A Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I played by the rules.

I directly and indirectly mentioned science, amplituhedron, geometric shapes(images). And I was constructive and added to the topic.

I even hypothesized/speculated that all of space and matter is like mental images - which is what the amplituhedron should help discover, if it works well. (imo)

Do I have to state everything as a scientifically testable archetype to participate in this thread? How do you know what I believe is testable or not?




posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Your post took science and turned it into sermon. That's what I'm saying and what I'm politely asking you to cease doing in this thread. If you want to use science as a sermon, do it in a thread specifically intended for the purpose, please. Otherwise, it'll just derail the discussion. You know how it goes. Thanks.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


What I wrote was on topic. I can't help that you can't see it.

If you could stop derailing the topic by addressing me, and stay on topic by address my posts content about space and shapes within reality, that would be great. Thanks.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Sure, because this:


The answer is God/The Trinity, and the concept it is producing - which is faithful children. It takes faith to see this is the message of the Bible - but its there.

Father is consciousness/awareness - the thinker of thoughts - creator of concept - the image creator. Spirit is will/motion - the force of all - the motion giver - the will that manifests desire/concept, Son is the body - the Word - the structure - the image.

Is it just a coincidence that reality behaves as mental images and the thought process? What is the true boundary of space? Is it unlike the depths surrounding a mental image? What is the motion of reality? Is it unlike the invisible force you use to manifest mental images? And what are the structures of the universe? Are they unlike the body of mental images - all embodiments of a symbol/image/or idea by a formless structure? Isn't the stuff mental images are made of like the aether or structure that all forms are made of. What is that body?

Do not confuse this as me saying we are God, cause I'm not. I'm saying all that is is the direct result of God/Trinity - having been formed by their thought process. We are like the trinity in our thought process but not our faith and understanding. All is in his image and we are in his/our likeness. The his/our is The Trinity/God. We are just like him in our thought process - [good] concept producers, but our faith/understanding is broken - it is our source of corruption.


...This is science. Just not the kind we read about in any of our science books.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Dynamike
 


So essentially, everything that has happened, is happening, and will ever happen is exactly what's supposed to? No matter how horrible or senseless, it is meant to be?


fphoto.photoshelter.com...

Check out that image. I think that sums up our universe. That image is a vibrating string. As you can see the photograph took a picture with multiple strings that coalesce into one when not in motion. Our universe represents one of those thousands of strings seen in the image. You can follow the string's path from right to left or vice versa. If you choose a different path then you must choose a different string. I think this explains our universe quite well. If you want to choose a different outcome to a certain event, then you are choosing an entirely different string, or universe.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


The science in that is the way I described the trinity in relation to reality. I didn't use any physic equations but I did use scientific terms which represent geometric shapes/scientific concepts.

Granted, the understanding is not applicable to science today, but science is about the progression of knowledge. So maybe one day, science can see what I was trying to describe in both scientific, and spiritual terms, about the way everything appears to be trying to produce good concepts once they become aware of something new and then reproduce the [good] concepts in others.

If you ask me, science is all about concept reproduction - and everything else is as well. So its on topic whether you dislike it or not.

You think it's a [bad] concept to speak of God and science so you want to reproduce your [good] concept in me? No thanks.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Dynamike
 


M-theory, then? An infinite number of universe all hinging on an infinite number of possible events both vast and minute? Which means every eventuality has already happened...but that's not to say that we can predict which universe we are in at any given time.
edit on 25-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   

trollz
I'm not gonna pretend I understand quantum physics, but from what I read, this seems like a very interesting development. I'd be interested in seeing responses from other members, especially ones who are knowledgeable with this sort of thing.


I think I'll say Wibble Wobble wib ablle worble wiboble wabele belewel wib.

Because clearly my previous post which imparted some of the knowledge you requested in your op has fallen on deaf ears.

Shame really.... As I have learned so much over the years about this all encompassing topic. I wonder if this is how it feels to grow old and be treated as irrelevant??

Peace,

Korg.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Your post took science and turned it into sermon. That's what I'm saying and what I'm politely asking you to cease doing in this thread. If you want to use science as a sermon, do it in a thread specifically intended for the purpose, please. Otherwise, it'll just derail the discussion. You know how it goes. Thanks.


Can you quit pretending to be a mod and stop derailing this thread?

To OP, thanks for posting this. Really interesting stuff, even though I have to keep using google to keep up with the discussion. This is a learning process for me.

Also thanks Dynamike for helping us layman out here.
edit on 25-9-2013 by lucidclouds because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


M-theory is relevant to string theory, it merely expounds upon it. If string theory is a photon, then M-theory is a star.

Most people like to use the term "infinite possibilities." But I am hesitant to place infinite into that idea. And the reason is similar to placing a vehicle in the middle of the united states and filling up the gas tank and saying, "well we can go to an infinite number of locations." But in reality, you can go to many locations but eventually you will run out of gas.

There are limitations to the location of any given particle at any given time.



top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join