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.

 

Infinity a big mistake ?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 09:22 PM
link   
www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk...


Here, check this out and make up your own mind about what it is.




posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
You can’t think of infinity as a place because you could never be there unless you were not there. Since it has no beginning or end then it has no present ether because it still has not started so it is just there eternally never to begin or end. No mater what form you apply it to.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 09:53 PM
link   
math is science.
he was both a scientist and a mathemitician.
how can u tell me Einstein was not a scientist when he tried to explain physics?
does this not imply he was both a scientist and a mathemitician at the same time?
physics and matter where his problem, but he tried explaining it thru math.
i believe i was right when i called him a scientist, for he was not trying to tell us that x=2 if 4x=8.........



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   
anikah hit it.
don't forget about the infinately small.
personally i do not believe in science, or God.
i don't believe in space.
i don't believe somone created space.
i believe everything is just everything.
and even math has it's faults... if u believe we are a calculation of math/possibilities(leading you to believe chance and infinite possibilites DO take place(even our thoughts ain't really ours)- and everything is prewritten)... then i can explain it like this... of all the possibilities, it would have to be concluded that one equation say everything that is, was, and ever will be, is as is FOREVER.
whilst another equation would say everything that is, was, and ever will be NEVER exists(never started or ended, just never was)... forever....

...that is a contradiction.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   
i would like some people to watch the full 3 hours of this video. yes, three hours is long, and u won't like most of the first hour(unconvincing). but as expected, at the second hour you'll start to understand and believe. the first hour is unconvincing because it is the hour which releases information that will be talked about and its necessary to watch it. then the second and third hour explain and debunk some of the things talked about in the first hour.
here is the link...
ENJOY!
(average person can comprehend what they are talking about, it's pretty much in layman's terms)

www.pbs.org...



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by chibidai_rrr
i can only say that, whils't math is not perfect, it is just part of reality.
....

its all in ur head and im going to free us soon. everything is a part of everything. we don't even need our bodies if we free our mind.


1. Reality as in how we percieve the true reality? or what?

2. What do you mean "im going to free us soon"?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 12:17 AM
link   
If you have Google Video, you can search for "elegant universe" and it should bring up a 35 second commercial with related links on the right side with all 3 episodes (or at least it use to).

The upside is that you don't have to load up all 10 mini-episodes per hour (30 transitions). Plus, you can make the video full screen. This is one of the first good uses I've found of Google Video.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by albie
Infinity has nothing to do with maths or philosophy.


What is an asymptote?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Why would I want to watch a video about scientific bluster? These nerdy twits think they know so much, trying to get one past us about particles manifesting spontaneously.

NO I WON'T SHUT UP ABOUT IT!


I'll take common sense over w4nk maths anyday.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 04:14 AM
link   
If you looped the series of numbers then that would equate to a finite string with no beginning as well as no end, where ever you started would be the beginning as well as the end of the string sequence - just a thought



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by albie
Why would I want to watch a video about scientific bluster? These nerdy twits think they know so much, trying to get one past us about particles manifesting spontaneously.

NO I WON'T SHUT UP ABOUT IT!


I'll take common sense over w4nk maths anyday.


look albie , common sense doesn't work often. 1000 years ago it was a common sense to say that the earth is flat. when it was discovered later that earth is spherical it was against common sense.

Scientists make conclusions from equations that are derived from previously proved facts. the conclusions don't always follow common sense , In fact you cannot define common sense. Common sense is usually based on well known facts, so if new facts are proven they will become common sense after some time.

Fictional ideas of the present could be trivial facts in the future. And believe me REALITY IS STRRANGER THAN FICTION.


[edit on 14-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]

[edit on 14-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Oh, please! Here he is with his flat earth story! Please save us from cliche.

Actually, most people thought the world was round in those days.It's a common misconception that only he thought so. Galileo was arrested for suggesting the earth moved around the sun.

