Infinity

[Arkilogue]

Applied physics.

Applied as in calculating how many boxes you can safely load on to a fedex truck ? If you are claiming to be a scientist with a university degree then I think that would open some very challenging conversations here on AF.

Applied as in calculating external relative mass, lean, integrity of material and variability of wind influence on setting the directed catastrophic collapse of tree into motion all as an intuitive function honed over 16 years of hands on application. I also must often correctly intuit a counter vector balancing the above equation with a pull rope at variable angle to the drop line and degree of leverage on the tree depending how high up I go. My life, livelyhood, and other peoples property depend on my successful execution.

In case I cannot drop the tree with a single cut I must climb it, incorporating a whole new internal equation: The variable strength/integrity of my body, the constant of vertical gravity, the decreasing integrity of the wood holding me up and the increasing influence of variable horizontal wind. I have learned to look up wind at the canopies of other trees to time cuts with an otherwise invisible ebb and flow. All working together internally as a constant, moment to moment intuitive calculation. Up there, no objective measurements are really possible or practical for getting the job done...and inaccuracy is fatal.

Up there, I must account for the opposing reaction of felling a large vertical top on the flexible point I cut it from...that I am also attached to. It pushes back and "spring loads" the remaining spar only to be thrown free, leaving it to vibrate in place like a giant tuning fork. If the amplitude is too large I can be flung from the tree (at-least paddle-balled a bit being tied to it) and there is a sweet spot (bad spot) to cut a tree which produces maximum throw. Between 1/2 and 2/3 the way up.

There is also nodal frequency to be aware of if the top spar is tied to the tree for lowering purposes. I once tied the 1/4 top of a Norfolk Pine to the trunk in front of me after trimming all lower branches. The thing is basically a pole. When that falling top hit the end of the rope it was half the length of the remaining spar. It yanked the tree into nodal vibration like the number "8" and rag dolled me up there. The solution was to tie the top about 1/5 the way down the remaining spar, about 10 ft below my feet. The resulting yank did not produce stable vibration and largely canceled itself out....still scary non-the less.

Take the large branch going horizontally out over someone's roof: There are a relatively infinite numbers of ways I could divide/cut it but very few that result in no harm done to the roof or me. I select the cuts based on correct estimation of mass and length in rational free-fall and the integrity of the wood, the ability to both throw and hang onto itself. The size of the branch or quanta of the tree changes all these variables.

If I drop branches in the wrong order I end up with a gigantic birds nest stuck in the tree, easily tripling the amount of time the job takes and completely blowing my price estimate. My lively-hood depends on getting the order of collapse correct.

In the middle of a job, my mind is a whirlwind of force balance calculations as a continuity. There is only pass and fail...and most of those potential failures would be the last one I make in this life.

To sum up what I do as a career, I organize the order of quantum collapse in physical, organic fractal systems by Newtonian equal/opposite reaction. I am the pen, paper and the calculation in execution. And there is a great deal of conscious and subconscious motivation to get it right.

If surfing can help scientists get a better handle on string theory... http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cros...-academia/

...then perhaps a professional Arborist has some developed insight on the connected and branching structures of the universe above and below the human scale of things.

[chimp3]

Applied as in calculating how many boxes you can safely load on to a fedex truck ? If you are claiming to be a scientist with a university degree then I think that would open some very challenging conversations here on AF.

Applied as in calculating external relative mass, lean, integrity of material and variability of wind influence on setting the directed catastrophic collapse of tree into motion all as an intuitive function honed over 16 years of hands on application.  I also must often correctly intuit a counter vector balancing the above equation with a pull rope at variable angle to the drop line and degree of leverage on the tree depending how high up I go. My life, livelyhood, and other peoples property depend on my successful execution.

In case I cannot drop the tree with a single cut I must climb it, incorporating a whole new internal equation: The variable strength/integrity of my body, the constant of vertical gravity, the decreasing integrity of the wood holding me up and the increasing influence of variable horizontal wind. I have learned to look up wind at the canopies of other trees to time cuts with an otherwise invisible ebb and flow. All working together internally as a constant, moment to moment intuitive calculation. Up there, no objective measurements are really possible or practical for getting the job done...and inaccuracy is fatal.

Up there, I must account for the opposing reaction of felling a large vertical top on the flexible point I cut it from...that I am also attached to. It pushes back and "spring loads" the remaining spar only to be thrown free, leaving it to vibrate in place like a giant tuning fork. If the amplitude is too large I can be flung from the tree (at-least paddle-balled a bit being tied to it) and there is a sweet spot (bad spot) to cut a tree which produces maximum throw. Between 1/2 and 2/3 the way up.

There is also nodal frequency to be aware of if the top spar is tied to the tree for lowering purposes. I once tied the 1/4 top of a Norfolk Pine to the trunk in front of me after trimming all lower branches. The thing is basically a pole. When that falling top hit the end of the rope it was half the length of the remaining spar. It yanked the tree into nodal vibration like the number "8" and rag dolled me up there. The solution was to tie the top about 1/5 the way down the remaining spar, about 10 ft below my feet. The resulting yank did not produce stable vibration and largely canceled itself out....still scary non-the less.

