What Lies at the Heart of a Quarter (a Cosmic Mystery Resolved)

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
What do you see when you look at a quarter? A round, silver object with ridged edges engraved with the likeness of an old man in a wig? A symbol of pride in your statehood worth collecting? An object which amassed over time might pay for your vacation? All of these things and more might pass through your mind when considering the question posed. To my mind, another question arises: what exactly *is* an object in the first place? Posing a series of related questions which I shall then attempt to answer, I hope to explore the nature of what exactly it means to exist.

In order to have a coherent dialogue (or in this case, monologue) it is absolutely imperative that certain definitions be made clear. The concepts that are central to an understanding of the topic at hand must be rendered comprehensible for all to see. When agreeing to a precise definition of the key words in play, the first steps towards a consensus have been taken. This is what might be known as "Platonic Dialogue" a dialogue in which the unwavering and precise definition of common knowledge makes mutually agreeable solutions more likely.

With that being said, let's talk about the mathematical properties of a circle. {Why a circle, you might ask?}
Oxford American Dictionary of 1980, from which all definitions henceforth shall be drawn, defines "circle" as follows: n 1. A perfectly round plane figure 2. The line enclosing it, every point on which is the same distance from the center 3. Something shaped like this, a ring 4. Curved rows of seats rising in tiers at a theater etc., above the lowest level 5. A number of people bound together by certain interests.
Circle v. To move in a circle, to form a circle around
Allow me to delineate that the relevant definitions given the context of this conversation shall be definitions 1 and 2 of the noun variant of the prescribed word. Given this understanding, it is crucial that we consider the dictionary definition of a particular word and its' implications: perfect.
Adj. 1. Complete, having all its essential qualities. 2. Faultless, excellent. 3. Exact, precise, *a perfect circle* 4. Entire, total
V. To make perfect N. The perfect tense
Now, allow me to stipulate that the relevant definitions of the word "perfect" given the context of the current conversation, shall be defininitons number one, two, and three of the adjective variant of the prescribed word. Let us examine these definitions in the context of a quarter.
A quarter is an object most of us would consider to be round. Questioned casually in conversation, one might be likely to concede in turn that a quarter constitutes the physical manifestation of the concept of a circle. If we examine the concept more precisely given the aforementioned definitions, several questions arise. Remember the relevant definitions of "circle": n 1. A perfectly round plane figure 2. The line enclosing it, every point on which is the same distance from the center
Recall the relevant definitions of the term "perfect": 1. Complete, having all its essential qualities. 2. Faultless, excellent. 3. Exact, precise, *a perfect circle*
Now, if we examine just one simple aspect of the physical properties of a quarter, we can determine whether the words "perfect circle" can be used to accurately describe said quarter. As previously noted, a quarter has ridged edges. Given the understanding that the ridged edges of a quarter act like a wave of crests and troughs, it is immediately apparent that the quarter does not meet the standard of an object enclosed by a line in which "every point... is same distance from the center." And so it is apparent that the most basic assumptions about the geometric nature of a simple object can be objectively rendered inaccurate with relative ease.

Now, allow me to pose a thought experiment you might try.
Take a circle with a diameter of 6 feet. In order to have a more exact measurement, suppose you determinte to measure the circle in terms of inches, and find that your measurement indeed turns up an answer perfectly commensurate with your initially less precise measurement of 6 feet: (6×12=72) 72 inches. Now, imagine you are given a microscope that allows you to measure the diameter of the circle to the nearest 1000th of an inch. Given this new level of precision, you find that the circle has a diameter of 72.001 inches. Measuring the circle with a higher level of precision has rendered your initial calculation inaccurate.
Even if you found the circle to have a diameter of 72.000 inches, the key insight still stands: no matter how you choose to measure the diameter of the circle, there is a higher level of precision to be achieved which will ultimately render your initial measurement inaccurate. I.e., the same force that lies at the heart of a hypothetical perfect circle or at the heart of a "relative" circle such as.a quarter, is the same force that lies at the heart of a black hole and before the dawm of time. That force is the singularity. Every single object that exists is made in eternity's image, perpetuated by, existing within, and/or making relative, objectively imperfect observations of infinity. I have spoken.
 
