What if the Bleeding Monk...

An area for Valiant SPOILER-RELATED discussions.
Any books which have been published and are available may be discussed here. Recent book discussions may contain spoilers for those who have not yet read them.

Moderators: Daniel Jackson, greg

User avatar
jmatt
Mmm, I was drooling over Cooshie tonight.
Mmm, I was drooling over Cooshie tonight.
Posts: 11026
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:41:10 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA!
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by jmatt »

kjjohanson wrote:
jmatt wrote:
Chiclo wrote:Stringing together a bunch of physics buzzwords for an audience that probably would not know the difference?
No, there's an episode where Sheldon uses Schroedinger's Cat to explain his thoughts on a matter. I thought yardstick might be making a reference to the show in this conversation. I mean, how often do you hear a reference to that? :lol:
It all depends on the crowd you hang out with, I guess.
I was an astrophysics major in college for two years. I hung around with that crowd plenty. And no, I don't have selective mutism. :P

User avatar
yardstick
Just jumpin' through time arcs, that's all.
Just jumpin' through time arcs, that's all.
Posts: 1780
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:49:04 am
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by yardstick »

Chiclo wrote:
yardstick wrote:
jmatt wrote:
MarrowMan wrote:Sometimes just "Observing" can enact change in the observed.
That's the Heisenberg Principle or more generally the Observer Effect.
Schroedinger's cat?
No, Schrodinger's Cat says that quantum states are so counter-intuitively unpredictable that when applied to a macro scale, they would lead to situations as paradoxical as a cat being both alive and dead at the same time and only ending up in one state or the other upon observation.

Heisenberg said that we can know location or velocity (as a vector possessed of both speed and direction; this includes momentum, a product of speed and mass) of certain particles but not both at the same time. There is a useful mathematical proportion established as a ratio of Planck's constant establishing the finest precision we could understand both values - as we get more precise on one, the other becomes less precise. As one approaches 0 (exact precision), the other approaches infinity (no precision at all).

The Observer Effect just says we change results by observing them. A very general statement of the Heisenberg Principle could coincide with that, however the parallel falls apart when rigorous mathematics is applied. Schrodinger's Cat, however, does remain consistent as a case of the Observer Effect when put to task, probably because it is a platitude and not something to which rigorous mathematics need be applied.
My understanding of Schroedinger's Cat was that, while in the box, there is no way to tell if it is alive or dead. It is observation that makes the cat alive. Thus, the observation has an effect on the actual results.

Maybe I was getting the cat in the box confused with the Cat in the Hat...

User avatar
yardstick
Just jumpin' through time arcs, that's all.
Just jumpin' through time arcs, that's all.
Posts: 1780
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:49:04 am
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by yardstick »

jmatt wrote:
Chiclo wrote:Stringing together a bunch of physics buzzwords for an audience that probably would not know the difference?
No, there's an episode where Sheldon uses Schroedinger's Cat to explain his thoughts on a matter. I thought yardstick might be making a reference to the show in this conversation. I mean, how often do you hear a reference to that? :lol:
Naw, I was thinking of the tree that falls in the forest, and whether or not it makes a sound...

Of course, the question is begged: How often to you hear a reference to yardstick [on here]?

User avatar
Chiclo
I'm Chiclo. My strong Dongs paid off well.
I'm Chiclo.  My strong Dongs paid off well.
Posts: 21667
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:09:11 am
Favorite character: Kris
Location: Texas
Contact:
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Chiclo »

yardstick wrote:
Chiclo wrote:
yardstick wrote:
jmatt wrote:
MarrowMan wrote:Sometimes just "Observing" can enact change in the observed.
That's the Heisenberg Principle or more generally the Observer Effect.
Schroedinger's cat?
No, Schrodinger's Cat says that quantum states are so counter-intuitively unpredictable that when applied to a macro scale, they would lead to situations as paradoxical as a cat being both alive and dead at the same time and only ending up in one state or the other upon observation.