Take the large branch going horizontally out over someone's roof: There are a relatively infinite numbers of ways I could divide/cut it but very few that result in no harm done to the roof or me. I select the cuts based on correct estimation of mass and length in rational free-fall and the integrity of the wood, the ability to both throw and hang onto itself. The size of the branch or quanta of the tree changes all these variables.

If I drop branches in the wrong order I end up with a gigantic birds nest stuck in the tree, easily tripling the amount of time the job takes and completely blowing my price estimate. My lively-hood depends on getting the order of collapse correct.

In the middle of a job, my mind is a whirlwind of force balance calculations as a continuity. There is only pass and fail...and most of those potential failures would be the last one I make in this life.

To sum up what I do as a career, I organize the order of quantum collapse in physical, organic fractal systems by Newtonian equal/opposite reaction. I am the pen, paper and the calculation in execution. And there is a great deal of conscious and subconscious motivation to get it right.

If surfing can help scientists get a better handle on string theory... http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cros...-academia/

...then perhaps a professional Arborist has some developed insight on the connected and branching structures of the universe above and below the human scale of things.

That is what I thought. Not a scientist.

Addendum: I own a book titled "Modern Arboriculture' by Alex Shigo. Know of it?

[Arkilogue]

That is what I thought. Not a scientist.

Addendum: I own a book titled "Modern Arboriculture' by Alex Shigo. Know of it?

If my procurement of real food depends on the accurate trajectory of an arrow or bullet hitting it's target, I'm not going to pay a Harvard professor to give me a spread sheet calculus of possibilities. I'm going to pay the 20 yr old who has been hunting for a life and lively-hood since he was 4. And I am going to learn to correctly, intuitively account for all variables through hands on practice repeatedly over time so I can accomplish the task for myself.

I'm a hands on professional physicist and I'm good at what I do. Because my life and lively-hood depend on accuracy of trajectory and ordered collapse of potential energy stored in mass into kinetic energy and inertia that can kill me.

It's on my long list of books to read.

[chimp3]

Well , sometimes bored people resort to embellishment to offset the fact that they are ordinary. Take it from a blue collar joe. No shame in it at all.

[Ravenshire]

In the universe as we know it the following is true.
1.       Infinite time is time without end and as such can never be reached.
2.       Infinite distance can never be reached. Speed has a maximum which is the speed of light as such an infinite distance cannot be reached for the following reason.
Consider sending out a beam of light. The light will never reach infinity as it would need infinite time. An infinite time can never pass as its time without end.
3.        Nothing can be infinitely old. Consider making some object. Any time in the future it will always have a finite age as infinite time can never pass. Applying this to the past means that everything that exist is not infinity old or did not always exist.
4.       The truth of 3 has been demonstrated by the big bang which was the event that gave birth to the universe.
5.       The cause of the event that gave rise to the universe, if it had a property of infinity the same as the infinity in this universe then it in turn would be of a finite age and would need a creating event.
6.       Thus anything with a property of infinity the same as the infinity of this universe could not be the ultimate cause of this universe or any universe like it.
7.       Thus the ultimate cause of everything that exist has an infinity that is different or nothing like the infinity of this universe.

Yet another one trying to logic his gawd man into existence.

[Arkilogue]

Well , sometimes bored people resort to embellishment to offset the fact that they are ordinary. Take it from a blue collar joe. No shame in it at all.

Ordinary as compared to what or whom? Can you imagine the improbability of the specific sequences of events in our lives that make each one of us who we are? Each of us are extraordinarily improbable.

[robvalue]

Yeah... everything is improbable if you work it backwards far enough. It's not an argument. Well, not a good one. Improbability doesn't tell you anything.

We have many qualified real scientists on the forum, and even chumps like me are good at spotting pseudo science / misapplied science.

[Arkilogue]

Yeah... everything is improbable if you work it backwards far enough. It's not an argument. Well, not a good one. Improbability doesn't tell you anything.

We have many qualified real scientists on the forum, and even chumps like me are good at spotting pseudo science / misapplied science.

It tells me no one is ordinary, because that's a relatively subjective entrained state of the perceiver.

Good, then I'm at the right place.

[robvalue]

Yeah... but you've demonstrated before you don't follow the scientific method. You omit crucial stages of it. I can "prove" absolutely anything if I am willing to compromise the method.

[chimp3]

Well , sometimes bored people resort to embellishment to offset the fact that they are ordinary. Take it from a blue collar joe. No shame in it at all.

Ordinary as compared to what or whom? Can you imagine the improbability of the specific sequences of events in our lives that make each one of us who we are? Each of us are extraordinarily improbable.

Certainly unique. I love trees. I would prefer to talk trees with you. Your science is laughable.