james blunt
Well-Known Member
Sir I narrowed science down to the beginning, science knows the answer is God . ZpP is Gods miracle.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I challenge the world , bring it on!
- Thread starter james blunt
- Start date
james blunt
Well-Known Member
If you like , I will be God so the Sun does not hurt me. I am on the Sun looking at you and you are looking back.
No, you were banned from *science* forums because what you say is wrong and you don't want to learn and contribute to the *science*.
But this isn't a science forum. You can have your beliefs even if they are wrong. And most will consider you to be wrong. But that is the price of diversity.
Are you at rest relative to me? Or moving?
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Let us to begin with we are both at rest, we have a linear vector between us . This is how Einstein worked and company do it anyway. A point I have about photons missing targets is another subject sir.
You 00:00:00>...................................................<me 00:00:00
Start the clocks sir.
OK, in that case, we have the same time coordinate (mostly), so each of us sees the other after about 500 seconds.
And?
Of course, to even start the clocks, we have to agree on a time coordinate.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
me 00:00:08><you 00:00:08
We are now together sir in the present, we were never not out of each others present. It was I and you that travelled from the present to the present sir.
The point is Sir, all of the entirety of the Universe is always now. No past, no future. Just now being remembered by us to create a memory of history. We have no future memory sir.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
I find the analogy that Polymath25 provided extremely thought provoking (i.e. I'm kinda able to understand what he said lol). I'd like to throw gravity into the analogy as I see it for correction by those who understand these things far better than myself.
It is my opinion that gravity is "instantaneous" and could/should be considered to be the latex of the balloon surface on which "stuff" (like marker dots) reside. That is to say that I believe any two particles on the surface of the expanding balloon are gravitationally connected no matter where they are located on the balloon surface. I know enough physics to be aware that two particles can separate at greater than light speed because of the expansion of space. If gravity were limited by the speed of light then these two sufficiently separated points would no longer be connected by gravity once they begin receeding from each other at greater than light speed and the balloon analogy seems to break down (I'm not stating this as a truth I'm pondering this awaiting explanation and discussion). The latex on the balloon gets thinner and thinner analogous to the effects of gravity at ever greater distances but the latex remains continuous i.e. no holes or strange geometries form.
Folks tell me don't be stupid, suppose the sun disappears how long before you'd know... and they tell me nothing changes on earth for 8 minutes because gravity is limited by the speed of light. So I say hmmm... suppose I put the balloon on a scale and weigh it then pluck the sun off the surface of the balloon, would I see the weight displayed on the scale change in less than 8 minutes? Of course the sun can't disappear in either argument so no one will ever know as the balloon would pop.
Could someone please comment on this as far as where the flaw is in my thinking as scientists believe gravity is not instantaneous... although scientists believe quantum entanglement is instantaneous.
Thanks you!
It is my opinion that gravity is "instantaneous" and could/should be considered to be the latex of the balloon surface on which "stuff" (like marker dots) reside. That is to say that I believe any two particles on the surface of the expanding balloon are gravitationally connected no matter where they are located on the balloon surface. I know enough physics to be aware that two particles can separate at greater than light speed because of the expansion of space. If gravity were limited by the speed of light then these two sufficiently separated points would no longer be connected by gravity once they begin receeding from each other at greater than light speed and the balloon analogy seems to break down (I'm not stating this as a truth I'm pondering this awaiting explanation and discussion). The latex on the balloon gets thinner and thinner analogous to the effects of gravity at ever greater distances but the latex remains continuous i.e. no holes or strange geometries form.
Folks tell me don't be stupid, suppose the sun disappears how long before you'd know... and they tell me nothing changes on earth for 8 minutes because gravity is limited by the speed of light. So I say hmmm... suppose I put the balloon on a scale and weigh it then pluck the sun off the surface of the balloon, would I see the weight displayed on the scale change in less than 8 minutes? Of course the sun can't disappear in either argument so no one will ever know as the balloon would pop.
