coffeesippin

11 hours ago, DrP said:

yea? Keep on embarrassing them with your clean air, free and happy life style, good manners, good international relations, great care for your ex military, care for the mentally ill, low crime, high public safety, recycling, inclusion of minorities, open immigration policy, blindness to skin colour and homosexuality etc..  I'm sure they will need to wipe out that kind of commie socialist dystopian BS at some point before they are made to look TOO dumbass. ;-)    

 

 

I've lived in Canada 71 years and Dr. P you sure aren't describing the Canada I live in where white cops shoot Blacks and Orientals because they are that race, where peaceful democratic protesters are beaten and jailed, where the working poor are slaves to the landowners, where tens of thousands of us get sick and die each year from air pollution, where our water is covered by BlueGreen algae and dogs die quickly after swimming in rivers where people get ALS from bluegreen toxins.    Sure is clear you never lived where I live, Dr. P.   But we do have free Health Care if you don't count dental .. that's on the plus side.

Paul was a person of high importance in the Jewish nation .. a Pharisee of the Pharisees, a Son of a Pharisee, a leader of the rapidly growing Christian people.  He had to be treated like gold by the Romans, they had to determine his value to Rome.   When it became apparent his death would help save Rome another violent revolution from the Jews he was killed to appease the Jews.  Rome knew the Christians were not a violent threat, and that the preaching of Christ lead to peace and non-violence.  He was enabled to preach as a value to Rome.  Then he was killed as a value to Rome.  To ask if Paul was real is to ask if the bible is true. 

Amen_.

26 minutes ago, Strange said:

Link doesn't work. But I assume, from the question, that it is an example of pareidolia

From: https://tn.com.ar/salud/lo-ultimo/que-es-la-pareidolia-cuando-el-cerebro-ve-cosas-que-no-existen_837325

http://justsomething.co/34-hilarious-examples-of-pareidolia-seeing-faces-in-everyday-objects/

Thanks for the examples, Strange, they're great.  Some folks will think one letter ablaze with strings of clustered galaxies is pareidolia, but when the mapping is complete, and the entire name is spelled out, it will be TOO much for coincidence.  You'll probably know Hebrew letters are often topped with little flames.   https://www.google.com/search?q=hebrew+alphabet+chart&sa=X&rlz=1C1GGRV_enCA803CA812&biw=1024&bih=489&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=U57FcWwDf1eEuM%3A%2CIkRGghFmXo4qLM%2C_&usg=AI4_-kR8vShXlY6Y4YWh_lfDy8VWoCKAFA&ved=2ahUKEwihubf0q4ffAhUK2VkKHR9wAZEQ9QEwA3oECAAQCg#imgrc=U57FcWwDf1eEuM:    

Here's a link that might work to the maps in question .. I sure hope it's a genuine site.  https://futurism.com/videos/detailed-map-date-place-universe

On 9/28/2018 at 3:52 AM, Prometheus said:

On 9/28/2018 at 12:44 PM, Phi for All said:

Adam: "We ate the apple and didn't die. And don't call me Shirley."

Surely God told the first lie then. Adam and Eve didn't die that day. 

This seems to be a later interpretation. When God speaks to the serpent just after Adam tells him what happened (Genesis 3:14), he indicates the serpent is but an animal.

 

I'm not sure when the snake became identified with Satan, but Paradise Lost would have popularised the idea, if not started it:

 

 

They lost their eternal life in that day, so they did die, though their flesh lived until that too died outside the garden.  They will not have eternal life again until the resurrection when they will eat of the tree of life which was also in the midst of the garden, but which they could not eat of because the cherubims and flaming sword guarded the entrance.   Genesis 3:24   "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:  Therefore the Lord God sent him forth out of the garden of Eden ..." Genesis 3:22, 23    

Also .. their nakedness was not of the flesh, but of the spirit.  They had betrayed God and knew it, because they knew good and evil.  They hid themselves because they were ashamed they had disobeyed God.   

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

Reminds me of this
https://daily.jstor.org/water-on-mars-canals/

 

Thanks for the canal link.  John, did the ofthebox image come up for you, it won`t connect here now. 

