Itoero

Senior Members
  • Content count

    1191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Itoero

  1. This is an odd statement. You can't 'beat' evolution( change over time ). Beating 'evolution' is like beating 'time'.
  2. This will come as a surprise to most people but God does exist. A while ago he got sick of being God and he made me God. So I'm God.
  3. Quantum Entanglement ?

    I never said that. But if you think like that, it's rather 5 dimensions instead of 2.
  4. Quantum Entanglement ?

    If it's encoded on a two dimensional surface then that doesn't change the observable dimensions we live in. And it's not a 4 or 5 dimensional space since the holographic dimensions are not space....they create space.
  5. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No, you are again completely wrong. If the holographic principle is correct then that doesn't change the three-dimensional space we live in which is a geometric setting in which three values (called parameters) are required to determine the position of a point. By proving the holographic principle you don't reduce the amount of coordinates needed to specify any point within the space.
  6. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No. The ER=EPR is a conjecture in physics stating that entangled particles are connected by a wormhole (or Einstein–Rosen bridge) It''s proposed by Leonard Susskind in 2013,, a proponent of the holographic principle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER%3DEPR
  7. Quantum Entanglement ?

    The ER EPR is based on the holographic principle. But it's not literally said. The holographic principle is a supposed property of quantum gravity that states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary to the region—preferably a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First proposed by Gerard 't Hooft, it was given a precise string-theory interpretation by Leonard Susskind who combined his ideas with previous ones of 't Hooft and Charles Thorn. The ER=EPR conjecture was proposed by Leonard Susskind and Juan Maldacena in 2013. Why do you say that? The H principle doesn't remove or delete things, the principle explains things, it gives extra information. Yes but dimreepr seems to think he knows.
  8. Quantum Entanglement ?

    No it doesn't but the ER EPR is based on the hologr
  9. Calculations suggest that physical information(like mass) could permanently disappear in a black hole. (Black hole information paradox)
  10. Quantum Entanglement ?

    you're missing the point, they aren't connected So ER=EPR is wrong? I give neg rep because you deny the work of several of the 'best' physicists of this time and your example doesn't make any sense. You do know that more then two particles can get entangled?
  11. Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

    The last time you said that, a theorem backed me up. This happened very often on this forum. People always say I'm wrong yet I'm very often backed up by science. I'm talking against faith-based beliefs...believe what you want.
  12. Quantum Entanglement ?

    That's what the holographic principle provides. It states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a lower-dimensional boundary to the region. In my oversimplified explanation...two entangled particles are connected by 2D info. 2D info implies the absence of time and space. There is no space between entangled particles which allows the seemingly instantaneous collapse.
  13. Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

    "Inside the event horizon all paths bring the particle closer to the center of the black hole. It is no longer possible for the particle to escape." There is no evidence for this, it's the idea from a smart man a long time ago. If you knew more about how physicists like Hawking and Susskind investigate this and what the current idea's are, then you would know the idea that "Inside the event horizon all paths bring the particle closer to the center of the black hole. It is no longer possible for the particle to escape." is probably wrong. GR doesn't give the absolute truth... That's not true...science evolves you know, things change. Not everything in GR is correct. Hawking has the soft hair theory. And the holographic principle was invented by G t Hooft and it was given a stringy look by Susskind. Those are ways to deal with the black hole info paradox. The stuff the GR says about BH has not much value anymore. It states the universe is a hologram. Black hole event horizons are then boundaries which separate our observable 3D world from 2D info. Time and space are not present in 2D info...you shouldn't apply GR-logic to understand BHs.
  14. Quantum Entanglement ?

    Ok but between entangled particles the act of measuring or observing is transferred. It's spooky reaction at distance.
  15. Quantum Entanglement ?

    Yes it is. It allows us to see. Nuclear reactions in the sun form light and our photoreceptorcells absorb the photons. The most simple example is that an electron can absorb and release a photon.
  16. Quantum Entanglement ?

    It's mathematically possible to explain quantum-phenomena so the quantum-probability becomes part of a deterministic system. This is all about the holographic principle. The 2D-plane you can call an extra dimension. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle There is more and more 'evidence' that points to the holographic principle. Then the ER=EPR is imo correct. It states that entangled particles are connected by a wormhole. A wormhole implies the absence of time and space...so does the 2D info in the holographic principle.
  17. Quantum Entanglement ?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-dimensional_space Entanglement and quantum-probability imo demands an extra dimension. https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.01287
  18. Why do many people make a distinction between abiogenesis and evolution? The process that led to the forming of life is subject to survival of the fittest trough natural selection just like the Darwinian evolution of life. For example: -The energy of photons (light) can work as catalyst to form organic matter but the formed matter must be fit enough not to break apart due to the photon energy. You might call this survival of the fittest molecules. -In the Miller Urey, the applied energy forms amino acids but also limits the size since the formed amino acids have to be resistent (or be fit enough)not to break apart because of the applied energy.
  19. high jump+roll

    From how high could you jump if you had a perfect roll at the end? You roll to absorb the impact. This is the roll I mean:
  20. True but those wishes and beliefs are formed by experiences/acquired knowledge...they don't just appear all of a sudden. You constantly make choices/decisions and some of them you can relate to free will. When there seems to be a random aspect in the choice making, people call it 'free will'. We have free will because we are conscious.
  21. Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

    Citation? And that doesn't ''prove' anything. You can only make assumptions about the inside of black hole by knowing what's inside. If the holographic principle is correct ( and it seems like it is) then there is no centre in a bh. I didn't say that. Mass is physical information. The bh info paradox concern all physical info.
  22. This is part of Kent Hovind's ideas that (in his opinion) show a young earth.
  23. high jump+roll

    The point of this technique is to absorb most of the impact by rolling which allows you to jump from higher heights without breaking your ancles. So the strength of your ancles is important but it's not the limiting factor. In order to roll, you need momentum along the x-axis...you can't jump straight down.
  24. Scientists and pop sci

    This reminds me of an episode in Friends where Phoebe talks with Ross about evolution.
  25. Fantasy beasts and where to find them.

    In Canada I noted that many indians believe in bigfoot. I also met a guy that was in prison for a long time I think and he had very 'strong' opinions concerning Jews and gay people...he also believed in Bigfoot. I remember I was on a hike with him, we heard noise in the forest next to us and this was what he said: "Bears don't make noise like that,.................................it might be a Bigfoot'"