Heisenberg said that we can know location or velocity (as a vector possessed of both speed and direction; this includes momentum, a product of speed and mass) of certain particles but not both at the same time. There is a useful mathematical proportion established as a ratio of Planck's constant establishing the finest precision we could understand both values - as we get more precise on one, the other becomes less precise. As one approaches 0 (exact precision), the other approaches infinity (no precision at all).

The Observer Effect just says we change results by observing them. A very general statement of the Heisenberg Principle could coincide with that, however the parallel falls apart when rigorous mathematics is applied. Schrodinger's Cat, however, does remain consistent as a case of the Observer Effect when put to task, probably because it is a platitude and not something to which rigorous mathematics need be applied.
My understanding of Schroedinger's Cat was that, while in the box, there is no way to tell if it is alive or dead. It is observation that makes the cat alive. Thus, the observation has an effect on the actual results.

Maybe I was getting the cat in the box confused with the Cat in the Hat...
Your understanding is accurate on the macroscopic scale. The reason that we don't know if the cat is alive or dead is because we don't know what a certain quantum state is - and more importantly, both of two quantum states exist in equal probability until the state is observed.

Quantum physics doesn't make a lot of sense, even if you study it for two semesters.

User avatar
Chiclo
I'm Chiclo. My strong Dongs paid off well.
I'm Chiclo.  My strong Dongs paid off well.
Posts: 21667
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:09:11 am
Favorite character: Kris
Location: Texas
Contact:
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Chiclo »

jmatt wrote:
Chiclo wrote:Stringing together a bunch of physics buzzwords for an audience that probably would not know the difference?
No, there's an episode where Sheldon uses Schroedinger's Cat to explain his thoughts on a matter. I thought yardstick might be making a reference to the show in this conversation. I mean, how often do you hear a reference to that? :lol:
There is also an episode where Sheldon tells Amy Farrah Fowler that no scientific discoveries were made while having a good time. I wanted to badly for someone to bring up Tycho Brahe.

User avatar
lorddunlow
I think you might be a closeted Canadian.
I think you might be a closeted Canadian.
Posts: 13552
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:51:31 pm
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by lorddunlow »

Chiclo wrote:
yardstick wrote:
Chiclo wrote:
yardstick wrote:
jmatt wrote:
MarrowMan wrote:Sometimes just "Observing" can enact change in the observed.
That's the Heisenberg Principle or more generally the Observer Effect.
Schroedinger's cat?
No, Schrodinger's Cat says that quantum states are so counter-intuitively unpredictable that when applied to a macro scale, they would lead to situations as paradoxical as a cat being both alive and dead at the same time and only ending up in one state or the other upon observation.

Heisenberg said that we can know location or velocity (as a vector possessed of both speed and direction; this includes momentum, a product of speed and mass) of certain particles but not both at the same time. There is a useful mathematical proportion established as a ratio of Planck's constant establishing the finest precision we could understand both values - as we get more precise on one, the other becomes less precise. As one approaches 0 (exact precision), the other approaches infinity (no precision at all).

The Observer Effect just says we change results by observing them. A very general statement of the Heisenberg Principle could coincide with that, however the parallel falls apart when rigorous mathematics is applied. Schrodinger's Cat, however, does remain consistent as a case of the Observer Effect when put to task, probably because it is a platitude and not something to which rigorous mathematics need be applied.
My understanding of Schroedinger's Cat was that, while in the box, there is no way to tell if it is alive or dead. It is observation that makes the cat alive. Thus, the observation has an effect on the actual results.

Maybe I was getting the cat in the box confused with the Cat in the Hat...
Your understanding is accurate on the macroscopic scale. The reason that we don't know if the cat is alive or dead is because we don't know what a certain quantum state is - and more importantly, both of two quantum states exist in equal probability until the state is observed.

