It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Debate Tournament, 3rd Round: JB1 Vs OIMD: The Bermuda Triangle

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 12:20 AM
DEBATE TOURNAMENT, 3rd Round: John Bull 1 vs OnlyInMyDreams

The Semi-Finals round of the First ATS Debate Tournament continues!

The topic: The Bermuda Triangle is an interdimensional portal.

John Bull 1 will argue the position of affirmative.

OnlyInMyDreams will argue the contrary position.

John Bull 1 has won the toss for opening statement. (JB1 can pass his first post to OIMD if he wishes)

The format will be:

1 opening statment from each side.

4 alternating posts from each side. Each post cannot exceed 1,000 words and my not have more than one reference link. Each participant will have 18 hours to post thier arguements respectively.

OnlyInMyDreams has first closing statement (like the opening statement, he can pass to John Bull 1)

Each side may have 1 follow-up rebuttal post to the other's closing statement, but rebuttals may not exceed 200 words.

Please follow all other rules of ATS Online Debate posting in the Debate Forum.

John Bull 1, the debate thread is yours.

posted on Jul, 23 2003 @ 11:22 PM
Anyone care to post????

posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 12:19 AM
John Bull 1, you have until 7 AM CST 7/24/03 to post, or first post goes to Onlyinmydreams

posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 01:31 AM
I'll pass the opening over.

posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 02:50 AM
Ships sink, planes crash… and navigators make mistakes.

The Bermuda Triangle, or ‘Devil’s Triangle’ (as it was known before the 1960s) is an area marked off by three tips at Bermuda, Puerto Rico, and Miami. True, many ships and planes have been lost within its boundaries over the centuries, but the idea that the area had paranormal hazards did not become part of its legendary status until the late 60s and early 70s, when a series of stories and books began to promote the idea that ships within it were being snatched away by either aliens or due to an ‘interdimensional porthole.’ The first of these stories, in fact, were fictional and written expressly for magazines that published ONLY fiction. Later writers built-upon these tales when writing their ‘non-fiction’ tomes… but, in presenting their stories, they did little to acknowledge that, prior to the era in which the fiction stories appeared, no sailors or pilots ever reported or claimed to know of or believe in seemingly unnatural, mystical, or paranormal effects that existed in the area that might bring a plane down or cause a ship to sink. True, sailors had called the area the ‘Devil’s Triangle’ for some time, but they thought of it more as a spot where you were likely to be surprised by a storm rather than a place prone to terrestrially-bound black holes or wormholes.

It is true, however, that within the triangle there is a magnetic anomaly, one that also occurs on the other side of the Earth – essentially, a compass in this area, near a certain point, will point to True North instead of Magnetic North. Normally, a navigator compensates for this discrepancy, called compass variation… but, if he made an error in assessing the point at which his compass began to point to True North, he would automatically err in assessing his true compass variation. In a nutshell, if one is not precisely careful, even ‘flying by instrument’ can get one far off course.

Now, add this navigational oddity in with the intricacies of the Gulf Stream, tropical storms and hurricanes, and high traffic… and you have a zone which is slightly more dangerous to navigate in than some other areas of the Earth. There is no need to believe in interdimensional portholes to explain the loss of ships and airplanes in this region… and, most importantly, there is no evidence to support any such thing. One imagines that an earth-bound wormhole would cause some more problems, eh?

But why so many losses? Well, to be frank, the number of ships and planes that have been lost in this area is not really that high when you consider the raw size of the triangle’s area and level of traffic. The public has a perception that a weirdly high number of craft have gone down in it because that image has been re-enforced by writers of book like the types I mentioned above – writers who, by the way, simply cite each other when backing up their arguments… but never really seem to worry about official coast guard reports.

And, yes… I would agree that tales of missing navy planes are interesting, but not that they’re extraordinary, especially when those flights are flown by trainees who lack navigational equipment in their own planes and have to follow a single flight leader and rely on HIS calculations… And, yes again, the story of the USS Cyclops is interesting, but the most interesting part of it comes BEFORE it was lost, as it’s a tale of an incompetent captain who walked the decks in his underwear and had to deal with a near-mutiny because his crew thought him an idiot.

As I hand the debate over to JB1, I ask him to prove not only that the Triangle has an inter-dimensional porthole, but that such portholes even exist. I wish him good luck and look forward to his posts,


posted on Jul, 24 2003 @ 08:19 AM
I would like to open my argument by discussing Mankinds Perception of the Universe because it is our perception,or the limts of our perception,which dictate our limited understanding of the phenomena in question.

Let's start by imagining that you are walking from Munich to Rome in a straight line and the journey takes 1 week.From the air looking down the line appears straight but in 3 dimensions it becomes apparent that it is not because you have walked over the Austrian Alps.The line instead follows the geographical topography.
Looked at from a stationary sattelite the perceived route you have taken changes again.It will now appear to spiral because the Earth has rotated 7 times.
Move further back and take into consideration the Earths movement around the Sun and it complicates things further.Now take into consideration the rotation of the Galaxy and even the Universe and we all start giving up.
All perceived lines of your route are correct not one is more legitimate than any other.You may wish that you'd just stuck with the original straight line view from the air or perhaps like me you'd rather view the route from a small cafe looking at the horizon while drinking a well deserved beer after what would have been an arduous week long walk.It's your choice there is no accounting for taste.

