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.

 

Theory of predicting everything past and future.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Before answering plaese assume that-
1.there is no god or non matter /energy force in the universe.
2.Time travel isnt possible

Well I as just thinking if all matter and energy reacted in the same way under the same conditions would it be possible to predict everything.
I mean youd need to know how every single molecule in existance was and all the energy and a powerful enough computer.

Also if the bi bang is correct along wiht the big crunch theory wuld it be possible at that moent to know everthing in the entire universe adn to be able to change it so that it would go the way you want it.

Just an idea


Mod Edit: title only.

[edit on 24-7-2005 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle pretty much rules this out. There is no way of predicting the location of even a single particle with a definite determination in either the future or the past.

[edit on 24/7/05 by Strodyn]



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I don't think it is possible. The concept of calculating the presice location/resting place of every particle of an exploding sun would also rule it out.

As far as "Knowing" everything in the universe - I don't think anyone has entertained the idea that the universe is/could be a large computer.

[edit on 7/24/2005 by dancer]



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by dancer
As far as "Knowing" everything in the universe - I don't think anyone has entertained the idea that the universe is/could be a large computer.


That sounds like the matrix in a way.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Sure does now that you mention it....

Although I was refering to .......... Er.... It does sond a little too much like the Matrix or "The 13th Floor" uh...boy



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   
After I read Stephen Hawkings universe in a nutshell, the chapter about the holographic nature of the universe. I really thought long and hard about the matrix. like Whats outside the hologram. What If we are just a computer simulation for some greater bieng.

Another interesting tie in is Terrence mckennas timewave zero and his theory that perhapse god exists not at the beginning of the universe but at the end and we are bieng pulled forward through time towards the singularity of exponentially increasing novelty.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by dancer
Sure does now that you mention it....
Although I was refering to .......... Er.... It does sond a little too much like the Matrix or "The 13th Floor" uh...boy

Actually, I was thinking more like Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, when the mega-computer "Deep Thought" designed the Earth to be a bio-matrixed computer to run a 10 Million Year Program to dechipher the Ultimate question of Life, the Universe & Everything for which the answer is 42.


Ummm...That "Uncertainy Principle" would probably be more widely known as "Chaos Theory", wouldn't it?


[edit on 25-7-2005 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:24 PM
link   
This relates exaclty to the Hitchhiker's Guide. There's a machine that removes your soul by deducing the entire universe from a piece of angel cake, showing you your insignificance.

Basically, long before Heisenberg is a problem for you computing power will be. There's no way to calculate an infinite series of events, and your computer won't even be able to do an infinitesimal amount of the work. And that's not to mention what the effects of computing will do.

In short, no.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   
If you could work out pi then thats an achievement in its self. You would also have to calculate the weight, the origin, the surface area of each particle and the time relationships and the relationship to the rest of the universe plus thousands of different factors in between. So its quite difficult without God's help.

[edit on 25-7-2005 by The time lord]



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
This relates exaclty to the Hitchhiker's Guide. There's a machine that removes your soul by deducing the entire universe from a piece of angel cake, showing you your insignificance.

Oh yeah, I'd nearly forgotten about the "Ultimate Perspective" device...The one that Beeblebrox got into...Which in itself was part of a computer-based virtual reality that Beeblebrox unwittingly stumbled into.


Originally posted by The time lord
...So its quite difficult without God's help.

Yeah...Even the best scientists working under the most controlled conditions can't even be absolutely certain of what they're observing. But I think that the ultimate goal of science is to figure out how God did it in the first place. Even though science can be as full of dogma & supposition-taken-as-fact as any religion I've ever studied...The best scientists still never lose sight of God's wonders when they take a close look at one of them.

Even Albert Einstein was asked a question (And I can only paraphrase here): How did he (Einstein) figure out all of his stupendous theories.
Answer: I sit back & ask myself, "If I were God, how would I have done this?"

And then I remember that Einstein failed math...


[edit on 25-7-2005 by MidnightDStroyer]


xu

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I will quote myself from this thread which I was talking about the exact same thing not 10 days ago.


destiny already exists scientifically, without the need of a religion or prediction, the same casues always creates the same outcome, however keep in mind that the causes and their effects are infinite. even if you try to calculate the future in a sterile lab environment there are infinite effects which you wouldnt be aware of their existence. so we have a long way to go (cpu power) before we can actually see the future or destiny as some call it.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
I find that scientists are acceping that God has had a hand in making our universe tick as they observe the details more closely and find out that design of cells and the fractal concepts and laws of the universe is more than coincidence. But at the same time priests are falling away as they demand more proof of their faith in todays world. Its not happening in major numbers but the trend is growing in that direction, its the highly educated people now that see the fingerprints of Gods design and the normal obsever takes for granted what TV throws at them and find it difficult to accept God. Every body has a view and opinion and the more free we are to decide on our perceptions of the world the more legitimate their faith or view can be. Its not as clean cut between Biblical faith and science as people may think, each side ups its level, some theories support each other some inspire each other.

[edit on 25-7-2005 by The time lord]



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by The time lord
I find that scientists are acceping that God has had a hand in making our universe tick as they observe the details more closely and find out that design of cells and the fractal concepts and laws of the universe is more than coincidence. But at the same time priests are falling away as they demand more proof of their faith in todays world. Its not happening in major numbers but the trend is growing in that direction, its the highly educated people now that see the fingerprints of Gods design and the normal obsever takes for granted what TV throws at them and find it difficult to accept God. Every body has a view and opinion and the more free we are to decide on our perceptions of the world the more legitimate their faith or view can be. Its not as clean cut between Biblical faith and science as people may think, each side ups its level, some theories support each other some inspire each other.

