Sitting still is relative, moving is absolute

This saying is well-known. Presumably, you are considered staying still  relative to your car while you are driving, whereas, you are moving relative to the earth. Thus, sitting and  moving are defined according to a datum point.

However, I realise that moving is absolute regardless of the datum point you choose. If you use a precise enough ruler to measure the distance between two certain things,  that distance should be changing by a extremely small amount every moment. So nothing sits still in all dimensions!

We all know that time is just a dimension of space. Time doesn’t stand, either do space.

This could be generalized to explain the existence of multiverse.

I think the big thing is related closely to small things in atoms. Moreover, as time could become space and the reverse does hold, it should be possible to store a multiverse in small things like atoms. A multiverse could possibly originates in our small hands. If that is true,  circle is absolute.

P/S: I have been obsessed by the idea that we are just a copy of “real things”, and we are, the whole universe, on the surface of a black hole, just codes for duplicating “real things”. It seem reasonable as astronomers have been long time used the “codes” of stars to tell human’s future. It could be possible that the future has happened and saved in the orders of the stars.

Advertisements

The external seminar at La Trobe

I got a chance to meet Dr Eric Nævdal (Princeton Uni and FRISCH Centre) in a talk on “Climate change, catastrophic risk and the pure rate of time preference” yesterday at La Trobe Uni. Well, I can say that he was not a great presenter, but an excellent researcher in all senses. Moreover, his spirit has inspired me a lot in this hard time. Let’s recap several key points here, they might work with some of you too.

An impressive metaphor when he compared the world and climate change thresholds to a person running to the edge of a cliff. The faster he runs, the more money he will get paid, but the higher possibility that he will fall (“turn over” was actually the word he used). The idea is simple but his model is so complicated that I could not fully understand without reviewing “Hazard rate” and “Optimal control models”. Then the message conveyed is different discount rate could change your decision on when to stop and the benefit you have. Reversely, if you know where the cliff is (know time t), the discount rate turns out not really matter anymore. Basically, those are all key points I found interesting in the 1 hour talk 🙂

An inspiration when he said if you feel PhD is easy then perhaps you should not do PhD, or you have chosen a wrong school.

A surprised moment (well, for me only) when he and Liam talked about how to get to external seminars like this. Literally, just email the seminar organizers and if you happen to be somewhere near, they will happy to pay for your fare. It’s a good way to extend your trip and at the same time spread out your research result.

And an admiring feeling from everyone when he shared his passion of doing research. Not polished but realistic, not many words but fast thinking and great word choice.

He said, to be a professor at Princeton, you have to be a super freaking genius but to be a lecturer there, you could be just good at your field. But I find that he is on the way to the genius.

Well, perhaps I should at least keep going up 🙂

P/S: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management is a tough one but great to light your profile up in searching for job