All Activity

You are missing the point I used those equation so that I can introduce metric tensor frequency(as far as am concerned,unless told otherwise it's a new concept) that I used in already known energy-frequency relation so that I can bring the idea of quantization,after that I solved Schrodinger equation to get the actual spacetime metric tensor,that is clear on that photo...my point was establishing equivalence in energy frequency relationship and metric tensor frequency....whose solution i had to give it further interpratation.. (how I get to scalar field) I was not given that chance.Is there something wrong with beginning from known to unknown? It's difficult to get it if am not given that chance to offer explanations....thats why I talked about prior notions.

Well, thank you. So, am getting a glimmer now of what this is about... This famous Gould assertion would also make a great thread here at SFN. UAPs are disparate phenomena, not necessarily arising from some common phylogenetic tree branch, is what you're saying?

Isn't it obvious???

I have to agree, I know I'm supposed to be a true believer nut case, but these documents are of unknown providence, in fact they are copies of copies sent anonymously to a UFO researcher back in the 70s or 80s if I remember correctly. I've googled this to death and I can't find a source but I'll keep trying.

There's no such thing as fish

It's hard to decipher some of your oracular comments. Can you offer a summary of what the podcast is about, in case I don't have the 41 minutes required to hear it? And how it's relevant?

Yes. And mathematics. Thank you. Just have looked at it in amazon. Have several concerns: 1. Although it technically falls into the range of "past decades", it is older than I'd like. 2. The amazon description says about the book's topic, "whether quantum mechanics gives a complete account of microphysical reality", which is not what I expect in case of "no philosopher today sees philosophy as a way to empirical truths". 3. $80 paperback, no Kindle version. Thank you. Some 35+ years ago I took (and successfully passed) a semester class in philosophy of science from Prof. Agassi in Tel-Aviv University. We went through a set of schools of thought. I would like to learn about new, later ideas.

Bas van Fraassen, The Empirical Stance.

According to Relativity, the photon speed is the same throughout space whether we are in motion or not. Our perceptions may differ, but you must decide what topic interests you. Are you interested in how the Universe looks to your perception, the perception of the light source, or the space the photons move through? We can precisely calculate what the Universe looks like from our perception instead of another perception because the photon speed is always constant in the space it moves through. Relativity theories have no foundation if the photon speed varies in different localities. By "locality," we are talking about the quantum scale.

Ohh snap, welcome to my labyrinth of echos... 😉

I think the comparisons are what philosophers call "trivially true." His math is correct but it misses the point. Medical errors kill more people than mass shootings but medical errors don't jump out in a movie theater or shopping mall or school and start slaughtering. Mass shootings have unique aspects of horror because of their psychological effects and ability to spark mass fear - and destruction of what were perceived as safe spaces in our lives. So, yes, Neil does tend to be glib and dismissive sometimes.

Like I said, he doesn't understand puberty...

@Eise is the local expert, if I'm allowed to say so. Eg, I'd heard about this David Z. Albert that he mentioned, but I'm not familiar with his work. The only book I can recommend is Michael Redhead's wonderful, Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism, which I liked quite a bit. Carl Popper and Russell etc, are of course classics, but I assume you've got that covered. Bohm was very philosophy-inclined, but his philosophy is sometimes perceived as impregnated with mysticism. Really --and Eise's and others' recommendations pending--, Michael Redhead's book is a very good and very serious read. I assume you meant physics, of course.

What do you guys think of this comment of his?

If you listened to the pod-cast, maybe... You'd understand, just a little bit more, what the map might look like...😉

As I mentioned in my previous post, it's cogent to my argument; I don't care if it's you, or not, bc there's bugger all I can do about it and the mere allegation was motive enough for you to press the button trigger... 😉 This is a logical fallacy, in more than one way, for example, it's not a binery question; either you believe in nuclear antiproliferation or you're a bee keeper. I don't care about your justification for virtue signalling, if that's what floats your boat then all power to you; just don't expect me to clap. It's funny, other than the fact that I never deveated, according to the rules of 'Just a minute'.

Observing pedestrian crossing the street - thought experiment. The experiment is split in three systems: System 1 There is two pedestrians at position A. Pedestrian 1 is moving at speed of v1=1m/s and goes to position B and return backwards to position A. The distance d1=2m time t1=2sec speed v1 is constant. This is all observed by non moving pedestrian 2. System 2 The pedestrian 1 is not moving. The road is moving at speed of v2=1 m/s The pedestrian 1 moves from point A to point E. the distance d2=2 m Time t2=2s The speed v2 =1 m/s is constant This is observed by pedestrian 2. The third system is system 1 and system 2 taking place simultaneously. The trajectory of movement of pedestrian 1 has zig zag pattern - this is observed by pedestrian 2. The total length dt=2.84m The total time travelled is tt=2.84sec the total observed speed is vt=dt/tt=1 m/s The speed of pedestrian 1 is 1 m/s - constant - in all three systems . The observed distance was increased because system 1 and system 2 are applied simultaneously. It will take longer time for pedestrians 1 ,traveling at constant speed to move on Bigger distance of observed trajectory 2.84 m. There is difference in observed time and length but the observed speed is constant. Opinions?

I (not a scientist) am unaware of these changes either but would like to get a taste of them. Any recommendations?

