Rules?

[cjlmlml]

I've designed as part of my placement with a multi-arts organisation working with a community within the public housing sector.

The idea is that it will will occur with tenants in the elevators and lobbies of the estate and collect conversations, insights, thoughts and day to day stories of arrivals and departures. It is designed to be both an outlet for addressing concerns around safety and as a creative forum for communication. It is all about re-establishing a sense of ownership over the public spaces of the estate. Safety is built on creating networks within communities. By encouraging conversation and communication between residents in this space, trust and familiarity grows.

The challenge for me now is to design a process which will be both a positive and fun experience for the tenants, but one which is as non-intrusive as possible. I am aware that some are a little wary of people coming in to their spaces, and ways to counter this are building relationships with the community before hand, which I have done over a number of weeks, but for those who I haven't met (and there are hundreds!), I need to let them know about the project - what it's about, why they might be interested in contributing, and how it will work.

I am also completely aware of the Heisenberg Principle (quantum physics guy I think) that simply observing something (especially with a camera and in the confined space of an elevator!) changes the nature of what is being observed. At this stage I am seeking out methods with which I can counter this potential obstacle. The appointing of a 'buddy' (a tenant) to act as a buffer may be a way of doing this with the additional benefit of creating a role of responsibility for the nominated tenant in that position.

The whole process of community arts is a new world to me and has been very much a learning curve for me as much as for the tenants who have been involved in previous arts activities on the estate. It is interesting that it has taken me two and a half months to devise this project after spending time at the estate, talking to tenants, talking to other stakeholders and reflecting on the information, stories and experiences I've collected over that time. Now that I can finally answer the 'what' and the 'why' with this project. I now have the question of 'how'.

[jeffburch]

:shock:

[Mike Bell]

Right on bruthah, Preach it....................... 8)

[CMC17]

Taking nominations for a "buddy" buffer? Or, is this strictly an appointed position? 8)

[MikeP99Z]

Free cookies.

[Mike Bell]

Sounds like Chris has been hitting the "special brownies" again. :o

[CMC17]

Found part of the new community.

http://www.tek-racing.net/lavalamp.jpg

[mitchntx]

I've designed as part of my placement with a multi-arts organisation working with a community within the public housing sector.

The idea is that it will will occur with tenants in the elevators and lobbies of the estate and collect conversations, insights, thoughts and day to day stories of arrivals and departures. It is designed to be both an outlet for addressing concerns around safety and as a creative forum for communication. It is all about re-establishing a sense of ownership over the public spaces of the estate. Safety is built on creating networks within communities. By encouraging conversation and communication between residents in this space, trust and familiarity grows.

The challenge for me now is to design a process which will be both a positive and fun experience for the tenants, but one which is as non-intrusive as possible. I am aware that some are a little wary of people coming in to their spaces, and ways to counter this are building relationships with the community before hand, which I have done over a number of weeks, but for those who I haven't met (and there are hundreds!), I need to let them know about the project - what it's about, why they might be interested in contributing, and how it will work.

I am also completely aware of the Heisenberg Principle (quantum physics guy I think) that simply observing something (especially with a camera and in the confined space of an elevator!) changes the nature of what is being observed. At this stage I am seeking out methods with which I can counter this potential obstacle. The appointing of a 'buddy' (a tenant) to act as a buffer may be a way of doing this with the additional benefit of creating a role of responsibility for the nominated tenant in that position.

The whole process of community arts is a new world to me and has been very much a learning curve for me as much as for the tenants who have been involved in previous arts activities on the estate. It is interesting that it has taken me two and a half months to devise this project after spending time at the estate, talking to tenants, talking to other stakeholders and reflecting on the information, stories and experiences I've collected over that time. Now that I can finally answer the 'what' and the 'why' with this project. I now have the question of 'how'.

Let me see if I understand ...

You are wanting to shoot "up-skirt" video of elevator patrons and start a new website. You want a partner to blame when you get caught.

Is that accurate?

[MikeP99Z]

"Elevator Confessions"
by Up-Skirt/Down-Shirt Productions, directed by CJL, inspired by MW

also by CJL, coming soon -

"Lobby and Lounge Lizards - a guide to avoiding undesireables in public spaces".

[MikeP99Z]

CJL - Master of Disguise:

The Doorman

The Conceirge

The Valet Dude

The Groundskeeper

The Maid

The Bartender

The Maintenance Man

[cjlmlml]

You guys missed my whole point, let me explain further.


This question comes up in the context of wondering whether photons are really "massless," since, after all, they have nonzero energy and energy is equivalent to mass according to Einstein's equation E=mc2. The problem is simply that people are using two different definitions of mass. The overwhelming consensus among physicists today is to say that photons are massless. However, it is possible to assign a "relativistic mass" to a photon which depends upon its wavelength. This is based upon an old usage of the word "mass" which, though not strictly wrong, is not used much today. See also the Faq article Does mass change with velocity?.

The old definition of mass, called "relativistic mass," assigns a mass to a particle proportional to its total energy E, and involved the speed of light, c, in the proportionality constant:

m = E / c2. (1)

This definition gives every object a velocity-dependent mass.

