Wikipedia

User talk:Ancheta Wis/d

< User talk:Ancheta Wis
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Ancheta Wis in topic why time causes paradoxes in physics
Learn more about this page

1[1] 2[2] 3[3] 4[4] 5[5] 6[6] 7[7] 8[8] 9[9] 10[10] 11[11] 12[12] 13[13] 14[14] 15[15] 16[16] 17[17] 18[18] 19[19] 20[20] 21[21] 22[22] 23[23] 24[24] 25[25] 26[26] 27[27] 28[28] 29[29] 30[30] 31[31] 32[32] 33[33] 34[34] 35[35] 36[36] 37[37] 38[38] 39[39] 40[40] 41[41] 42[42] 43[43] 44[44] 45[45] 46[46] 47[47] 48[48] 49[49] 50[50] 51[51] 52[52] 53[53] 54[54] 55[55] 56[56] 57[57] 58[58] 59[59] 60[60]

  1. ^ Backus 1978
  2. ^ Patterson & Hennessy 1998, p. 42
  3. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  4. ^ Schmandt-Besserat 1981, p. 1
  5. ^ Menninger 1992, p. 1
  6. ^ Lazos 1994, p. 1
  7. ^ Montaner i Simon 1887, p. 1
  8. ^ Kells, Kern & Bland 1943, p. 92
  9. ^ Schmidhuber, p. 1
  10. ^ Smith 1929, p. 1
  11. ^ Leibniz 1703, p. 1
  12. ^ Jones, p. 1
  13. ^ Menabrea & Lovelace 1843, p. 1
  14. ^ Hollerith 1890, p. 1
  15. ^ Lubar 1991, p. 1
  16. ^ Eckert 1935, p. 1
  17. ^ Eckert 1940, p. 1
  18. ^ Fisk 2005, p. 1
  19. ^ Hunt 1998, p. 1
  20. ^ Ulam 1983, p. 1
  21. ^ Horowitz & Hill 1989, p. 1
  22. ^ Chua 1971, p. 1
  23. ^ Steinhaus 1999, p. 1
  24. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  25. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  26. ^ Phillips, p. 1
  27. ^ Coriolis 1836, p. 1
  28. ^ Davenport & Root 1958, p. 1
  29. ^ Ziemer, Tranter & Fannin 1993, p. 1
  30. ^ Turing 1937, p. 1
  31. ^ Moye 1996, p. 1
  32. ^ Bergin 1996, p. 1
  33. ^ Zuse, p. 1
  34. ^ Welchman 1984, p. 1
  35. ^ Copeland 2006, p. 1
  36. ^ Shannon 1940, p. 1
  37. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  38. ^ Da Cruz, p. 1
  39. ^ Stern 1981, p. 1
  40. ^ von Neumann 1945, p. 1
  41. ^ Enticknap 1998, p. 1
  42. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  43. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  44. ^ Feynman, Leighton & Sands 1965, p. 1
  45. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  46. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  47. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  48. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  49. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  50. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  51. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  52. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  53. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  54. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  55. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  56. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  57. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  58. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  59. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  60. ^ Ifrah 2000, p. 1
  • Backus, John (August 1978), "Can Programming be Liberated from the von Neumann Style?" (PDF), Communications of the ACM, 21 (8), 1977 ACM Turing Award Lecture{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  • Patterson, David; Hennessy, John (1998), Computer Organization and Design, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman, ISBN 1-55860-428-6.
  • Ifrah, Georges (2000), The Universal History of Numbers: From prehistory to the invention of the computer., John Wiley and Sons, p. p. 48, ISBN 0-471-39340-1 {{citation}}: |page= has extra text (help). Translated from the French by David Bellos, E.F. Harding, Sophie Wood and Ian Monk. Ifrah supports his thesis by quoting idiomatic phrases from languages across the entire world.
  • Menninger, Karl (1992), Number Words and Number Symbols: A Cultural History of Numbers, Dover Publications German to English translation, M.I.T., 1969.


  • Lazos, Christos (1994), The Antikythera Computer (Ο ΥΠΟΛΟΓΙΣΤΗΣ ΤΩΝ ΑΝΤΙΚΥΘΗΡΩΝ), ΑΙΟΛΟΣ PUBLICATIONS GR.
  • Montaner i Simon (1887), Hispano-American Encyclopedic Dictionary
  • Smith, David Eugene (1929), A Source Book in Mathematics, New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. pp. 180–181 {{citation}}: |pages= has extra text (help).


  • Hollerith, Herman (1890), In connection with the electric tabulation system which has been adopted by U.S. government for the work of the census bureau, Columbia University School of Mines {{citation}}: |format= requires |url= (help); More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help).


  • Eckert, Wallace (1940), Punched Card Methods in Scientific Computation, Thomas J. Watson Astronomical Computing Bureau, Columbia University, pp. 101–114 Chapter XII is "The Computation of Planetary Pertubations".


  • Fisk, Dale (2005), Punch cards (PDF), Columbia University ACIS, retrieved 2008-05-19.
  • Ulam, Stanisław (1983), Adventures of a Mathematician, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, (autobiography).