If I ask you to picture in your mind's eye an example of 2 dimensions you may well decide to form the image of a postcard.It will have no depth and the image will appear flat.
If I then ask you take an example of 3 dimensions you have only to look out of the window.The biological computer that is your brain takes the imformation given it by your eyes,reverses it (as it is upside down) and allows you to perceive depth and distance,without which you would have no perception of the space around you and your position within it.
Now if I ask you to imagine 4 dimensions (adding time) you might well struggle to find an easy example to picture but the very fact that you are able to catch a ball which involves not only the use of your perception of time,distance/depth and form but also the effects of gravity and friction of the air on the ball and you are able to do this complicated differential calculus instinctively means that on a subconscious level you understand only too well what it means to exist and succeed in 4 dimensions.(nb England cricketers are specifically chosen for their inability to act even subconsciously within 4 dimensions.Hence they can't catch balls.)

So how are you at perceiving the effects of 5 dimensions?

6 dimensions?

How about 7 dimensions?

Scientists today now except that there are 11 dimensions and that number seems to be growing.We exist in a universe with atleast 11 dimensions and we understand 3.The other 8 do not effect us adversely(or atleast not obviously) and the 3 we understand are essential for us to understand in order to survive.

I want to backtrack a little to our 2 dimensional postcard and go even further back.I want you to try and imagine 1 dimension.At this point you may simply turn your postcard side on but you will notice that the edge forms a 2 dimensional line.You could collapse that line to a dot but it would still be a 2 dimensional dot.

1 dimension is as hard for us to perceive as 11 dimensions but we should make the effort and try and form a concept of a 1 dimensional existence.

So I would like you to imagine an infintesimally small pin prick in the dark vacuumous nothingness.Within this pin prick is contained all matter,all time,and even multiple realities occupying the same space similtaneously.

Do we perceive Everything more clearly as we factor in each dimension?
Actually no.
The more dimensions we factor in the more incomprehensible Everything appears.Our inferiority complex grows as our perceived Universe expands and we are left feeling smaller and more insignificant as we struggle to grasp what it all means to live in such a complicated Reality.
How different is it if we view Everything through 1 dimension?
The answer is very different.This is how God views it.Time is complete.History is written.
By viewing Everything in 1 dimension we no longer struggle hopelessly to find the boundaries of infinity but we instead look on Everything from outside and it all appears alot smaller and alot simpler from there.

I will seek to show in this debate that on a Quantum level sub atomic particles are now thought to be able to move from one perceived reality to another.Viewed via our 1 dimensional world this hardly seems improbable.
From there I will show that as all matter,space ,different realities,and time exist similtaneously in the same infinitely small place that the Bermuda Triangle(in a collapsed state) also exists on different planes,times,and realities.From there I will show that the recorded phenomena in the Bermuda triangle can be explained in the context of the gently shifting soup of the Space,Time,Reality Continuum.A Continuum that mistakenly appears stable only when viewed using 4 dimensions and which occasionally is disrupted when viewed using 1 dimension.

posted on Jul, 25 2003 @ 12:56 AM
To be frank, I have no idea how to begin responding to John Bull's opener. It was almost like a poem or mystic incantation of some sort... beautiful in many ways... but it gave me nothing to really respond to. I'll grant to JB1 that there may very well be more than 3 or 4 dimensions within the universe... in fact, many leading physicists do, in fact, believe that these extra dimensions are real. However, as JB1 failked to mention, the extra dimenions they describe are not 'alternative realms' that you can fly a plane into. By their very definition, all existing objects must, simultaneously, exist in these dimension, but there is no way for them to be compacted into these dimensions alone. The crux of multi-dimensional theories is that they are all over the place, co-existing with us, but that we cannot detect them because we lack the senses to do so. we are, in effect, 'flatlanders' living on a piece of paper, whom, when the paper folds, still feel that their universe is flat. However, while we cannot detect these dimensions, they are nevertheless a part of the universe, existing within the same space as us... They are not alternate worlds that one can walk into and exist as oneself. To be perfectly clear, dimensions are measurements of time and space, as can be perceived by conscious beings -- they are not self-contained worlds within which things exist in accordance with the four dimensions we are all familiar with. As such, by DEFINITION, there is no 'porthole' in which a plane can fly through an enter another dimension.

So, I concede, right away, that there may be extra dimensions in the universe... it's just that they're 'dimensions' and not self-conatined places. Perhaps this debate should have been entitled "The Bermuda Triangle leads to a parallel universe"...

