Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,248 Year: 5,505/9,624 Month: 530/323 Week: 27/143 Day: 0/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An Ether-Based Creation Model
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 166 of 589 (887262)
07-28-2021 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Tanypteryx
07-27-2021 4:13 PM


Re: Fair Warning
Hi Tanypteryx
Tanypteryx writes:
Prayer and supernatural revelation
From his opening statement I don't believe he believes in either.
He is just looking for a reason he can believe in the Cosmic egg theory of creation.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-27-2021 4:13 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-28-2021 10:38 AM ICANT has replied

  
Michael MD
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 108
Joined: 04-03-2021


Message 167 of 589 (887263)
07-28-2021 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by ICANT
07-28-2021 1:52 AM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
To answer your question,my ether model would have to go through a number of steps, including a few basic assumptions that should be reasonable and logical.
If an underlying ether exists, it would have to be universal, and to have formed first-causally. In the very beginning, it is assumed that all that existed was universal space. Original space would have differed from present day space. It would have been free of everything else, such as forces. Thus, original space could well have been very self-compatible, where extremely-rarified, "elemental," or etheric, "points," or point-localities, were reciprocally oscillating, in a perfectly "pure" type of oscillation.
Eventually, a pair of adjacent points underwent oscillational fatigue, and fell toward each other, forming "Yin and Yang" couplets. (Oscillational fatigue is a known process. It occurs in metals.) At this juncture, there were multiple areas all throughout space where couplets were forming, and this process would not have been uniform everywhere, producing multiple tiny energy units that were coursing in various directions, with different units interacting with each other. (After oscillations of points had transitioned to independent vibrations, the units now were able to interact with each other via contact-vibration. Couplets tended to interact with other couplets, as their matching vibrations "felt" each other.)
This would have represented a "second world" consisting of etheric energic processes interacting with each other everywhere.
In my ether model, a creational Entity arose after the etheric processes in a local spot happened to be very linear, where the linearity of the ether units caused their vibrations to align mutually with each other, so that they entrained with each other, producing larger and larger units, up to the size of quantum units. This quantization of ether units then produced a "cosmic egg" quantal moiety, which then became a sapient Entity, as speeding ether units happened to tangentially contact it, producing reverberating energy circuits, which were able to form intelligence and consciousness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 1:52 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 6:37 PM Michael MD has replied
 Message 178 by Taq, posted 07-29-2021 4:51 PM Michael MD has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Inactive Member


Message 168 of 589 (887264)
07-28-2021 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by ICANT
07-28-2021 1:58 AM


Re: Fair Warning
He is just looking for a reason he can believe in the Cosmic egg theory of creation.
Huh, I've never heard of that. Beliefs are pretty worthless too.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 1:58 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 6:03 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 169 of 589 (887266)
07-28-2021 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Tanypteryx
07-28-2021 10:38 AM