While looking through maps of the universe I found this image.

http://ofthebox.org/presenting-detailed-map-universe-date/

Compare the image to the first letter in Hebrew YHVH   יְהוָֹה

2 hours ago, DrP said:

Thanks....  Do you see my point though?  It is clearly a fictitious place.  

There's a Mordor  near All Creatures veterinary services .. Mordor tattoo.  https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Mordor+Tattoo/@48.1989234,-122.1282559,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x54854f83747c98e1:0xaac65611a6ef6bfc!8m2!3d48.1989234!4d-122.1260672

To some people Mordor is just down the street where you get a tattoo. 

Until that search Mordor was a place or thing I've vaguely heard of in a fictional book I've never looked into. It could have been a real place for all I knew, or it could be a thing, like a humidor .. there could be money in Mordor Humidors especially now that weed is legal in the dry air of Canada's winter.  Maybe I should change my interest from science to marketing.  

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Or, "once upon a time"...

Hey .. then I thought, 'Once upon a time travel .. great title for a book.'   But Google told me it's already been done.  https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36469446-once-upon-a-time-travel

3 hours ago, Strange said:

You mistake looking at pictures with scientific evidence. Where is your mathematical model? Where is the data? where is the analysis?

The map was made by NASA .. they must have used math and data to make it.  I analyzed it with my brain that told me, 'hey, the Voids are like party balloons being blown up, and they're obviously restricting matter from entering them, while obviously pushing pushing the galaxies towards each other so that the galaxies are arranged as filaments.    

Voids described as empty space:  "Generally free of dust and debris, intergalactic space is very close to a total vacuum. The space between galaxy clusters, called the voids, is probably nearly empty. Some theories put the average density of the Universe as the equivalent of one hydrogen atom per cubic meter.Dec 14, 2010"  If that's the AVERAGE density, can we imagine or calculate the density of the Voids?  

Here's something interesting, though you probably know about it, and I think I heard about it before.  https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12546-biggest-void-in-space-is-1-billion-light-years-across/    It would be interesting to examine the structure of the groups and perhaps there might be single galaxies I doubt it though, around that void.

Actually, the billion year void proposes another evidence for my Speculation while my Speculation may solve the Cold Spot problem as to why it is there:

        "Because the CMB is leftover radiation from the big bang, some cosmologists have said that the cold spot is a problem for the theories of the early universe. But Rudnick               says that the void could have been created billions of years after the big bang."

Void GROWTH is a huge part of my Speculation.  Perhaps Rudnick should have (or could have) said, '.. the voids could have been created in the big bang, and grew more rapidly than the overall expansion.'     That seems to be the case with the Void which is pushing our group.     

4 hours ago, Strange said:

You even make the same careless spelling mistakes as Beecee!

I didn't want to say that, Strange.     

13 minutes ago, DrP said:

OK  -- So what is the best way to Mordor?

"Walking Directions From the Shire to Mordor in Google Maps. If you go to Google Maps, click “Get Directions,” select walking, and search for directions from The Shire to Mordor, this amusing Lord of the Rings Easter egg from Google will caution you that “One does not simply walk into Mordor."   (But that's from Google, not me.)  It's an interesting exercise to think that a person may or may not be convinced that Mordor does or does not exist unless he or she follows that map.  And if the map doesn't take him or her to Mordor, he or she may believe that the map is wrong, and try Internet Explorer.   

11 minutes ago, Strange said:

New physics requires evidence.

The big difference between you and me in this is that I saw the evidence right before my eyes, like the sailors looking at the approaching ship knowing the surface of the ocean was curved without having to shoot out a lazer.  So I believe in the best sense of that word that if I and others are searching we WILL find more evidence.   I have a motivation to search, and that's what you may be missing.   But I think if we are interested in science it's because of a deep shared curiosity.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Calling it silly is not an actual rebuttal.

It is a fact that proofs exist in math.

 

Many people use "theory" to mean "guess", but that's not what it means in science, where some words have a much narrower definition.

I see Olympic divers enter the water feet-first from time to time.

