This article discusses why the colloquial expressions such as “That’s why I gravitate towards you”, “I’m falling for you”, and “She is attracted to me” can be quite scientifically accurate. The following article muddles up the meanings of casual words like “falling” and “attraction” with the currently accepted theories, studies, and findings of physics theory on the related matters. I’ve done something like this before , similar in fashion to how the word “God” is poetically and figuratively used in relation to the “religious”  views of Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and other physicists . This time, it’s love.

First we have Space-Time

Space-time or spacetime is a mathematical model that you get when you combine the 3 dimensions of space with a 4th one,  the dimension of time.  In a nutshell, space-time is similar to a landscape where a point locates an event i.e. a 3 dimensional location + the time when it happened, instead of just a usual, spacial point in space like in maps, even if it’s a 3D map. Since space-time involves 4 dimensions, even most scientists find it very hard to imagine what 4 dimensions would look like, since us humans are accustomed to only 3 dimensions of our space. We always look at time as something that is fixed and unchanging. Newton certainly did when he wrote the laws of motion. One of the most impressive feats of Einstein was that he showed this was not so, and that time is as maleable as space.

To see this graphically, observe the image above. Since scientists are only humans, they have difficulties imagining warped 4 dimensions, and so 2 dimensional analogs are used, which are enough to illustrate the point. The image above shows a distortion in space-time.  These imaginations of space-time were first thought of as what are famously now known in science as thought experiments, with one of the most popular users being Albert Einstein himself.

Then there’s Gravity

General relativity describes gravity as a curvature in space-time and that, again in a nutshell,  gravity is a dent in space. To further picture this, consider again the image above. Ordinary matter, which makes up everything we see in the universe, causes space-time to warp and bend around it. The more matter there is in a given object or point, the more warping, denting,  and bending of space time, and therefore the stronger the gravity. The image shows the Earth, which is relatively quite massive, making a dent in the space-time continuum, thus creating a gravitational effect which pulls us, the moon, and other objects in space towards it, even including the Sun. The Sun of course has the strongest gravity or pull in the Solar system, since it’s the most massive object in it. Again, remember that the image is just a 2D analog of a 4D space-time continuum. The Earth does not immediately plummet towards the Sun since the Earth has its own gravity, which counteracts the Sun’s pull. But nevertheless the Earth is slowly circling down the drain/dent of the Sun in the space-time continuum (Sun’s gravity) and in a few billion years, the Earth and everything less massive than the Sun will quite likely plummet towards it. In other words, gravity is just an illusion since we can’t quite really conceive a 4th dimension in our minds, and that gravity is really just a warping of the space-time continuum.

You can then further imagine or create a thought experiment that other less or more massive bodies than the Earth in the Solar system create their own dents or warps in space-time. These include the other planets, asteroids, and even us humans, albeit in a very minute fraction only.

In fact, one of the suggested ways of mitigating a future asteroid impact on Earth is based on the premise that mass causes denting or warping in space-time. The gravity or gravitational tractor, as it is known, deflects an asteroid many years prior to its impact on Earth, by simply hovering or “parking” beside the asteroid. This form of asteroid mitigation does not really require cutting edge scientific discoveries or engineering feats, it does not need to physically contact the asteroid, and does not necessitate the need for the mechanical and structural composition of the asteroid in advance. Simply put, it works by allowing the relatively massive object, the gravity tractor, to “pull” the asteroid towards a direction which will lead it away from a future Earth impact. The “pull” comes from the fact that, slowly but surely, the tractor’s warping of space imposes a pull, albeit tiny, to the nearby asteroid.