It's so simple for you to compare flat earths with reality manifesting from nothing, isn't it.


Tell me, when was the last time something popped into existence, right in your living room?

And please don't tell me it happens on a sub atomic level. The evidence is flawed. Sadly, the scientific brigade are so irked by the God mob that they feel they have to exaggerate their claims.

Please think. Please ponder how actually flimsy quantum mechanics is. Basing your beliefs on it is like believeing the Bible.




posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by albie
It's so simple for you to compare flat earths with reality manifesting from nothing, isn't it.



something appearing from nowhere is very possible in higher dimensional universe, for example if we live in 5d universe (4 dimensions for place and 1 dimension for time) then in our 4d world (3 dimensions for place and 1 for time) things will appear from nowhere (ex. 5d object passing through our 4d world). Now scientists are trying to unify physics forces in Super String Theory, they found that one possible solution is through 11-dimentional universe !!!



Additional dimensions
Theories such as string theory predict that the space we live in has in fact many more dimensions (frequently 10, 11 or 26), but that the universe measured along these additional dimensions is subatomic in size. As a result, we perceive only the three spatial dimensions that have macroscopic size.
en.wikipedia.org...



Originally posted by albie
Tell me, when was the last time something popped into existence, right in your living room?


I want to mention that scientists considered a theory of Everything came from Nothing. The Big Bang started from a point of concentrated matter, the size of that point actually goes to nothingness. in black holes matter get concentrated and goes back to nothingness. It could be possible that nothingness is just a state of infinite pure energy that is concentrated in 0-dimentional point.


Please before you argue something complicated like : quantum physics or Super String Theory go and educate yourself about them first. Try to back up your ideas with some knowledge.




[edit on 14-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Do not patronise me. String theory is rubbish. How is a string another dimension? More exaggerated bull.

You don't even know what I mean, when I say 'nothing'. Do you? You have no concept of the true depths of that notion. Because you are fooled by science.

Now go back and make sure you've got all your facts about Galileo right, won't you. There's a good boy.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:22 AM
link   
albie

don't make it hard on your self , don't trust science if you want, go and dismiss math and physics as you wish. go and call efforts of hundreds of scientists Rubbish if you like...

I think you are one of the people who still believe that earth is flat



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   
Maths and physics are fine, until you get to the point where reality blurs with unreality. As I'm discussing with the Produkt on the other thread, true nothingness cannot spawn anything, because it is unreal.

Quantum nothingness is not true nothingness. Hence they have no right to suggest that the universe's genesis from nothing...is...


OH SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Albie, you want a better common sense answer?

Look way back to the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.

Now Socrates, my good buddy, had his socratic method of figuring things out with common sense - and it worked very well for metaphysics, spirituality, and other unprovables.

However, as time went by, Plato and Aristotle started using it for science - trying to figure out physics with metaphysics.

It set us back for a thousand or more years.

They logically deduced that matter was made of the elements; Fire, Water, Earth, and Air. Every thing in the world was made from some kind of mix of these things (steam, for example, was Water and Fire). And to some extent, it was provable. Their experiments could be replicated over and over again.

However, it also made scientists start to look for things that weren't there. They looked for "the element of life". There was the popular trying to turn common metals into gold.

But people could keep adding fire and water together in order to make steam. People could keep finding limestone on ocean fronts. It looked like it made sense.

Now we know that it's made of molecules and atoms. Common Sense was wrong.

And the more we look, the more we see that Common Sense continues to be wrong! As stated, the earth is not flat. The Sun does not go around the earth. Dying crops does not mean a which cast a spell on them. Human beings are made out of cells and organizations of smaller creatures. The earth is more than a few dozen thousand years old. Creatures evolved instead of simply popping into existance. The universe is in a state of motion, and is not static as God created it. AIDS is not a homosexual disease.

The list of commonly held beliefs that were, or are, false is huge! It is not up to you, albie, to decide that science is some strange new fade.