Anyways, to get back to the Trinagle itself, I've provided, below, a short, easy to read article on it. It comes from PBS and accompanies a TV series called "Savage Seas":

Originally, I had intended to provide links to NOAA -- the agency which is entrusted with keeping accurate navigational and weather records for sailors and airmen -- with the hopes that you could all see that, in looking through their maps, that there was really nothing bizarre going on in the Triangle area... But I realized that many of you are not trained as pilots or sailors. Plus, as a government agency, I knew JB1 could claim that, like the Navy and Coast Guard sites (which both deny that anything weird is going on within the area in question), they were 'conspiring' against thousands of mariners and pilots by hiding 'hazards' from them. As it is, I hope that a PBS series narrated by Leonard Nimoy will convince you: Spock cannot tell a lie, remember?

Again, I grant that ships and planes have been lost in the Triangle area... But so they are lost everywhere. The Great lakes are filled with Iron and wooden hulls... Is there a stargate over Chicago and Milwaukee?

Basically, because a craft is lost, and has not been acounted for, does not mean that it entered some realm that only Star Trek fans or theoretical physicists can describe. If anything, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof--- And there IS NO PROOF or EVIDENCE which points to any craft, in the history of this region, being swallowed up by a black hole or dimensional porthole or whatever. So, not only must JB1 prove that extra dimensions exist as separate, breachable worlds with portholes... he must also prove that such breaches occured with the various craft that have been lost in the Triangle. I'm betting that he can offer no such proof.

Before I hand this back to JB1, I'll admit that there is only circumstantial evidence out there in regards to the loss of the famed "Lost Squadron" of TBF Avengers, or the USS Cyclops many years before... but such lack of direct data does not automatically mean that paranormal or fantastic forces must be at work. As any pilot or sailor knows, bad stuff can happen quickly when you are out alone on the seas or in the sky. As a kayaker, I can attest to about a half dozen times when I was surprised by a sudden storm and almost sank in conditions where my remains would not have been recovered. In short, very earthly events can cause very dramatic, and mysterious, losses.

posted on Jul, 25 2003 @ 08:10 AM
As everyone can apreciate this is a very difficult subject to describe and if my opening did not make absolutely clear that the dimensions I refered to were spatial/time dimensions and not alternative realities or Sub-Universes in a Multiverse/Polyverse system then I apologise.It was not my intention to mislead and I'm sorry if OnlyInMyDreams did not grasp what I was trying to say.
As the amount of Sub-Universes or Alternative Realities is likely to be infinite it would be silly of me to restrict their number to 11.The existence of multiple realities is something I will return to later in the debate.
The existence of atleast 11 dimensions now plays a strong role in current "String Theory" which as everyone here will except is at the cutting edge of theoretical physics.
There are many sites that discuss this on a Google search key words should include "11 dimensions-String theory-spatial-time".Here is a link to one site that may explain it better than I.

It is important that this is not thought of as a crank theory.It is not.It is a corner stone of String Theory.

Now,In the next post I hope to explain how Sub-Atomic Particles have been found to move between our Multiverse system or between Aternative realities which will,I hope, show that the maximum distance between you and any time/place in this Universe is less than the width of a molecule.
However,I must take some time here and now to deal with some of the points OIMD has raised.

If you read carefully what OIMD has already written you will find that he appears to be making a lot of arguments for me.There is a reason for this.There is the argument that OIMD wishes or hopes that I will make and the argument that I am actually making.The one that OIMD wishes I was making is one in which I will rehash lots of stories about mysterious green,hazy lights,Airplanes,and boats disapearing,of a conspiracy to cover up these mysteries.That is not my argument at all and I will not be entering into this argument.
Instead I am basing my argument on science.
The topic of this debate is that the Bermuda Triangle is an Interdimensional Portal.I intend to show this is infact true by.

a)Showing,as I hope I already have,that our perception of the Universe is incomplete and far more complicated than we actually can conceive.

b)Showing that leading quantum phycisists except that matter on a sub-atomic level can and does move,aparently at will,between different realities,or planes.

c)This happens everywhere and all the time including the Bermuda Triangle.

d)The Universe,Existence,Everything(Pick you own word)is by it's nature Interdimensional.

e)So it follows that the Bermuda Triangle is Interdimensional.

f)There is only one portal and it exists everywhere including but not specifically the Bermuda Triangle.

g)Therefore,the Bermuda Triangle is an Interdimensional Portal

Now,OIMD states that I must not only show how this is true but Prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
It is the nature of debate that the burden of proof should fall equally on both of our shoulders.I will indeed endeavour to show as clearly as I can why what I state is infact true but I also expect OIMD to not rely on the preconceptions of those that will read this debate and ultimately judge this debate.I expect OIMD to seek to prove me wrong.

So now that OIMD has a clearer understanding of the argument I am making I hope we can all steer clear of quoting Spock,Captain Kirk,Yoda,or Robbie the Robot.

posted on Jul, 25 2003 @ 07:52 PM
Well, actually, I understood that 'dimesnions' were just that... measurements of space and time... and so my argument was that a plane couldn't 'fly into' an extra one...

