TJ McCaustland

Actually, even with this tidbit of proof you can't prove it, Tell me again why exactly a crazy Austrian monk defined the universe with his experiment?

Or you can get a fancy pants Star Trek style Transporter and join me in Ten forward for coffee

In all actuality you can visualize anything, but the probability of such visualization in given circumstances is the point in and of itself. Ahem...... How then would you explain higher dimensions when you can't even COMPREHEND a four dimensional object let alone a tenth. You wouldn't just say God, you would say "Um well crap..... how the hell did this happen?" even if you were say a tenth dimensional being, you still couldn't understand 11th dimensional matter, the proof of an outside force is the presence of force, I.E. you take out God from the equation and you can't even prove that 2+2=4 because then theoretically 4 nor 2 exists.

Interesting , Especially how fermionic matter would only exist in our dimension without wormholes..... now that doesn't really make sense that there would be all that space with no matter in it, which even though matter itself is unlikely, an entire multiverse devoid of matter is far more unlikely.

Um..... well........... *&*(%*!!! Why exactly can't people grasp that there is such a thing as Schrodinger's cat which means that the world of the Quantum state (Maybe-world) exists which means that we don't know jack ** about the universe because we can't even prove 1+1=2 because 1 is a representation of exactness in an inexact universe...... I mean come on! Don't beat up on him just because he believes in something, because if we can't even prove that the coffee I'm drinking isn't just a figment of my imagination then I hardly think we're fit to provide any advice for someone who almost KILLED himself over his personal problems and found comfort in a religion. If we burst that bubble and he kills himself that blood is on OUR hands. BTW Phillip..... You might wanna get help if you are or were suicidal..... Just saying....

Wow....... I think I might have a phrase that suits you well... from a song I recently heard..... "Teenagers scare the living (&^# outta me!"

This is not good....... first goes language..... then goes privacy.... then we're all in prison because we can't control our own thoughts enough.......

That wouldn't really work...... Um..... First of all infinite mass can't really exist....... maybe in a quantum state...... but not easily AT ALL. Secondly..... even if all black holes connect (which is an IF with infinite mass) then they wouldn't be spitting out mass in normal matter.... maybe hawking radiation or if you wanna take a big jump off the scientific cliff into the speculative hypothetical abyss..... dark matter or energy (Yeah nobody really knows what happens when you pass the event horizon of even a vanilla Schwartzchild black hole.....) but maybe..... just maybe if you took out the infinite mass bit then you could possible do this by using a form of........ Quantum entanglement? Maybe? IDK? to get out of a black hole...... that is if you can actually figure out how to link the two (If they are not already linked as stated in the OP.)

Yes, I do. The evidence lies in the fact that lets say you one day visualize a universe, it's created by a five dimensional star collapsing which causes the big bang and starts your universe, and at the same time a man who is a Christian, or a Jew, or of whatever religion visualizes another universe, no matter how non-scientific their version may be, would you envision the same universe as him if he didn't tell you about his, and you didn't believe in any outside, omniscent force starting it all? No. In this way he can envision a brilliant car that uses the earth's magnetic field as a means for energy and works in both yours and his universe, while you envision no such thing because you were not inspired by the text you were reading, even if it's the same as the one he was reading, because you don't have the same thought process as he does because there's and extra variable in there that you don't have. Why this occurs in the said situation? Because you don't believe in the same things, and therefore are inspired differently by the said text. In the same method you can envision a new type of train that uses solar energy to move while he doesn't because although again you're reading the same text and have different views on it. Take an image of a cross or a six sided star for example, would it mean anything to you truly if a nasty comment were attached to it? No. However if a man of one of those religions saw it..... FLAME ON! He would verbally butcher the person who wrote it.

If this is true, then wouldn't that mean that there's now hard evidence for wormholes of a sort as well? Because it seems that if we live in a universe that doesn't have any connection in quantum state or physical link to another then that means that that other universe technically doesn't exist relative to us at all because it has no affect on our universe and therefore means nothing to us? That would also mean that if there is no evidence for theory (Because evidence must be observable) then this could be horribly wrong (As for the theory) but still be right AT THE SAME TIME because there ARE other universes. Another Schrodinger's cat! Now the question is who wants to pet Schrodinger's Cat?

Because of the fact that having a religion makes you view the universe in a different way, and it's generally difficult to visualize the same things say, a priest of some religion would, if you're from a different religion or don't believe at all. The crazy creationists for example who say asteroids "Pop into existence", Although they are stupid and highly non-scientific, they have a different perspective that allows them to formulate a train of though (Choo Choo ) that you wouldn't normally be able to on your own (Psychology )

Have some sort of degree in science, it helps science books get published and picked up by schools, believe me, EVERY science book I've ever had to work in was written by someone with a formal degree, mostly people with Doctorates in chemistry if it's chemistry or whatever in whatever, Basically follow fiveworld's steps, get a degree if you don't have one, and listen to ajb's advice carefully, he's much smarter than even he believes.