How can you possibly say "I won't believe those science lies!". Where is the grounding in this? You're taking it like it's some conspiracy, like it's brain-washing, or like it's an occultish religion. Why? Why do you distrust scientific facts? Where would we be without science?

And accepting science does not make you close-minded either. It is many scientist's goal to find the connection between science and god - between what they believe, and what they can truthfully observe to be.

Math sometimes is a bit messed up - but it always holds true. The only time math does not hold true is when there is a user error - when we do the math wrong. Math helped Quantum Physics, and predicted "Quantum Tunnelling". It's the idea that something can pass through something else if the electrons are aligned in the correct pattern (and, observably, two objects occupy the same space at the same time, even though they're off by a massively tiny amount).

And we use Quantum Tunnelling! It's not pseudo-science - it has real-world applications! Tunnelling Electron Microscopes use it to literally peer "inside" something (albiet, not very far - by it's own nature, Quantum Tunnelling is a result of probabilities... and so the more mass you're "tunnelling" through, the better chance that you'll hit something).

However, in theory, Quantum Tunnelling COULD occur at a real-life level! I could slam my hand down on a table, and my hand could go right through it. The chances against it are ASTRONOMICAL to say the least - but in theory, it could happen.

So why do you distrust science? Why do you distrust math? What grounds do you stand on there? Why are you so blind and so ignorant as to not watch some of the easily accesible science-documentary movies that have been suggested?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Yes, yes, yes, I'm all thick and primitive while you have quarks and mesons.

You still can't make something from nothing. I don't care what you say. Particles may appear to manifest and demanifest, but that doesn't prove anything major.

Some scientists believe that they emanate from other dimensions. Which is more likely. Jumping to conclusions may well make quantum nerds famous and sell nerdy magazines, but let's face it...early days yet.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   


Some scientists believe that they emanate from other dimensions. Which is more likely.


Lol, just like some people say god's in another dimension ... If these particle's emanate from another dimension, then in that dimension, where did those particles come from? Like you said, can't get something from nothing right? Or, perhaps those particle's in the other dimension also came from another dimension different from it ad infinitum? Maybe ... but that's still leaving the door wide open as to where and how the first particles came from and leaving an infinite amount of possibilities as quantum mechanics suggest's. Strange universe we live in huh?



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 10:13 AM
link   
This might be off topic but...


Originally posted by Frosty
Einstein was a mathematician.

Please, he wasnt a mathematician!


Originally posted by chibidai_rrr
he was both a scientist and a mathemitician.

Abso-freaking-lutely-NOT. He was a physicist and scientist but lacked the high level mathematical knowledge to pull this off. Most phycists face difficulties when encountered with complex mathematical problems, Mathematicians on the other hand have no problem adapting to physics( real life application of math)


physics and matter where his problem, but he tried explaining it thru math.
i believe i was right when i called him a scientist, for he was not trying to tell us that x=2 if 4x=8.........

He tried his best explaining it thru the math that he couldnt formulate.

The German mathematician under Guass, Riemann, had solved problems that Gauss had wondered about for his whole life! Riemann's system of "differential geometry" made it possible to measure any curved surface. He laid the foundation for Einstein's relativity. Also check out some of Jules Henri Poincare's mathematics. Too bad Poincare did not publish before Einstein.


Poincaré sketched a preliminary version of the special theory of relativity and stated that the velocity of light is a limit velocity and that mass depends on speed. He formulated the principle of relativity, according to which no mechanical or electromagnetic experiment can discriminate between a state of uniform motion and a state of rest, and he derived the Lorentz transformation

www.iep.utm.edu...

Its also too bad that Riemannian Geometry never was able to reach its potential because of the untimely death of Riemann. Maybe we wouldnt really have needed Einstein at all.
I just wanna point out that I do respect Einstein a lot. I just have a problem with not giving credit where its due.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join