Speculations

Several months ago I began reading up on genetic algorithms, and the impact they are going to potentially have on technology is earth-shattering. I was at a workshop a few weeks back and saw a demonstration of a genetic algorithm in real-time on screen. It was simply several arms working in coordination to find the best angles and shortest path to hold onto a moving ball. Several times while the presenter was talking (he hadn't touched the computer for minutes), the program suddenly started moving again and found a better position, then became inactive again. The applications in every field of science (and even art, music, and literature) are quite literally …

Most astronomers believe that large quantities of some unidentified material pervade the universe called dark matter. Galaxy clusters move about but do not escape due to gravitational pull. The laws of physics tell us how much mass needs to be present to counterbalance the motions, their by preventing the dispersal of the system. The mass of the amount of the universe actually observed falls far short of that. Mass discrepancy appears in practically all systems, from dwarf galaxies through normal galaxies and galaxy groups on to the vast super clusters. Dark matter is expanding faster and faster inside this bubble which contains our visible universe. Out side of our v…

I thought I might move the Unconscious and Collective Unconscious debate out of the Biology forum. Ok, I hope you do realize my comments on the ‘unconscious intellect’ are purely for hopefully interesting discussion and deeper insights, they are not considered by me as solid science at all. Honest. 1. The ‘unconscious intellect’ has no reason why it should drive anything; it just does, like the sun shines, like the cosmos exists. It is the primal force that drives matter into becoming life forms. It isn’t a divine consciousness. It is best seen as a tree that grows, simply because IT CAN. It has the resources around it, the evo pressures that are available to aid…

TIME EXPLAINED Time is very simple, once you get it. But “getting it” is so very difficult. That’s because your current concept of time is so deeply ingrained. You form a mental map of the world using your senses and your brain. You use this mental map to think, and you are so immersed in it that you can’t see things the way they really are. You are locked into an irrational conviction that clocks run, that days pass, that time flows, and that a journey takes a length of time. It takes steely logic to break out of this conditioning. First of all we need to look at your senses and the things you experience. Let’s start with sight. Look at the picture below: …

I know why there are no black hole singularities. It's crushingly simple. But the explanation is deemed to be pseudoscience, so I can't share it here.

There is no wave / particle duality, everything is analog continuous waves, and they only appear discrete due to certain resonance effects. For example in the twin slits experiment, there never are individual photons passing through the slits one by one, there are just analog continuous waves that (of course) interfere with each other through the slits. The apparently discrete nature of the measurement is due only to the fact that photons are detected by absorption by an electron (whether in a photocell, photosensitive emulsion, or photopigment in the retina) and electrons are only absorbed at discrete levels that match the energy difference to the higher level or…

Ok. First things first. Do you believe in any such thing, one way or another? I'm not a firm believer. I get freaked out a little if someone does it, but I usually attribute it to chance, or just good memory or cheating. But, anyway, and I hope this is the right place to post, what do you think will be the best way to test someone on whether or not they can "examine" something without examining it firsthand? Like a vision or something. Assuming this phenomenon is real, what would you think the best way to eliminate any real variables will be, like eliminating all means of communication, and all means of viewing the test material? Me and a friend want to design an …

Evolution is a very nice idea, which is nevertheless completely un-provable and unsupported by science. Therefore, it is simply another religion or form of belief, just like any religious creation story. It is no different from the native creation belief that man was made out of clay and put in the oven until he came out the right colour. Those who believe in it do so because they have faith in it, not because it has been proven by science. The main problem we have with evolution today is that the information presented to us in our textbooks seems very credible and very realistic, because we haven’t been told the whole truth. We haven’t been told all the details surr…

what if there is no missing link? Perhaps the most famous of Terence McKenna's theories and observations is his explanation for the origin of the human mind and culture. McKenna theorized that as the North African jungles receded toward the end of the most recent ice age, giving way to grasslands, a branch of our tree-dwelling primate ancestors left the branches and took up a life out in the open — following around herds of ungulates, nibbling what they could along the way. Among the new items in their diet were psilocybin-containing mushrooms growing in the dung of these ungulate herds. McKenna, referencing the research of Roland L. Fisher Ph. D.(College of Optometr…

Have you guys given any more thought to a religion forum

Uncertainty Principle of Mathematics (MUP) Is our universe real or not? see paper attached send comment correction an yor opinion

This is my first post, I have a question and would love to get some feedback. What are some current thoughts or explanations of the concept of "units" of nothingness existing. Here are mine please someone explain how I am proven wrong. On an abstract level we can understand what nothingness describes. But by definition it is a contradictional essence. Simply by being catagorized as nothing the presumed nothing instantly trancends into being something. But what if the so called "nothingness" (for lack of a better word) follows the concepts of nothing while being something. The one property of nothingness would be to not have anyother properties other than not…

I don't think we can prove anything is infinite and that all scientific laws apply everywhere becuase we can't be everywhere at once and we can't be be here to observe something for infinite.