Could someone please comment on this as far as where the flaw is in my thinking as scientists believe gravity is not instantaneous... although scientists believe quantum entanglement is instantaneous.
Thanks you!
james blunt
Well-Known Member
The surface of the balloon is representative of quantum fields, when a field inflates it pushes things away. i.e expansion of the universe. Gravity is the natural phenomenon of neutral or negative energy , is attracted to neutral.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
Cool I just commented about QF. So either QF give rise to gravity or gravity gives way to QF. Seems to me the better analogy on the balloon is gravity is the latex giving rise to QF.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
So what exactly is the ever-thinning latex of the balloon analogous to if not gravity? Heavier stuff depresses the surface of the balloon more than lighter stuff but the entire surface remains continuous across all the universe. Sustainer says QF but I am not understanding.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Q.F.P (quantum field physicality) explains the expansion, but I have not written it yet, let science stay in ignorance and let the world end in their ignorance, because God does not like humans very much and thinks there is very few of them worth saving from the Evils that are coming.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
So as two entangled particles recede from each other at greater than light speed the particles remain entangled by the fabric that is empty space?
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
...that entanglement remains intact because the fabric that is empty space cannot be destroyed?
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
Argh... I struggle to believe that gravity and entanglement are separate. Perhaps the two are really the same expression?
james blunt
Well-Known Member
By the fabric of fields , the empty space is just empty. Consider a magnet, it has a field, the field does not affect space, it you expand the density of the field by using a stronger magnet, the field density occupying points changes. But enough on that I am giving all my hard efforts away. I am poor , I need money to survive, this is my last week I have , I have until Sunday or my forum days are over.
I need find work from home so I can continue.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
If as Polymath25 states time and space must be thought of as a continuum to make sense what makes time the driving factor in the expansion of the universe? Polymath25 stated that the radius of the balloon is analogous to time so I inferred that time was driving the expansion but is that really the case? Perhaps the expanding surface of the balloon is causing the radius to increase? If that is the case it seems to stand to (my) reason that whatever is causing the expansion (QF) becomes slightly weaker for greater and greater expansion suggesting that early on the expansion was faster suggesting time is much slower now than it was in the beginning. If in the beginning time was faster than it is now then the speed of light (the distance covered by light in a given time) would be less. That seems counterintuitive though. If on the other hand the fabric of empty space is not QF but gravity then the expansion is actually speeding up due to weakening gravitation suggesting that time was actually slower at the beginning than now which in turn would allow light to travel a greater distance in the same "time". That would explain the greater than light speed requirement of the early state of the big bang but it isn't light speed that changed rather it is time that changed and at the beginning time was Loooooooong.
Hmmmm. The above seems like a logical argument that the fabric of empty space is gravity rather than QF because as gravity weakens time speeds up. I think that meshes with relativity as a person standing on the surface of a very heavy object experiences slower time than one standing on the surface of a light object. If expansion were driven by QF then seems like expansion would slow down as QF weakens in density.
Hmmmm. The above seems like a logical argument that the fabric of empty space is gravity rather than QF because as gravity weakens time speeds up. I think that meshes with relativity as a person standing on the surface of a very heavy object experiences slower time than one standing on the surface of a light object. If expansion were driven by QF then seems like expansion would slow down as QF weakens in density.
exchemist
Veteran Member
I think you have the right idea.
Just for your edification, Sustainer is Theorist, last seen as loverbal on sciforums, from which he was banned after starting this thread: How many dimensions fit in a point? | Page 2 | Sciforums
If you take a look you will see the same stuff and the same method. Of course there it was a science forum, so they got rid of him. (On April 14th actually, the same day he joined here.)
Here I don't know what view they take. But he is a terrible timewaster and nobody will ever get any sense out of him, or get him to stop. The only way is not to respond.
But e may not agree as to what all is 'the present'. That s the basic point: simultaneity is not a fixed concept.