Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #645726 > unrolled thread
| Started by | alal65536@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-08-13 09:45 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-08-18 08:14 -0700 |
| Articles | 12 on this page of 72 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 09:45 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 12:20 -0500
Re: Why is there something? poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-08-19 00:11 -0700
Re: Why is there something? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 10:22 -0700
Re: Why is there something? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-13 12:07 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 11:20 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 12:23 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-13 14:07 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 22:27 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-14 11:46 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 11:45 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 13:17 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-15 13:48 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:27 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:33 -0700
Re: Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 13:56 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 16:21 -0500
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:05 -0500
Re: Why is there something? alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-14 00:06 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:33 +0000
Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 05:00 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 12:38 +0000
Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 05:42 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 06:27 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 08:44 -0500
Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 19:06 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 13:00 -0500
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 17:55 -0400
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 16:17 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 23:36 +0000
Re: Why is there something? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:38 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 00:54 +0000
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:36 -0400
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-15 18:56 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 03:34 +0000
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 16:40 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 01:04 +0000
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 21:54 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 02:28 +0000
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:24 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:52 -0700
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:34 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-15 21:25 -0500
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-16 16:38 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 03:34 +0000
Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 08:14 -0700
Re: Why is there something? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:24 -0400
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 01:30 +0000
Re: Why is there something? Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-14 07:45 -0500
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-13 22:28 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:04 -0500
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. alal65536@gmail.com - 2017-08-13 17:25 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-13 21:02 -0500
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. KCIR2 <rick_s7777777@yahoo.ca> - 2017-08-14 07:17 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 19:13 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 18:00 -0400
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:38 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 19:29 -0400
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:37 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:41 -0400
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 18:56 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 17:41 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 21:33 -0400
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 18:53 -0700
Re: Why is there something? KCIR2 <rick_s7777777@yahoo.ca> - 2017-08-13 17:36 -0700
Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2017-08-14 10:02 +0000
Re: Why is there something? "Anthony Zen Pride Week" <sender@hotmail.com> - 2017-08-16 07:13 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-16 07:29 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-16 17:30 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 20:42 -0700
Re: Why is there something? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-17 22:49 -0700
Re: Why is there something? Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 08:14 -0700
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-15 18:56 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. |
| Message-ID | <79ce4db3-7806-4001-ab21-a73528e52c4e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646119 |
On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 11:41:24 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > On 8/15/2017 8:37 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 9:29:44 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > >> On 8/15/2017 6:38 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:00:52 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > >>>> On 8/14/2017 10:13 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 12:17:36 AM UTC+10, KCIR2 wrote: > >>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 1:25:27 AM UTC+1, alal...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+5:30, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >>>>>>>> I meant: The future is just as fixed as the past. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't believe that time is a dimension, or that the future is fixed. According to QM, events are random. The human mind is free to create the future. