What came first, the pheromone or the ant?

An ant egg was first.

Then the first ant popped out. It was a bit lonely. But since nobody observed it, it just pissed around while taking a stroll. It was fun.

After licking some fruit it noticed it can follow the smell to track back. It found its egg shells again. But hey, there was another egg too, and a second ant popped out right now, which was hungry.
So our ant said: ‘Just follow the smell, bro. You'll find delicious fruit!’
And the other said: ‘Thanks. I'll refresh the piss along the way. For our little other little brother, waiting in this third egg here.’

And all was good.

But after some time, one ant from a latter generation got bored from the repetitive process of strolling, pissing and licking. It was a thinker ant and it asked: ‘Mama - who was first? The piss, an ant, or an ant egg?’
Mama ant tried to answer. But the question was so though. It kept it busy with thinking hard for too long. Much too long, without laying any more eggs. Consequently all ants died out.
And why?
Just because one little bored ant was asking too much stupid questions.

I hope you draw the proper conclusions, taby! Our species may depend on it…

LOL. Thanks for your thoughts. 🙂

So, do humans exist to serve the graviton?

Edit:…

Do gravitons undergo Shapiro delay? If so, then are graviton condensates naturally cold?

taby said:
Do gravitons undergo Shapiro delay?

So far gravitons only exist in the minds of quantum researchers. It's a fantasy.
They are a bit like we are. They try to fit a mathematical model so it can describe the universe, to explain the things we see.
It's a hopeless endeavor. But they keep trying, and hide their failure by increasing the complexity of their models so far that nobody can understand it to reveal their bugs.

What if math can not describe the universe at all? Maybe because math is just part of the universe, but does not govern it?
Assume the universe changes. Does the math change with it? Do people living close to the big bang observe different math and laws of physics than people living at the edge of the universe billions of years later?

Idk, but i guess we never get a simple theory of everything working, and no complex theory either.
And i assume the same applies to super intelligent aliens or AI machines.

We are not able understand everything.
But luckily we can take the little we know, turn it into a simplified model, make a simulation out of it, and then we might know everything about that at least. And we can feel enlightened and confirmed.

Thus, gravity is simply -9.8 everywhere, and that's good enough \:D/

Thanks for your reply, man. This reminds me of a Turing machine that can take itself as a parameter, like DNA encodes the machinery that is used to decode the DNA. I read about these things in a book called Complexity.

And technically, there is no real edge of the Universe, just like there's no real edge to a 2-sphere like Earth's surface.

The binary pulsars show that gravitational waves are emitted according to general relativity. You just don't see it as a bunch of gravitons eh?

taby said:
like DNA encodes the machinery that is used to decode the DNA. I read about these things in a book called Complexity.

That's like making a zip out of winrar.exe and data.rar. : )

You read the wrong book. Complexity might be interesting, but it is your worst enemy.
You should read a book about minimizing complexity. And then send it to me. I could use it.

taby said:
And technically, there is no real edge of the Universe, just like there's no real edge to a 2-sphere like Earth's surface.

Pah - there is even a restaurant at the edge of the universe. It exists!
In your sphere example, the surface itself is the boundary, defining the spheres finite volume.
So, if the universe is growing space out of an initial big bang point, it MUST be finite.
Maybe there is no space on the other side of the boundary, but this does not mean there is no boundary.

I might beleive in an infinite universe, but then i won't believe the big bang fairytale.

The binary pulsars show that gravitational waves are emitted according to general relativity. You just don't see it as a bunch of gravitons eh?

No, it's just ripples in space time, and it does not proof the existence of some imaginary particle carrying gravity, afaik.

When i was a kid, sitting at the shore of a lake, i was thinking: If i would throw a drop of water in, could i measure the ripples on the other side of the lake? Could i somehow distinct the ripples of my drop from all the other ripples made by wind?

Probably. But that does not explain what water is.
And probably i would need many drops, so they encode some signal. Then, already knowing about the expected signal, i could eventually measure and decode it. Because i know what i'm looking for.

The gravitational waves detection reminds me on that. They know what to expect, they measured it, and it confirmed some of Einsteins physics. That's nice, but it does not tell us what gravity is.

Maybe gravity is actually a repelling force of black matter filling the void, and not some attraction force at all?
And then there might be no graviton, just anti gravitons : ) Who knows…

Edit:

there is even a restaurant at the edge of the universe.

In case you don't know what i mean, maybe you would like to read the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy. It's all about stupid questions about ants, the universe, the meaning of life, and all the stuff you're interested in.
The Hollywood movie is terrible. But the book and the British TV show is great.

Thanks again for you time and expertise.

I am not familiar with Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, although I know of people who have read the series, and I generally get your joke. :) I was more into naval battle stories like in Horatio Hornblower by Forester, and other fiction authors like Stephen King and Michael Crichton. I'd read more Canadian authors, but there's only so much to say about the shitty weather like 9 months of the year. LOL

Is a photon a gas?