 

Good point, Swanson .. and you must be especially familiar with the Swan Dive.   And some springboard divers dive up into the air before doing summersaults and twists and entering feet or head first.  Here's one .. "A sudden movement in a specified direction.

3 hours ago, Eise said:

As DrP noticed, you did not answer my question: so here is it again.

How should one prepare for the coming of God's kingdom:

- according to Jesus

- according Paul

If you evade to answer the question again, we all know that your believe in the bible is a lie.

Once more then: Paul said he spoke the commandments of God, though he admitted he failed at times and was saved through grace.  Jesus did and and spoke the commandments of God, without failure.  Therefore we would prepare the same way according to Jesus or according to Paul.   The answer is 1 Timothy 4:10 .. works and faith.

"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe."  To that we can easily ad, "shall we sin?  God forbid."  

For an answer beyond that you will have to begin with "In the beginning..." and continue to the last word "Amen."

How do you prepare for the kingdom of God, Eise?

2 hours ago, coffeesippin said:

My observation of the map of the known universe is to me sufficient argument, disregarding anything else.  But I'm tired, I've been up when I should be sleeping because lying down aggravates my sinus head cold, but I need to sleep, the sun is rising here, I gotta go.  More later.  Thanks for you contributions, Strange.

Runaway train or starship headed into the great sparkly Unknown?  We have a long way to go .. but we won't get there if we don't fire up the boilers.

Material for the shell that doesn't interfere with matter or anti-matter?   Scoop up some Dark Matter?  Or some Light-Dark Matter?Maybe some grey matter!   (We need a Big Brained Smiley Face!)

New pyshics?    How does that compare to the new math Jordan devised so QM could be established?   "Jordan devised a type of nonassociative algebras, now named Jordan algebras in his honor, in an attempt to create an algebra of observables for quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. Today, von Neumann algebras are also employed for this purpose. Jordan algebras have since been applied in projective geometry, number theory, complex analysis, optimization, and many other fields of pure and applied mathematics, and continue to be used in studying the mathematical and conceptual underpinnings of quantum theory."

19 minutes ago, Strange said:

Of course not. This is science.

However, there are good arguments against and zero for. So, you know, balance of probabilities.

Totally missed the point. The reason "pushes" is in quotes is because it is not really pushing. These are called "scare quotes" and are used to indicate a word or phrase is being used to mean something other than the usual meaning. In other words: nothing is pushing.

A "neutral shell" would be even less effective at shielding matter and antimatter. Oe of the challenges of the CERN ALPHA project s finding ways to contain anti-matter long enough to measure its properties. We can contain anti-protons or anti-electrons because they have electric charge. Anti-matter atoms are neutral so, even when kept really cold, they will eventually hit the sides f the vessel and be annihilated.

You are invoking some sort of magic material that interacts with neither matter or anti-matter and is either solid enough to keep them apart of uses some sort of magic force to keep them apart.

Then how does it "push" the water on the far side of the Earth?

(And, yes, it is exactly your argument.)

Of course there is that possibility. And it would be very exciting because it would require masses of new physics to explain how it could be there and be undetected.

Never going to happen though ...

I am not going to jump on a runaway train heading for a cliff edge just because it might take us on a magic journey.

It is allowed. We are discussing it.

My observation of the map of the known universe is to me sufficient argument, disregarding anything else.  But I'm tired, I've been up when I should be sleeping because lying down aggravates my sinus head cold, but I need to sleep, the sun is rising here, I gotta go.  More later.  Thanks for you contributions, Strange.

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Damn, busted! I guess it’s time to come clean. 

I suppose I always knew it would come out that I’ve spent over a decade at this site contributing nearly 20,000 posts on varied topics... and all just to bolster the master plan and ready the battleground such that one day when you ultimately registered at SFN 11 years later... when it finally all came together once you joined this community one month ago complete with your ironclad logic and inpenetrateble arguments... that I might hope to fool the flock into not taking you seriously.

Well spotted, Mr Homes. Well spotted, indeed. You have clearly bested me with your awe inspiring genius. I concede.