But this is better than the original hypothesis I had for this now isn't it, therefore I am learning indirectly to stop doing "This" by improving upon these hypothesis with mathematics and fact rather than fiction until they match current standards for such models and therefore become theories in and of themselves, Hence why all my crazy hypothesis posts are in speculations for now, the theories will most likely be in the Physics forum when I do get there.

You can't not necessarily visualize something someone with a religion can, but it may have to be presented to you via inspiration or an idea you see somewhere that you refine into the same thought, i.e. You probably aren't as "Outside the box" as some people with religion are, Because religion is crazy and therefore we are crazy

And so you're blaming me for sharing it when it is very clearly part of a LEARNING process that is well worth the risk of posting it here and possibly being humiliated? I think you should of shared some of your stuff, then improved upon it and learned from advice and correction from here, because then instead of expert your tag would say "Know it all"

The problem with thinking that 1 does exist in the terms of say an egg, or whatever else, is that they are simply figments of our imagination, we know that matter is mostly space, yet we see it and feel it as a solid 100% mass object, so you cannot say that 1 exists when it is more like X, because 1 itself is just a representation, and representations are not exact, so by that same logic, the universe is a representation because although our perceptions and minds state it is a solid mass where matter exists in place of space, it is in reality mostly space, like this 1 as my LCD displays it, it is really just a representation of something real, and we believe it's real and cling to that logic to the very end because we cannot begin to imagine the universe as it truly is, and are afraid to see it as such because we never could understand the least bit of it, so we are ignorant, and believe it's real though we know it is just a representation, inexact to us because we can never perfectly measure it to attain it knowledge of it's exact nature. So in order to live and remain sane in this universe people believed in their own religions, because they cannot ever begin to conceptualize the most basic form of it as it truly is, but in some cases this ignorance was actually a spark of brilliance in one way or another, because someone made a wild hypothesis because he thought he had been visited by his god, so he said some crazy, insanely impossible thing "In his day." that in some cases was later actually found out to be true by application of science. So although you may not believe in any religion JC, because as you stated you are "Bald" or do not believe, but some day in the future you may because of some event, or you may not believe at all ever, but my advice to you though it may not be my place, is to keep an open mind always, and never be indoctrinated into anything totally, but at the same time retain your own beliefs (Even if you have none.) So no a dozen eggs has never been a dozen eggs and never will be, because all we've actually learned is faith in itself, because we can never truly know what 1 is, So your so called science, is faith in our own belief that 1 is 1, and not X,( so you DO have beliefs ) and thus science cannot explain it's own belief because it is irrational, but at the same time is useful because it is PARTIALLY rational, just in the same way we say 1 is 1 when it's truly X. So no science cannot explain everything in a universe without God because it is FOUNDED on the same principle as the faiths that believe in him (Whatever their god may be.), (even if science does not have the same beliefs) That 1 is 1 and always will be 1 instead of it being X because it's just a representation we conjure to try to understand the un-understandable, Useful yes, but never actually exact or entirely true.

You'd have either (a a crappy tasting sponge cake, Or (b a pillar of flame, depending on whether or not you introduced a certain low temperature plasma to it's new friend Either way, my point still stands as you forgot that hypothesis can stay hypothesis until either (a someone disproves it completely, or (b it gets evidence behind it and becomes a theory. and you can't really set up a proper experiment to test the validity of religion. It's not really possible because there are so many factors that if you started when you were a new born and worked till you died you still wouldn't come up with even a fraction of a list of all the factors involved in proving/disproving such. It's like it's own whole hypothetical science, it cannot be entirely proven, or disproven, and no proper experiment could ever be set up to disprove/prove it all. You can however prove/disprove some parts.

But it doesn't minimize the things that are wishful but hypothetically possible, it looks into them, such is the case of SOME of Christianity.

Wow..... Just wow lol...... I'm assuming your age group is becoming a bit of a minority if you don't like any of the heavier stuff people listen to now...........

Seeing how that thing lashed out I think if we made them do all the @#&$@$# tasks I think we might run into some trouble if we gave them saws or drills or something......

Your visualization and opinion are your own, I appreciate your efforts on this forum but if atheism is a distinct lack of religion as baldness is a distinct lack of hair then why is it considered a hairstyle? But what meaning does "1 mole of O2 or 6.022*1023 O2 Atoms" have if the universe as we conceptulize it is infinite? Because although we state the universe only has so much matter, dark matter, energy, dark energy etc. with infinity comes the possibility for anything to happen, even multiverseS, where 1 mole of O2 has no meaning as measurement of matter in any one of those is irrelevant as the potential matter is measureless? Forgive me for playing the devil's advocate but it sounds a lot like lots of other things in SCIENCE that are "Facts" Don't make sense either when taken from a certain point of view.....

But science also includes thinking in the form of speculation, no matter how wishful.

Because it's an answer involving a claim in the form of a question, So it's not truly a question but an answer.

Thanks man. +1 to all your posts.

But can you prove it?