Re: Fair Warning
Hi Tanypteryx
Tanypteryx/qs writes:
Huh, I've never heard of that. Beliefs are pretty worthless too.
So are you saying all the assumptions that have to be believed and accepted to get the Big Bang Theory off the ground are worthless also?
Definition of assumption: a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof. assumption - Search
So you never heard of Hawking/Hartley instanton or Son Goku and cavedivers little pea sized something that became the Universe?
We sure have discussed it a lot over the past 13 years.
Michael has to make certain assumptions to get his theory off the ground. His assumptions sounds just as true to me as your assumptions unless you have a source for all the energy that had to begin to exist as the universe had to have a beginning to exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-28-2021 10:38 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-28-2021 8:15 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 170 of 589 (887267)
07-28-2021 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Michael MD
07-28-2021 7:51 AM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
Hi Michael
Michael writes:
If an underlying ether exists, it would have to be universal, and to have formed first-causally. In the very beginning,
That does not tell me anything about where the ether came from.
Michael writes:
it is assumed that all that existed was universal space.
So you are assuming that all universal space existed?
But where did that space come from if there was not existence?
Michael writes:
In my ether model, a creational Entity arose after the etheric processes in a local spot happened to be very linear, where the linearity of the ether units caused their vibrations to align mutually with each other, so that they entrained with each other, producing larger and larger units, up to the size of quantum units. This quantization of ether units then produced a "cosmic egg" quantal moiety, which then became a sapient Entity, as speeding ether units happened to tangentially contact it, producing reverberating energy circuits, which were able to form intelligence and consciousness.
As I understand this model all this stuff, thingamagiggers, and whatever was just floating around in existence for eternity past until some point " a creational Entity arose". This entity started the events that eventually " became a sapient Entity". Which "produced reverberating energy circuts, which were able to form intelligence and consciousness".
So let me be very clear here.
You say something had to exist prior to T=0.
This something jostled around and eventually the universe appeared.
That sounds more logical than what they have been telling me for the past thirteen years. They tell me space, time, energy, matter, did not exist at T=0.
The reason being that math they keep pounding on you about breaks down and becomes silent at T=0.
I don't know why they keep harping math to you when they don't have any.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Michael MD, posted 07-28-2021 7:51 AM Michael MD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Michael MD, posted 07-29-2021 7:36 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 198 by dwise1, posted 07-31-2021 10:21 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 200 by Phat, posted 07-31-2021 10:34 AM ICANT has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Inactive Member


Message 171 of 589 (887268)
07-28-2021 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by ICANT
07-28-2021 6:03 PM


Re: Fair Warning
ICANT writes:
So are you saying...
Nope, you are saying that and falsely trying to attribute it to me.
I simply said that I do not remember hearing about the Cosmic egg theory of creation.
I am really interested in physics, astrophysics, cosmology, particle physics, etc. but I don't know very much, so I'm always trying to learn more. There may have been discussions here or books I have read using Cosmic egg theory of creation, but if there were it didn't register in my consciousness. It sounds more like slang to me or maybe a Jesus Freak rock and roll album title.
ICANT writes:
His assumptions sounds just as true to me as your assumptions
That would not surprise me at all, if you knew my assumptions, but you do not.
You seem to be trying to make the discussion about you.
One thing I have learned, while watching you over the years, is that you could never help me understand anything about physics.
I am interested in observational data. Watching and recording a supernova evolve in multiple wavelengths and at multiple energies and seeing how well the observations match predictions. Observing completely new phenomena, trying to observe it again and understand it is science.
All those hypotheses that you get your panties in a bunch about are not the answer because we haven't collected nearly enough data yet. You want science to provide rock solid answers, but that is not the function of science. Instead, it is a systematic method of learning more about the Universe. Any actual theory of the Universe has to include explanations of ALL THE DATA that we have observed so far.
You try to get people here to defend hypotheses as if they are complete theories against the ICANT creation fantasy because its certainly not still collecting observations. Your creation fantasy is never going to explain the observations.
Piss Off,

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 6:03 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 10:49 AM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Michael MD
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 108
Joined: 04-03-2021


Message 172 of 589 (887275)
07-29-2021 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by ICANT
07-28-2021 6:37 PM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
When you ask me to clarify what the ether is with respect to space, it's a question difficult to answer from the standpoint of our experiential world, which is mediated by quantum forces.
In my ether model, we have not been able to perceive, or to detect the ether technically, due to limitations inherent in our world, where forces are mediated by much-larger energy units, i.e., quantal units. In my ether model, the predominant units comprising the ether are vastly smaller. (Being first-causal in origin, they are "elemental," and had their origin in a world-setting very different from ours.)
Since it was derived from original space, ether units would have no mass. (This has been hard for me to put over with some theorists clinging to the concept that since we perceive "solidity" in our everyday experience, there has to be such a thing as "mass." -If this represents a major sticking-point for some theorists, this is as far as I can go on that point. While we are not able to demonstrate the ether scientifically, at least not yet, neither is there a clear definition of what "mass" actually is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by ICANT, posted 07-28-2021 6:37 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 11:33 AM Michael MD has not replied
 Message 176 by nwr, posted 07-29-2021 1:30 PM Michael MD has not replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 173 of 589 (887279)
07-29-2021 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by Tanypteryx
07-28-2021 8:15 PM