  • Horowitz, Paul; Hill, Winfield (1989), The Art of Electronics, Cambridge University Press, pp. pp. 1-44, ISBN 0-521-37095-7 {{citation}}: |pages= has extra text (help).


  • Steinhaus, H. (1999), Mathematical Snapshots, 3rd ed., New York: Dover, pp. pp. 92-95, p. 301 {{citation}}: |pages= has extra text (help).





  • Davenport, Wilbur B., Jr; Root, William L. (1958), An Introduction to the theory of Random Signals and Noise, McGraw-Hill, pp. 112–364, Library of Congress Catalog number 57-10020{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link).


  • Ziemer, Roger E.; Tranter, William H.; Fannin, D. Ronald (1993), Signals and Systems: Continuous and Discrete, p. 370, ISBN 0-02-431641-5.




  • Bergin, Thomas J. (ed.) (November 13 and 14, 1996), Fifty Years of Army Computing: from ENIAC to MSRC (PDF), A record of a symposium and celebration, Aberdeen Proving Ground.: Army Research Laboratory and the U.S.Army Ordnance Center and School., retrieved 2008-05-17 {{citation}}: |first= has generic name (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  • Welchman, Gordon (1984), The Hut Six Story: Breaking the Enigma Codes, Penguin Books, pp. pp. 138-145, 295–309 {{citation}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |Location= ignored (|location= suggested) (help)


  • Copeland, B. Jack (ed.) (2006), Colossus: The Secrets of Bletchley Park's Codebreaking Computers, Oxford University Press {{citation}}: |first= has generic name (help); Unknown parameter |Location= ignored (|location= suggested) (help)
  • Shannon, Claude (1940), A symbolic analysis of relay and switching circuits, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering {{citation}}: More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help).
  • US patent 2668661, "Complex Computer", issued 1954-02-09, assigned to AT&T .


  • Stern, Nancy (1981), From ENIAC to UNIVAC: An Appraisal of the Eckert-Mauchly Computers, Digital Press, ISBN 0-932376-14-2.


  • Wang, An. US patent 2708722, "Pulse transfer controlling devices", issued 1955-05-17 .
  • Manchester Mark I, Computer History Museum, The University of Manchester, 1998, 1999, retrieved 2008-04-19 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link).
  • Feynman, R. P.; Leighton, Robert; Sands, Matthew (1965), Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, pp. III 14-11 to 14-12, Library of Congress Card number 63-20717.


  • Cleary, J. F. (1964), GE Transistor Manual, 7ed, General Electric, Semiconductor Products Department, Syracuse, NY, pp. 139–204.
  • Simon, Herbert (1991), Models of My Life, Basic Books, Sloan Foundation Series.

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

  • Eckhouse, Richard H., Jr. (1979). Minicomputer Systems: organization, programming, and applications (PDP-11). pp. 1–2. ISBN 0-13-583914-9. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

  • Mead, Carver (1980). Introduction to VLSI Systems. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-04358-0. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

  • Pellerin, David (April 22, 2005). Practical FPGA Programming in C. Prentice Hall Modern Semiconductor Design Series Sub Series: PH Signal Integrity Library. pp. 1–464. ISBN 0-13-154318-0. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help).

The scheme of Paul G. Hewitt, Conceptual Physics, 9th edition ISBN 0-321-05160-2

  1. Prolog
  2. Mechanics
    1. Inertia
    2. Motion in a straight line
    3. Newton's second law
    4. Newton's third law
    5. Momentum
    6. Energy
    7. Rotation
    8. Gravitation
    9. Trajectories
  3. Matter
    1. Atomism
    2. Solids
    3. Liquids
    4. Gases and Plasmas
  4. Heat
    1. T Q expansion
    2. Heat transfer
    3. Change of phase
    4. Thermodynamics
  5. Sound
    1. Vibrations and waves
    2. Sound
    3. Music
  6. Electromagnetism
    1. Electrostatics
    2. Current
    3. Magnetism
    4. Electromagnetic induction
  7. Light
    1. Properties of light
    2. Color
    3. Reflection and refraction
    4. Light waves
    5. Light emission
    6. Light quanta
  8. Modern physics
    1. The atom and the quantum
    2. The atomic nucleus and radioactivity
    3. Fission and fusion
  9. Relativity
    1. Special theory
    2. General theory
  10. Epilog
  11. A
  12. B
  13. C
  14. D
  15. E

why time causes paradoxes in physics

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Math is a highly compressed language that seeks to symbolize experiences in a very precise way. In many calculations time is treated as an abstract term, just a number, and detatched from the experience that is beyond the symbol, namely a cycling countable event. because of this detatchment, silly notions like backwards in time and time travel can arise. It is not so easy to make time into a negative if you see it for what it is, namely some perceived stable event that one can use as a gauge for other less orderly events. Speed is Distance/time, but this gets all hairy in relativity where its not so nice and neat as the mass of the object and its speed begins to effect the time factor, which mathematically seems to go negative beyond light speed...but of course that is only because the numbers have lost their connection to the events they are symbolizing.Jiohdi 21:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I will get more concrete and refer to John Cramer [http://seattlepi.com/local/292378_timeguy15.html is preparing an experiment] to determine whether quantum entanglement is also nonlocal in time as it is in space. This can also be stated as 'sending a signal back in time'. The experiment is still in preparation as of 10:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC).

