Posted on 10/23/2005 10:26:02 PM PDT by Checkers
NixonsAngryGhost
Since Jul 18, 2005
Yes. I mean no. Wait, yes. Umm, no. Maybe.
You really need to create a page and your point is absolutely meaningless. Now don't bother me again. Kindly, pls.
Sobran speaks at gatherings of the Institute for Historical Review.
The IHR is the world's largest organization of Holocaust deniers.
It would be hard to find a more antisemitic group of people.
Thank you for your affirmation.
Assuming that each angel contains at least one bit of information (fallen / not fallen), and that the point of the pin is a sphere of diameter of an Ångström (R=10exp-10 m) and has a total mass of M=9.5*10exp-29 kilograms (equivalent to that of one iron atom), we can use the Bekenstein bound[3] on information to calculate an upper bound on the angel density. In a system of diameter D and mass M, less than kDM distinguishable bits can exist, where k=2.57686*10exp43 bits/meter kg.[7] This gives us a bound of just 2.448*10exp5 angels, far below the Schewe bound. Note that this does not take the mass of angels into account. A finite angel mass-energy would increase the possible information density significantly. If each angel has a mass m, then the Bekenstein bound gives us N1/kD ¼3.8807*10exp-34 kg this produces an unbounded maximal angel density as each angel contributes enough mass-energy to allow the information of an extra angel to move in, and so on. However, if angels have mass, then the point of the pin will collapse into a black hole if c2R/2G< Nm (here I ignore the mass of the iron atom at the tip).4 For angels of human weight (80 kg), we get a limit of 4.2089*10exp14 angels. The maximal mass of any angel amenable to dance on the pin is 3.3671*10exp16 kg; at this point there is only room for a single angel. The picture that emerges is that, for low angel masses, the number is bounded by the Bekenstein bound, and increases hyperbolically as mcrit is approached. However, the black hole bound decreases and the two bounds cross at mmax=1/(4GkM/cexp2+kD), very slightly below mcrit. This corresponds to the maximal angel density of Nmax=8.6766*10exp49 angels (see figure). Maximum number of angels for a given mass. The allowed region is bounded from above by the line c2R/2G=Nm (gravitational collapse) and the curve N=kD(M+Nm) (information density) which has an asymptote for mcrit, and from below by N=0. The maximal number of angels occurs at the intersection of the gravitational bound and the asymptote at mcrit Dance Dynamics If the angels dance very quickly and in the same direction, then the angular momentum could lead to a situation like the extremal Kerr metric, where no event horizon forms (this could also be achieved by charging the angels).[4] Hence the number of dancing angels that can crowd together is likely much higher than the number of stationary angels. However, at these speeds the friction caused by their interaction with the pin is likely to vaporise it or at least break it apart. Even for a modest speed of 1 m/s the total kinetic energy of Nmax angels of mass mcrit would be 1.682*10exp16 J. In the case of charged angels at relativistic densities, pair-creation in their vicinity would likely cause the charge to dissipate over time,6 and charge transfer to the pin would also likely induce electromechanical forces beyond any material tolerances. The uncertainty relation also imposes a limitation on the dance. Since the uncertainty in position of the angels by assumption is less than the size of the point ÐxR we find that the uncertainty in momentum must be ÐpŽhbar/R, and this leads to a velocity uncertainty Ðv>hbar/Rm. If m= mcrit we get Ðv>> 8.6766*10exp59 m/s (>> c), which shows that: (1) the angels must dance with speeds near the velocity of light in order to obey quantum mechanics; (2) a full relativistic treatment is necessary; and (3) that the precision of the dance must break down due to quantum effects. This can be used to rule out certain types of dance due to their high precision requirements.
I condemn vulgar anti-semitism and Holocaust denial but you have overreached.
I know your style of ill posting and prefer to ignore you and your line of reasoning.
Bugger off, you are a born instigator and baiter.
LOL!! What are you afraid of? The IHR website lists Joe Sobran as one of their speakers. It's right there!
You must not give a damn what Harriett Meirs thinks, because she was unwilling to give herself a hearing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.