brad89

If a coincidence happens to one person out of a million, is it really all that much of a coincidence?

I think intelligence is not able to be rated, because some people not only concentrate theirs in different areas, such as art or sports, but because some people choose not to use theirs. I kinda think intelligence is how much people know on the spot. It is more of how they can apply things they already know to teach themselves new things. I don't necesarily think someone can be more intelligent than someone else, but they can be not willing to use it as much as others. Some people are intellectually lazy, they decide not to use their intelligence, because they aren't in the mood, or aren't very smart, or just making it up because of whatever reason. But nobody is really more intelligent than someone else.

I think it won't 'end', after all, matter can not be created or destroyed. Same with energy. The amount of energy in the universe is the same, it can't be created or destroyed either. If the universe ends in a 'big crunch', than it would compact the energy together, making it hotter, not frozen.

I am not trying to argue. Im saying its not a theory, just a thought. I have the same thing, not a theory, just a thought.

you know he must have something to prove it. It is tough to describe without actually being in front of a person to describe it to them. Thing is, you don't really need to have proof to have a thought. I don't think he is trying to prove it (well, he is..), but he is trying to get some input from other people on his idea. But I think he must have some proof.

Keep track of every idea that you have in a notebook or something. That is what I did eventually because every time I had a good idea, than went to work on it again, I forgot everything I said earlier. I would try my best to remember, but I could never recall it. So it was like having to restart the theory from my last point of memory. Maybe you have a better memory than me, though, so I don't know if what im saying even matters to you. Just a thought to help you out!

I have to say, I completely agree with the whole thing about the universe having no beginning or end. That is why I believe that time travel is impossible. On a timeline of infinity, how is it possible to point to a precise point on it? It isn't, because infinity is not a number. What is half of infinity? Infinity? Infinity is not a number. A timeline of infinity is impossible to move on. If time is just energy, than it makes sense that when energy is huddled close together, that time goes faster, so time can move at a different pace. But to move back or forward in time, it can't happen. The universe probably wouldn't have an age, because it never begins or ends. That is why I think time is an invention, it is really just the next instant of matter changing position due to energy. If the universe doesn't have a beginning or end, why does anything else? That is why time travel is impossible. As for your theory, I wonder about the last part, because how can matter be destroyed? I wondered myself whether or not that once it goes somewhere, it comes out somewhere else.

I agree with the whole energy of walking and running. But the thing is, why couldn't such a device be attached to everything? The wheels of your car, the feet of your pets, the blades of your ceiling fan? Also, it would be effective with athletes and sports stars. However, I don't understand how much energy it would develop. If everyone did it, maybe we would get somewhere. But when one person does about a half a block jog and expects to power his home, they are expecting too much. For such a thing to work, you need to have time on your hands, and to be active.

Well, for one, I didn't get a revelation, I just thought about it for a while. The thing is, why should I have to be in college and geometry to place a thought? The ancient greeks developed math from the ground up, and they had to come up with this stuff originally. I did the same thing with trigonometry. Taught myself. The same with science, I used the base stuff I already knew, and expanded upon that. There is no revelation involved, I just think about this stuff alot.

Sorry, I fell asleep when I was posting this. I shortened it up a bit and went to sleep to see some replies. Anyway, to answer some questions, I will say a bit about what was stated above. The thing is, a 'real' point is non existant, because even the smallest dot has dimensions. That is why I called it imaginary, just to clear that up. Second, I mentioned nothing about the other dimensions. What I wanted to say was that the curve, the cylinder, the cylindric curve, the spiral, the cylindric spiral, time, and absolute zero, plus the point, are the real 11 dimensions. I thought this because a line is perfectly strait, why would the curve be a bent line? It must be its own dimension. Thing is, I am not even in geometry class yet, I am smart, but I don't know much past what I have been taught, and that is just some basic stuff. Anyway, this is just theory, because I thought the 11 dimensions of string theory haven't been defined so far. They were just considered to be closed up so tighly that we couldn't see them. I didn't know they were already defined.

