Big Bang...How Did it Happen?

btw, i thaught that strangness in quantam mechanics is a result of parralel universes. Eh? That is a cause.

The math for programming, in most cases, is mostly algebraic, and quite simple compared to what is required for higher level physics.
After 3 semesters of calculus, I am at the point where I am starting to understand the math behind some of the upper division phyisics. You can do well with the first few semesters of physics with the first semester or two of calculus. However, the more I look into higher division physics courses, the more math I see that I just don't know. Right now, I am taking Differential equations, which is just allowing me to see some of the mathematical reasons for equations that were handed to us in earlier physics classes, because at that earlier stage, most students have enought math to manipulate the equations, but not to derive them. As it stands, I still have many more semesters of math ahead of me to be able to understand the mathematical reasoning behind various physics priciples. The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know.If you want a strong math backround to understand physics, just stick with the mathmatics courses, and follow through the calculus courses. Understanding the math will help you understand the physics.

Actually, it wouldn't."Logic" is a kind of mathematics where you derive conclusions from initial principles that aren't tested but assumed.That is, you assume some general things are true, and then, from those things, you determine what else would be true if those first things were true.Logic doesn't really get us anywhere in terms of finding out about the universe because we don't know what aspects of the universe we can assume are true. So we have to work backwards, through induction instead of deduction, and determine what general principles we can infer about the universe based on specific observations. That's called "the scientific method."See the difference? Logic starts with general assumptions and results in specific conclusions. Science starts with specific observations and results in general conclusions.What will really bake your noodle is that the scientific process isn't logically valid. (This is called the "inductive fallacy", which is an extension of "the fallacy of affirming the consequent.") Because this is so, it turns out that all the scientific conclusions we make have to be tentative.

I wan't to learn it now. I can't wait until I am 18 to learn it.

When you type in messages, there's a link next to the text box that says "UBB Code is ON". Click that and it'll show you the list of markup codes we're all using.

so basicaly what you are saying is that erashional thaught and elogical thaugh gives us an advantage at discovering new things?

got it.

Well, it's not a "result" of parallel universes; the parallel universes thing (called "the Sum-Over-Histories interpretation") is just one way that some folks came up with to try to make sense of what's going on in quantum mechanics; to try to make it deterministic to some degree.But it turns out that this guy (I don't remember the details) says he's done an experiment that proves this interpretation false. So we're back to the random, weird world of quantum mechanics.

No, I'm just saying that "logic" doesn't mean "rational thought", it refers to a specific mode of reason that doesn't really apply to the universe.The scientific method is certainly rational; but its conclusions are not logically valid. That doesn't mean they're wrong, just, that we can't entirely trust them. Some new data could come along and change everything, you see. We don't know.So, we're tentative. Every scientific conclusion is tentative. That doesn't mean we know nothing at all, though - it's this same illogical process that made the computer you're in front of, after all - just, that we don't know anything for sure.

You don't have to wait, if you are motivated, go to Barnes and Nobles, or some other book sight. Get a good solid book on Algebra and Trig (both are extemely important). After you feel you have mastered that, move on to a pre-calc or calculus book. Feel free to talk to teachers for help, many are willing to help motivated students, or find other students who want to excel in math at a faster pace. There is alot of material to calculus, so that will probably take some time, but stick with it. Alot of intersting stuff becomes mathematically appearant as you progress.

but just because we haven't found any cause for things in QM doesn't mean that there isn't any. Even if all conclusions and all evidences show this and that it is world-wide accepted it very well may be false. Math is a creation of man. It is concept. You cannot grab a 3 unless it is a physical image of a 3. If our understanding of QM is flawed then how is math going to help us. Didn't scientist have to create a special type of math to calculate this. New things that come may not be calculatable by this type of math.

Right.But also, because we've found things for which we've found no cause, we can't say yet that "cause and effect" always apply. Not exactly... what happened was, there was this math that everybody thought was totally abstract, that they thought couldn't possibly model anything in the real world - "imaginary" numbers, etc. - and it turned out that it, and only it, models quantum mechanics accurately.

So you can calculate a simulation of an object being effected by gravity right. How much math is that. Could you show me the equations?How do you get the answer. What is returned from the equations or what is in the question that you extract to recieve the answer? Are there any algebric variables in there that have to be solved?

Not offhand, no... maybe Darwin Storm could. Well, motion is position over time, right? So, given the equation describing the motion of an object and a given time, you can solve for the objects position at that time.You can do more, too. You can change the equation in such a way that now, it gives you the object's speed over time. You can change that equation in the same way (called "taking the derivative") and get the object's accelleration (or change in speed) over time.This is the basic stuff. I can't give you examples because I don't know any, but pretty much, what calculus does is describe the motion of objects in ways that let you find out other things, like speed and accelleration.

that's cool. Is there an online tutorial to start learning the basics.