Quantum physics doesn't make a lot of sense, even if you study it for two semesters.
That's because it's wrong. The math works out and we can use it to understand the universe and further our understanding, but I'm convinced that it is a case of the numbers working, but the underlying concept being wrong. Maybe not completely wrong, but an approximation (like Newton's calculations of celestial bodies and gravity and such - math worked out, but it wasn't the whole story). I'm constantly thinking of the discussion of Daniel Jackson and the Tollan guy about faster-than-light communication, and the other Tollan guy and Samantha Carter about Shroedinger's Cat. In both conversations, they're like "Ah, we had those same fallacies in our scientific history. How quaint." I really think that's how quantam theory will be viewed 100 years from now.

Edit: I geeked out there and assumed everyone knew what I was talking about. The above is an SG-1 reference. I'm sure Chiclo knew that, though.
*SQUEE* your science, I have a machine gun.

User avatar
jmatt
Mmm, I was drooling over Cooshie tonight.
Mmm, I was drooling over Cooshie tonight.
Posts: 11026
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:41:10 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA!
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by jmatt »

Chiclo wrote:
jmatt wrote:
Chiclo wrote:Stringing together a bunch of physics buzzwords for an audience that probably would not know the difference?
No, there's an episode where Sheldon uses Schroedinger's Cat to explain his thoughts on a matter. I thought yardstick might be making a reference to the show in this conversation. I mean, how often do you hear a reference to that? :lol:
There is also an episode where Sheldon tells Amy Farrah Fowler that no scientific discoveries were made while having a good time. I wanted to badly for someone to bring up Tycho Brahe.
You and I need to split a case of beer one night. :thumb: I've always enjoyed Sagan's telling of the story.

User avatar
Xtianhardy
My posts can all fit in a short box
My posts can all fit in a short box
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:17:40 pm
Valiant fan since: 1995
Favorite character: Pete Stanchek
Favorite title: Harbinger
Favorite writer: Joshua Dysart
Location: Regina, Canada
Contact:
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Xtianhardy »

Phoenix8008 wrote:
greg wrote:
BugsySig wrote:Or he could be a stand in for Toyo's father...a father-figure for him to search out since his father is more than likely dead...The Monk could be using that very need to his advantage when he reaches out to Toyo.
Possibly... but Pete's father is also more-than-likely dead and I get the feeling there's more to both daddy stories. :hm:
I don't remember anything pointing to Pete's dad being dead. All I remember is him being put in a coma when Pete tried to turn on his powers. Maybe once Peter gets good at it, he'll go visit daddy and try again to do it right or heal what he screwed up in the first place! THAT would be an interesting new story thread!
+1 to this. Ever since it was mentioned that Pete's dad was in a coma I've been hoping that his dad will be revived from his coma and join up with the H.A.R.D. Corps.
"We are what we imagine ourselves to be" - Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

User avatar
Phoenix8008
I don't know about a power, but I keep hearing these weird tones from the radio
I don't know about a power, but I keep hearing these weird tones from the radio
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:49:54 am
Valiant fan since: 1992
Favorite character: Aric
Favorite title: Harbinger
Favorite writer: Joshua Dysart
Location: Florida, USA
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Phoenix8008 »

Xtianhardy wrote:
Phoenix8008 wrote:
greg wrote:
BugsySig wrote:Or he could be a stand in for Toyo's father...a father-figure for him to search out since his father is more than likely dead...The Monk could be using that very need to his advantage when he reaches out to Toyo.
Possibly... but Pete's father is also more-than-likely dead and I get the feeling there's more to both daddy stories. :hm:
I don't remember anything pointing to Pete's dad being dead. All I remember is him being put in a coma when Pete tried to turn on his powers. Maybe once Peter gets good at it, he'll go visit daddy and try again to do it right or heal what he screwed up in the first place! THAT would be an interesting new story thread!
+1 to this. Ever since it was mentioned that Pete's dad was in a coma I've been hoping that his dad will be revived from his coma and join up with the H.A.R.D. Corps.
I had forgotten about that theory of mine (I spew so many they're hard to keep track of) but you have taken it to the next level! Combine that with the idea others have had about the new HARD Corps getting their powers beamed to them from live Psiots (the PRS kids) to their brain implants, and it would be shaping up to be one heck of a series. Much more interesting than the previous incarnation!
-Phoenix8008 (a.k.a. Charticus!)
Viva la Valiant!
(moderator of r/Valiant subreddit)