But John Bull1 has done something pretty clever, here. He's not even going to touch tales of ships and airplanes vanishing... instead, he's saying that some theoretical physicists believe that there are extra dimensions THROUGHOUT the universe, and that, as particles MAY be able to cross between them, that the area southwest of Bermuda is, by default, a porthole between dimensions, as all the universe is possibly an interdimensional porthole...

...but that's 'if' the theories that call for extra dimensions are correct...

John Bull1 has dedicated his position to science, and not cute articles about Atlantians from Argosy magazine, a position which brings this debate into the realm of facts and data. He's also challenged me to provide evidence discounting the idea of extra dimensions, which, as the representative of the more conservative argument, here, I am not required to do. Still, I am more than happy to bring up such evidence, as even the most mundane evidence, which, by its nature, makes an entire theory an impossibility, cancels-out even the best, and most poetic, theories.

...Well, basically, the scientific basis for 'extra dimensions' comes out of what is called String Theory, which is an attempt to 'unify' all the forces of nature into one basic equation. To do this, it postulates that extra dimensions exist in a 'curled up' state that we cannot as yet observe. To be honest, I am not versed enough in quantum physics to explain why this must be so, but I do understand that these 'strings' must exist, within our current science, for extra dimensions to exist... and that, in practice, it is string theory that serves as the basis for all hyperdimensional theories.

Now, an effect of these 'strings' of curled extra dimensions is that they MUST distort or alter gravity, itself, at an ultra microscopic scale/level. It is not the case that these 'strings' can exist and not alter gravity... as such alterations are inherently worked into the 'unification' theories that brought about string theory in the first place. So, to clarify, if 'strings' exist, and, in turn, if extra dimensions exist, gravity MUST do weird things at extremely microscopic levels...

The problem is... Gravity doesn't do this. In February, the highly respected, peer-reviewed journal 'Nature' published a paper that carried the results of an experiment in microscopic gravity. Using new technology, the scientists were able to show that, at the levels in which gravity SHOULD magnify due to extra dimensions, it DOESN'T. In fact, it acts pretty much like how Newton, hundreds of years ago, said it should.

Below is a link to an article from 'New Scientist' magazine that sumarizes these findings:

To be perfectly clear, here, and leave no misunderstandings among readers, this new data disproves the fundamental ideas behind the only scientifically acceptable theories that support the notion of extra dimensions. This is also not old data that the people who created hyper-dimensional theories new about when they created String Theory in the 80s... This is modern data which says that their theories are flatly wrong.

So... Perhaps, after all, JB1 would really like to get back into the world of Commander Spock, Green lights, and Atlantis, as his admirable scientific efforts are, due to scientific data, misguided....

I look forward to hearing about missing ships, now

posted on Jul, 26 2003 @ 10:30 AM
I'm very pleased that OIMD has given us a link to that article in Nature as it gives me the oportunity to tell a story about a cat(Thereby making my argument more popular to all animal lovers)Dr Ewin Shroedinger was so frustrated by the perculiarities inherent in scientific experimentation and observation at a quantum level that he developed this nice little fictional experiment to show it.(no cat is ever put in any danger)

A cat is placed in a box, together with a radioactive atom. If the atom decays, and the geiger-counter detects an alpha particle,a hammer hits a flask of prussic acid (HCN), killing the cat. The paradox lies in the clever coupling of quantum and classical domains. Before the observer opens the box, the cat's fate is tied to the wave function of the atom, which is itself in a superposition of decayed and undecayed states. Thus, said Schroedinger, the cat must itself be in a superposition of dead and alive states before the observer opens the box,"observes'' the cat, and "collapses'' it's wave function.Thereby killing it.
To put it more simply the very act of observing effects the experiment.Sub-atomic particles are so small and sensitive that the act of viewing through an electronic microscope effects any experiment and that is why quantum physics is almosts entirely theoretical.
(nb,No one is quite sure why Shroedinger's cat went so willingly into this box.My own theory,for what it's worth,is that the bell around Shroedinger's cat's neck was forever setting off Pavlov's dog salivating and that the box,with all it's inherent dangers was an effective shelter against a continual stream of drool.)

Now I would like to move on to some experiments and observations that have been made recently.

"Ahhh ha!" I hear you cry "How can I,on the one hand,show how the story of Shroedinger's cat put's any observations on a sub-atomic level in a dubious light,while producing observed sub-atomic reactions to prove my own case."

The answer is quite simple.It is one thing to observe a reaction that remains in the realms of established possibility,it is quite another when a particle,while observed,disappears completely and turns up 5 minutes later in a completely different place.Whether by observing it has effected the experiment or not an effort must still be made to explain the phenomenon which until very recently would have been thought to be impossible.Only String theory has a credible explanation for it.

Here is a link.I apologise for the fact that is so complicated and I've cut and pasted the most relevent section so you don't have to struggle to get there.