Re: Fair Warning
Hi Tanypteryx
Tanypteryx writes:
I am interested in observational data. Watching and recording a supernova evolve in multiple wavelengths and at multiple energies and seeing how well the observations match predictions. Observing completely new phenomena, trying to observe it again and understand it is science.
Yes that would be science.
So is the study of the human body.
So is the study of the earth and what is in it. etc
Tanypteryx writes:
All those hypotheses that you get your panties in a bunch about are not the answer because we haven't collected nearly enough data yet.
Since there is zero data, or experiments, of what existed at T=0 the Big Bang Theory is not a theory as it is based upon an assumption but a hypothesis. Yet it is taught a a fact.
Remember the definition of an assumption? "a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof."
Tanypterys writes:
Any actual theory of the Universe has to include explanations of ALL THE DATA that we have observed so far.
So where is the data that supports the universe popping into existence out of non existence?
At least Michael is not trying to support such an idea as he has something existing that caused the universe to begin to exist.
All though he won't give a source of that something. He just assumes it was there and caused the universe to begin to exist over time.
Could you explain the difference between Michael's assumption and the assumption that is required for the BBT.
There must be a universe existing in some form for it to expand and us be able to observe and study that process.
Since I came here in 07 my question has always been, "Where did it come from"?
Would you like to give it a try? Insted of your snide remarks as you ended the post with.
You are a puppet that has drank the koolaid and believe everything you are told rather than have an open mind and question everything.
Just give me the facts.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-28-2021 8:15 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-29-2021 11:45 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 177 by AZPaul3, posted 07-29-2021 1:40 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 174 of 589 (887280)
07-29-2021 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by Michael MD
07-29-2021 7:36 AM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
Hi Michael
Michael writes:
When you ask me to clarify what the ether is with respect to space,
I did not ask what the ether is in respect to space.
I simply asked where it came from.
If it had existed eternally in the past would mean all the energy that is in the universe today had to have existed in the beginning. If that was the case by now there would be no energy left as it would have reach equiliberium, a state in which opposing forces or influences are balanced. Therefore we would not be here. This was the problem with the steady state theory held by Einstein. Therefore the realization that the universe had to have a beginning to exist. Which is why scientist tell us the universe is somewhere between 8 billion and 20 billion years old. The age depends on who you listen too.
Michael writes:
(Being first-causal in origin, they are "elemental," and had their origin in a world-setting very different from ours.)
Since energy can not be created would require that at the beginning all energy in the universe today had to already exist. Or do you propose a way that energy can be produced as Guth did to get his zero energy universe?
Michael writes:
Since it was derived from original space,
Where did this original space come from?
Michael/qs writes:
While we are not able to demonstrate the ether scientifically, at least not yet, neither is there a clear definition of what "mass" actually is.
I am sitting here in a seat typing this message on a keyboard. Both are considered to be mass, but in reality they are only atoms that are held together by some unknown energy force. Remove that force and the chair and keyboard would disappear.
Everything in this universe is held together by that same energy force.
By the way if you will click the peek mode on the top right of this message you can see how we quote each other.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Michael MD, posted 07-29-2021 7:36 AM Michael MD has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 589 (887281)
07-29-2021 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by ICANT
07-29-2021 10:49 AM


