It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There's no such thing as matter

page: 7
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   
We're the matter guys. Don't worry, we don't really exist.




posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: SleepyDude
You got to wonder about this world of ours. There is a lot that we haven't figured out yet.

A very thought provoking thread


Thanks for the comment. It's sort of like Plato and the Allegory of the cave.

You have people who live in a cave of their beliefs and they can't think past what they blindly believe.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I may not exist but I can repeat the question:

When you want to refer to a conglomeration of atoms in the everyday macroscopic world which everyone else (including scientists) call matter - how do you go about it?



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: EvilAxis

You're not making much sense.

Of course you can call it matter as a description of an underlying reality. You can't say that means a magical material substance called matter exists.

You just blindly believe. Look at your post. They're devoid of any science that says matter is a material substance.

It's just like a friend of mine is named Thomas. Thomas is just a name used to identify my friend. The word Thomas doesn't explain how my friends heart pumps blood or how neurons work in his brain.

This is no different than matter. The word matter doesn't explain anything. It doesn't tell us about an electron cloud around a nucleus or quarks. It's just a word we use to identify an underlying reality.

You haven't provided a shred of scientific evidence to suggest that this magical material substance called matter exists.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

Sometimes I think some of you guys are just one person. You guys pop up with the same posts devoid of any logic or science.

Do you even know what local realism means?

The fact is the death of local realism destroys any notion of separation. This is what Heisenberg was talking about when he said we're looking at potentialities and possibilities instead of things and facts.

If there's no things just the illusion of separation, then how can a material thing exist?


How does that paper support your conclusion? Use an illustration from the paper. I just want to know how you interpret that paper such that it supports your hypothesis that matter does not exist in any form. Heisenberg was in the early part of the 20th Century. This paper was published in 2016. I think it's important to understand what it really says.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Also, what about that wallet in the video? I think that contradicts your hypothesis. Otherwise, the experiment wouldn't need the wallet. Right?



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

Your question makes no sense.

I don't think you understand what local realism means.

The question is, how can a material thing not be locally real?

According to the video you posted these are the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter. If the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter violate local realism then what exactly is material matter?

Matter is just a word used to identify an underlying reality. There's no evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

agreed mate!



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

Your question makes no sense.

I don't think you understand what local realism means.

The question is, how can a material thing not be locally real?

According to the video you posted these are the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter. If the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter violate local realism then what exactly is material matter?

Matter is just a word used to identify an underlying reality. There's no evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.


It's a very simple question. Explain how that paper supports your hypothesis and use an illustration from the paper. What's so difficult to understand? Just answer the question. If you read the research paper then you should know why it's relevant to your hypothesis.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

And you still haven't answered about the wallet. You're the one who started the conversation with a dyed-in-the-wool hypothesis. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask how you got there using the illustrations you posted.




edit on 4-10-2017 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: EvilAxis

Of course you can call it matter as a description of an underlying reality. You can't say that means a magical material substance called matter exists.

Not once in this thread have I or anyone else said it means that. But you accuse us of doing so in all your posts.


originally posted by: neoholographic
You just blindly believe. Look at your post. They're devoid of any science that says matter is a material substance.


See - you're doing it again!


originally posted by: neohologgraphic

It's just like a friend of mine is named Thomas. Thomas is just a name used to identify my friend. The word Thomas doesn't explain how my friends heart pumps blood or how neurons work in his brain.

This is no different than matter. The word matter doesn't explain anything. It doesn't tell us about an electron cloud around a nucleus or quarks. It's just a word we use to identify an underlying reality.


That's my point entirely. Of course the word doesn't explain anything. How could it? It merely refers to something. That's how words work. It could refer to something which doesn't exist (like a unicorn) or, as you put it, an 'underlying reality' which does exist.

So at last we are agreed: 'Thomas' and 'matter' are just words or names for underlying realities.

Now it's incumbent on you to explain why you say matter does not exist without also saying your friend Thomas does not exist.

edit on 4-10-2017 by EvilAxis because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

You're sounding really desperate.