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Abhinav Lal > >>>>>>> Writer & Investor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree with you to a certain extent. > >>>>>> There is no such thing as random but the level of complexity so great that it appears random. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, there is such a thing as random. > >>>> > >>>> Rolf doesn't believe in random, Banjo. He says the universe is big > >>>> machine god wound up and now it runs. > >>> > >>> Fair enough, and a bigger version of my call centre simulator PACT. Which made > >>> a major part of my living in Australia. However in that program I used random > >>> number generation algorithms following Knuth. Given a seed there can be a > >>> particular random number sequence as all know. > >> > >> Algorithms do not generate random numbers. Hey, you know I went to > >> school with Knuth. He never mentioned PACT to me. > > > > Okay they generate pseudo random number sequences. > > When they take in external inputs then it is the equivalent of a natural > > random process. > > PACT took in 64000 external variables. Could take in more. > > I made it to simulate the teletraffic performances of complex call centre > > network, the routing strategies, all leading to reducing call wait time and > > adjust staffing and other matters. > > That was back in 1995. It was a separate application, stand alone, and was a > > showpiece project for many years. > > Yeah, Pseudorandom good enough for traffic simulation. Lots of call > centers (centres) could use improvement...even now. If you want random you got to shake something.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-15 17:41 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. |
| Message-ID | <c79ec5ed-4d0c-4c81-a43c-03cf34d45f49@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646087 |
On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 9:29:44 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > On 8/15/2017 6:38 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:00:52 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > >> On 8/14/2017 10:13 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 12:17:36 AM UTC+10, KCIR2 wrote: > >>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 1:25:27 AM UTC+1, alal...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+5:30, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >>>>>> I meant: The future is just as fixed as the past. > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't believe that time is a dimension, or that the future is fixed. According to QM, events are random. The human mind is free to create the future. > >>>>> > >>>>> Abhinav Lal > >>>>> Writer & Investor > >>>> > >>>> I agree with you to a certain extent. > >>>> There is no such thing as random but the level of complexity so great that it appears random. > >>> > >>> No, there is such a thing as random. > >> > >> Rolf doesn't believe in random, Banjo. He says the universe is big > >> machine god wound up and now it runs. > > > > Fair enough, and a bigger version of my call centre simulator PACT. Which made > > a major part of my living in Australia. However in that program I used random > > number generation algorithms following Knuth. Given a seed there can be a > > particular random number sequence as all know. > > Algorithms do not generate random numbers. Hey, you know I went to > school with Knuth. He never mentioned PACT to me. > > >>>> By nature cause and effect tells us there is no random. > >>> > >>> When one event happens as a result of a given cause, out of a multiplicity of > >>> possible causes, then that event is called a random event. > >> > >> > >> > >>>> And you can pretend through quantum mechanics or any quantum theory that cause and effect do not exist but of course the facts are the facts. > >>> > >>> Sometimes to one effect there is one cause, and that is not a random event > >>> but a deterministic one. > >>>> > >>>> As physicists we create our reality to a large degree. Not the phgysical universe here so much directly but we do. > >>> > >>> In other words, modern physicists make up fairy tales using strange ideas > >>> and maths. > >> > >> No fairytale, banjo. The moon does not exist until some physicist looks > >> at at. That is truth. > > > > Science has to be subjective at the creative level, but that is initial. To > > make it subjective there has to be objectivity solidified by learned opinion. Oops sorry, I should have written "make it objective" instead of "make it subjective" above. > > Which could be wrong. Objective opinion may have been that the Moon was a piece > > of green cheese. > > Actually there is data (if you believe the Moon shots were nor faked) > that the green cheese theory is false. Nor is it a toy for Lord Krishna to play with. "Maia mori, mai toh Chandra khilona leihoN" Mother, I will have the moon for my toy. > > >>>> For instance by getting together and agreeing that inflationary theory is valid, we are creating our own stage. > >>> > >>> Especially when the public pays for all that. If they did not pay they would > >>> actually write some fairy tales and sold them. > >>> > >>>> In fact there is nothing in inflationary theory which is provable. > >>>> It defies the laws of physics completely and in doing so we permit ourselves to diverge from the laws and make an exception. > >>> > >>> In other words, you have given up on the scientific method. And reduced science > >>> to the level of voodoo on the one hand, and fiction on the other. > >>> > >>> Ugh. > >> > >> Banjo, Rolf is into computers. He understands little else. All computers > >> (except quantum computers that don't work) are deterministic. Hence, > >> Rolf's world is deterministic and he pushes his world onto everyone else > >> as well. Ugh. > > > > He may have heard of fuzzy logic. To model reality one has to get into the > > randomness. Then the answers are not deterministic, but cover a spread, which > > then gets subjected to statistics. The money from such modelling comes when > > something anomalous is found and its cause tracked (then in real life, > > amplified or rectified for more profits). Doing such has been my career. > > > > Cheers, > > Arindam Banerjee > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-15 21:33 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. |
| Message-ID | <5993a0e8$0$61900$c3e8da3$e074e489@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #646102 |
