Super Moderator florduh Posted October 9, 2012 Super Moderator Share Posted October 9, 2012 holy fuck Marg. He's incepted into your brain now. SHIT. That's entailment for ya. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdaddy Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Legion....The candle in EX-c represents how one quantity is related to another quantity of another candle. A candle may be looked at in 2 different ways. as A:B candle or A/B or by the phrase "A to B". A ratio of 1:5 says that the second quantity of the candle is five times as large as the first candle. The following steps will allow the candle to be determination if two conflicting candles are compared. Example: Determine the ratio of 24 to 40. Divide both terms of the ratio by the greatest common factor (24/8 = 3, 40/8=5) to get the first candle. State the ratio of the first candle (The ratio of 24 to 40 is 3:5) to get the second candle. This accounts for EX-cer's beautiful burning candle!! It's just that simple!! I hope this is simple enough for you my friend!! Congratulations, madame, this is the most brilliant thing I've read on the internet all day, perhaps even all week. I tip my hat to you. Ive seen this before. somewhere..... WAIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdaddy Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Legion, I can see that this subject is very important to you. Is it important enough, that you'll step outside of it's language/notation and demonstrate it's value to us, in plain English, before we go into it? If your answer is, 'Yes', then I'm game. If your answer is, 'No', then I'm out. Or rather, I was never in. Being optimistic and assuming a 'Yes', could you please explain the value of this subject, without resorting to it's language/notation. How about starting with a historical example of a problem that was solved or made easier to understand by it? Thanks, BAA. i KNEW i wasnt the only one that had trouble understanding his pseudo-english prose. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted October 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted October 9, 2012 Legion....The candle in EX-c represents how one quantity is related to another quantity of another candle. A candle may be looked at in 2 different ways. as A:B candle or A/B or by the phrase "A to B". A ratio of 1:5 says that the second quantity of the candle is five times as large as the first candle. The following steps will allow the candle to be the determinating factor if two conflicting candles are compared. Example: Determine the ratio of 24 to 40. Divide both terms of the ratio by the greatest common factor (24/8 = 3, 40/8=5) to get the first candle. State the ratio of the first candle (The ratio of 24 to 40 is 3:5) to get the second candle. This accounts for EX-cer's beautiful burning candle!! It's just that simple!! I hope this is simple enough for you my friend!! holy fuck Marg. He's incepted into your brain now. SHIT. I'm just a really smart, intelligent person mcdaddy......I can't help myself....it's all about 'mat matics'........ Maybe someday, you'll understand people like me and Legion.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't mind a burning candle. It's nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thought2Much Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Some scented candles give me a headache. I also don't like the ones that smell so much like food that they make me hungry when my wife burns them, causing me to snack unnecessarily. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Some scented candles give me a headache. I also don't like the ones that smell so much like food that they make me hungry when my wife burns them, causing me to snack unnecessarily. I like Bayberry. Too bad, you can hardly find them anymore. Most other scents I don't care for and just prefer incense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeasabird Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Legion, I can see that this subject is very important to you. Is it important enough, that you'll step outside of it's language/notation and demonstrate it's value to us, in plain English, before we go into it? If your answer is, 'Yes', then I'm game. If your answer is, 'No', then I'm out. Or rather, I was never in. Being optimistic and assuming a 'Yes', could you please explain the value of this subject, without resorting to it's language/notation. How about starting with a historical example of a problem that was solved or made easier to understand by it? Thanks, BAA. The most concise and the most awesome comment I've read from you in a while. Well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ro-bear Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Some scented candles give me a headache. I also don't like the ones that smell so much like food that they make me hungry when my wife burns them, causing me to snack unnecessarily. I like Bayberry. Too bad, you can hardly find them anymore. Most other scents I don't care for and just prefer incense. I had a friend who made candles using a milk carton, Gulfwax, ice cubes, and potpourri. I left one unattended for a few minutes and almost burned my dad's workshop down. The potpourri caught flame and acted like dozens of little wicks, melting the mass until when I returned to find a flaming mass of waxy debris about to ignite the workbench I left it on. That's science for you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Some scented candles give me a headache. I also don't like the ones that smell so much like food that they make me hungry when my wife burns them, causing me to snack unnecessarily. I like Bayberry. Too bad, you can hardly find them anymore. Most other scents I don't care for and just prefer incense. I had a friend who made candles using a milk carton, Gulfwax, ice cubes, and potpourri. I