Re: Fair Warning
ICANT writes:
Tanypteryx writes:
All those hypotheses that you get your panties in a bunch about are not the answer because we haven't collected nearly enough data yet.
Since there is zero data, or experiments, of what existed at T=0 the Big Bang Theory is not a theory as it is based upon an assumption but a hypothesis.
You are trying to argue with me about something I have never said.
ICANT writes:
Yet it is taught a a fact.
Not to me. That sounds more like an assumption on your part. You remember your definition of an assumption? "a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof."
ICANT writes:
So where is the data that supports the universe popping into existence out of non existence?
I have no idea. None of the material I've read says that's what happened.
ICANT writes:
Could you explain the difference between Michael's assumption and the assumption that is required for the BBT.
Nope, can you?
ICANT writes:
There must be a universe existing in some form for it to expand and us be able to observe and study that process.
Thanks for clearing that up.
ICANT writes:
Since I came here in 07 my question has always been, "Where did it come from"?
Like I said before, you are demanding an answer, when you know full well that the data is insufficient to provide an answer.
The answer is "WE DON'T KNOW!!"
ICANT writes:
Would you like to give it a try? Insted of your snide remarks as you ended the post with.
You really need to work on your reading comprehension. I have repeatedly stated that I am only interested in the data from our observations.
I'm only responding to your snide remarks at the end of your posts.
ICANT writes:
You are a puppet that has drank the koolaid and believe everything you are told rather than have an open mind and question everything.
So, you attack me and falsely accuse me of a position that I have never held.
ICANT writes:
Just give me the facts.
The fact is, you are an insulting ASSHOLE who knows Jack Shit about physics.
Piss Off!

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 10:49 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 5:41 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6445
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


(1)
Message 176 of 589 (887286)
07-29-2021 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by Michael MD
07-29-2021 7:36 AM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
In my ether model, we have not been able to perceive, or to detect the ether technically, due to limitations inherent in our world, where forces are mediated by much-larger energy units, i.e., quantal units. In my ether model, the predominant units comprising the ether are vastly smaller. (Being first-causal in origin, they are "elemental," and had their origin in a world-setting very different from ours.)
Or, in other words, you've got nothing.
That you have nothing has been pretty obvious throughout this thread. But thanks for openly admitting it.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Michael MD, posted 07-29-2021 7:36 AM Michael MD has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8614
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 177 of 589 (887287)
07-29-2021 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by ICANT
07-29-2021 10:49 AM


Get Real.
Since there is zero data, or experiments, of what existed at T=0 the Big Bang Theory is not a theory as it is based upon an assumption but a hypothesis.
Oh, Reverend, you still shilling that old BS strawman?
You have been here long enough to know the BBT does not include any statements on T=0.
Big Bang - Wikipedia
We can't say ANYTHING about T=0 precisely because we have "zero data, or experiments, of what existed at T=0". And neither can you.
So stop with the lying. Incomplete knowledge of T=0 DOES NOT negate BBT!
The Lambda-CDM model of cosmology (our present BBT) is ALL evidence-based and gives us a very accurate model of what we see out there in the sky. We know, with ever increasing confidence, what this universe is made of and how it operates.
Lambda-CDM model - Wikipedia
It cannot address T=0 because our present knowledge has limits NOT because our present theories are wrong. We have more yet to learn but what we know, we know exceptionally well. Well enough to be beyond challenge by anyone in this forum.
Just like the vaccines. Our knowledge of virology may be forever incomplete but we know, with certainty, vaccines work.
Big bang, in some form or other, consistent with Lambda-CDM, amended by whatever discoveries may come, will be the dominate cosmological model for humanity for the remainder of our existence because it is real and we have the evidence of its reality.
No, it doesn't answer your unanswerable T=0 question but neither does anything else in our knowledge base, yet.
Edited by AZPaul3, : added cite

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 10:49 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by ICANT, posted 07-29-2021 6:19 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 178 of 589 (887289)
07-29-2021 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Michael MD
07-28-2021 7:51 AM