User avatar
Chiclo
I'm Chiclo. My strong Dongs paid off well.
I'm Chiclo.  My strong Dongs paid off well.
Posts: 21667
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:09:11 am
Favorite character: Kris
Location: Texas
Contact:
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Chiclo »

lorddunlow wrote:Edit: I geeked out there and assumed everyone knew what I was talking about. The above is an SG-1 reference. I'm sure Chiclo knew that, though.
SG-1? What is an SG-1? :P

User avatar
Phoenix8008
I don't know about a power, but I keep hearing these weird tones from the radio
I don't know about a power, but I keep hearing these weird tones from the radio
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:49:54 am
Valiant fan since: 1992
Favorite character: Aric
Favorite title: Harbinger
Favorite writer: Joshua Dysart
Location: Florida, USA
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by Phoenix8008 »

Chiclo wrote:
lorddunlow wrote:Edit: I geeked out there and assumed everyone knew what I was talking about. The above is an SG-1 reference. I'm sure Chiclo knew that, though.
SG-1? What is an SG-1? :P
Stargate SG-1... awesome show.
-Phoenix8008 (a.k.a. Charticus!)
Viva la Valiant!
(moderator of r/Valiant subreddit)

User avatar
vaevictis
My posts can all fit in a short box
My posts can all fit in a short box
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:57:46 pm
Valiant fan since: 1992
Favorite character: Phil Seleski
Favorite title: Harbinger
Location: Belleville, IL
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by vaevictis »

My gut is telling me the Bleeding Monk is a future version of Archer. Both have blue eyes, Archer was a PRS project, Kay notices the infinity symbols on surrounding him (I'm not saying he is immortal, just that he fits outside the norm). Also, in the original series he was a sort of monk. While I am aware this is independent from VH1, there is nothing saying that he won't go down that path anyway.
Vae Victis - Woe to the Conquered!

User avatar
BugsySig
I could be talking poo-doo.
I could be talking poo-doo.
Posts: 9535
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:47:04 pm
Valiant fan since: 1992
Favorite character: Ivar, Timewalker
Favorite title: Harbinger/Timewalker
Favorite writer: Joshua Dysart/FVL
Favorite artist: Joe Quesada
Location: Central CT
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by BugsySig »

vaevictis wrote:My gut is telling me the Bleeding Monk is a future version of Archer. Both have blue eyes, Archer was a PRS project, Kay notices the infinity symbols on surrounding him (I'm not saying he is immortal, just that he fits outside the norm). Also, in the original series he was a sort of monk. While I am aware this is independent from VH1, there is nothing saying that he won't go down that path anyway.
I think I proposed the same theory in the A&A #7 discussion thread. I don't know if it is true, but the pieces fit together.
Kurt Busiek wrote:Bull$#!t
Image

User avatar
FormerReader
I spoke with Dino and he said you can divulge all information to me.
I spoke with Dino and he said you can divulge all information to me.
Posts: 3754
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:15:58 pm
Location: Florida
Re: What if the Bleeding Monk...

Post by FormerReader »

BugsySig wrote:
vaevictis wrote:My gut is telling me the Bleeding Monk is a future version of Archer. Both have blue eyes, Archer was a PRS project, Kay notices the infinity symbols on surrounding him (I'm not saying he is immortal, just that he fits outside the norm). Also, in the original series he was a sort of monk. While I am aware this is independent from VH1, there is nothing saying that he won't go down that path anyway.
I think I proposed the same theory in the A&A #7 discussion thread. I don't know if it is true, but the pieces fit together.
I really hope that's not true. I don't want every single thing being related. Have him be something new.


Post Reply