"The seemingly impossible really happens:
(Back to the double slit later.) Nature defies common sense, and this really happens: an electron or other particle can disappear in one location and simultaneously reappear at another location if the wave associated with the particle extends to the other location. After you buy that, we can make sense out of the rest of it. Here are some examples of the disappearing-reappearing magic:"

If you scroll down to that bit and read from there onwards you will understand better what I mean.

String theory has it that the particle moves from one version of reality to another or even exists,perhaps similtaneously in different realities.

I'd like you to imagine an empty circular swimming pool.Now we fill it with water from a large hose into it's centre.The main lights are turned off and and a strip light the diameter of the pool which emits a laser beam the width of a molecule is shone down on into it.A thin sheet of illuminated water is visible but around it it is dark.That thin sheet of illuminated water represents the reality you perceive.Now you have to remember that there has been a lot of energy expended into the water as it filled the pool.The sheet of light appears constant to you yet it's fabric is in flux.Different molecules are being illuminated and others are moving into darkness into unviewed realities.
Now this is only model and one that does not fully describe the complexities of the universe.The swimming pool is finite in size and each molecule would have to be adjacent to every other similtaneously to fully show what I'm trying to show.

Finally,I'd like to comment on OIMD's claim that his standpoint represents conservative science.I would have to agree with him.But I would point out that it has been the case in the past that conservative science has always been left behind.15 years after Einstein's Theory of Relativity was published conservative scientists were still disputing it and so I believe it is the same with String Theory.The number of those that adher to String Theory is growing and those that adher to Field Theory is shrinking

posted on Jul, 26 2003 @ 11:01 PM
Hold the train, here...

JB1 says that he's not going to wage a debate on the basis of fanciful stories and that he will use science to prove his position, yet he has now made an argument to the effect that 'just because you can't observe it doesn't mean it's not there. Well... Science is all about observation and understanding the world based on deductions which can be made from these observations... It is NOT about coming up with a theory that 'explains everything', then, when evidence has been uncovered that completely undermines this theory, saying that it must be correct because it 'explains everything.' To be frank, not only is such thinking circular and without any type of archimedian point, it borders on religious mysticism.

Yes, religion. String theory is closer to religious dogma than hard science simply because it is based on 'transcendant' (just to be clear, I use that word mockingly, here) knowledge that has not been supported by real-world data, with said 'knowledge' being presumed to be true simply because it sounds nice... it 'explains everything.' Like a religion, or cult, in this case, it commands followers who believe in the 'explanation' for everything more than they believe in every 'thing.'

JB1 has, here, stated that he can prove, scientifically, that the Bermuda Tringale is an interdimensional porthole. He has based his argument on a scientific theory... But this theory, it turns-out, is based entirely on something that people want to be true. It is a theory that came about so as to achive a goal (unifying all known physical forces), but not so as to explain something that had been observed, and, as such, its supporters can say anything, or make any argument, to protect it simply because it is ALL argument, and no hard facts.

And, now, JB1 has asked you all to ignore data simply because, all of the sudden, the universe cannot be observed! Is that science or Hindu mysticism?

Below is a link to a web page from 'Nature' that also links to the paper I mentioned before. The author puts it best when he says something to the effect of, "String Theory is the best candidate for a theory of unification, yet in terms of evidence it is lacking":

Like JB1's stories above, String theory is just a story. It is no different than the tale of Paul Bunyan. Early settlers invented Paul Bunyan as a way to explain the formation of the Grand Canyon to their children. The canyon is a huge cut into the Earth, so somone had to cut it, right? In the same way, String theory would have us believe that, since the forces of the universe are believed to be linked, somehow, and as bundles of extra dimension would do that, these extra dimensions must exist. Right?

But I have made a mistake, here, too...

There is shame on me for failing to notice that the way JB1 is using String theory is, really, no different than the one, discredited by both sides, here, that would have you believe that an airplane can fly into 'another dimension'. What I failed to notice is that JB1 is making that argument, which he himself thought I was trying to rope him into, but at a microscopic level, as he is saying that particles can go back and forth between our dimensions and the 'stringed' ones. remember his comments about how all the universe was an 'interdimensional porthole' because particles could appear and dissapear within it? Well, in essence, a particle that can, somehow, 'go' between invisible multi-dimensional strings and the three dimensional normal world is just like a plane that is traversing between two different realms of existence -- Or atleast it is like that in JB1's reasoning.

Besides all the things I've said before about how an object can't 'go into' a dimension, the String theory which JB1 is relying upon, itself, does not show how such a thing can be possible. This is because String theory holds that all of the universe is composed of strings, which are themselves bundles of dimensions that have 'nothing' within them. That is, under the theory, strings ARE the universe (you, me, my computer, etc.). So, how can a particle go 'between' the world of strings and the regular world if one is composed of the other? Again, a string isn't some 'other place' or 'sinkhole' or microscopic black hole... It is the building material of the universe itself. Saying that a particle can go in and out of a string is like saying that I can go in and out of my own cells.