Ever seen Logans Run? I haven't. But I know what the point of it was. To kill everyone turning thirty to match the population, and disguise it as a religion. When Phi for All said that we could mine asteroids for more resources, he had a pretty good point. I started thinking, and I also realized that if asteroids were to contain hydrocarbons, we could do more to conserve fossil fuels by having a bit more time to find a new source of energy. The thing is, I posted a thread about energy concerns in the politics section, yet all I heard was that it wasn't any kind of threat. I don't understand how it isn't any kind of threat! It's all about the corporations, just wanting to make more money by upping the prices. We are at peak oil situation, which means that we are at the highest point on the chart of oil production. What does that mean? When the prices of gas go up because fossil fuel is rapidly depleting, and the consumers of gas go up because the world population is only increasing as we sit here. They say there is no threat? Than why is it that we don't have a new fuel source yet? Because for all we know, we might not find one. The same reason that companies should pay attention to miles per gallon. The thing is, if overpopulation persists, then where will everybody live? As jobs increase, yet are rapidly taken, we will only increase in the unemployment population. Who knows, the point may come where the only people to have jobs are going to be the super-geniuses, the people who can solve all of these problems. Well guess what. The people who can solve all of these problems are all by themselves. Thier ideas are only thier own, they need other people to point out the problems of certain ideas. That could bring the world to peace, a world gathering of all of the worlds scientists, from every country. Everybody with degrees in certain fields of science and medicine. A UN of scientists, so to speak. Hell, with so many people working together like that, they could solve one world problem at the rate of one per day. And I mean problems like global warming, overpopulation, cancer, oxygen consumption, energy sources, and I have the hope of being the pioneer of it. That is the reason that I care about science so much, and also the reason I don't believe in god. If god existed, I wonder why we would be left in the dark about all of this. If the scientific revolution hadn't come around, we would all hope that god would solve these problems, or perhaps we wouldn't have all these problems. Science is the future, it is the present, and it is the only thing that will ever get us to last another thousand years. I make a prediction that the human race will only last another two hundred years, and that would be one sad fate. We are the ones with the power to stop this from happening, and with science as a tool, it is possible. That is why the UN of science would make such an impact on the world. That is why overpopulation is such a problem. That is the reason I joined this forum, to get the word out that this has to happen. It is the only way the human race will survive. Soon, I am going to write a letter to the president about this. Surely, somebody else has thought about this. But I think that I have the courage to say it to people. Hell, if I had two minutes on the floor of the UN, that is what I would say.

I was just doing some work out by my pool today. I stared at the sky and looked at the moon. Then for some wierd reason I started thinking about string theory, and I wonder if I could explain the other dimensions. To make this short, I started wondering. Each dimension is an expandature of the last. The first dimension is thought to be the line, while the second dimension is thought to be the plane, and the third the cube. But I began to think. If the first dimension were the line, wouldn't the line have originated from an infinitesimal point? It is confusing to explain. Say this. A point in geometry is imaginary, because a dot has a two dimensional plane. But a real point doesn't, perhaps its marker does, such as a dot. But the point is imaginary, and in itself infinitely small. If this point were to expand, than it would add another point. This would create a line

Plus, I once heard that if we were to triple the current amount of trees existing and about to be grown, and cut our consumption for fuel and paper, yet lost the oxygen producing bacteria of the ocean, we would probably not live. Yet if we lost most of our trees and increased our consumption, yet retained the oxygen producers from the ocean, we might just survive.

Good point, however, all of the resources needed to go off planet come from the earth. Sure, it won't happen overnight, but I have a wierd point of view, I am concerned about the future, and I don't mean twenty years from now, I mean three hundred years from now. Sure, it won't happen overnight, but it will happen. As for the skyscraper comment, I meant to impose that it is kind of a bad thing. Does everybody want to be three thousand feet from the earths surface? Slipping off the patio means death. I don't know about certain people, but I prefer ground level. I have always wondered if it were possible to 'harness' lava after an eruption, and perhaps create artificial land from it. The lava would continuously come at a constant rate, creating new jobs, and new hope towards colonizing space. Problem is, conduction would melt just about everything it touches. And, we are hoping for some steel or titanium walls to these modules, not dirt! Any thoughts?