Finally, Falling in Love

So, by now perhaps you’ve already surmised my coy and sly use of the words “falling” and “attraction” with respect to falling in love, as well as how physics theory currently views gravity and space-time. In other words, geeks and nerds like me often joke about how a girl could “fall” for you if you simply sit near her, since you do have mass, however minute. That mass of yours will eventually make her notice you, or perhaps not, but it will certainly impose a “pull” on her towards you, or vice versa. Of course technically speaking, it will take millions to billions of years before the more massive one between you two finally pulls the other. In this case, it’s better if you just ask her out, and that sometimes physicists, geeks, and nerds like me don’t really give that much good an advice. Still, as I mentioned earlier in this article, phrases such as “I’m falling for you” and “We’re attracted to each other” are quite scientifically accurate. Ah, love in geek or nerd speak. So romantic.

Which brings to mind the fascination of some men in today’s times to skinny women. Based from what I’ve pointed out here, it’s physically (by this I mean in physics theory) understandable why some men would prefer heavier or more massive women, but what about skinny women? I suppose the social sciences have more to learn and discuss in these matters.

Resources, references, and further reading:

• The source of it all, The Project Gutenberg EBook of Relativity, Albert Einstein Reference Archive, ‘Relativity: The Special And General Theory’ by Albert Einstein (1916).
• Wikipedia article on space-time and General relativity.
• Wikipedia article on the gravity tractor, which is one of the many suggested ways to mitigate an asteroid impact on Earth.
• Best selling science book with easy to understand explanations of the cosmos, which includes descriptions of space-time,  ‘A Brief History of Time‘ (1988) by Stephen Hawking, Bantam Books. ISBN 0-553-38016-8.

So if anyone asks about the gap, I’ve been on sabbatical, trekking in the Andes or breaking the tantric-sex session world record.

Everyone loves lolling around in a sweaty chair, listening to the slow crackle of their beard growing, one hand fumbling for the Oreos, the other down the front of their five-day-old pants; but if you tell someone you spent a whole summer doing it, they look disgusted and absolutely won’t let you buy them a drink…

Chicks eh? I’ll tell you about alienation Hegel…

I love it when philosophy and physics theory agree, it’s like mind and body in unison; the real and the ethereal. So there’s this Hegel feller, pondering the universe, trying to change the world of thought. And he reckons that there’s no such thing as an ‘object,’ but that everything is slowly changing. In the (questionably) wise words of saint wikipedia:

‘the properties we discover in objects depend on the way that those objects appear to us as perceiving subjects, and not something they possess “in themselves”, apart from our experience of them.’

So two hundred years later, and it turns out that’s pretty much the case. Objects are made of atoms, and atoms are made of various bits including electrons. And electrons…well this handy video explains it best:

A friendly, non-threatening way of saying scientists have no fucking clue what’s going on down there. They don’t even call them ‘electrons’ any more, but ‘probability density charges,’ because they’re not objects spinning neatly around a nucleus like they teach you.

Rather, they’re little sparks that pop up wherever they damn please within a certain area. Sometimes they can even pop up on the other side of an impenetrable barrier, in a phenomenon awesomely known as ‘quantum tunneling.’

Also, the scientists who tried to measure the electrons, the ‘perceiving subjects,’ completely changed the ‘properties’ of them, exactly as Hegel thought. A little too exactly…similar experiments with electrons have offered the first glimpses of time-travel technology…

I think the conclusion is obvious: Hegel was part of a shady scientist cabal that discovered time-travel in the late 21st century. He stole the technology and went back in time to take all the credit, anticipating glory, fortune and all the burly German women he could handle.

Week after week (after week after week…), CollegeCandy and our pal John bring you some of the weirdest, funniest, and saddest things he hears on his college campus. And we know he’s not the only one who hears this stuff. Join the Overheard revolution! Listen in on some weirdos’ conversations and share them in the comments or send ‘em over to us to put in next week’s post.

(Two guys, at a bar.)

Guy: I have a really good pickup line.

Guy 2: Yeah?

Guy: It’s kind of specific, though. It only works if on a dark female thermophysicist.

(Guy, after watching the “Avatar” trailer.)

Guy: It looks like… ‘Gears of War’ meets ‘Fern Gully.’

(Computer science Professor, in a morning class.)