Sherlock Holmes:  "Mr. Watson, I need you.  This fellow is saying I'm right.  That doesn't happen very often around here, and I'm confused.  Could you make me a tea?"

Watson:  "Certainly Sir.  And I shall have a word with the Gentleman as well."

(Changing posture slightly to avoid a stiff neck.)  "Mr. iNow.  Please understand that Mr. Holmes operates on reason, evidence and questioning, which is why he included a question mark in his opening statement to you.  His was not a statement of fact.  However, even I, Mr. Holmes unworthy assistant, can easily see similarities in personage between you and BeeCee, positive as well as negative, not the least of which is sarcasm, though you show creative humour which BeeCee may not. In any case, I know Mr. Holmes well, and he certainly did not mean to insult you in any way."

Watson turning to Holmes:  "Perhaps, Sir, you could reassure Mr. iNow of your honourable intention?'

Holmes, looking off into the distance.  "The evidence was NOT conclusive, Mr. Watson..."   Then turning to iNow, "... which is why I DID include a question mark in my statement; and which is why I did NOT you on ignore, yet, despite your obvious insults.  Now, if you both will excuse me, I'll take my tea to bed."

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

I have never seen them described as empty space. Areas of lower density and without the large scale structures such as galaxies and filaments. But only very poor quality journalism would report them as being empty.

You have been given multiple reasons, by various people, why it is highly unlikely there is antimatter in the voids and why it is even more unlikely that antimatter has negative mass.

Did you miss the fact that it says "pushes" in quotes? That is important.

Would consider the fact that the Moon raises tides on the opposite side of the Earth by "pushing" the water to be evidence of the Moon being made of antimatter? Because that is pretty much your argument.

"I have never seen them described as empty space." 

              Descriptions of Voids have changed, I'm 71 years old and have been reading about astronomy for over 60 years.  However, thank you for the prompt to which I found:  "Cosmic voids are vast spaces between filaments (the largest-scale structures in the universe), which contain very few or no galaxies. ... Voids located in high-density environments are smaller than voids situated in low-density spaces of the universe."  Wikipedia.  To me this is another evidence and/or speculation that the voids are smaller in high density areas BECAUSE they are pushing from within against the density.  Voids in low density areas can grow larger because they don't have as much resistance to whatever is pushing from within.  

"You have been given multiple reasons, by various people, why it is highly unlikely there is antimatter in the voids and why it is even more unlikely that antimatter has negative mass."

        Your words "highly unlikely" tell that the answer is not in.

"Did you miss the fact that it says "pushes" in quotes? That is important."

            That's what I say too .. pushing against the filaments from within the Void .. a neutral shell (there are neutral points in electrodynamics, right?) insulating between the matter and anti-matter.  https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/35/009/35009649.pdf  All I know about electrodynamic neutrality is from neutral wires in circuits and a brief glance at the google result which mentioned three levels of neutrality in that paper.

"Would consider the fact that the Moon raises tides on the opposite side of the Earth by "pushing" the water to be evidence of the Moon being made of antimatter? Because that is pretty much your argument."

           That's not my argument.  The moon is not anti-matter.  I don't mean to be brief, or curt, I don't mean to ignore, but I do have to use your own words,  it is"... highly unlikely there is antimatter in the voids ..." as admission that there is room for new evidence to reveal itself or be revealed, on both sides of the discussion.  I hope that allowance will keep the discussion alive, and not tossed, because if the voids ARE responsible for Expansion there are, as you firmly know, enormously important changes to our understanding of cosmology coming.  Why not be in a POTENTIAL forefront, rather than regretting the opportunity years from now?  The forum has nothing to lose, the topic is Speculation, so no one can say mods were slack in allowing it.  

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Depends on what you’re wearing. Depends on how deep the diving point is and whether you enter head first or feet first. Even in your ridiculous example, we cannot presume to know the answer with certainty. 

Hey, look that! Even YOU knew enough to switch from the word proof to the word evidence in your second sentence before posting. Perhaps it’s because even you’re aware they have different meanings?

iNow a sock puppet of BeeCee?  