Re: This Thread Expressed Through Cartoons
Michael MD writes:
To answer your question,my ether model would have to go through a number of steps, including a few basic assumptions that should be reasonable and logical.
In screenwriting, they call that "foreshadowing".
Thus, original space could well have been very self-compatible, where extremely-rarified, "elemental," or etheric, "points," or point-localities, were reciprocally oscillating, in a perfectly "pure" type of oscillation.
That's just word salad. It isn't logical or reasonable. It's as if you saw these terms in the back of a physics book and then randomly assembled them.
Eventually, a pair of adjacent points underwent oscillational fatigue, and fell toward each other, forming "Yin and Yang" couplets. (Oscillational fatigue is a known process. It occurs in metals.)
That is illogical and irrational. Just because metal fatigues does not mean that space has the same features. This is known as the false analogy fallacy.
Just these two snippets alone demonstrate that you don't have assumptions that are either logical or reasonable.
In my ether model, a creational Entity arose after the etheric processes in a local spot happened to be very linear, where the linearity of the ether units caused their vibrations to align mutually with each other, so that they entrained with each other, producing larger and larger units, up to the size of quantum units.
You also don't seem to understand the concept of assumptions. You don't take your hypotheses and present them as assumptions. That's not how it works. Assumptions are something that both you and I would agree to, some basic working principles. Assumptions are never the claim that you are trying to prove. You are essentially saying that if we assume your ether model then it is true. That's illogical and irrational.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Michael MD, posted 07-28-2021 7:51 AM Michael MD has not replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 179 of 589 (887291)
07-29-2021 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Tanypteryx
07-29-2021 11:45 AM


Re: Fair Warning
Hi Tanypteryx
Tanypteryx writes:
Like I said before, you are demanding an answer, when you know full well that the data is insufficient to provide an answer.
The answer is "WE DON'T KNOW!!"
I was only asking you.
I know several in the scientific communities answer is ""WE DON'T KNOW!!" as I have been told that by several scientist.
Since no one knows where or how the universe began to exist, how can we know how we got from there to here?
I live in South Florida so I decide to go to New York City how many choices on travel by land do I have to get to my destination?
You want to tell me the way you believe we got from T=0 to where we are today is the only correct way possible. Why do you believe that?
Tanypteryx writes:
The fact is, you are an insulting ASSHOLE who knows Jack Shit about physics.
I have never claimed to know anything about physics.
I do claim to know non existence can not produce existence.
I was raised on a farm and I know life produces life, but a dead animal could only produce a bad odor.
If I remember there was quite a few experiments trying to produce life from non life that all failed.
I also claim that the universe has always existed in some form just not as we see it now.
If it did not always exist then it had to begin to exist which requires a creation to take place.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-29-2021 11:45 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-29-2021 8:09 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 144 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 180 of 589 (887292)
07-29-2021 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by AZPaul3
07-29-2021 1:40 PM


Re: Get Real.
Hi Paul
AZPaul3 writes:
Incomplete knowledge of T=0 DOES NOT negate BBT!
But it does relegate it to a hypotheses without certain assumptions.
AZPaul3 writes:
Lambda-CDM model
Parametrization is the process of deciding and defining the parameters necessary for a complete or relevant specification of a model or geometric object. What would those parameters be based upon?
First we have a cosmological constant associated with dark energy.
Then the postulated (suggest or assumed existence of) Cold Dark Matter.
With the third ingredient of ordinary matter.
So what does that explain?
It does tell us what the universe has in it. Not its origin.
AZPaul3 writes:
Well enough to be beyond challenge by anyone in this forum.
There you go closing your mind to any other possibilities.
AZPaul3 writes:
Just like the vaccines. Our knowledge of virology may be forever incomplete but we know, with certainty, vaccines work.
But no vaccine is 100% effective.
AZPaul3 writes:
it is real and we have the evidence of its reality.
Just because you believe it does not make it so. Science has changed a lot in my 82 years on this planet.
AZPaul3 writes:
No, it doesn't answer your unanswerable T=0 question but neither does anything else in our knowledge base, yet.
The BBT can never answer what existed at T=0 as the math no longer works therefore there is no information available to process.
Religion or Metaphysics will have to produce that information.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by AZPaul3, posted 07-29-2021 1:40 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-29-2021 8:15 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 187 by AZPaul3, posted 07-30-2021 2:22 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 189 by Michael MD, posted 07-30-2021 12:36 PM ICANT has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024