Science and religion

[Audie]

I, too, know how well you write.

 

[james blunt]

People often confuse my relaxed writing approach in being some sort of illiteracy . When discussing things on forums I personally like to be relaxed and do not want to or feel like I need to write everything as if doing some writing degree .
People understand my ''lazy'' English so I don't know what their problem is ! I guess they just don't like when factual miracles ventures into science .


Ya conna always av it me focused brain , i gotta switch off now and again .

 

[james blunt]

I, too, know how well you write.

It's a matter of concentration ! Most of the time my mind is in a chaotic state , there is too many everyday life problems and distractions in my life to give my 100% efforts and attention . Now for example I'm rushing this post because I have to go out soon , I have to sell my monitor to survive !
I need to sell this so I've got transport money for tomorrow to go a DWP appointment . My life is difficult at the moment and relaxation is just a word I know , not something I have .

 

[SalixIncendium]

**MOD POST**​

The topic of this thread is Science and Religion, not Critique Another's Writing Style.

Continued off topic posts may result in moderation under Rule 4 of the RF Rules.​

 

[Audie]

It's a matter of concentration ! Most of the time my mind is in a chaotic state , there is too many everyday life problems and distractions in my life to give my 100% efforts and attention . Now for example I'm rushing this post because I have to go out soon , I have to sell my monitor to survive !
I need to sell this so I've got transport money for tomorrow to go a DWP appointment . My life is difficult at the moment and relaxation is just a word I know , not something I have .

Sorry about your problems! We all like you and wish you the best.

Be it noted your post here is written to subzies standards,
or mine.

We have been unfair to you and I apologize.

 

[james blunt]

Plz delete.

I've deleted it and accept the apology with thanks !

 

[Audie]

I've deleted it and accept the apology with thanks !

Good enough. I only read about the first three words of your
response, so nothing for you to apologize for.

My mom was so extremely strict about my speech
and writing! It bothers me more than it should
when I encounter...well, you see what I am saying.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

As some of you may know I'm an amateur scientist and I also study religion . The world says I am crazy and my notions are malarkey so I am going to write my notion in brief and would like your honest opinions if you think my notion is malarkey or understandable .

The N-field Theory

Abstract - The N-field theory is an united theory that unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space , making reference to Albert Einsteins notion of space-time and Newtons absolute space . Additionally , the N-field theory explains a spontaneous creation of an Electrical Universe making reference to Dirac and Tesla .
Penultimately the N-field theory provides a set of simplicity maths to reach conclusion that the creation of the Universe is a miracle .

Extra content :

1:Explaining the nature of light

2:Explaining the mechanism of gravity

3:Explaining time


Does that look insane to anyone or doesn't make sense ?

Until you show your work, your abstract is pretty meaningless. Please show us your "simplicity maths" and all the steps taking you from your basic assumptions to reach the conclusion that "the creation of the universe is a miracle."

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I know they are wrong and can demonstrate they are wrong on theories etc . I can also add correctness to the science .

Then please quit telling us you can, and actually DO SO!

 

[Subduction Zone]

And sorry for starting this language mess.

But as @beenherebeforeagain please show us the math. Tell us what reasonable test would refute your model. @james blunt , you do not appear to understand that if you do not have a reasonable test that could show your model to be wrong, if it is wrong, then what you are proposing is not science by definition. Scientific ideas need to be testable.

 

[james blunt]

Until you show your work, your abstract is pretty meaningless. Please show us your "simplicity maths" and all the steps taking you from you basic assumptions to reach the conclusion that "the creation of the universe is a miracle."

Step 1 - The consideration and rational thinking about , what is space and what are the properties of space .

Reference and thoughts : Newtons absolute space

According to Newton, absolute time and space respectively are independent aspects of objective reality:[4]

Absolute space and time - Wikipedia

My N-field theory respectively considers Newtons notions on absolute space and consider what is space and the properties of space . Firstly , directing our attention to the definition of what space is defined to be .

space
/speɪs/
noun

1. 1.
   a continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics is important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition .


The N-field theory proposes the properties of space in respect to an absolute space and physics .

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space has no physicality

3) Space has no mechanism to age , time being absolute

4) Space is the unique property of an infinite void


I will pause there , to allow time for thought !

 

[George-ananda]

Does that look insane to anyone or doesn't make sense ?

It loses me, but I am not that deep into science myself.

To me 'religion' has to involve human experiences. So I am not sure why you are even bringing the word 'religion' into this.

 

[james blunt]

And sorry for starting this language mess.

But as @beenherebeforeagain please show us the math. Tell us what reasonable test would refute your model. @james blunt , you do not appear to understand that if you do not have a reasonable test that could show your model to be wrong, if it is wrong, then what you are proposing is not science by definition. Scientific ideas need to be testable.

Perhaps if you give me time to write my notion and try to understand it , you will understand my rational math .