On 8/15/2017 8:41 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 9:29:44 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: >> On 8/15/2017 6:38 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:00:52 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: >>>> On 8/14/2017 10:13 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 12:17:36 AM UTC+10, KCIR2 wrote: >>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 1:25:27 AM UTC+1, alal...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+5:30, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >>>>>>>> I meant: The future is just as fixed as the past. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't believe that time is a dimension, or that the future is fixed. According to QM, events are random. The human mind is free to create the future. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Abhinav Lal >>>>>>> Writer & Investor >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with you to a certain extent. >>>>>> There is no such thing as random but the level of complexity so great that it appears random. >>>>> >>>>> No, there is such a thing as random. >>>> >>>> Rolf doesn't believe in random, Banjo. He says the universe is big >>>> machine god wound up and now it runs. >>> >>> Fair enough, and a bigger version of my call centre simulator PACT. Which made >>> a major part of my living in Australia. However in that program I used random >>> number generation algorithms following Knuth. Given a seed there can be a >>> particular random number sequence as all know. >> >> Algorithms do not generate random numbers. Hey, you know I went to >> school with Knuth. He never mentioned PACT to me. >> >>>>>> By nature cause and effect tells us there is no random. >>>>> >>>>> When one event happens as a result of a given cause, out of a multiplicity of >>>>> possible causes, then that event is called a random event. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> And you can pretend through quantum mechanics or any quantum theory that cause and effect do not exist but of course the facts are the facts. >>>>> >>>>> Sometimes to one effect there is one cause, and that is not a random event >>>>> but a deterministic one. >>>>>> >>>>>> As physicists we create our reality to a large degree. Not the phgysical universe here so much directly but we do. >>>>> >>>>> In other words, modern physicists make up fairy tales using strange ideas >>>>> and maths. >>>> >>>> No fairytale, banjo. The moon does not exist until some physicist looks >>>> at at. That is truth. >>> >>> Science has to be subjective at the creative level, but that is initial. To >>> make it subjective there has to be objectivity solidified by learned opinion. > > Oops sorry, I should have written "make it objective" instead of "make it subjective" above. > >>> Which could be wrong. Objective opinion may have been that the Moon was a piece >>> of green cheese. >> >> Actually there is data (if you believe the Moon shots were nor faked) >> that the green cheese theory is false. > > Nor is it a toy for Lord Krishna to play with. > > "Maia mori, mai toh Chandra khilona leihoN" > Mother, I will have the moon for my toy. Contrary to your opinion of your own supposed abilities, you haven't a clue what Lord Krisna does for fun. >>>>>> For instance by getting together and agreeing that inflationary theory is valid, we are creating our own stage. >>>>> >>>>> Especially when the public pays for all that. If they did not pay they would >>>>> actually write some fairy tales and sold them. >>>>> >>>>>> In fact there is nothing in inflationary theory which is provable. >>>>>> It defies the laws of physics completely and in doing so we permit ourselves to diverge from the laws and make an exception. >>>>> >>>>> In other words, you have given up on the scientific method. And reduced science >>>>> to the level of voodoo on the one hand, and fiction on the other. >>>>> >>>>> Ugh. >>>> >>>> Banjo, Rolf is into computers. He understands little else. All computers >>>> (except quantum computers that don't work) are deterministic. Hence, >>>> Rolf's world is deterministic and he pushes his world onto everyone else >>>> as well. Ugh. >>> >>> He may have heard of fuzzy logic. To model reality one has to get into the >>> randomness. Then the answers are not deterministic, but cover a spread, which >>> then gets subjected to statistics. The money from such modelling comes when >>> something anomalous is found and its cause tracked (then in real life, >>> amplified or rectified for more profits). Doing such has been my career. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Arindam Banerjee >>> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-15 18:53 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. |
| Message-ID | <7bee0ed2-3656-4fba-a19e-e122a0710e6e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646115 |
On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 11:33:32 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > On 8/15/2017 8:41 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 9:29:44 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > >> On 8/15/2017 6:38 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:00:52 AM UTC+10, benj wrote: > >>>> On 8/14/2017 10:13 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 12:17:36 AM UTC+10, KCIR2 wrote: > >>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 1:25:27 AM UTC+1, alal...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>> On Monday, August 14, 2017 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+5:30, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > >>>>>>>> I meant: The future is just as fixed as the past. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't believe that time is a dimension, or that the future is fixed. According to QM, events are random. The human mind is free to create the future. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Abhinav Lal > >>>>>>> Writer & Investor > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I agree with you to a certain extent. > >>>>>> There is no such thing as random but the level of complexity so great that it appears random. