eax + ebx -> eax", yuck!
Post 17 Apr 2019, 11:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 16511
Location: M87*
AT&T syntax should die in a fire, after being poisoned, hung, drawn, and quartered. Smile
Post 17 Apr 2019, 11:56
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8125
Location: ˛                              ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣ Posts: 6699
fpissarra wrote:
sleepsleep wrote:
fpissarra wrote:
I think it is well stablished that energy isn't created or destroyed, isn't it?
My issue with such statement is, it somehow conflicted with the expanding universe idea.
"Somehow", how?

I guess I never really go deep into the somehow, how, it just a feeling that they are conflicting.

Let say we use spring for our imagination, to have the expanding motion, it means things must be compressed form in the initial.

How things are compressed in the beginning is an issue for me, I don't think I could accept the idea energy somehow somewhat exist in compressed form.

I don't think we could print a 3D compressed spring that have energy to expand upon completion? Or could we?

If we could accept the idea energy is there from the beginning, not created and will not get destroyed, then we might as well accept there is no big bang, everything, the universe, is there out of nowhere.

Before things could expand, the algorithm for limit must be set, (who or what set this) what cause the constant for energy inside atom?

And what cause those energy compressed, in my pov, we need "somebody, who, what" to compressed all these before expansion.

If we use the zip file analogy, unzip algorithm must exists before we could unzip, or zip algorithm must exists before we could unzip, oh man, this is intriguing,
Post 17 Apr 2019, 15:32
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
sleepsleep wrote:
Let say we use spring for our imagination, to have the expanding motion, it means things must be compressed form in the initial.

Yep. I think, essentially, this is the basis for the "big bang" theory...

sleepsleep wrote:
How things are compressed in the beginning is an issue for me, I don't think I could accept the idea energy somehow somewhat exist in compressed form.

I don't think we could print a 3D compressed spring that have energy to expand upon completion? Or could we?


Great question, by analogy!

sleepsleep wrote:
If we could accept the idea energy is there from the beginning, not created and will not get destroyed, then we might as well accept there is no big bang, everything, the universe, is there out of nowhere.


I have a great prejudice about the idea of a "universe from nothing" (Lawrence Krauss thesis) as well... But, except him, I think no cosmologist says the universe was "created" on the big bang, because all physics laws breaks down at certain point (I think 10⁻³² seconds "after" the possible event)... And some scientists says, because of quantum mechanics, "creation" is impossible (there is an effect called quantum tunneling)... I.e, if one accepts the big bang hypothesis, there is no way the universe being smaller then ℏ (Planck's constant)...

sleepsleep wrote:
Before things could expand, the algorithm for limit must be set, (who or what set this) what cause the constant for energy inside atom?

And what cause those energy compressed, in my pov, we need "somebody, who, what" to compressed all these before expansion.

If we use the zip file analogy, unzip algorithm must exists before we could unzip, or zip algorithm must exists before we could unzip, oh man, this is intriguing,

Aristotle "first cause" argument... But, maybe, it not apply... What if the universe is cyclical? It shrikns and expands? NOW the evidence shows the observable universe is expanding, hence it should be very small in the past, but what if it was big before that and shinking?

Is is a possibility, but we cannot collect any evidence about it. There is no set of rules that corroborates this possibility. so it isn't even an hypotesis. That's what science is: Hypotesis about a fenomena (even if it is a possible one), corroborated with set of experiments, which is promoted to theories (with restricted abrangence) and laws (with 'universal' abrangence)...
Post 18 Apr 2019, 00:05
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
fpissarra



Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Posts: 24
Kedar wrote:
fpissarra wrote:
In math '=' means equal. In physics '=' means equivalent... Mass isn't "made of" energy (it could be, nobody knows).

I get the Tower of Babel issue...in Programming '==' means Equivalence, and '=' means Assignment


Well, if somebody wants to discuss physics, I think they must use the appropriate jargon and concepts. This is the first step for both parties to discuss the same thing.

I could compare '=' with C++ overloaded operator, for example, and say that this means anything I want...
Post 18 Apr 2019, 00:14
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 193, 194, 195, 196  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2019, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.