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.
Quantum descriptions must be quite different because quantum mechanics asserts that a particle does not have a position and a velocity. Instead the particle has, in some sense, simultaneously a range of possible positions and velocities. The particle has some chance of being found here, another chance of being found there, etc.
originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: DpatC
The flaw may be relying on or using only classical mechanics/mathematics (algebra).
Quantum descriptions must be quite different because quantum mechanics asserts that a particle does not have a position and a velocity. Instead the particle has, in some sense, simultaneously a range of possible positions and velocities. The particle has some chance of being found here, another chance of being found there, etc.
www.physics.csbsju.edu...
It is understood that the mystical gift is not given for the convenience of the recipient, but to aid him in helping his fellow man or in performing a function some distance away that had been forgotten. Often the recipient of this gift employs it to attend the dying, to comfort, to instruct and for many other reasons which we will now explore
originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: DpatC
The flaw as I pointed out was your math related to the Pope which did not allow for time travel and being in multiple locations at the same time or bilocation.
It is understood that the mystical gift is not given for the convenience of the recipient, but to aid him in helping his fellow man or in performing a function some distance away that had been forgotten. Often the recipient of this gift employs it to attend the dying, to comfort, to instruct and for many other reasons which we will now explore
catholicmystics.blogspot.ca...
So, I would say it is not a dangerous idea just an idea without any way to find the answer to existence. Except that perhaps there is no paradox within Yin Yang because it is entangled and balanced, seemingly.
www.quantamagazine.org...
originally posted by: InTheLight
But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.
Now appears to be moving but it never moves - it is always right here.
Of course there is no 'thing' as nothingness - but if words did not arise to divide the all into bits then the all wouldn't be along side any other 'thing' - so it would not be a 'thing'.
This that IS is not a thing - no thingness.
originally posted by: InTheLight
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.
Now appears to be moving but it never moves - it is always right here.
Of course there is no 'thing' as nothingness - but if words did not arise to divide the all into bits then the all wouldn't be along side any other 'thing' - so it would not be a 'thing'.
This that IS is not a thing - no thingness.
Thanks INA, but I think we stumbled onto a algebraic/quantum mechanics thread where the IS is a thing and must be computed to be understood.
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.
Now appears to be moving but it never moves - it is always right here.
Of course there is no 'thing' as nothingness - but if words did not arise to divide the all into bits then the all wouldn't be along side any other 'thing' - so it would not be a 'thing'.
This that IS is not a thing - no thingness.
Obviously quirks and quarks of perceived reality.
Thanks INA, but I think we stumbled onto a algebraic/quantum mechanics thread where the IS is a thing and must be computed to be understood.
How can 'what is' be understood? Is there actually any thing separate to 'what is' that can stand apart from it?
originally posted by: InTheLight
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: InTheLight
But everything ('all') has to be in motion and there may no such thing as nothingness.
Now appears to be moving but it never moves - it is always right here.
Of course there is no 'thing' as nothingness - but if words did not arise to divide the all into bits then the all wouldn't be along side any other 'thing' - so it would not be a 'thing'.
This that IS is not a thing - no thingness.
Obviously quirks and quarks of perceived reality.
Thanks INA, but I think we stumbled onto a algebraic/quantum mechanics thread where the IS is a thing and must be computed to be understood.
How can 'what is' be understood? Is there actually any thing separate to 'what is' that can stand apart from it?
Obviously quirks and quarks of theorized reality.