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, there is such a thing as random. > >>>> > >>>> Rolf doesn't believe in random, Banjo. He says the universe is big > >>>> machine god wound up and now it runs. > >>> > >>> Fair enough, and a bigger version of my call centre simulator PACT. Which made > >>> a major part of my living in Australia. However in that program I used random > >>> number generation algorithms following Knuth. Given a seed there can be a > >>> particular random number sequence as all know. > >> > >> Algorithms do not generate random numbers. Hey, you know I went to > >> school with Knuth. He never mentioned PACT to me. > >> > >>>>>> By nature cause and effect tells us there is no random. > >>>>> > >>>>> When one event happens as a result of a given cause, out of a multiplicity of > >>>>> possible causes, then that event is called a random event. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> And you can pretend through quantum mechanics or any quantum theory that cause and effect do not exist but of course the facts are the facts. > >>>>> > >>>>> Sometimes to one effect there is one cause, and that is not a random event > >>>>> but a deterministic one. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As physicists we create our reality to a large degree. Not the phgysical universe here so much directly but we do. > >>>>> > >>>>> In other words, modern physicists make up fairy tales using strange ideas > >>>>> and maths. > >>>> > >>>> No fairytale, banjo. The moon does not exist until some physicist looks > >>>> at at. That is truth. > >>> > >>> Science has to be subjective at the creative level, but that is initial. To > >>> make it subjective there has to be objectivity solidified by learned opinion. > > > > Oops sorry, I should have written "make it objective" instead of "make it subjective" above. > > > >>> Which could be wrong. Objective opinion may have been that the Moon was a piece > >>> of green cheese. > >> > >> Actually there is data (if you believe the Moon shots were nor faked) > >> that the green cheese theory is false. > > > > Nor is it a toy for Lord Krishna to play with. > > > > "Maia mori, mai toh Chandra khilona leihoN" > > Mother, I will have the moon for my toy. > > Contrary to your opinion of your own supposed abilities, you haven't a > clue what Lord Krisna does for fun. But I do. According to Soordas, Yashoda his foster mother brought out a large brass plate, filled it with water, and placed it on the ground. The Moon's reflection came on the water. Go play with the Moon, she said. Mothers are mothers. > > >>>>>> For instance by getting together and agreeing that inflationary theory is valid, we are creating our own stage. > >>>>> > >>>>> Especially when the public pays for all that. If they did not pay they would > >>>>> actually write some fairy tales and sold them. > >>>>> > >>>>>> In fact there is nothing in inflationary theory which is provable. > >>>>>> It defies the laws of physics completely and in doing so we permit ourselves to diverge from the laws and make an exception. > >>>>> > >>>>> In other words, you have given up on the scientific method. And reduced science > >>>>> to the level of voodoo on the one hand, and fiction on the other. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ugh. > >>>> > >>>> Banjo, Rolf is into computers. He understands little else. All computers > >>>> (except quantum computers that don't work) are deterministic. Hence, > >>>> Rolf's world is deterministic and he pushes his world onto everyone else > >>>> as well. Ugh. > >>> > >>> He may have heard of fuzzy logic. To model reality one has to get into the > >>> randomness. Then the answers are not deterministic, but cover a spread, which > >>> then gets subjected to statistics. The money from such modelling comes when > >>> something anomalous is found and its cause tracked (then in real life, > >>> amplified or rectified for more profits). Doing such has been my career. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Arindam Banerjee > >>> > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | KCIR2 <rick_s7777777@yahoo.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-13 17:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2f24a80f-c43e-4cfd-b51c-07be21beef13@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #645726 |
I think our minds are wired to believe that it is easier to always have had something, than for something to come from nothing. So the Big Bang but seeds of entropy, it is not all uniform and homogeneous there is a tiny bit of math one of the elements is different than the others by .0000000006 or so and that little bit is enough to keep it from locking up or being homogeneous or perfectly spherical and so then as soon as there is any form of contact the balls will hit the rail of the pool table at different angles as an example and things will appear to be random like the motions of molecules in a gas. One theory about the big bang that I like is a split of the void like a sheet as a change of phase creating quantum foam bubbles it would have had to have made larger bubbles as well. It's difficult to conceive of how Hydrogen would be made in that way. It is probable that the foam was created in the big bang if it was a supernova. Make the atoms, explode out and make foam. That would explain why they only come in two sizes. Atoms and foam bubbles Planck length. Those are so tiny the latter ones that you can;t compress them into anything but you plow through them and they cause drag. Will plant you in the car seat and they go right through the car. Spin a superfluid and they are quantized at Planck length. They are always divisible by Planck length. So there is a lot of evidence of what there is that we call something. But take an atom, drain all the energy out of it and it will disappear. Like a bubble you let the air out and it is now just the fluid again. It is the energy or mass and its pulsing in and out and its temperature since they cool it down to Bose Einstein Condensate where atoms meld together to form one larger bubble and they can drain it fast, cause an explosion like a supernova. Called a Bosenova. So we are pretty sure what is down there. As far as we can detect. So then the question is, where did it come from? So then it is computer code of course, this is a virtual reality housing real people who had to make an emergency exit from where they were and God moved the entire universe into a 50 foot simulator. And then told me he did it because the galaxy machine we were in, could not be fixed. 