Wulphstein

[latex]\frac{\Delta_f}{f} = \frac{\lambda}{\lambda_o} = \frac{v}{c}=\frac{E_o}{E}=\frac{hc}{\lambda_o} \frac{\lambda}{hc}[/latex] [latex]\frac{\Delta_f}{f} = \frac{\lambda}{\lambda_o} = \frac{v}{c}=\frac{E_o}{E}=\frac{hc}{\lambda_o} \frac{\lambda}{hc}[/latex] [latex]\frac{Delta_f}{f}[/latex] Mordred, do I have latex privileges available to my account?

Bingo! That I can explain. But first, I'm trying to get Latex to work. Unless you're okay reading PDF files.

[ math]x^2[/ math]

I'm trying to figure out how to program in Latex so I can post nice equations. \documentclass{article} \usepackage{graphicx} \begin{document} \title{Introduction to \LaTeX{}} \author{Author's Name} \maketitle \begin{abstract} The abstract text goes here. \end{abstract} \section{Introduction} Here is the text of your introduction. \begin{equation} \label{simple_equation} \alpha = \sqrt{ \beta } \end{equation} \subsection{Subsection Heading Here} Write your subsection text here. \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[width=3.0in]{myfigure} \caption{Simulation Results} \label{simulationfigure} \end{figure} \section{Conclusion} Write your conclusion here. \end{document} [latex ]\frac{\Delta_f}{f} = \frac{\lambda}{\lambda_o} = \frac{v}{c}=\frac{E_o}{E}=\frac{hc}{\lambda_o} \frac{\lambda}{hc}[/latex ]

I will require someone with knowledge of physics who is also an innovator. If you close your eyes and ears, it is inevitable that you will choose not to understand the argument. I can't change that. Since you won't read the paper I attached, I'll have to get handy with Latex coding. I'll have to experiment with it. I uploaded a PDF file that we can discuss, if you're interested. Begin antigravity tech.pdf You don't need exotic matter to create spacetime curvature.

All I see in your comments are reasons why you will not understand antigravity technology. I speak for a billion human beings who are ready to travel to the stars. If there is anyone here who thinks they understand, I will teach. If not, I will look for someone who can understand the basics of the experiment.

We can perform an experiment that can prove antigravity is possible. Exotic matter is unnecessary.

Can't you tell just by looking around that this universe has to be created by an Intelligent Designer?

I don't think atheists have enough sense to realize that a God can come into existence more easily than a fine tuned universe. That was my point. Having said that, the Creator, who is eternal, proved his existence to me.

God has always existed. God is the engineer who designed and created the universe, all life, and man. Does that make sense? God is current. I heard his name in a dream last night.

Oregon God has always existed. God is the engineer who designed and created the universe, all life, and man. Does that make sense?

I don't understand. I asked you to cite an example. What?

The universe is efficient. That's an established fact

Evading what? If anything, I thought I was being to hard on atheists.

I made a lot of points, made a lit of statements. Nobody was able to falsify my statements or tell me fallacy it violated, other than strawman. But no understandable argument was made or attempted. So therefore, my statements are valid.

Atheism is inconsistent with established science. You can believe in atheism, just like you can believe in unicorns, fairies and scientology.

This universe is very efficient. That is a fact. Atheists try to justify their atheist argument with quantum foam and 10^10^142 failed attempts. That is the least efficient way to create our universe. Therefore, it's false.

You offered a counter example. Let's hear it. Anyway I didn't understand your other question.

Name the counter example.

So atheism is falsified. It was crushed to death by two empirical facts. First, the universe is efficient. Think of the least action and least time principles. Therefore, quantum foam is falsified. Second, complex systems require engineering.

I solved antigravity with metaphysics. I work in the high tech industry. It is always cheaper to solve problems in the design stage. So you make a product one time, not 10^10^147 times, like atheists do. The innefiency of the quantum foam falsified it. Nature would choose a more metaphysical way to design it before setting off the big bang. You'll have to accept the reality that nature is efficient and prompt. Least action. Least time. The innefiency of the quantum foam falsified it. Nature would choose a more metaphysical way to design it before setting off the big bang. You'll have to accept the reality that nature is efficient and prompt. Least action. Least time.

God of the gaps is such an amazing tool, I was able to figure out how antigravity works in another thread! There is where I find atheism to be totally irrational. Why wouldn't you want a nice cozy warm inner feeling from a deity that ... was seen again... and now there is an anti-gravity paper. Sorry to hear that. In the engineering company I work at, anything goes! If it works, if it solves the engineering problem, then it doesn't matter where the idea came from. It sounds like you're trying to argue that engineering is unnecessary. Is that correct? Your argument makes absolutely no sense.

Metaphysics "The nature of things" is the way in which we figure out what kind of experiments can be performed to do important things like: invent antigravity by testing for it. You should ask: "what does Yahweh have to do with antigravity?"

Actually, I have demonstrated that there are millions, billions of human beings who are witnesses to God. That is an established fact. There are zero scientific experiments that have proven m-theory or quantum foam. That is a fact.

My apologies. I misunderstood. I have never had a moderator censure an irrational skeptic before, on my behalf. Thank you.