left one unattended for a few minutes and almost burned my dad's workshop down. The potpourri caught flame and acted like dozens of little wicks, melting the mass until when I returned to find a flaming mass of waxy debris about to ignite the workbench I left it on. That's science for you. Yes, of course, never leave a burning candle unattended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galien Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I called Stephen Hawking about this. I got the machine, so I hung up. I'm stealing this and making it my facebook status this very second. I have tears, literal tears, running down my face from laughing so hard at this... Florduh has a certain way of making other grown men cry tears of joy and ecstasy. and women...if only i lived in america Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted October 10, 2012 Super Moderator Share Posted October 10, 2012 If only!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdaddy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Settle down, Florduh, settle down....don't get yer Depends all moist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe if I carry on by myself for a while, others here will join in. Between work and sleep I've not had much time to think about this, but I believe it's a promising thing. I think a burning candle is a thermodynamically open natural system. So a handful of explicit understandings (i.e. formal models) of it might be cool. I've not yet thought of a natural system which is analogous to a burning candle. This could be very helpful, if one occurred to me. And really I can't settle on what the boundaries of the burning candle should be. Should I just consider the flame? The flame and the wick? The whole candle? I don't know yet. I wanted to look over some of the branches of math available for this task. I've listed some of them here... algebra geometry calculus set theory category theory statistics I thought maybe if I could build a rough model using differential equations (i.e. calculus) then this might suggest what the boundaries of the system could be. But, I've forgotten more calculus than I care to re-learn. And I don't believe I'll try to build a statistical model here. I know statistics has a proper place, but I just don't much care for it. Anyway, I guess I'll just sort of piddle around with this over the next few days and perhaps weeks, and see what might come of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thackerie Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe this thread should be moved to the Totally Off Topic section. No, it should be moved to the Totally Off the Wall section. I have absolutely no idea what the OP is about. Is it some kind of code? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wndwalkr99 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe if I carry on by myself for a while, others here will join in. If you actually want someone to join in, that's probably your best bet. I have absolutely no idea where you are going with this (the unlit path I referred to in the thread about evolution) and I really just think you're asking vague questions so that when someone responds seriously, you can tell them that they're wrong for xyz reason that is magically now included in the question. If you can do a better job of lighting that path, you might get some takers. Otherwise, I don't have either the time nor the interest. But I'll watch what you write, and perhaps respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe if I carry on by myself for a while, others here will join in. Between work and sleep I've not had much time to think about this, but I believe it's a promising thing. I think a burning candle is a thermodynamically open natural system. So a handful of explicit understandings (i.e. formal models) of it might be cool. I've not yet thought of a natural system which is analogous to a burning candle. This could be very helpful, if one occurred to me. And really I can't settle on what the boundaries of the burning candle should be. Should I just consider the flame? The flame and the wick? The whole candle? I don't know yet. I wanted to look over some of the branches of math available for this task. I've listed some of them here... algebra geometry calculus set theory category theory statistics I thought maybe if I could build a rough model using differential equations (i.e. calculus) then this might suggest what the boundaries of the system could be. But, I've forgotten more calculus than I care to re-learn. And I don't believe I'll try to build a statistical model here. I know statistics has a proper place, but I just don't much care for it. Anyway, I guess I'll just sort of piddle around with this over the next few days and perhaps weeks, and see what might come of it. Yes, perhaps you'd better carry on by yourself for a while, Legion. Never mind about any interest I've expressed about your ideas. If you do want to break this cycle of non-response to your repeated invitations, try relating to other members on an equal basis. But if you can only deal with other folks on your own terms, then you'll just filter out anyone who isn't your clone. Bye, bye! BAA 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 Yes, perhaps you'd better carry on by yourself for a while, Legion. Thank you for re-suggesting what I've already suggested for myself. Never mind about any interest I've expressed about your ideas. Okay, cool. Bye, bye! See ya. Have fun with your mental cage reductionism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stryper Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 http://www.math.harvard.edu/~knill/pedagogy/waterexperiment/index.html http://ask.metafilter.com/210546/How-much-oxygen-would-a-candle-burn-if-a-candle-would-burn-oxygen http://www.woodrow.org/teachers/esi/1998/p/carboncycle/candle.html 