The key, here, is the 'porthole' aspect of this debate. There may very well be other, unknown, dimensions, but I have yet to see JB1 show how things can go in and out of them... or between them.

posted on Jul, 27 2003 @ 09:36 AM
First let me say that the story of Shroedinger's cat is not the product of my own fertile imagination.It was developed by Dr Ewin Shroedinger to give vent to the frustrations he felt when dealing with matter at a quantum level.I sense those same frustrations in the tenor of OIMD last post.It is frustrating.Science isn't mean't to be this way we are taught at school but that is how it is.

OIMD says that String Theory is unproven and he is correct.

Dr Stephen Hawking,probably the most esteemed theoretical scientists of our time,agrees,atleast on that point, with OIMD.He says that although String Theory has come along way in the last 20 years it still remains unproven and that it could take a further 20 years before it will be proven.
Notice that he does not agree with OIMD that it is fantasy.He believes and even expects that the theory will prove to better explain the Universe than present "conservative" theory.

So what heinous crime has String Theory committed?

Well it is able to explain everything that "Conservative" Theory does and where "Conservative" theory ceases to work it offers credible if as yet unproven answers.String Theory's crime is to offer answers where "Conservative"Theory fails.
Think about that for a moment.

Sub Atomic particles have been observed to disappear.That is a fact.
It is the nature of quantum mechanics that Sub Atomic particles do not follow the Physical laws that govern classical science,fact.
I am not trying to show that an Airplane can disappear.I said early on I wouldn't do that and I am not.I am saying that sub atomic particles do disappear.

But do they disappear??

If you and I were sitting in my living room watching TV and you turned around and saw I was no longer there and then 2 minutes later you turned around and I was there again.Would you say I had disappeared?Or would you look at the 2 beers I have in my hand and guess I'd walked into the kitchen, opened the refridgerator ,and brought back a cold beveredge for us both?
It is not that I had disappeared only that you were no longer able to perceive me.

It is the same with the particles that have been observed to disappear.They still exist.They just temporarily exist in a reality we are unable to perceive.

I'd hoped that my opening statement would show that we do not perceive everything.

Many scientist now believe that we perceive only one of an infinite number of alternative realities.An infinite number of those you would perceive to be no different from this one.On the other hand an infinite number would be different.There would be a reality that represented every choice you had ever made.Ones where Elvis is still churning out hits and less fortunately dodgy movies.Ones where Hitler won the Second World War.Our consciousness anchors us to our reality.But sub atomic particles are not anchored and they slip effortlessly between these alternative realities.

Now OIMD says that the key to this debate is the "Porthole" aspect.By this he means Portal but I except the words are interchangable.Porthole,Portal,Door,Gate,Cat Flap.I'm happy with any word as long as it is excepted that we are placing a name on something we are unable to perceive.Therefore we should not be looking for a phenomenon that has the physical characteristics of a Porthole or Door.I don't want this debate to slide into a battle over semantics.I don't want OIMD to say that what I describe is not a Porthole because it has no frame or handle.

I would also ask readers to put out of their minds images that they may have of what a Portal looks like.I'm as big a fan of StarGate as any one else but the reality is nothing like it.

A sailor in a yacht may sail from the Pacific Ocean across into the Indian Ocean and not know that he has crossed over.

So I will give you my word.OIMD has Porthole.I will give you Threshold

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 12:44 AM
This debate has rehashed itself too many times....

I obviously understand what JB1 is saying about 'dimensions' and such, the only problem is that I am playing with the exact ideas that he is pushing for his side... So, suppose that String Theory really IS accurate... so how, then, can objects which are MADE from ultra-dimensional strings go to and fro from the realm of those strings themselves? You see, the whole point of string theory is that the raw materie'l of the universe is made from compressed, microscopic,extra dimensions... So how, I ask, can a 'thing' go into and come out of the raw existence of which it is made? Again, saying that an airplane OR a particle can go into
a 'dimensional portal' is like saying that a man can fly into his cells or atoms ------ To summarize the above discussion, string theory, as inaccurate as it probably is, DOES NOT, on its own, pave the way for objects to transit between dimensions... If, anything, it says that objects are MADE FROM extra dimensions, so, obviously, they CANNOT go into (or cross a portal) into that which they are made of...! String theory argues that the universe is made from curled-up extra-dimensions... not that any thing within the universe can implode itself and go into those dimensions.

JB1 is right, in one way, though.... When I was talking about 'portholes' I had the maritime discussion I thought we would have in mind, and so inserted it, subconsciously, for the word 'portal'... but that doesn't really matter as both are 'gateways' between worlds... and neither the real world or string theory offers a chance at either. Whether it be the alternate world of Argosy articles or the subatomic one of superstring theory, neither has any room for anything which can 'port', 'portage', 'go', 'slide', or 'cut' between them... as, even by itself, String theory states that the world is made by those objects which, themselves, are BUILT from extra-dimensional folds....

To conclude, instead of adding new links, I am only going to refer you all to the ones I have provided above. They clearly show that, even if string theory were correct, that it holds that the universe is made of extra dimensions, not that any 'thing' that makes up the universe can go between these dimensions... and thus 'bridge' a 'portal' of ANY sort...