What is the world going to do when we run out of land to develop? We can't artificially make land! Even if that was done, we would eventually lose the oceans, and die of Oxygen loss. Where can we live when the world reaches its limits and we lose our elbow room? The single family homes will be replaced with towering skyscrapers to house all of the newly needed families. Eventually, we will exhaust all of our natural resources, meaning no more plastic, no more new cars, no more houses, buisness, maybe energy, what else could we lose? What can we do about it?

By the way, for a camera to be able to see better than us is impossible, because we would never know due to we would be the ones to look at its image, making its picture the same as our eye. Also, I guess that you could say that it would be able to see past our visible spectrum, but that already exists.

This brings up an interesting thought. Say that time travel were possible. If so, than you could go back in time and change something in the past. That would mean that you would end up in the universe that ended up doing that same thing. So by time travel, you would end up in a parallel universe.

This is just a thought. I heard the same hypothesis that gravity is weak because it is spending most of it's strength in the 11th dimension (string theory). But doesn't gravity become stronger due to mass? Maybe it doesn't necesarily need more energy, but more mass. Just a thought. Hey Grant, check out the punctuation!

Personally, I would stick with human intuition. Determining how somebody will act takes human mind, not computer processing. Sure, some cases could be easily determined by either one, but with a human mind behind it, a computer doesn't even compare. A human brain will forever outperform a computer, no matter what. We have the sense of free will, and a computer doesn't, which is why I wouldn't put things like that in the hand of a computer (which doesn't have hands).

Here is something interesting. No, this isn't from the matrix. But really, is there a such thing as 'choice'? Choice means that you can do one or more things at a certain point in time. Choice obviously exists, you can make a choice, but there is only two ways to change a choice, to go back in time, or to know the future. You can choose to go somewhere, but 'ultimately', you would have always chosen to go there. You can't change that. But say you were right next to god. Say that he told you you were going to choose to go to Taco Bell instead of Quiznos. Now, if you end up still being able to choose, you now are faced with a 'true' choice, which means that you could even prove god wrong! You could now choose Quiznos, just to piss him off! Now you have defied god! That means that there was a true choice. This really didn't make much sense, I could clear it up, but that would be a really long post in the end. I felt kind of lazy, so I decided to shorten it up a bit. (When I mentioned god, that was purely for just an example)

You know, thinking in ways that are 'tangental' is the key to finding out new information. Look at Einstein, he was mocked for his thoughts, yet look at them now. But I do have to say, the theory you made is kind of a bit too outside the box. To think of gravity as something in the Earths atmosphere is like saying nowadays that the Earth is the center of the solar system! You should pursue ideas that have some kind of backbone behind them. To say that gravity is something that works the Earths atmosphere does nothing to explain the rest of the universe.

I have posted many times about my theory of absolute zero and the universe beginning. I have to know the same thing. I believe that space and time are proportionate to matter and energy. If matter correlates to space, and energy to time, and matter can not completely run out of energy, space and time are interconnected. As long as energy has even the slightest bit of matter to be the space, than it can theoretically work out, which is the basis of the primordial atom. If all of the universes energy is concentrated in the smallest of space, than this is obviously the highest energy possibly attainable. The way to figure this out is to figure the amount of matter and energy that currently exists in the universe. Good luck if you plan to try!

I thought relativity was the belief that energy and matter are a relation of the same stuff. I knew there was more to it, but is that really true or not?

Damn, I am impressed. That was one long post! Anyway, thanks a bunch, now I actually am starting to get it. All I have to do is try to understand that a bit more, and maybe I will understand how to do this before summer is over. Thanks for showing me this stuff.