I said dive in, not jump in.  But you're partially correct, I will rewrite the example.  If I dive into the great unfrozen ocean which at the point of dive is deeper than one foot, with the ocean surface calm and unwavering in depth, my head uncovered from any waterproof membrane or watertight construction, my head not covered by any waterproof substance, my head not above a temperature which will instantly convert the entire ocean to steam driven away from the head by certain principles of physics as well as instantly turning mud of sand at the bottom of the ocean into dry land .. will my head get wet?  Will I have to prove the definition of wet versus dry?  Is the water heavy or light?  Will the universe explode in the Great Rip, saving me from drowning or broken neck, in the moment I make the dive but before my head enters the ocean?   Yes .. so many important considerations.

Yes, even I am aware that incomplete evidence can be considered proof by science and law, even circumstantial evidence like two posters having the totally identical characterizations whether naughty or nice, yet are they truly sock puppets?  What does the jury say?  HO HO HO WE THE JURY don't really care, few others would as well.  I can put either on ignore, or ignore the either, depending on necessity.  

21 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

You shouldn't mix proof in science with proof in a court, but even in court, proof is based on the balance of probabilities i.e. it is not absolute.

Proof?  Will I have proof that my head will get wet if I dive into the ocean?    Even in the odds against of diving in and never being seen again my head will be wet.   

Why shouldn't proof in science and court be compared?  The evidence is in, and whether incomplete or not, we the jury/Consensus find for the so and so who proposed the conumdrum in the first place.

11 minutes ago, DrP said:

People have been saying that for generations. 1000 years ago people were convinced it was the end times...  they are still saying the same now and, if nothing happens, will say the same in 1000 years time (unless the human race realises it's pointless superstition to be what it is).  You can read anything into vague prophetic ramblings.

It has actually shown much of it to be complete fiction. There are contradictions too - which shouldn't have been allowed into the book if god was as it is described in the book.

 

Basically - once again - your entire argument depends upon the bible and nothing else.

 

The bible scriptures is the topic of this thread, Dr. P.  Not even if it is true or false.  

Science contradicts itself frequently and dramatically .. does that make science untrue?   Case in point, Aristarchus established the earth revolved around the sun 2,000 years ago instead of the then Consensus sun around the earth (before the time of the establishment Christ labelled institutions) yet he was exiled by the establishment.  Probably every bible believer encounters what appear to be contradictions, which is why the bible tells us to study it, that we might know it better, and having done so the contradictions solve themselves.  

If you want to open a topic on the accuracy of Revelation please notify me and I'll try to contribute.  But I'm seen as a proselytizer by some mods and admin here .. I don't want to aggravate the situation by opening the Revelation thread, because wisdom from above is peaceable.  You might be frightened though, by what Revelation contains.  Count your cost.

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Yes.

 

Evidence can encourage a person to seek further evidence which will lead to proof.  But evidence is also part of proof.  So .. I think lawyers and scientists may use phrases such as 'incomplete evidence.'

24 minutes ago, DrP said:

None of that addresses Eise's question from what I can see....  you have just quoted some scripture. Your faith is in the book. 

I just had a glitch in formatting happen.

 

Each scripture answers a question specifically. For instance:  "The way that Jesus said, or the way Paul said? Who of the two is right, and why?"    Is answered by:     If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."  Those are Paul's words.  Jesus taught the commandments of God, Paul also.  They are both right.

Your question was what would I do if I found the book to be fiction.   I've known the book to be true for 41 years.   All my doubts about the language of the book have been answered by research using a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.  The bible Revelation concerning our present historical era proves the bible goes beyond mere language, into prophecy.  Science has proven many aspects of the bible true, and I'm sure it will prove the entire bible true if we are given enough time, but God requires faith of us, as well as intellect, so maybe we won't have time for science to prove the bible true, and we will have to have complete our faith with faith. 