I don't need to post any illustration from the paper. That's just stupid.

Most people here are smart enough to know what local realism means.

In the video YOU POSTED it talked about the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter.

If these BUILDING BLOCKS violate locality then exactly what is this magical material substance called matter?

Again, stop sounding desperate and try to find some evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.

We're 7 pages in and still not a shred of evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: EvilAxis

You can"t be serious. This is from my OP.

Matter just doesn't exist and the universe is just a collection of data points that we call matter as a way to describe it to each other but matter has no intrinsic value or nature. 

I never said the word matter didn't exist. I said there's no evidence that matter is a material substance.

That's just nutty. Where did I ever say the word matter didn't exist? You sound really desperate to prop up your silly arguments.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

You're sounding really desperate.

I don't need to post any illustration from the paper. That's just stupid.

Most people here are smart enough to know what local realism means.

In the video YOU POSTED it talked about the BUILDING BLOCKS of matter.

If these BUILDING BLOCKS violate locality then exactly what is this magical material substance called matter?

Again, stop sounding desperate and try to find some evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.

We're 7 pages in and still not a shred of evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.


In other words, you never read the paper so you can't answer the question. You never watched the video either otherwise you know that the topic was condensed MATTER physics - semiconductors and the like -
You've fooled no one.
It's a good thing you never attempted a formal science education - I don't think you would have lasted a month.
The essence of science is to be able to explain your hypotheses as well as understanding the underlying fundamental science. You've presented absolutely no evidence to support your case. Guilty as charged. Case dismissed.


edit on 4-10-2017 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

LOL, you're desperation isn't a good look.

Again, people reading this thread know what local realism means.

You keep asking for an illustration because you're 7 pages in and you still haven't provided a shred of scientific evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.


If these BUILDING BLOCKS violate locality then exactly what is this magical material substance called matter? 



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

(a)How about you summarise what your new finding is?
(b)how has what you have stated changed anything. You have simply moved the slider from "matter" to "datapoints
(c)What is your new theory, what is the new application.
(d)What have you brought to the table other then attacking other users with an over inflated sense of ego? Name one application of your "new theory".
(e)Also link to your thesis. How has anything you've said got any relevance?
(f)Prove that matter doesn't exist, prove that data points exist and it's only a "2-demensional reality".

I look forward to seeing your thesis peer-reviewed



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: WorShip

Okay Johnny Come Lately, you said:

Prove that matter doesn't exist, prove that data points exist and it's only a "2-demensional reality". 

PROVE THAT MATTER DOESN'T EXISTS?

Why should I have to prove matter DOESN'T exists when there's not a shred of evidence that a magical material substance called matter exists?

That's like saying prove that flying pink unicorns don't exist.

Look, I have presented a mountain of evidence to support my position and nobody has presented a shred of evidence that this magical material substance called matter exists.

If you really want to debate, you will read the thread. I'm not going over all of that evidence again. This thread is 7 pages long and if you find a post you want to debate then quote it and I will respond. But I'm not going to repeat 7 pages of evidence for a Johnny Come Lately that will not take the time to read the thread before they respond.



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

There's no evidence for all the things we haven't discovered yet - does that mean there are no evidences of things we haven't discovered? Not at all. Get some logic.

Now for the rest of my points you ignored?
edit on 4-10-2017 by WorShip because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: WorShip
a reply to: neoholographic

There's no evidence for all the things we haven't discovered yet - does that mean there are no evidences of things we haven't discovered? Not at all. Get some logic.

Now for the rest of my points you ignored?


What? Gobbledygook

As for your questions they have been asked and answered. If you quote a previous post you have questions about I'll respond.

I'm not going over 7 pages of evidence for a Johnny Come Lately that will not take the time to read the thread.
edit on 4-10-2017 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

You can't understand? Not suprising...

I can't bear to read more through the rambling and offensive posts you made in this thread. If you could just summarize one new application of your theory that would be great.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join