2012 and all that machine maintenance stuff. So it all got moved into a new computer and so the software stayed the same, and so then this one started in 1991 yet the people were not aware of it. They saw time as continuous. Across that boundary. So then prior to that well a galaxy is a mainframe computer apparently. So then they are virtual machines inside a large computer the size of the moon. And it is modeled after the real one in the real universe. This universe being digital the last one analog. But I assume the original universe was analog. You know a lot of random activity and gray areas with very fine shades of grey. Perhaps higher resolution. But how did it all begin in terms of life and all that? That would take a very long time to develop. That's digital computer code. So first there was the computer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-14 10:02 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Everything is nothing because the (4-D) timescape is static, immutable. |
| Message-ID | <omrsfj12ok5@news4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #645726 |
On Sun, 13 Aug 2017 14:23:29 -0700, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > > SemiRandomness is SemiIgnorance, nothing more. > Hoooo, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Jeff-Ass is showing off his abysmal stupidity once again! Have a look at my superb video, made entirely with GNU/Linux tools, which depicts the development of chaotic regimes in a VERY SIMPLE driven non-linear system: http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=07737369247849395879 This particular system happens to be the SIMPLEST NON-LINEAR SYSTEM possible. We have TOTAL KNOWLEDGE of it. Yet, for certain amplitude ranges it develops CHAOTIC BEHAVIOR that is indistinguishable from RANDOMNESS. In fact, we could sample from these chaotic regimes and produce PURELY RANDOM output. Thus, the only ignorance present is Jeff-Ass, and it's not SEMI-IGNORANCE but TOTAL-IGNORANCE. Haaaaaaaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Anthony Zen Pride Week" <sender@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-16 07:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <on1jta$4qm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #645726 |
> A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask, why is > there, > something rather than everything? I didn't read the book. Learn how to read.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-16 07:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <599456DF.5A8F@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #646159 |
Anthony Zen Pride Week wrote: > > > A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask, why is > > there, > > something rather than everything? I didn't read the book. > > Learn how to read. If there was everything...then you would have nothing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-16 17:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5994E3A7.10AF@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #646161 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Anthony Zen Pride Week wrote: > > > > > A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask, why is > > > there, > > > something rather than everything? I didn't read the book. > > > > Learn how to read. > > If there was everything...then you would have nothing. everything comes from nothing...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 20:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f53e2bfc-bbb4-4363-8d35-67e50175e862@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #645726 |
On Sunday, August 13, 2017 at 12:45:08 PM UTC-4, alal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask,
> why is there something rather than everything? I didn't read the
> book. So please answer the questions. Why is there something?
Abhinav... Think about the reprehensible alternative. Nothing!
Not to misrepresent/misanswer your question, what in hell is EVERYTHING?!
> Abhinav Lal
> Writer & Investor
Very nice question: {Nothing, Something, Everything}? Thanks for the headache!
My cousin is named Lal. Very successful. Physics educated, Lal is.
-- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: d(me) != 0 ... me alwa(y)s changes... Enjo(y)!”
Enjo(y)... Salute… Cheers... Open your M I N D… Time it is Is IS 3PM somePlace.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 22:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <59967FD6.10DA@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #646409 |
Mahipal wrote: > > On Sunday, August 13, 2017 at 12:45:08 PM UTC-4, alal...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask, > > why is there something rather than everything? I didn't read the > > book. So please answer the questions. Why is there something? > > Abhinav... Think about the reprehensible alternative. Nothing! > Not to misrepresent/misanswer your question, what in hell is EVERYTHING?! everything is where all questions have been answered... that leaves you with...no more questions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 08:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <525a8f80-925f-4d12-a458-c0b9116e006b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646420 |
On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 1:48:58 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote: > Mahipal wrote: > > > > On Sunday, August 13, 2017 at 12:45:08 PM UTC-4, alal...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > A book asked, why is there something rather than nothing? I ask, > > > why is there something rather than everything? I didn't read the > > > book. So please answer the questions. Why is there something? > > > > Abhinav... Think about the reprehensible alternative. Nothing! > > Not to misrepresent/misanswer your question, what in hell is EVERYTHING?! > everything is where all questions have been answered... I disagree. Who is asking any questions at the center of any Star/Sun/BH/NYC/...? > that leaves you with...no more questions. Interesting point StarMakerJi. My favourite Moody Blues Song is Question? https://www.google.com/search?q=question+moody+blues Play It Loud! Often! -- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: Poet Pla(y)ing Moody Blues! Jedi Mode...” Enjo(y)... Salute… Cheers... Open your M I N D… Time it is Is IS 3PM somePlace.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web