 

[james blunt]

It loses me, but I am not that deep into science myself.

To me 'religion' has to involve human experiences. So I am not sure why you are even bringing the word 'religion' into this.

Maybe you'll understand more of the science when I have wrote more ! If there's anything you need clarification on , please feel free to ask .

 

[james blunt]

Step 1 - The consideration and rational thinking about , what is space and what are the properties of space .

Reference and thoughts : Newtons absolute space





Absolute space and time - Wikipedia

My N-field theory respectively considers Newtons notions on absolute space and consider what is space and the properties of space . Firstly , directing our attention to the definition of what space is defined to be .



It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics is important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition .


The N-field theory proposes the properties of space in respect to an absolute space and physics .

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space has no physicality

3) Space has no mechanism to age , time being absolute

4) Space is the unique property of an infinite void


I will pause there , to allow time for thought !

For purposeful and meaningful discussion , the N-field theory gives absolute space namely the value of k and in maths describes :

Δ k = 0

Δ k (t) = 0

Where k is space , t is time and Δ is Delta / change .

Does anyone disagree with this ?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Step 1 - The consideration and rational thinking about , what is space and what are the properties of space .

Reference and thoughts : Newtons absolute space

Absolute space and time - Wikipedia

My N-field theory respectively considers Newtons notions on absolute space and consider what is space and the properties of space . Firstly , directing our attention to the definition of what space is defined to be .

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics is important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition .

The N-field theory proposes the properties of space in respect to an absolute space and physics .

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space has no physicality

3) Space has no mechanism to age , time being absolute

4) Space is the unique property of an infinite void


I will pause there , to allow time for thought !

Thank you. So, you have here outlined your basic propositions about space and time.

First, are you aware that Newton's concept of space and time has been superseded by the general relativity proposed by Einstein? That is, space and time are two aspects of the underlying reality, the space-time. Space and time cannot under this theory be separated

If you wish to demonstrate that general relativity is incorrect and that the Newtonian model is correct, you are going to need to get into some pretty deep mathematics, because there are lots of observations (= evidence) that need to be explained by your alternative.

Same goes if you are trying to show that Newton was wrong...and even moreso if you're trying to show that both Newton and general relativity are wrong. Actually, Newton's theories are mathematically quite useful still, and we know that relativity is quite useful, but also has some remaining mysteries. But your new theory will have to explain all the things that can be explained using Newton or Einstein...and explain the things that they cannot.

So, as you state above, and I'm restating to make sure I understand what you're saying, your basic assumptions are that:
1) space cannot be created or destroyed
2) space has no physical nature or existence
3) Time is absolute, and so is space...and they are separate
4) space is a unique property of something else, "the infinite void"

Do you have any evidence to support these assumptions?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Time is not "absolute". That claim is refuted by mesons from cosmic rays. I guess that is another "theory" that can be laid to rest.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

For purposeful and meaningful discussion , the N-field theory gives absolute space namely the value of k and in maths describes :

Δ k = 0

Δ k (t) = 0

Where k is space , t is time and Δ is Delta / change .

Does anyone disagree with this ?

Ok, it's a statement of your assumptions. What is your evidence that these two equations actually apply to reality?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

As some of you may know I'm an amateur scientist and I also study religion . The world says I am crazy and my notions are malarkey so I am going to write my notion in brief and would like your honest opinions if you think my notion is malarkey or understandable .

The N-field Theory

Abstract - The N-field theory is an united theory that unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space , making reference to Albert Einsteins notion of space-time and Newtons absolute space . Additionally , the N-field theory explains a spontaneous creation of an Electrical Universe making reference to Dirac and Tesla .
Penultimately the N-field theory provides a set of simplicity maths to reach conclusion that the creation of the Universe is a miracle .

Extra content :

1:Explaining the nature of light

2:Explaining the mechanism of gravity

3:Explaining time


Does that look insane to anyone or doesn't make sense ?

An "amateur scientist?" LOLOLOL. Studying science as a hobby is great, but calling yourself a "scientist" if you don't even have a science degree is just laughable.

 

[james blunt]

Thank you. So, you have here outlined your basic propositions about space and time.

First, are you aware that Newton's concept of space and time has been superseded by the general relativity proposed by Einstein?

So, as you state above, and I'm restating to make sure I understand what you're saying, your basic assumptions are that:
1) space cannot be created or destroyed
2) space has no physical nature or existence
3) Time is absolute, and so is space...and they are separate
4) space is a unique property of something else, "the infinite void"

Do you have any evidence to support these assumptions?

I'll explain space-time and Albert later on in my theory , he is not wrong and neither was Newton .

You ask about proof / evidence of my four proposals , it is observable . A nuclear weapon cannot destroy space and there is no mechanism for space to age , things age relative to absolute space which I will explain also later on in my theory .

They are more axions than assumptions , self evidently true .