𝗦ʈÛᵈ𝑦 𐌷𝚊Гᵈ Ꮤ𐌷𝚊ʈ וֹ𝖓ʈ𝙚Г𝙚ՏʈՏ 𝑦𐒠Û ʈ𐌷𝙚 ɱ𐒠Տʈ וֹ𝖓 ʈ𐌷𝙚 ɱ𐒠Տʈ Û𝖓ᵈוֹՏ∁וֹꝓ𐌉וֹ𝖓𝙚ᵈ៸ וֹГГ𝙚𝐕𝙚Г𝙚𝖓ʈ 𝚊𝖓ᵈ 𐒠Гוֹဌוֹ𝖓𝚊𐌉 ɱ𝚊𝖓𝖓𝙚Г ꝓ𐒠ՏՏוֹъ𐌉𝙚 Ꮢ 𝖥𝙚𝑦𝖓ɱ𝚊n

Joined September 2017
Replying to @bgreene
Because we are always at the end of the path.
2
4,410
Any 1976. La Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona fa 5 anys que ha estrenat el nou campus de Bellaterra i els estudiants denuncien problemes de construcció i expliquen les peripècies per a arribar-hi. Vénen d'arreu del país i ens mostren diferents accents de la llengua catalana. 💜
38
304
11
1,367
56,456
Jo també vull del mateix.
Si con esto no se soluciona el problema de la vivienda yo ya no sé qué más se puede hacer.
2
149
100 years old. Still the sharpest mind in the room. Jean-Pierre Serre, youngest Fields Medalist in history (age 27), first Abel Prize winner, and the “Mozart of mathematics,” turned 100 on September 15 and is still lecturing, still writing on the blackboard, still shaping the field. Happy 100th to the greatest living mathematician. The rest of us are just trying to keep up.
58
884
75
5,203
310,124
In 1985, Carl Sagan sat in front of the United States Senate and described the weather of 2026. Not as prediction. As physics. Sitting across from him was a junior senator named Al Gore — who would later win the Nobel Prize, the Oscar, and build a climate investment fund worth over $36 billion repeating almost word for word what Sagan said that afternoon. Sagan opened with Venus. 470°C surface temperature. 900°F. Hot enough to melt lead. "Not because it's closer to the sun," he told the senators. "Venus actually reflects more light than Earth. It should be cooler." The reason it wasn't: carbon dioxide. A runaway greenhouse effect that turned a planet nearly identical to Earth into a furnace. Then he looked at the committee and said: we're running the same experiment here. The senators nodded politely. Then they went back to approving fossil fuel subsidies. What Sagan told Congress in 1985: Global average temperature will rise several degrees by mid-to-late next century. Local climates will redistribute. Glaciers will melt. Sea levels will rise. And the problem cannot be solved by any single nation — not even if the US and Soviet Union agreed on everything — without China. China, he said, had the world's largest coal reserves and was about to industrialize. Every sentence was correct. He also said something that got almost no coverage at the time: "The initial stages of global temperature increase — one region might benefit while another suffers." That is the sentence that explains the last 20 years of geopolitics. Canada's growing season expanding while Pakistan floods. Russia opening Arctic shipping lanes while Bangladesh disappears. The politics of climate was never going to be clean because the physics wasn't distributed evenly. Sagan mapped all of it from first principles, in a Senate hearing room, 41 years ago. The part nobody quotes: He didn't say stop burning fossil fuels immediately. He said: "That has such severe economic consequences that no one will take it seriously." So he proposed something else — remove government subsidies from fossil fuels, accelerate solar, develop safe nuclear fission, and begin building international frameworks before the crisis made them impossible. That's not an environmentalist's speech. That's an economist's. Carl Sagan wrote 20 books. Cosmos was watched by 500 million people across 60 countries. He won the Pulitzer. The ideas in this testimony became the scientific foundation for a carbon market now valued at over $800 billion annually. He said one line at the end that nobody remembers. "We are all in this greenhouse together." In 1985, that was poetic. Now it's a weather report. The full testimony is free on YouTube. 17 minutes. Almost nobody outside of climate policy circles has watched it as a complete predictive model — laid out in plain language before any of it happened.
259
1,150
68
3,231
1,056,875
La condició mínima és un sistema irreversible q es mira a si mateix. Ha d tenir memòria interna, integració i una auto-referència. Landauer ho segella: per escriure un record, cal dissipar entropia. El subjecte és aquest plec del temps sostingut per una despesa irreversible. 🔻
1
25
Si li arrenques la memòria, la retenció i l’anticipació, no trobes un ésser en un present etern. Trobes una pedra. La pedra no viu un ara perpètu, simplement no té cap ara. No és el grau zero de la consciència, sinó el grau zero de la subjectivitat. 🔻
1
12
I queda el misteri de per què aquest procés es sent? Podem descriure l’ara funcional, però no per què l’ara és viscut. Potser la consciència no és una cosa sinó una flama, un procés que es manté mentre crema. Potser el procés mateix és l’experiència. La física és ja metafísica.
9
Un “ara” no és un punt: és un plec. Perquè hi hagi un ara, alguna cosa del just-passat ha de romandre en l’estat present. Sense aquesta retenció mínima no hi ha diferència, i sense diferència no hi ha subjecte. El present viscut és una membrana, no una línia. 🔻
1
37
Carlo Rovelli parteix de la relativitat i de la gravetat quàntica de bucles per dir que el temps no és una propietat fonamental de l’univers. No hi ha un rellotge universal, ni un “ara” compartit per tot l’univers. 🔻
1
62
Hem passat de la intuïció del temps com una línia universal, a la idea que el temps és emergent i que la fletxa temporal sorgeix de l’augment d’entropia gravitatòria. El Big Bang no és un forat negre, sinó un estat inicial d’entropia gravitatòria extremadament baixa. 🔻
1
18
Saber què és exactament i quina relació té el Big Bang amb l’origen del temps és un dels problemes oberts de la física fonamental.
18