[edit on 25-7-2005 by The time lord]


You must have looked pretty hard to find those "scientists". And I agree everyone has notions about things, but a truly objective scientist does not believe in a god, and is always looking for the buildup of logic to explain everything around them.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Sometimes it takes more belief than others to believe in God as it is as easy for a priest to give up because they need more proof for God to exist.

If you see enough books or you surround your self in religion then you will see these people exist who once were completely scientific and found faith in God and use science to disprove science and give the Bible a scientific approach to how things fit in. Its not just scientists but archaeologists and historians who have come to accept the word of God as they reaseach and combine their understanding with creation and history. The same again will apply to people who turn away.

I never looked for these scientists or ex-scientists they sort of came to me in my research.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by xu
I will quote myself from this thread which I was talking about the exact same thing not 10 days ago.


destiny already exists scientifically, without the need of a religion or prediction, the same casues always creates the same outcome, however keep in mind that the causes and their effects are infinite. even if you try to calculate the future in a sterile lab environment there are infinite effects which you wouldnt be aware of their existence. so we have a long way to go (cpu power) before we can actually see the future or destiny as some call it.


THis is what I meant but first you have to assume there is no god and you have a infinitly powerful computer adn that sopmehow you haveknowledge of where every particle/energy is in the universe(im not discussin if this is possible) then if from all these you could work out everything pst and future.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Predicting everything?

All things must be born and must die. There. Life goes on regardless of your puny existence. Stand on a high mountaintop at night and think of your limited days on this planet.

Life is a genetic lottey. Predicting things is just stating the inevitable.

Being unborn is what death is.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 01:50 AM
link   
When an ordinary star explodes in what we call a supernova, that exploding star, which has burned off most of it's matter, and which has lost the gravity needed to hold it's great mass together, due to it's shrinking and eventual collapse, it explodes in a sky shattering explosion, which, for a brief time, maybe a few standard earth weeks, shines brighter than all the suns in the heaven.

This colossal star death is what we refer to as a supernova. The ones we see from our earthly perspectve have, in actuality, occurred many many eons ago. The light from these dying stars takes possibly thousands, even millions, of years to reach us.

Basically when we look out on the starry night, we are seeing our corner of the galaxy as it was many years ago. Space is so vast that our fragile eggshell minds cannot begin to comprehend it.



posted on Jul, 26 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Your idea has been contemplated since the days of Newton..........its known as determinism or classical physics............in that if you knew everything about anything regarding matter,energy,time and space that you could predict all future cause and effects............

However, subatomic discovery of indeterminism in quatum realities has dispelled all efforts to conceive of a predictable or classical interpretation of the universe........

Einsteins famous through experiment debates with Neils Bohr about the strangness and ramdom fluctuations of a granual reality in quatum physics lead to Einsteins famous quote "God does not play dice with the universe"...........of course he was never able to overturn the quantum perceptions in his debates with Bohr and later had to recant such statement but refused to accept it being true til the day he died.....

....Ironically, Einstein's paper on the corpusel nature of light was a catalyst for the entry of quantum physics..............a theory he struggled all his life to accept..........in a way Einstein was the last of the classical physicts that would believe is such an idea that you have proposed with this thread subject.......

But Einstein lacked the technology of the digital age to understand the microscopic aspects of reality within the universe.................as a result classic determination in physics has gone the route of the buggy whip.........

Unfortunately the public in general has little grasp of our universe or its reality through the discoveries confirming the nature of quatum physics........its such a strange and unusual reality that one of its founders, Bohr stated......."if you think you understand quantum physics........then you don't really understand it at all.........."

If you would like to read a good book on that subject check out

"Elegent Universe" Greene is the author I think...............)

Hope this helps...........



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 06:20 AM
link   
.
On a macro scale the Universe is a complex interaction of many (infinite?) gravity waves.
Essentially an undulating surface/film.

I was watching a geology program about how waves in deep ocean have only limited level, and only rise to their shoreline heights as they come close to land.

The Indian ocean Tsunami was only a long mound a couple of meters high in the deep ocean, but rose to a hundred feet when it came on-shore in many places.

I was thinking the future might be determinable this way by calculating the deep wave patterns and knowing the local shoreline topography you could, with study and effort, be able to give a quite accurate estimate of the effects of only subtlely apparent aspects of the deep.

Sort of like looking at that optical illusion lettering that looks like a bunch of lines side by side till you hold it at an angle to foreshorten it and it appears as recognizable lettering.

I don't know, though, how you can detect gravity waves, since everything [light, matter] stretches and breathes with them.

Off topic question: I was wondering what happens to light rays as the go over/down the stretch/arc of the warp of a stretched space gravity well? Does a high frequency blue light wave get stretched to red [because it has to travel a longer distance], or is all time slightly slowed in the gravity well?

Since we operate at the macro scale of the Universe, perhaps the individual random quantum events, due the the law of large numbers essentially have zero effect. In other words we only for our needs need to look at the macro scale, the hyper micro scale will take care of itself.

In short we are looking for the local intense effects of subtle but powerful things/waves that have come at us from a distance.

Sort of like the future exists and is calculable as some kind of translation function.
We can look for the big things that come at us from any direction. It would probably be counter productive to seek out every single detail.

Usually what we want to know is things will change gradually, and when there will be major disruptions in the current shape of the Universe. Sort of like you might be able to get some kind of fuzzy/approximate image of what was to come. Fine detail might not be discernable but the general outline might be viewable.

Absolute detail is probably for the most part unnecessary. We need the level of abstraction that affects and is useful to us.

edit: spelling

[edit on 27-7-2005 by slank]



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I dont think some of you understand what im saying:
Quantum physics aparently screws up my idea.
Well I dont think it does becasue yes its real complicated and seems to be completly random, but so did the waether a couple of hundred years ago, its just we dont understadn the universe enough yet.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join