Can anyone explain if this is right. if i can divide 2 infinitely to an infinitely small number once i reach the infinitely small number couldn't i multiply that infinitly small number an infinite number of times meaning that the number 2 is infinite or am i just confusing myself?

What if you simply examine reality as a case of ABSOLUTE motion within an ABSOLUTE 4 dimensional frame. In other words, Time is to be regarded as being a dimension of which we can cross, and it is just part of the complete 4 dimensional Space-Time environment in which all events take place. Funny enough, if you see Time in this way, the outcome of the examination of such a structure, predicts changes that if converted into mathematical equations, become identical to equations known as.... 1) The Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction equation. 2) The Time Dilation equation. 3) The Lorentz Transformation equations. 4) The Velocity Addition equation. One may direct…

From:http://space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600 4 Belfast homeopathy results MADELEINE Ennis, a pharmacologist at Queen's University, Belfast, was the scourge of homeopathy. She railed against its claims that a chemical remedy could be diluted to the point where a sample was unlikely to contain a single molecule of anything but water, and yet still have a healing effect. Until, that is, she set out to prove once and for all that homeopathy was bunkum. In her most recent paper, Ennis describes how her team looked at the effects of ultra-dilute solutions of histamine on human white blood cells involved in inflammation. These "basophils" releas…

Can I ask the members of this forum to look at the link below and have a rough guess as to how hot the temperature would have been for this person to be able to stand where she is? http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_woman.html I don't wish to upset 'Cap'n Refsmmat' with this one.

I have found an excellent video that is very scientific, yet it provides evidence against evolution. If you watch this video, you will see that the people who created it have an excellent understanding of evolution. The video starts by explaining the theory in great detail, and then it mentions lots of problems with the theory. Here is the link to the video: http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/aqoo/home.html Just click where the moving text says, "Watch Video Here" and then select your connection speed. I think you all will be impressed with how much evidence they provide.

INTRODUCTION I’ve always held Albert Einstein in the highest regard. I admire his ability to think outside the box, I empathise with his curiosity, and I share his desire to understand the world in terms we can grasp. And I so love the romance of the lowly patent clerk who applied his fresh young mind to the world’s great mysteries. There he was, in the dying days of horse-drawn transport, dreaming of light, and of space and time. What he came up with was just so profound. It feels like it was ahead of its time, and I suppose it was. It took a long time to catch on, a long time to earn recognition, and a long time to catch the public eye. But when it did, the public w…

MASS EXPLAINED v3.0 You know that energy is an intangible thing. You can’t hold pure energy in the palm of your hand. Because energy is stress, which is the same as pressure, which is the same as negative tension, and you need a volume of stress to get the dimensionality right. You know that mass is a tangible thing. You can hold an object in your hand and feel the mass of it. You even know that E=mc², and that the intangible thing called energy can be used to make the tangible thing called mass. But you don’t know how. I’ll explain how. The answer is all down to motion. Or the lack of it. You have to get relative, and think in terms of momentum and ine…

Ok, pure speculation I devised while doing some dishes:D This is sort of based on my deformed understanding of GR I guess and some QM I would suggest, be aware though this is purely speculation. Ok, lets say dark stuff, dark matter/dark energy is the most primordial substance. Now lets say in this it has some degree of physics that currently is not understood save for interaction with gravity/time. Now lets say some weird quantum effect took place in which this basic substance was able to gain mass, or take on a form such as an electron or photon for example, or in general something that we see in the visible universe currently. Boom, you have your bang in a sor…

If the land mass were ever to become covered in water how long would it take for the ocean to loose it's salt content; if it ever would?

What scale would a ‘drinking bird toy’, or, ‘dinky bird’, need to be in order for it to fully power a low voltage 20w light bulb. I’d imagine it would produce power by moving some type of dynamo of your choice? Any takers on this hair brain idea? cheers.

BELIEF EXPLAINED When I analysed my basic concepts, I found things that weren’t real, that don’t exist, that we never actually see. But we assume they’re real, we take them for granted, and we believe in them. Because we have holes in our understanding, holes that we’ve all grown up with. We’ve lived with them for so long that we don’t know they’re there any more. We cover them up with ignorance of our ignorance, with our blindness of our blind spot, and we shield ourselves with a peer pressure that persuades there are no alternatives to consider. We do it because we are social animals, we follow the herd, we are prey to groupthink. That’s the way we are. So much so, …

Most models of the universe are more geared toward physics. I would like to add something associated with the time between the formation of the primal hydrogen and where gravity takes over to make structures. In this span of time, chemical affects should be the dominant affect. For example, if we have an expanding cloud of ionized H, the H and electrons are sharing in a very openly distributed way. This is sort of like glue that just keeps the hydrogen from diffusing away. Essentially the EM forces and the outer orbitals of H help bind the cloud. The further down the energy levels the electrons can get the more stabile the H atoms. The coolest zone will be on th…