...They also say that there is no physical support for the idea of Super Strings at all...

So, in summary:

A:The Theory JB1 is using to prove his point has been proven, experimentally, to be wrong...
B:Even if it were correct, it wouldn't do what JB1 says it would... as String Theory holds that the universe IS MADE from curled extra dimensions, not that objects can go between these dimensions...

..BTW, I learned all about the poor old USS Cyclops just to have to explain to a guy that a lego with four pegs can't fit into a Lego with one peg.... Just as an item MADE from extra dimensions (under String theory) can't FIT into an object made from those dimensions, themselves.

posted on Jul, 28 2003 @ 11:56 AM
Sub Atomic particles have been observed to disappear and reappear.

OIMD should address this issue.

If they do not disappear into a dimension we are unable to perceive then where do they go?
I've offered an explanation.OIMD has not even addressed this issue.If he does not the readers will have to except my explanation.

In my second post I laid out my argument in detail point by point.I'm going to post again with my views on those points in brackets.

a)Showing,as I hope I already have,that our perception of the Universe is incomplete and far more complicated than we actually can conceive.(I think that this has been shown and that we both agree on this)

b)Showing that leading quantum phycisists except that matter on a sub-atomic level can and does move,aparently at will,between different realities,or planes.(This has not been addressed by OIMD.)

c)This happens everywhere and all the time including the Bermuda Triangle.(ditto)

d)The Universe,Existence,Everything(Pick you own word)is by it's nature Interdimensional.(OIMD has written above saying that he accepts this may be the case)

e)So it follows that the Bermuda Triangle is Interdimensional. (and so he must accept also that this may be true)

f)There is only one portal and it exists everywhere including but not specifically the Bermuda Triangle. (This has not been addressed)

g)Therefore,the Bermuda Triangle is an Interdimensional Portal.(The only obvious and logical conclusion.)

OIMD next post will be his closing statement.It is his final oportunity to address these issues.

These particles disappear.They disappear somewhere.As they do they cross a boundary into which we can observe it no longer.Call that boundary whatever you like.Threshold,Frontier,Door,Gateway,Porthole,or even PORTAL.It does not matter.

I am satisfied that debating position that initially looked impossible to defend actually looks more likely than the one opposing it.

Roll on the Closing statements.

The floor is yours OIMD.

posted on Jul, 29 2003 @ 12:22 AM
The universe is, indeed, far more complex than we can grasp, or even, perhaps, ever begin to understand, however, when science is concerned we must work backwards from observation...

Unfortunately, this closer will not be as elegant as the universe, itself, for I have to re-address issues that I have already, by my argument, handled above... But, as JB1 seems to want a definitive defeat of all his points, let me indulge him...

String Theory has no direct evidence to support it, but, even if it did, it would NOT support JB1's argument, as it hinges upon the idea that all things, at an ultra-microscopic level, within the universe, are MADE from curled bits of extra dimensions.. Not that they can GO INTO these dimensions, particle or not. You see, under String theory, that particle is made from the dimensions JB1 says it is flying into... a transit that is inherently impossible, as an object cannot be consumed by its parts... no less that a man can be eaten by his own mouth.

You see, even if extra dimensions did exist, the objects that we know of, either airplane or particle, would either already exist within these dimensions, with us being unaware of them, or they would (as in String theory) be made, at a primordial level, from them, and so could not 'enter' into the absolute, and constricting, parameters of their realm. So, as dimensions, by either a conservative viewpoint or a theoretical one, are the constraints from which all matter is percieved and can be manifested in terms of factors of distinction and, perhaps, pure existence, it follows that they cannot be exclusively transgressed by the objects that they 'measure' and, in the case of String theory, compose.

As for those particle experiments, which, by the way, JB1 has not given us a background or link to learn more about... I will use JB1's own logic to deflate his idea that they are moving 'between dimensions' (well, he said 'between planes of existence'... But, in our first posts, didn't he, himself, admit that discussing other planes or worlds of existence that an object could enter and, within which, continue to exist was a silly notion, without any logical validity), as, if you can remember, JB1 chose to deny the results of tests that disproved String theory by saying that, at the Quantum level, you couldn't believe your eyes when observing something, and that observation affected results. So, my answer to JB1's challenge is basically to just say that thos particles may very well have not dissapeared, or they may just have existed in the form of a vague field within which no material pinpoints can be made (as in an electron shell... keep in mind that an electron is a particle), but they most certainly could not have 'gone into' their own measurements, or, in the string theory world, their own composites!

And, as for JB1's sudden mentioning of 'alternate planes' (you know, the 'alternate realms' he was denying the debate was about, many posts ago), I see no reason to defeat an argument JB1 has yet to make, yet expects me to respond to. This is not a debate about alternate universes, it is a debate about about the possibility of dimensional portals. 'Dimensions' and 'universes' are two different things, just as a car's length is different than the car, itself, or just another place, besides its normal garage, where it can be parked. So, to this end, I will not bother to debate the idea that alternate universe exist... they may very well, but that has no bearing upon this debate, which hinges, by definition itself, on whether or not an object acn move into a measurement... whether it is, bizarrely, made from those dimensions or just merely measured by them.