The modern definition assigns every object just one mass, an invariant quantity that does not depend on velocity. This is given by

m = E0 / c2, (2)

where E0 is the total energy of that object at rest.

The first definition is often used in popularizations, and in some elementary textbooks. It was once used by practicing physicists, but for the last few decades, the vast majority of physicists have instead used the second definition. Sometimes people will use the phrase "rest mass," or "invariant mass," but this is just for emphasis: mass is mass. The "relativistic mass" is never used at all. (If you see "relativistic mass" in your first-year physics textbook, complain! There is no reason for books to teach obsolete terminology.)

Note, by the way, that using the standard definition of mass, the one given by eqn (2), the equation "E = m c2" is not correct. Using the standard definition, the relation between the mass and energy of an object can be written as

E = m c2 / sqrt(1 - v2/c2), (3)

or as
E2 = m2 c4 + p2 c2, (4)

where v is the object's velocity, and p is its momentum.

In one sense, any definition is just a matter of convention. In practice, though, physicists now use this definition because it is much more convenient. The "relativistic mass" of an object is really just the same as its energy, and there isn't any reason to have another word for energy: "energy" is a perfectly good word. The mass of an object, though, is a fundamental and invariant property, and one for which we do need a word.

The "relativistic mass" is also sometimes confusing because it mistakenly leads people to think that they can just use it in the Newtonian relations

F = m a (5)

and
F = G m1 m2 / r2. (6)

In fact, though, there is no definition of mass for which these equations are true relativistically: they must be generalized. The generalizations are more straightforward using the standard definition of mass than using "relativistic mass."

Oh, and back to photons: people sometimes wonder whether it makes sense to talk about the "rest mass" of a particle that can never be at rest. The answer, again, is that "rest mass" is really a misnomer, and it is not necessary for a particle to be at rest for the concept of mass to make sense. Technically, it is the invariant length of the particle's four-momentum. (You can see this from eqn (4).) For all photons this is zero. On the other hand, the "relativistic mass" of photons is frequency dependent. UV photons are more energetic than visible photons, and so are more "massive" in this sense, a statement which obscures more than it elucidates.

Reference: Lev Okun wrote a nice article on this subject in the June 1989 issue of Physics Today, which includes a historical discussion of the concept of mass in relativistic physics.

Is there any experimental evidence that the photon has zero rest mass?
If the rest mass of the photon was non-zero, the theory of quantum electrodynamics would be "in trouble" primarily through loss of gauge invariance, which would make it non-renormalizable; also, charge-conservation would no longer be absolutely guaranteed, as it is if photons have vanishing rest-mass. However, whatever theory says, it is still necessary to check theory against experiment.

It is almost certainly impossible to do any experiment which would establish that the photon rest mass is exactly zero. The best we can hope to do is place limits on it. A non-zero rest mass would lead to a change in the inverse square Coulomb law of electrostatic forces. There would be a small damping factor making it weaker over very large distances.

The behavior of static magnetic fields is likewise modified. A limit on the photon mass can be obtained through satellite measurements of planetary magnetic fields. The Charge Composition Explorer spacecraft was used to derive a limit of 6x10-16 eV with high certainty. This was slightly improved in 1998 by Roderic Lakes in a laborartory experiment which looked for anomalous forces on a Cavendish balance. The new limit is 7x10-17 eV. Studies of galactic magnetic fields suggest a much better limit of less than 3x10-27 eV but there is some doubt about the validity of this method.

[mitchntx]

Yes, but what does it do in 1/4?

[CMC17]

I will stick with the "HHGTTG" thank you very much.


42 FTW!!!

[MikeP99Z]

and you're trying to apply physics to the community social interaction experiment?

just for clarification - I thought your job was in the financial advisory sector.

[jeffburch]

what's that old saying?
"If you can't baffle them with brilliance................"


jb

[AI#97]

and you're trying to apply physics to the community social interaction experiment?

just for clarification - I thought your job was in the financial advisory sector.

My thoughts exactly!!! so far he atleast has the longest posts on the forum?! :mrgreen:

[David Love AI27]

ROFLMAO!!!! I can't believe I read the WHOLE FRIGGIN THING!!!

[bossskip302]

WTF.............or better WFO :shock:

[AllZWay]

what's that old saying?
"If you can't baffle them with brilliance................"


jb

:lol:

[chicane23]

Chris you know what you "Sign" would be right?

With a big L! ;-)

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html

[Doug_Yeargan]

Hey John,

Is that the only pic of your new AI car in your avitar? Is that the current state of the car?

[chicane23]

No, I have a bunch of pictures to be honest.

The car should be done and running on Friday. Just waiting on the driveshaft.

[Doug_Yeargan]

Are they on your web site? Or are you keeping it under lock and key? :lol:

[Todd Covini]

You guys missed my whole point, let me explain further.
.......

..........Studies of galactic magnetic fields suggest a much better limit of less than 3x10-27 eV but there is some doubt about the validity of this method.

Wait...wait...Pedersen hasn't finished working out the problem and will soon be responding to Chris with the answer. Sshhhh...don't tell him it's a joke!!!

-=- T