Eckard Blumschein [1] claims that there is no signal back in time but perhaps just a mistake. E. Schroedinger wrote in 'Quantisierung als Eigenwertproblem', 4th Mitt. in Ann. Phys. (4)81, 109ff (1926), p. 112, 'one may consider, if nessessary, the real part of psi the real wave function". He omitted the aspect of required apparent symmetry. Only positive elapsed time can be measured. Our usual time scale is bound to an arbitrarily chosen event. It has been abstracted and extrapolated from elapsed time which is bound to a real object. This abstraction replaces one-sided integral relationships by differential equations. Pertaining time-symmetry requires exclusion of the unphysical advanced part of solution in order to obey causality: Future quantities cannot influence current processes being causally embedded into the integral effect of past influences. Invariance against shift and even reversal of time reversal is only possible at the level of abstracted usual time.

Since time and frequency are related to each other via complex Fourier transform, function of either time or frequency must exhibit Hermitean symmetry, i.e. positive as well as 'unphysical' negative arguments. Fictitious negative elapsed time is required as to encode merely positive frequency chosen by Schroedinger and also by Dirac. Weyl did not understand this in 1931. He wondered about PCT-symmetry.

One has to humbly accept that both imaginary and apparently negative quantities are the tribute one has to pay for abstraction into IR anstead IR+ and use of complex calculus. Apparent symmetries must be interpreted as unreal. They would disappear with correct inverse transform as do imaginary quantities, too. Blumschein 17:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Your paper suggests an experiment based on Cramer. Cramer might try dumping energy into both future and past. Your paper suggests all the energy will wind up in either the past or the future, and not in both directions. But this would require careful accounting of the energy in each pulse which he is transmitting. --Ancheta Wis 19:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Do not get me wrong. I just picked up Cramer's idea as an example of ignored essentials. Nobody can analyze future data. They simply do not yet exist. While past events are evident from left traces, future events are only predictions, no matter whether they will come true or not. Albert Einstein wrote: 'For us believing physicists, the division into past, present and future has merely the meaning of an albeit obstinate illusion.' I do not see any reason to share this belief with him, Newton, Minkowski, Hamel, Hilbert, Noether and many others. At least there is no doubt: While past is unchangeable, future is uncertain. All measurable reality exclusively belongs to the past. It makes a serious difference whether one deals with abstract time as did A. E. and John Cramer or with reality-bound elapsed time. I am pointing my finger squarely to most serious consequences of the neglect of this essential difference between abstract time in IR and concrete elapsed time in IR+. While obviously nobody can go back in elapsed time, mainstream physics and technology do not yet understand the implications for signal processing and quantum mechanics, including fourfold redundancy, non-causality, arbitrariness, and misinterpretation of apparent symmetry. Blumschein 07:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Blumschein, first of all, welcome to Wikipedia.
Perhaps we need to emphasize the upper half plane of the complex plane in our physics courses. But what about the invariants which ought not to depend on time, as they are constants of the motion. The encyclopedia has some featured articles, notably Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector which are found to be constants of the motion of the planets, for example. What about the Ehrenfest theorem, might there be a restriction on the averages? --Ancheta Wis 02:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Left of launch is military jargon for military preparations on a time line from left —a mentally unprepared past—, to right —a wake-up event (such as a launch by an enemy of at least one nuclear-armed ICBM, bearing on the homeland)—, to possible events further to the right of the wake-up event, such as a desired future course (avoidance of catastrophe).[futures 1] [futures 2] [1][2][3]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^ Andrew Feickert, Congressional Research Service report IF11654 (8 Oct 2020) The Army's Project Convergence
  2. ^ Weapon Systems Handbook 2018 update Page 32 lists how this handbook is organized. 440 pages.
    • By Modernization priority
    • By Acquisition or Business System category (ACAT or BSC). The Weapon systems in each ACAT are sorted alphabetically by Weapon system name. Each weapon system might also be in several variants (Lettered); a weapon system's variants might be severally and simultaneously in the following phases of its Life Cycle, namely — °Materiel Solution Analysis; °Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction; °Engineering & Manufacturing Development; °Production & Deployment; °Operations & Support
    • ACAT I, II, III, IV are defined on page 404

References

edit
  1. ^ MDAA.org (16 Mar 2015) Left of launch
  2. ^ Brock Sheets (25 Jan 2018) Left-of-Launch Missile Defense: ‘You Don’t Want to Have Just One Solution to the Threat’
  3. ^ Uri Friedman (24 Jan 2018) Trump's Red Line on North Korea Gets Fuzzier
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ancheta_Wis/d&oldid=1031850099"