1123581321

I don't believe time as we know it and experience it exists at all. I believe there is no such thing outside of consciousness and that everything may well exist as it does within the confines of the atom. I also believe that time travel is within the bounds of consciousness and not time.

I think, without any evidence, at the least indirect evidence. That its safe to assume that existence or more specifically the nature of reality is perhaps all a great illusion to keep us playing the ultimate game. And even though it seems so plainly obvious that none of it is an illusion to any degree since we can physically effect ourselves with it and influence things within it. However it could be just that which makes the illusion so great, like the matrix. An illusionary-game hypothesis would possibly explain one of the greatest mysteries of nature, which is why there are so many particles. As well as why everything seems so complicated with all of what science has uncovered and is uncovering. Revolving around the understanding that every answer appears to be attached to even more questions all the time. Now why is that... is it because there are actually more questions including answers, which i realise that there obviously appears to be, or is it that its all a means of keeping us in play to avoid a or the revelation. And perhaps the all great TOE (theory of everything) is designed to lead us down the wrong path. (although i do believe in the TOE - this is just speculation). Could it be that consciousness is nothing more than the programmable game face, with higher consciousness being greater levels of understanding within the great game, hence why people who have experienced phenomenon within realms of ESP and so forth report that is feels realer than our ordinary everyday reality. Because its in-fact experience of levels which are closer to actuality.. And that ultimate consciousness is the game itself.. as well as technology perhaps being whats possible due to advancement of knowledge towards the greater reality of the game.. - please note that i'am not serious towards this theory, its simply deduction from what is with the possibility. thanks.

I was wondering what gives particles charge in the first place - has it got to do with their quark constituents or something else.. or does it revolve around their interaction with external influence.. etc etc

string theory basically says that the 3 constituents of elementary particles, such as protons - the quarks - are instead actually tiny vibrating strings. These strings are exceptionally small. billions and billions of times smaller than the proton itself. so small its beyond anything we are currently capable of to be able to see them, so thats where the theory gets a little scepticism. So just visualise the nucleus of an atom, then the protons etc and then instead of imagining quarks (or point particles), just think of them as tiny little vibrating strings.. its really just planck scale rubber bands in a way..

Hi, i was wondering, in the grand design, when hawking talks about the recent theory of time. Is he actually talking about time - as a dimension of space - unfolding with universal entropy or as it..

Actually quantum properties may well hold the answer to consciousness, as is explained by Stuart Hameroff.

Hi, i was wondering what the property is which gives or allows 11 dimensions in m-theory.. (is it a natural property of the theory itself or something external)

but Anura, that would mean science would get nowhere because it would be stunted in its path due to any prediction/theory being left without any means of investigation (in certain circumstances)..

ok, but then, if there was apparently nothing outside the singularity, then how could the singlarity evolve or 'expand' into the universe which is present...? how could existence evolve or expand into non-existence..

Hi, i was wondering how 'space' did not exist before the big bang, at the point where the universe is thought/known to have been just a microscopic singularity... because, then how did the singularity itself exist, or how was it able to be present - within existence - if there was nothing to exist in... because if it contained anything in the known universe, that is all of 'physical' reality, then how could there there be nothing outside of it.. hasnt it obviously expanded into a void of some sort, which is 'physical space' - to allow something 'physical' to exist and dynamically evolve in it.. because, if you, for arguments sake, went outside or beyond the universe itself, you arent just going to cease to exist or just dissappear are you, because wouldn't you just be merely leaving the universe, but still be in (dimensional) space itself.. i guess that i just dont understand how there can literally be no 'physical' space, as wouldnt that kind of defy existence in a matter of speaking - not getting off the topic too much..

Hi, i was wondering how many superstring theories there are, what exactly a superstring is - i mean it obviously encompasses susy in string theory, which i also dont really understand. i mean string theory is a theory of strings in place of point particles (quarks), but how exactly can you combine it with susy... i guess my question is - how exactly can strings themselves relate at all to susy... also, why and how does gravity become infinite as you approach a point particle and how does string theory predict susy or visa-verse.. thanks..

ok, cheers.

Hi, i was wondering if gigahertz (GHz) takes up computer memory at all..

I was wondering, if gravity in general relativity is the result of the curvature of space/time. Then how can the effect at the earth surface for which we all feel be accounted for, since space/time is being warped due to our presence on the earths surface is it... Because isn't general relativity only describing the topology of space external to the earth - as in the universe at large..

Hi. I was wondering if quantum field theory (for forces) is based on or at least around the quantized particles for the forces... i.e - graviton

How many string theories are there ?

I was wondering also, with bosonic string theory - the original model. Is bosonic referring to the string itself or just the particle for which it is associated with.. in its case, the boson.

I was wondering what anti-strings are..

I was wondering. If the strings in string theory are vibrating in more than 3 dimensions and they are the fundamentals to which all particles are manifested thereby producing the 3D reality for which we live. Why is it that 'we' only experience '3 dimensions' of physical reality.. In other words, why do we only experience and perceive 3 dimensions of reality when reality itself (and ourselves) is, at that most fundamental level, made of strings - which vibrate in more than 3 dimensions... Why don't we experience the number of dimensions for which reality itself is in.. I mean, shouldn't we experience the number of dimensions to which our own realty is in..

I was wondering. Although its obvious and practically everyone knows it, but how is there no sound in space when, although there exists no medium capable which allows sound waves to propagate, there are 'virtual particles'.. shouldn't they allow the propagation of sound wave as they are particles after all ? Or is it that they are incapable of supporting sound wave because they only exist for brief periods of time, therefor not long enough for the sustenance and/or maintenance of the waves...

ok, sweet. thanks..

seems too. However, there is a .01 difference in the file size of the one now on my HD and the original. Is that right..? Also Cap'n Refsmmat, what was the go with the thumbnail caches thing..

I was wondering what the 'itunes media folder' is ?

cap'n refsmmat, i followed the process that your link provided and ended up with, after holding down the option button and opening iphoto, thereby selecting the 'iphoto library file' which i had dragged onto my HD, iphoto opened but creating 'thumbnail caches' i think it was. Is that right/normal (for what should or needs to happen) ? note also that when i looked at the file which i had dragged onto my HD, it was flickering and going weird, but then just went back too normal..

I was wondering, if you were to transfer photos from your iphoto onto a HD and then transfer them to another iphoto on another computer. Will the photos, if simply dragged onto or copied onto the HD, automatically reassemble themselves back into the events...