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdaddy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe this thread should be moved to the Totally Off Topic section. No, it should be moved to the Totally Off the Wall section. I have absolutely no idea what the OP is about. Is it some kind of code? yeah. Im like whadafuq? im not on that level, whatever level it is. im not even sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thought2Much Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe this thread should be moved to the Totally Off Topic section. No, it should be moved to the Totally Off the Wall section. I have absolutely no idea what the OP is about. Is it some kind of code? yeah. Im like whadafuq? im not on that level, whatever level it is. im not even sure. Then you're just not deep enough. Or smart enough. Don't you know that if you don't understand what Legion is talking about at any given time, it's because he's said something so amazingly deep and smart that it's just beyond the ability of your lowly brain to process? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdaddy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Maybe this thread should be moved to the Totally Off Topic section. No, it should be moved to the Totally Off the Wall section. I have absolutely no idea what the OP is about. Is it some kind of code? yeah. Im like whadafuq? im not on that level, whatever level it is. im not even sure. Then you're just not deep enough. Or smart enough. Don't you know that if you don't understand what Legion is talking about at any given time, it's because he's said something so amazingly deep and smart that it's just beyond the ability of your lowly brain to process? ................yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Maybe if I carry on by myself for a while, others here will join in. Between work and sleep I've not had much time to think about this, but I believe it's a promising thing. I think a burning candle is a thermodynamically open natural system. So a handful of explicit understandings (i.e. formal models) of it might be cool. I've not yet thought of a natural system which is analogous to a burning candle. This could be very helpful, if one occurred to me. And really I can't settle on what the boundaries of the burning candle should be. Should I just consider the flame? The flame and the wick? The whole candle? I don't know yet. I wanted to look over some of the branches of math available for this task. I've listed some of them here... algebra geometry calculus set theory category theory statistics I thought maybe if I could build a rough model using differential equations (i.e. calculus) then this might suggest what the boundaries of the system could be. But, I've forgotten more calculus than I care to re-learn. And I don't believe I'll try to build a statistical model here. I know statistics has a proper place, but I just don't much care for it. Anyway, I guess I'll just sort of piddle around with this over the next few days and perhaps weeks, and see what might come of it. I think the candle should be considered holistically as the candle is more than the sum of its parts. The parts, when separated by space/time do not constitute a candle. Only when assembled together are they a system, imho. I believe that would define its structure. The behavior of the candle would include transforming the wick and I suppose the wax into carbon, heat and light. The interconnectivity shows that the wax is molded around the wick but I don't know how the flame connects to the wick. Maybe I'll light one up tonight and try to gather some data. Now a candle has two states, maybe three. Lit is one state, unlit is another state, and extinguishing, the third state. While lit, the candle has an additional structural component, the flame. The extinguishing state is just a transitory state between the unlit and lit states. As far as math goes, I could probably use geometry to calculate its size, but that's about it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 ... the candle is more than the sum of its parts. I have some doubts about the use of this heuristic phrase. It seems vague to me, I guess it can tune ideas for people though. The behavior of the candle would include transforming the wick and I suppose the wax into carbon, heat and light. Cool, yeah man. One of the ways I've begun to look at causal complexity, basically sees a paradox. For instance, if we look at the flame of the burning candle we might see the outlines of a paradox. The burning process transforms O2 rich air and vaporized wax into hot, CO2, H20 rich air. We might write this as, burning: (O2, Wv) --> (CO2, H20, light, heat). Then we might observe this generated heat vaporizes the solid wax of the candle. We might show this as, heat: Ws --> Wv. (I suppose the heated air also gives rise to a density difference which in a gravitational field causes the air to rise and flow, enhancing the input rate of O2 rich air.) Considering these entailment relations together... burning: (O2, Wv) --> (CO2, H20, light, heat) heat: Ws --> Wv ... we may see a paradox. And it seems to be unfractionable in sense that we require heat to generate vaporized wax, and we need vaporized wax to generate heat. The heat is both the "material" product of a process, and itself is a process which gives rise to a material transformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raoul Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 No, I am not interested. You think you're high-minded and profound, but you're really just intellectually dishonest. Why would I be interested? ROFL - at your first comment telling the 'philosopher' to fuck off. And kudos for the 2nd one here for seeing what I saw the very first time. Thanks for verifying that my head isn't on backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts