martillo

You didn't get it. It's figurative. It means that in an ideal kind of life no animal eat other animal to survive. All animals would be vegetarian. Some animal very similar to a lion could exist but vegetarian having his proper fruits, seeds or leafs to eat. Same for us humans of course. I'm not vegetarian but I recognize that in an ideal kind of life all beings would be. Vegetarianism nowadays leads to nothing, it's useless for me. One thing is how things are, other how they should be. In an ideal kind of life no one hurt or damage other ones. If not would not be ideal for the damaged ones. It must be ideal for all existent beings, obviously. But the solution of the problem is not a matter of a diet. The real problem is the not ideal values of the physics parameters as I already said in that shown page in posts #24 and #31. It's a problem in the Physics of the Universe and the solution would come with Metaphysics only since it requires the intervention of some "Superior Intelligence" capable to make changes in the Physics of the Universe. That's what I think.

I didn't say nor meant that. It would be: "Sorry no hunting. Go vegan."

No harmful accident be possible, no disease of any kind, no catastrophes at all.

To the lion I would tell sorry, no hunting. To us humans I would tell writing, on the sand of the beach only. ... ... ...

To a chaffinch I would tell no birdcages.

In an ideal kind of life, life is in armony with nature and all resources(like food) easily available. If not would not be ideal. Poor would not exist. You may ask and work? Well I think no work needed. You know, even no technology would be needed, I think.

Thanks for your opinions anyway.

Already posted at #24:

strange wrote: Phi for All wrote: You treat Physics and life problems as totally separated while they are strongly related... But I understand, don't worry. By the way I'm not trying to convince anyone, may be just looking for someone that could be interested, and that's because I'm explaining my point of view, just that. Phi for All wrote: I don't disagree with the scientific method. I think both empiricism and rationalism complement each other and must work together in the method. What I see is just that it became quite solely empirical and I would claim of a more advance in rationalism.

From my point of view there's too much suffering and paining everywhere. May be you are lucky in a comfortable situation and you feel fine enough to look for improving the things. I feel comfortable sometimes but when i feel fine I look around near or far away and lot others are not so lucky. So I concluded we are all in a bad situation and of course looking for something better.

I agree. I would say both mountains are not of the same nature. One is a mountain of human's knowledge the other a mountain of his unreasonable beliefs. Personally I prefer to walk on the side of the first one and I would take only a little bit on the other one but that is my option, others would take different paths. I can say you that what I would take as valid from the religious one is just about considering the existence of some "Superior Intelligence" creating the Universe what actually belongs to what is known as "Deism" and is not religious but a rational tentative of asume the existence of some kind of "God" in the Universe something not being currently considered in Science. Actually I don't understand well why Science does not mantain the possibility of some creator God open. The other thing I would consider is about the notion that our world and life are not the ideal ones that should be. For instance the Bible talks about the appearence of a "Devil" at early times seducing mankind and that would be the cause of the disappearence of an initial Paradise. I don't believe in Devils nor that human beings could be responsible for that but do believe in an initial ideal state of things and something else causing the fall into a non ideal state at Universal scale. Particularly I believe that the physics parameters values are not the ideal ones and life exist adapted to them as it can in contrary to the notion of both perfectly tunned as most scientific documentals transmit to us. I treat this point of view a Little more at my "Physics flaw" page:

But think that while transiting the valley some climbs can be made on any of the mountains as needed or desired...

I didn't say the Universe is in an ideal state, nowhere, on the contrary everywhere it is said it is not. Thanks for the advice. I see the Physics Science and Religion as two big mountains and in the middle a valley to transit...

You know, I have that problem in my mind, don't have a solution at the time, found a way to present it in the form of a hypothetical dialog and I just want other's opinions with the aim to find a way to face it someway. May be I will not find anything towards a valid answer to it but for me is the cause of all problems of life since the origins of the times. I mean, some ones believe to find the solution to life's problems in politics, other in religion, other looking for health cures, other in robotics but for me they are all endless ways because the real problem is a Universe's physics problem and the solution could come with Metaphysics only. Better treatment of this in another page: Seems may be just the first step in a long way trip... It's what I have...

Yes, thanks for your comment. I just clarified my approach.

I couldn't get your point.

Nothing to do with Bible. As it is said in the first post is related to DEISM not to any theism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

Bad misunderstanding. Poor reading. Nowhere it is being justified something bad in life as a mysterious act of God. On the contrary is brought the new proposition of a God in trouble by some problem happening at the times of the creation of the Universe and is opened the possibility for someone to imagine something that helping the troubled God would change the future.

What do you think about the following hypothetical dialog? Source: blog url removed by moderator Is not related to any religious concept of God but to Deism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism).

I understand Relativity and I understand your point. The difference comes from the fact that you believe in Relativity while I do not. I think you are making some concessions to mantain Relativity floating but I understand, there's no other option isn't it? I mean there's no other theory to compete seriously with Relativity... Now this have changed, there is a strong contender now, but this is for another thread. Take a look on the new thread in this forum: "A New Light In Physics..."

This topic is for discussion and debate of a new set of theories in Physics that can make "Modern Physics" tremble in its foundations. The theories are presented in a very precise and concise style at the site: "A New Light In Physics" Structures for photons, electrons and neutrinos are proposed to explain the "wave-like" behaviour of the particles so that the "wave-particle duality" mystery is finally solved! It's not easy, many great theories of Modern Physics had to been slightly corrected and others radically replaced. It can be the begining of a new "Real Physics" where no inconsistencies and paradoxes should be found. The "dirty job" was done finding the errors and correcting them. Now is time to develop it more and you can contribute and be a key participant in the process towards that "Real Physics"! WHAT YOU WILL FIND INSIDE: You will find what light really is. Light and every kind of radiation are made by photons. The photons are particles and here you can see exactly what kind of particles they are and how they exhibit a "wave-like" behavior. You will find a new concept of particle. You will find a new theory about the elementary particles and forces of the Universe. You will find a new definition of the Electric and Magnetic Fields and Forces. You will find a new theory about how the Electric and Magnetic Fields and Forces produced by the elementary particles can interact with those of other particles to form electrons, photons, etc and to produce the phenomena of diffraction pattern, photoelectric absorption, photoelectric radiation, pair annihilation and pair creation. You will find how the mystery of wave-particle duality is finally solved. You will find a new interpretation of experiments like those of Michelson-Morley, Fizeau, Davisson-Germer, Feynman, Hertz, Kaufmann, and those experiments about: interference and diffraction of photons, electrons diffraction (De Broglie formula is corrected and has a new physical meaning), Doppler Effect, Transversal Doppler Effect, mass variation and energy-mass conversion (E=mc2 continues valid but with a new physical meaning). You will find how communications really happens due to photons transmission. In brief, there are new theories in this text, there are modifications made to some of today's theories and some others are abandoned. The text begins with a correction on the electric and magnetic fields and forces. Those readers who prefer to see first the new theories about photons and the elementary particles of nature can go directly to Chapters Three and Four.

CPL. Luke, It does matter. There's only one reality in Nature.

CPL. Luke, It does matte because we are talking about the different predictions of a theory about a physical phenomenon. It is said in the problem that the twins can take photographs of themselves and send them to everybody to see what happens to them. Then it is possible to verify which prediction could be true! Now I will assume for a while that one is verified as the correct prediction, what happened to the other ones, failed???

insane_alien, But they are contradictory...

CPL. Luke, But each one sees a different thing and they are contradictory. Which could be true and which not? All the observations should be consistent and they are not.