And, to answer point B, specifically, JB1 has specifically NOT addressed whether or not subatomic components can move between 'realities' or 'planes'... If, anything, he pointedly said that he was not making such an argument in his first post to me. In fact, he stated that subatomic particles could move into DIMENSIONS, not other realities. Again, there is a fundamental error in terms, here, in this new argument. And, even if we were debating other realities instead of other dimensions, he never once explained, or opined, on how such Inter-Plane movement occured, nor did he cite the scientific papers and experts who have made such claims. Even his claims of vanishing particles are uncited... and thus uncredible and unbearing upon this debate.

Now that I have replied to all of JB1's repetitive challenges, let me finally get down to my true closer---

To believe the argument JB1 has made through MOST of this debate, which says that objects can slip into the dimensions that they are measured by (or composed of, in the misused case of string theory), one would have to reject all logic and the idea that elements of language can, on a consistent basis, be associated and used for abstract concepts in such a way that allows humans to communicate in any way that involves mutually understood ideas. You must reject the idea that humans can construct self-aware analects based upon awareness.

Now, Why is that? Because the argument JB1 is using says that the definitions from which an argument must be constructed can be ignored and have, on their own, no conditions that can be used to formulate complex ideas.

Now, maybe, in the ultimate and revelatory sense, he is right... maybe there can be no abstract meanings... maybe a car can go into its MPH rating, a man can eat himself, a daughter can conceive her mother, and a particle can go into a dimension (whether 'extra' or not)... But, in such a case, then JB1 has made an argument based upon non-logical revelation, not upon deductive reasoning, and, as the rules for this debate clearly say that the victorious argument is the one that is 'reasoned' best, not channelled in the most poetic style, it is self-evident that an argument, such as mine, which has continously relied upon using definitions to deduce arguments is the stronger one, and the one most deserving of your vote...

Sincerely, Jim

posted on Jul, 29 2003 @ 04:30 AM
First,I would like to thank Jim for this debate.

I'm going to keep this short.

The Universe is Interdimensional by it's very nature.
The Bermuda Triangle is part of the Universe.
What ever sub atomic matter passes through to enter an unperceivable Reality can conceivably be called a portal.

The Bermuda Triangle is an Interdimensional Portal.

OIMD has mentioned Airplanes in every post.It is an image he is keen to impose on your subconscious mind.
My argument is based soley on sub atomic matter passing into unseen dimensions.

I feel quite sorry for OIMD.Like everyone he read the debate title,thought he was fighting an unassailable position,and researched avidly reported phenomena in the Bermuda Triangle.
For his first 3 post he tried to impose that argument on me.

But the truth is that there is enough evidence to show that the Universe is Interdimensional by it's nature and there is enough evidence that Electrons pass into different realities or dimensions.So I had no need to argue about airplanes disappearing into a misty green haze.

Judging debates,something you now must do,is a tricky thing to do.

You must judge how you would have voted ,looking at our given positions,before we had written a word and then judge again after it is completed.

Before this debate started I would have said,basing my own judgement on the positions to debate that OIMD was 90% more likely to win.
Now I think that OIMD is only 40% more likely to win.Indicating a huge shift towards my position.

If you feel that the debate has seen such a shift towards my position you should vote for me.

If you feel on the other hand that I have made no inroads on OIMD position or that any inroads have been insignificant considering his position was so strong and he therefore must lose a little then you must in all fairness vote for OIMD.

I will not be rubutting.This is my final post.

It is now over to the ATS membership as far as I'm concerned.


posted on Jul, 29 2003 @ 06:38 PM
I have only mentioned airplanes because, in the fundamental sense that applies to this debate, a TBF Avenger, in regards to things like String theory, is really no different than a single electron. Yes, a TBF is made from electrons, protons, and neutrons... But that only emphasizes my point. These are things which are not only a part of the 'world'... They are things which can be measured. Under String theory, neither can go 'into' the hyperdimensional strings which make them (as a plan cannot fly into an electron, so thus an electron cannot go into a string), and under conventional sceince neither can transverse into a an abstract measurement.

JB1 is right when he says that you must vote based upon the skill of argument, here, and not upon what may appear to be the absolute truth (as even I would concede he had a harder argument to make)... But, if you re-read our arguments carefully, you will see that his 'inroads' are based on self-contradicting logic and the misapplication of various theories, while I have dealt with every challenge he has presented, often using his own thinking against him, in the process.

I now rest my case.

posted on Aug, 3 2003 @ 03:14 PM
By a vote of 7 to 9, Onlyinmydreams is declared the winner!

Onlyinmydreams will compete against David for the ATS Debate Tournament Championship!

new topics

top topics


log in