4 hours ago, Q-reeus said:

coffeesippin - you may have noticed I'm the only one to point out a basic physics reason why it's hugely unlikely anti-matter anti-gravitates. There is more. To itemize:

1: Consistent observations of deflection in magnetic fields shows that at least for charged anti-matter, matter and anti-matter inertial mass are equal. Equivalence Principle then requires equivalence of gravitational mass. Only Wheeler-Feynman notion of anti-particles being ordinary particles traveling backwards in time logiocally suggests anti-particles anti-gravitate. But since that violates EP as per above, few these days give the idea any credence (1: here already covered in earlier post).

2: When particle-anti-particle annihilation occurs e.g. electron-positron -> gamma ray pair, one doesn't have a net zero gravitational mass outcome. Which outcome should be the logical expectation if indeed the input is positive gravitational mass electron + negative gravitational mass positron. (There is also a conundrum for standard physics hidden in positron-electron annihilation btw, but I won't expand on that here). Point is, anti-gravitation of anti-particle idea fundamentally conflicts with the expectation of conserved net gravitational mass.

3: According to the vixra article you cited earlier: http://vixra.org/pdf/1001.0007v2.pdf
, anti-particle anti-gravitation has a very strange character. Anti-particles repel both ordinary particles AND other anti-particles. Which is equivalent to claiming negatively charged particles repel each other and attract positively charged particles (what actually occurs), but positively charged particles attract negatively charged AND other positively charged particles (which does NOT occur). Hence there is imo no logical consistency to what that author posits. It leads to bizarre runaway scenarios.

4: The standard picture requires BSM physics to cope with the observed ~ 1 to 10^10 ratio between matter particle and photon numbers. Which outcome implies a slight asymmetry between particle and anti-particle annihilation in the very early universe. As posited by voids = anti-matter regions scenario, there is actually a perfect net balance between matter and anti-matter in current universe. But there simply was no chance for gravity to appreciably separate matter from anti-matter in the early hot BB. Either total annihilation to radiation occurred if there was no BSM annihilation asymmetry, or you have the standard picture of an entirely matter over anti-matter dominated matter content.

It's ok to hypothesize a radically new model, but also important to dispassionately check for consistency with known physical principles and their implications.

Thanks Q for the post.   I'll point out that your summary sentence has to consider one of your primary sentences .. "it's hugely unlikely anti-matter anti-gravitates."    I don't mean to nit pick or make small of important considerations, but known physical principles and their implications change over time.  A mere few years ago Voids were KNOWN as mere empty space.  Now they are KNOWN as dynamic constructs.  That's a huge change.  Non locality a very short time back was considered a lunatic idea, your "bizarre runaway scenarios" would aptly describe the general mood.  I'm content to wait for changes to occur in our knowledge of known physical principles while putting out ideas based on observation, which is what mine is, my observation of the structure of the universe from a map developed with the most advanced information told me the voids were pushing on the filaments.  Fragments of the filaments do not pierce the Voids, the voids remain roughly spherical. Something inside the void is opposing matter, regardless of our understanding of the mechanisms.  if you and I live another ten healthy years we're going to see more enormous changes than we've seen in the past ten. Time is a great teacher.  This discussion is a great use of time.

I think I just had to reaffirm my 'ignore" of BeeCee on this thread, but I've been switching threads, so perhaps it was another thread in which his repetition of what I consider worn out argument and insults were major reasons for my not too difficult choice of putting him on ignore in the first place.  Maybe in  time the situation will change.

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

Again, not too surprising. And not evidence of antigravity or antimatter.

Why is it not surprising?  A VERY short time has passed since Voids were advertised as being mere empty space.  This link http://cosmologyscience.com/cosblog/gigantic-voids-are-expanding-and-shrinking/  says perhaps gravity is making some voids larger, but that would work only if the Void WAS mere empty space, and the void would be lopsided on the enlarged side, like an egg perhaps , whereas they're described as roughly spherical.  For the Void to remain spherical when pulled, it would have to be dynamic, like a soap bubble in the air, not empty space. Why would voids be dynamic if not constructed of something?   Anti-matter not only filling the Void but expanding it answers those questions, but explains why our local group appears to be moving twice as fast as gravity explanation alone allows.  https://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/cosmic-void-pushes-milky-way-3001201723/       

What do you see voids capable of pushing a group of galaxies as being constructed of?