Your “quantum gravity simplified” thread went on for 7 pages without a model. You knew that people responding were familiar with quantum physics, so simply writing down the e.g. energy-frequency relation or the Schrödinger equation wasn’t necessary. And you were told you had one chance. Nobody forced you to hit the button to publish the post. They don’t explain anything.

Maybe it's just an impression on my part, but I think many scientists are unaware of changes in philosophy having taken place in past decades, plus the relatively recent coming of age of a new breed of philosopher scientists.

I think that we can use rotation/spin in order to deflect the debris/parts away from a collision course. If the axis of rotation of the asteroid is more or less parallel with its path, an explosion should split the asteroid in parts going away from the axis/collision path. If the rotation is too weak, we can increase it, with well placed thrusters, prior to the carefully planned explosion. If there is no spin, or the axis is perpendicular to the asteroid path, we may use thrusters to deflect the entire asteroid. We can use as thrusters craters/wells on a side (at a pole, if it spins), where we initiate some chemical reactions or we simply heat them using large arrays of space mirrors (ultrathin reflecting sheets). The arrays of mirrors should be deployed in advance, in all directions, and used as solar power plants, before being converted into solar guns.

- A model is often an equation or set of equations, so that one can predict some measurable outcome under a set of measurable conditions.. I outlined the equations which were initial set of equations before other equations and explanations that could have led to measurable conditions and predictions...I was not given time to do so. If it links quantum mechanics and general relativity,it explains geodesics paths in a simple way,it explains issues concerning time dilation,it explains wave function colapse,it explains expansion of the universe..... The issue according to my thinking is deciphering it,not overestimation...just do this,look fo a diagram all over the internate and books that is simple and can compete with that diagram/those diagrams in explaining the outlined issues,we see it,and then I will be done trying to explain or deciphering those diagrams.

Hello @Riba Before taking any decision, first, you understand yourself. On which field you are interested, which one work inspires you to do more work, and you are always ready for that work. then you will take decision After take decision you will be more satification.

Does that same ratio hold for every charged particle in the universe? According to your theory, that is. I'll be working on other members' queries, btw. And I'm just curious. How did we come out in your tolerance test?

Outline of new religion. I assume that God exists. He resides over space where there would be a higher vacuum (vacuum above the cosmic vacuum), which can be treated as nothingness. Some form of God includes the planetary system, above all the Earth and the Sun. Christ was one of his incarnations. There were more such incarnations-avatars than accepted in the Vishnu religion, which mentions only ten avatars. There were probably several dozen of them. It dates back to the appearance of Cro-Magnon Man, approximately 40,000 years ago. Of course, we can assume that there were also incarnations in earlier hominid forms, and there were many of them. Christ is an incarnation of a spiritual being (solar idealith) of the solar system, primarily the Sun, and can also be called the Sun God (let us recall the Egyptian religion). Although Christ was only one of the incarnations of a certain form of God, he is the last, tenth avatar of Vishnu, but I believe that he was not the last avatar and that there will be more. Over the being of the Son Jesus extends the much greater and more powerful being of the Father. The Father covers the entire universe with his power. He is also the creator of the universe. Above I presented the order of cosmic structures. As for the cult of the Virgin Mary, it is false. Mary actually migrated after Christ in subsequent human incarnations and will continue to migrate. Therefore, among other things, Marian sanctuaries are unnecessary. I will also add that the concept of the Apocalypse presented in the New Testament is fiction. Instead of Marian sanctuaries, sanctuaries of God the Father should be built. About ultramodern architecture. You can also simply build churches in honor of the Father, although currently there are Fatherly temples, namely synagogues and mosques. However, the portrayal of the Father as strict and threatening, as in Judaism and Islam, is not correct. The father is actually friendly and gentle. Above the being of the Father resides the highest and most heavenly non-existence of Nothingness. Nothingness is actually the supreme God, or rather the Mother-Goddess, and creates everything. The Gorgias theory can be recalled here, but this would be its new and more interesting version. Why you sleep at night. Because darkness is inactivity, also passivity, femininity. Darkness and Nothingness is passive, which is why it can take the form as if of a woman. For us humans, Nothingness takes the form as if of a goddess, a woman-mother, but this image should not be taken too literally. In fact, the statement that Nothingness is a woman should be treated as a pictorial metaphor. Nothingness also means freedom and liberty. Mystery is darkness. Nothingness is darkness. Nothingness is the deepest mystery. The doctrine and religion I have presented may seem beautiful because Nothingness and Darkness are beautiful. I would propose creating a new religion of Nothingness and building temples and sanctuaries of Nothingness, about ultramodern architecture. The religion of Nothingness should be considered the most important of all, the temples and sanctuaries of Nothingness the most important. Nothingness is the supreme God, the Mother-Goddess. The condensation theory of Nothingness assumes that everything is just a condensed form of Nothingness and Darkness. Nothingness and Darkness as the Mother of all gives birth to the cosmos from the seed of the primeval singularity. This singularity was created by God the Father (cosmic idealith). The Father himself probably emerged from Nothingness and Darkness. diagram 4. Nothingness is darkness. Symbol of new religion of Nothingness. author of text: Gregory Podgorniak, Poland, 2024 People interested in creating and organizing a new religion of Nothingness, please contact me