It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kinda kurious
I also imagine that me and Soledad O'Brien from CNN are involved in an extra-marital affair since we both enjoy "dress-up" during romantic encounters wearing only stilts and oven mitts. (Sorry to be kinky, but the oven mitts must be left handed and always point west.)
Originally posted by RedDragon
You'd be right if everything was random. However, EVERYTHING would have to be random. If there is just one thing in the universe that's not random, then you're wrong.
There are things that aren't random such as relativity physics. Matter not on the quantum scale behaves predictably. Unpredictable matter on the quantum scale is bound by larger predicable systems therefor it is guided by predictable systems into unpredictable paths. This means that while the paths are random, they're constrained even as time approaches infinity.
This may be hard to understand for people with lower IQs because it's pretty abstract.
But imagine an X-Y plane. Now, draw 2 horizontal lines at y=2 and y=-2. Consider them to be infinitely powerful forces. Now, imagine a particle in between the two horizontal lines that moves in a random path for an infinite amount of time. Over this infinite time interval, it will touch every point between y=2 and y=-2. However, because y=2 and y=-2 are infinitely powerful forces, it can never go past them. Thus, even as time approaches infinity, the particle will never touch any points beyond them such as any points @ y=3.
Laws of physics can't be broken. Since matter on a large scale is predictable, it's governed by non-random laws of physics. This is similar to the constraints that were y=2 and y=-2. Thus, there are events that are constrained to these laws.
So, it's impossible for everything to happen. What you're saying isn't possible.
Originally posted by Irishwolf
But wouldn't this also raise the question of nothingness and the fact that I can imagine every event not happening.
How does that fit into your theory. Has and will everything and nothing and the opposite happen. Seems kind of pointless if you ask me. Like the shrodingers cat thing. The particles both exist for both situations but only one of them happens when it is observed. Its a good theory but not very practical.
If I imagine that something never has existed and never will and someone else imagines that the same thing does exist what happens then? Does the universe just implode or something?
Originally posted by WanderingParadox
Reading this, I came to wonder, as my enigmatic mental capacity suggested as an image, of a giant galaxy eating mass of darkness. Non-visible, however, it devours the galaxies and grows from it. Can that still be considered plausible? If it was, would it not signify we'd notice something of that sort? Yes, our universe is dubbed "infinite", however, if it's expanding continuously how could it be? Anywho, the concept of this theory seems correct, but, it just has me iffy on the whole thing.
Originally posted by charlyv
The original post in this thread exposes an absolute truth.
All it needs is a common factor, to avoid the endless scenarios that are all as valid as any other.
That factor comes from a quote by Dr. James Burke (of "Connections" fame. A most incredible television science series.)
On one of his programs, over 10 years ago, he made the most profound statement:
"The world is the way it is , because if it was not, you would not be here to contemplate or observe it. "
Roll this beauty of verse around in your head a few times.
It implies that anything not observed, or 'contemplated' does not really exist, and anything contemplated can, and does exist once we observe it. We therefore, create our own reality by merely existing in this time and space. Everything is a possibility.
Strong anthropic principle (SAP) (Carter): "the Universe (and hence the fundamental parameters on which it depends) must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage. To paraphrase Descartes, cogito ergo mundus talis est."
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics is the unresolved problem of how (or if) wavefunction collapse occurs. The inability to observe this process directly has given rise to different interpretations of quantum mechanics, and poses a key set of questions that each interpretation must answer. The wavefunction in quantum mechanics evolves according to the Schrödinger equation into a linear superposition of different states, but actual measurements always find the physical system in a definite state. Any future evolution is based on the state the system was discovered to be in when the measurement was made, meaning that the measurement "did something" to the process under examination. Whatever that "something" may be does not appear to be explained by the basic theory.
Originally posted by uk alienhunter
reply to post by The Parallelogram
Anything u think of does actually exist..... but not in the same way as some people on here would lead u to believe.. the existence of the thoughts are alive and well in your MINDS EYE the holographic image in your head... That is the extent of thier existence... and that is as valid existance as someting physical....
[edit on 23-10-2009 by uk alienhunter]