Another year is dawning

We have past Valentine's Day, and soon 1/6th of this year will be complete.

In Search of a Consistent Theory of Time Travel for Fun and Recreation

In Search of a Consistent Theory of Time Travel for Fun and Recreation

Basic Concepts before any time travel considerations arise

Can you think of better way to remind yourself of how much physics you never knew, and at the same time how badly you understood all the physics that you thought you at least somewhat understood. Me neither.

Let's start with our undefined terms, these are primitive notions¹, intutive concepts that I choose not to define, either because I'm too lazy, or because the rabbit holes discovered in defining them don't appear to be as interesting as the rabbit holes one can discover by leaving these primitive and moving on, but arguelby both. While were at it, we'll pretend we can use UTC as an absolute time system, which is obviously wrong, but we'll pretend it doesn't matter since we're taking things slow.

We can now define a whole class of undefined terms such as B(p,t) as the physical body of person p, at time t. This for instance takes into consideration that over time our bodies tend to change. So for fun we'll pretend that B(p,t) is a well defined intutive term.

Let P(t) be the set of all protons, nuetrons, and electrons that exist at time t. And for the fun of it, we could pretend that its actually well-defined.

Let BE(p,t) = { x : x ∊P(t) and with 99.99% probability or above x ∊ B(p,t)}

Inspiration as follows. We'll pretend the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principal implies that we can't know with complete certainty that at any given time, any given proton, nuetron, or electron is part of our physical bodies, so it becomes convienient to consider the electrons, nuetrons, and protons, that we are 99.99% sure of as making up our bodies at some particle time. The remaining inspiration for the relationship is from the old television series, Get Smart. The BE relationship may be refered to as our apparent physical body.

Let C(p,t₁,t₂) = | BE(p,t₁) ⋂ BE(p,t₂) │ / │BE(p,t₁) ⋃ BE(p,t₂)│

Intutively we can consider C has a change function here, measuring how much our apparent physical bodies change from one time to another. For example one second from now, the electrons, photons, and neutrons that make up our physical body, might be nearly the same as the ones we have now with relatively few exceptions, or for example C(John,now,now+1 second) rounded to 25 decimal places is probably 1.0000000000000000000000000. See How many atoms are in the human body?² I'm just guessing at the point, but I doubt our physical essense is changing much from one second to the next. In other words, C(p,t,t+1 second) is always pretty close to 1, at least after the first second of our conception.

Though I don't have any handy references, I think I've heard or read from several sources that over a period of seven years, that perhaps our apparent physical bodies change completely. That is, C(p,t,t+7 years) is pretty close to zero.

As should now be obviously apparent, I've put in enough information that certain things can be checked. Ignoring leap years, and any round off error my choice of Linux calculators introduces, I can compute that, 7 years is 220,752,000 seconds, .99999995^220752000 is 0.000016085, where as .9999999^220752000 is 0, and .99999999^2207520000 is 0.11. Or in laymen's terms, if one were to assume our bodies change completely in seven years, then from one second to the next our bodies rounded to 7 decimal places does not change (e.g. C(John,t,t+second) = 1), but rounded to 8 decimal places there is some decernible change, and not the 26 decimal places I was initially guessing.

Now here's where it gets interesting, and we haven't even messed things up with time travel considerations.

Since B(p,t) is an undefined initutive term, it doesn't technically make sense to consider what B(p,t) ⋂ P(t) means, but if we consider a physical body, to be the sum of its physical parts, then with our deepest apologies to the quarks, leptons, and boson of existence, we could take as an axiom B(p,t) = B(p,t) ⋂ P(t). And since the goal of having fun, out ranks most other goals, we take this axiom until such time as it can be demonstrated that its introduction leads to false results otherwise not achieved without.

We can conclude that BE(p,t) ⊂ B(p,t) for any (p,t) in the domain of the relations.

If we assume the quantum mechanics correctly implies, that for any x ∊ P(t) we cannot be completely certain that x ∊ B(p,t), and likewise cannot be completely certain that x ∉ B(p,t).

If so, then Prob(BE(p,t) = B(p,t)) is non-zero, but more importantly Prob(BE(p,t) = ∅) is non-zero as well. Or intutively this could be taken as meaning, that any given point in time, we may be exactly what we seem to be, and that any given point in time, we may have nothing in common with what we seem to be.

1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_notion

2http://education.jlab.org/qa/mathatom_04.html

Less than four months left before Christmas. The year is going fast. Many things are left to do.

Sad from Japan

For years now Japan has had a very low birthrate. One of the lowest. What many may not know is Japan's choice of birth control for many years after WWII into the start of this millennium was not birth control pills, not condoms, but abortion.

Japan is an aging population that is getting old at a very fast rate. Look up Japan's "lost decade". You may see its lasted twenty years.

No one is beyond hope. No country is beyond hope. That would be saying a person or country is beyond the reach of God's love.

Japan has been for sometime looking at robots to care for its elderly. Yes there is resistance, but it seems like the tide is rising against the resistance, and seems to be winning. It appears the Japanese leadership views robot care as a growth industry.

Sometimes the Wrath of God looks exactly like the consequence of one's own choices. That goes for a country as well as the person. Indeed when it looks differently, its a sign of God's great mercy.

We are following Japan. Our hope and their hope is to turn to the God who loves us. True for the person, true for the family, true for the country. True.

Case for a Clutch

Not being able to start my car after the Easter Vigil, I had it towed on Monday. My mechanic was quickly able to diagnose the problem. The car doesn't start from drive. It needs to start from park.

Note to self. Teach wife to drive a standard.

This Day is Made for Singing

This Day is made for Singing, and that's just what I'd do. One of these days I'm gonna sing a song or two. Couldn't carry a tune with a handle, couldn't carry a tune with a spoon. If I had a fork I poke a tune just for you.

Corporal or Spiritual Work of Mercy for the Day

How Do We?

How do we live for the greater glory of God? What do we have that we can offer to the Lord Our God?

Perhaps, maybe, we could start by asking ourselves, if we were to offer this day to the Lord, what kind of day would it be? How hard would we work, and with what resolve and focus. What would our attitude be on the many things that go wrong or grow right?

How would we encourage others? How would we encourage ourselves? How do we keep in mind that we are not the center of the universe, but keep proper awe in our lives that God has deemed us lovable enough to make us part of His creation?

Today is both the Inaugural Mass for Pope Francis, and The Feast of Saint Joseph?

In Honor of Pope Francis and his name sake, in giving to all men that we receive ...

Bear wrongs patiently

This is my selection the Corporal or Spiritual Work of Mercy for the Day, for today. What is yours? All choices are good. 

Proof reading, I nearly replaced "grow right" with "go right" close call.