Can religion reject this science ?

[james blunt]

I've just shown you why 7 is wrong - several times and you just keep telling me that objective facts about space are all in the mind. Talk about being in denial...

Oh no you haven't , you have not show that space has physicality !

Do you know what physicality means? It has physical presence, it is matter !

 

[ratiocinator]

Do you know what physicality means? It has physical presence, it is matter !

So now you're so desperate to be right that you are redefining the words. You do understand that "matter" is not actually a well defined term (it can refer to different things in different contexts) but it would be a stretch for it to include (say) photons, so are we to expect that you deny the 'physicality' of light, next?

 

[james blunt]

So now you're so desperate to be right that you are redefining the words. You do understand that "matter" is not actually a well defined term (it can refer to different things in different contexts) but it would be a stretch for it to include (say) photons, so are we to expect that you deny the 'physicality' of light, next?

HMMM, you don't know as much as you think you do . We have atomic matter and field matter , photons are field matter . They have presence and mass and can apply a force . However they do not have propulsion , they are quanta that traverse through the field ''ether'' and their mechanism of motion is transition to lower energy state points .

 

[ratiocinator]

HMMM, you don't know as much as you think you do . We have atomic matter and field matter , photons are field matter . They have presence and mass and can apply a force . However they do not have propulsion , they are quanta that traverse through the field ''ether'' and their mechanism of motion is transition to lower energy state points .

Nonsense. We have well tested theories that cover this and you have nothing but word salad.

 

[james blunt]

Nonsense. We have well tested theories that cover this and you have nothing but word salad.

Nope , I know all your theory malarkey and I've advanced them to be much more accurate and correct in the semantics .
Photons / light has no propulsion ! Light is pulled out of a light bulb by the lesser energy field in the space . Momentum c is equal to the lesser energy P(c) = <E

 

[Workman]

James are you saying that God is space?

 

[ChristineM]

It is definitely self evident about space unless you can show evidence to the contrary of the postulates . In example have you known , ever observed any space to have aged or decayed ?

I have provided evidence, you ignored it

 

[james blunt]

James are you saying that God is space?

Scientifically and logically , yes !

 

[james blunt]

I have provided evidence, you ignored it

No you haven't ! Like always the direct questions are ignored , a typical politicians move and side tracked with irrelevant material .

I asked you earlier to start here :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

You failed at 1 and provided no evidence to the contrary , physical or logical !

 

[ratiocinator]

I know all your theory malarkey...

Obviously not, as you need maths to understand them and you can't even do arithmetic.

Photons / light has no propulsion !

Nobody said it did.

Light is pulled out of a light bulb

A pull is a propulsion.

Momentum c is equal to the lesser energy P(c) = <E

Word and math symbol salad...

 

[james blunt]

Obviously not, as you need maths to understand them and you can't even do arithmetic.



Nobody said it did.



A pull is a propulsion.



Word and math symbol salad...

A pull is not a propulsion , propulsion is thrust , you know like those primitive glorified firework rockets you use . A pull is a gravitational force of attraction in lights causality of motion ! Light is a binary energy and it as to be or it wouldn't do no work .
P.s I don't need to know all maths to know how physical process works . Physical causality happens without maths .

 

[Workman]

Interesting theory! U have my ears! I wouldn’t worry about the others, their trapped in their own thoughts becoming their own theories, it’s why they’ll always be the same in person. I’m not a scientific person nor am I a religious person I am me and more, I’ve always thought that space could be something nearly as similar to a human mind, but haven’t quite looked that far.

 

[james blunt]

I’ve always thought that space could be something nearly as similar to a human mind, but haven’t quite looked that far.

The brain of energy occupying a void space giving purpose to nothingness . A hive mind , where all is connected by quantum entanglement !

Added - Without us and other things God / space has no meaningful purpose , that would mean the meaning of life is to be Gods purpose ! A purpose which was , to create heaven on Earth .

 

[ratiocinator]

I’m not a scientific person nor am I a religious person I am me and more, I’ve always thought that space could be something nearly as similar to a human mind, but haven’t quite looked that far.

The brain of energy occupying a void space giving purpose to nothingness . A hive mind , where all is connected by quantum entanglement !

All the actual science, the hard work, the complicated maths, the careful testing, eventually translates into working technology that enables people to talk utter gibberish about it to each other...

 

[james blunt]

All the actual science, the hard work, the complicated maths, the careful testing, eventually translates into working technology that enables people to talk utter gibberish about it to each other...

Well , you conna eat technology ! Regardless that some technology works, that doesn't mean you have the correct understanding and correct semantics of the universe .

I've done some of my own maths as you know ! My maths works too

I never understood why science always thought / thinks I am attacking them when I am simply trying to improve them !

Learn and advance as always been me .

I do know my physics though , I can envision almost any process which helps ! From my envisions , I can conceptually engineer workable physics and basic designs such as the space ship I presented in another thread .

This : Which does not use rocket fuel propulsion .

 

[Workman]

All the actual science, the hard work, the complicated maths, the careful testing, eventually translates into working technology that enables people to talk utter gibberish about it to each other...

Ok, I get it, you don’t agree with what’s going on, so then why do you give the respect to show you are still here? Go and be the same elsewhere or stay and know more, you can handle that can’t you or not! What harm will it do you!

 

[Prestor John]

The ''religion'' of science ?

Ooh.

That gave me chills.

 

[james blunt]

Ooh.

That gave me chills.

It does me after experiencing science forums for over a decade ! You can't argue they have errors and may be incorrect in several areas . Well to be honest they are pretty clueless to reality and I even think some of them are science belief extremists .

 

[ChristineM]

No you haven't ! Like always the direct questions are ignored , a typical politicians move and side tracked with irrelevant material .

I asked you earlier to start here :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

You failed at 1 and provided no evidence to the contrary , physical or logical !

Dont talk crap .i provided the nasa take, you tried to reword it to massage your ego.

I started at 1 when you started this thread. I refuse to go over old ground just for you to ignore it again

 

[james blunt]

Dont talk crap .i provided the nasa take, you tried to reword it to massage your ego.

I started at 1 when you started this thread. I refuse to go over old ground just for you to ignore it again

A Nasa opinion is not any sort of evidence ! You haven't provided any evidence that space can be destroyed or created !

Be honest , do you know of anyway to destroy space ?

That's a direct question , let's see if you can answer it honestly without the ''charades'' or ''dressing'' it up as something else !