Nov 12, 2020
154
31
130
A quarter? A fourth of a dollar or 25 cents? Two bits? Euphemistic Chump Change? An image imprinted circular coin that used to contain a stated content of sliver, but has been debased by the imprinting authority in order to make more such circular coins that in the scheme of governments can purchase less and less and can be increasingly taxed? In stark reality, the quarter, along with the penny are the coins mostly likely to find extended, if not everlasting life, in sundry jars of all sizes parked within easy reaching distance in bedrooms. Their qualities as circles are mostly unrecognized and unappreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: efarina96

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
A quarter? A fourth of a dollar or 25 cents? Two bits? Euphemistic Chump Change? An image imprinted circular coin that used to contain a stated content of sliver, but has been debased by the imprinting authority in order to make more such circular coins that in the scheme of governments can purchase less and less and can be increasingly taxed? In stark reality, the quarter, along with the penny are the coins mostly likely to find extended, if not everlasting life, in sundry jars of all sizes parked within easy reaching distance in bedrooms. Their qualities as circles are mostly unrecognized and unappreciated.

"This new theory is based on a concept known as 'loop quantum gravity' (or LQG). It was first formulated as a way of merging standard quantum mechanics and standard general relativity, in order to remedy incompatibilities between the two fields. Basically, LQG proposes that spacetime is granular, or atomic, in nature; It is made up of minuscule, indivisible chunks about the same size as the Planck length — which roughly amounts to 10-35 meters in size"
Spacetime is composed of eternity. There is no other fundamental explanation. All joking aside, the singularity *is* spacetime. That is why there is no such thing as a perfect circle. That is why all units of measurement of space and time are made up relative to our existence. You can measure any two dimensional property of the quarter (such as diameter) in terms of nanometers or feet, inches or lightyears... You can make up any unit describing two dimensional spacetime to describe said quarter up to infinity. I could say a "flustercluck" is a unit of spacetime exactly equivalent to 9,991,852,654,991,102,345,657^198,455,667,843,971 lightyears and measure the quarter in terms of flusterclucks. There is no end to this excercise, because all language and all math exists to describe relative infinity. There is only one truth: the Universe is Infinite.
 
Last edited:

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105
It's just funny to me... I am obviously right. I'm not going to mince words. Dale Carnegie once said that people are unconvinced by logic, that they won't admit when they are wrong. Contemporary research by scholar of moral psychology Jonathan Haidt backs that up. Knowing that doesn't make dealing with it in reality any easier.
 

efarina96

BANNED
Oct 17, 2020
211
15
105

"It might help to conceptualize exactly what this means if you imagine yourself traveling into a black hole. Under general relativity, falling into a black hole is, in some ways, much like falling into a very deep pit that has a bottom, only instead of hitting the bottom, you get pressed into a single point — a singularity — of infinite density. With both the deep pit and the black hole, there is no "other side." The bottom stops your fall through the pit, and the singularity "stops" your fall through the black hole (or at least, at the singularity it no longer makes sense to say you're "falling")."
This is not accurate at all. As you approach the event horizon, it will recede into the distance relative to the speed and velocity of your approach as well as your relative distance to the event horizon. The event horizon itself is an illusion. What is real is the source of gravity, the source of all gravity existing in our Universe: the singularity
It is transparently foolish to act as if our measurements of space that are confined to the past are adequate to understand what would happen as you approach a black hole. If you observe a black hole that is 1,000 lightyears away, that means what you are observing happened 1,000 years ago. When you hypothetically approach a black hole, that is happening *now*. Understand the difference? It's really quite simple. Describing a singularity as a single point of infinite density is misleading at best. The singularity is pervasive, it exists across all of space and time because it is all of space and time. The black hole represents knowledge obscured from us by the nature of Eternity. Eternity sees all. We see relative infinity in accordance with the rules imposed by our observation of light, which operates within a manifestation of infinity constrained by dimensional boundaries.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY