Higgs Boson Particle May Spell Doom For the Universe

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 23 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


All I know is that if you have to invent an impossible "always" of any kind, just to make your theory work, then you're better off spending that creativity and effort on a new theory. No theory should need the invention of impossible "always" things in order to not contradict themselves.


Yea well. Do you think mass exists? What is it? How does it exist? What caused it to exist?


Look at H2O molecules as they move around - under a microscope, I suppose. Maybe you can fit two or three within the entire field of view, and there's plenty of room between them. Doesn't look solid. Then you back it up - way up - like 200 feet up and there's a pond where those water molecules were, and it looks pretty much like a "mass" as it lays there and reflects the sky behind you.

Mass is defined by the perception interpretation of the human being defining it. All of material existence is a matter of perspective and relative context. Does mass exist? Yeah, it does. What causes it to exist? The confluence of the quantum of action, holon structure, and the existential imperative that is Identity survival.

No Higgs Field required.



Can you post a real photo of an h20 molecule if you can find one.


If I could find one, I suppose that I could.


Well the mystery of mass is really the mystery of "stuff". Where the heck did all this real stuff come from and why is there so much of it. 5 gram iron ball has less mass then a 10 gram iron ball because the 10 gram iron ball has twice as many atoms? Its the mystery of where the tiniest stuff, as stable as it is, gets/got its energy level from/mass. The mystery of mass is the mystery of the quantity of the universe, where it all comes from and how it was made to exist.


If you want to understand mass, then you need to try to walk from one side of a superhighway to the other side during rush hour traffic, as the cars are zipping by at 65 mph. Of course, you wouldn't make it into the middle of the very first lane. This is because that rush hour traffic - as far as your ability to cross it is concerned - is a solid mass of material that can't be penetrated. Of course, if you're inside one of the cars, it's not a solid mass at all, but then that's got everything to do with point of perspective, and how that mass of traffic is being viewed.

In the view of quantum mechanics researchers, particles "become" waves, but in reality they actually don't change at all. The point of perspective changes, and that's the only thing that changes.

You have to remember that we humans, on this here planet, act as if we get the truth about reality handed to us by extra-normal knowledge authorities, but that's just not true. We make determinations and state the facts of reality as a result of looking, and testing, and trying to make sense of what we see and what our tests indicate. And when I say "we", I mean a very small percentage of people who have never seen the wisdom of taking everything that's been "seen" and "tested" and comparing and contrasting and eliminating the contradictions, to really get a good overview of where all this "science" agrees and disagrees with itself as a whole.

And that sort of siloed focus on tiny slices of reality (to the general dismissal of the rest of reality in most cases) has only been allowed to proceed for a few hundred years. Before that, swimming through huge floods of irresponsible sewage was the way that the educated scholar examined reality. No one even knew enough to realize that nothing that was stated as fact made any sense whatsoever.

This is very new ground that is now finally being turned. I have no illusions about any of this.
edit on 2/23/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


ok that traffic analogy is good... atoms and subatomic particles of atoms can be seen like moving quantities that from our perception appear solid.. are you suggesting mass is an illusion and nothing exists?



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by NorEaster
 


ok that traffic analogy is good... atoms and subatomic particles of atoms can be seen like moving quantities that from our perception appear solid.. are you suggesting mass is an illusion and nothing exists?


Mass exists, but it's a confluence. The only concrete physical existence (meaning that it is immutable and solid in consistency and physical structure) is fact cluster sets of information. Confluences exist. They just don't persist as concrete and unchanged. Mass is a perception interpretation of an activity confluence that's made by the perceiving human mind. That's not surprising, though. The human brain is also an activity confluence, and so is every bit of the human material body. We tend to project how we view ourselves upon everything else that seems similar to us, and we view ourselves as solid and materially concrete.

Like I said, the basic structure of physical existence - while consisting of well-known and readily available components - is radically different than (it seems) anyone has proposed, if published papers are any indication. It's hard for me to believe that no one's figured this out yet, but after 5 years of searching for anything even remotely similar in approach or even raw concept, it might just be true that what I've discovered is completely unique. And that'd be just nuts, since it's extremely simple and easy to prove.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Confluences exist. They just don't persist as concrete and unchanged. Mass is a perception interpretation of an activity confluence that's made by the perceiving human mind. That's not surprising, though. The human brain is also an activity confluence, and so is every bit of the human material body. We tend to project how we view ourselves upon everything else that seems similar to us, and we view ourselves as solid and materially concrete.



Ok we dont persist for ever, but for the time we are alive are we solid and materially concrete? dropping a block of concrete on my foot, the force of the mass of that concrete is an illusion? I really dont get what you are saying. Protons are thought to be stable for hundreds of billions of years. Most every structure in this universal system is composed of fundamental particles and a limited number of atoms. These atoms can combine and do all sorts of things given their physical relations to one another the quantity of them in a particular place, what is surrounding them, and other details of energy and momentum. You are saying, yes nature created all these atoms, so the emergent things the atoms made can exist for sometime? What the heck are you saying, the momentary emergent phenomena is the prize possession of the universe, because life is an emergent phenomena and we are life and its nice to exist? So taking simple building blocks and swirling them around for long periods of time can create novel emergent phenomena? If this is anywhere near what you are saying, the simple way to put it (which is a notion I am drawn towards believing to be very possibly true); The reason/purpose of the universe, is to produce what we know of as life. ( not to say our life is most important, just saying what we know of as life, in regards to conscious, aware, alive, individual .. compared to a rock or gas for example)





 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join