Prof: But watch! When you treat it as a mergesort, it becomes an “log n” algorithm instead of a “n log n” algorithm! F**k yeah! Read the rest of this entry »

Let be the manifold of the configuration space of a system of particles perhaps subject to some constraints, the system at an instant is described as an element of the tangent bundle . The mass matrix , which in standard coordinates is diagonal with entries being the masses of the particles, is regarded as a metric on , which gives an isomorphism from the tangent space to the cotangent space at each by the familiar expression . The inverse is given by . The bilinear pairing appears as (twice) the kinetic energy in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian. The so-called phase space is the cotangent bundle , and the system at an instant is described by with and .

Stephen Wolfram’s essay entry

I’ve had a great couple of weekends!

Last weekend on Saturday I went to Fiesole, a small city just outside of Florence.  It’s very close to my house, only 10 minutes on the bus.  While I was there I simply walked around: from the main piazza, which had an interesting sculpture exhibit, down a small street (labeled “scenic walk”), north towards the old Estruscan walls (which I didn’t see much of because you have to pay to get in), and up towards San Francesco church.  In my wanderings I found a couple small public parks, one with swings and both with great views of Florence.  To end the afternoon I walked down another small street from Fiesole to San Domenico, a walk suggested by my Time Out Florence guide.  It was beautiful!

View of Florence from a public park in Fiesole

On Sunday I watched the Fiorentina (our local soccer team) play Lazio with Christine at a bar.  There was small group of peole at the bar to watch the game, and we were all getting into cheering for our team.  I’d love to do this for all the games!  (If I’m not at the stadium seeing them that is.)

This Friday night I went out with a lot friends to celebrate the birthday of one of the Smithies, Victoria.  Then on Friday I went to Rome to attend a manifestazione (demonstration) for gay rights in Italy, called Uguali (which means same”).  I went with 3 other Smithies and we all bused over with a group of people from Florence.  It was an awesome experience and very good Italian practice, from talking with people on the bus (specifically the older man sitting in front of us, who was very sweet!) to listening to the speakers at the rally.  The number of people at the demonstration seemed large to us, but apparently it’s even bigger and livelier for pride!

Demonstration in Piazza della Republica

Today I went with Christine to Via Gioberti, the street where our director Giovanna lives, for a special artists day.  The street was lined with tons of artists out to present their wares.  Some of them were even working!  We also at lunch at a very cute pizzeria and, thanks to Victoria and Chrysanthe, found a small local market at the end of the street.

All of the people on the street and a large piece of paper for kids to color on!

The last week and a half of orientation was also very fun: we cooked gnocchi (fresh pasta made of potatoes) one day and 4 types of risotto another day in cooking class, and went to Santa Croce (where Galileo’s tomb is!) and San Lorenzo for art history class.

Gnocchi with butter, cheese, and sage - incredible!

And with that orientation is (finally) over; classes start tomorrow!  I won’t lie: I’m pumped.  This semester we are taking 4 classes at the Sede and auditing one university class.  At the Sede I’m taking Survey of Italian Literature (required), History of Style (with Constanza, who taught a small class during orientation about living in Florence and is great!), Stylistics (a language class, with a teacher who I’ve heard is awesome), and Art History (which I’m seriously excited about, especially after three classes we had during orientation).  I’m currently looking for a university course.  It’s so fun to look at all of the classes offered!  (That is, once I’ve searched through the complicated and confusing university website to find them…)  The biggest question is whether to take a physics theory class or not, the biggest issue being that they take place very far away, about an hour by bus.  Right now though, it looks like the internship at the Arcetri Observatory is going to happen (yay!!!), so my current thought is to forgoe taking physics theory classes and take something in the Facoltà (school) of Literature and Philosophy, like a music history class.  All in all, I’m excited to start classes and to have a regular schedule.

A talk with physics theory Professor Emeritus Murray Gell-Mann about his life, research, and accomplishments.