Jump to content

æτhεr φ

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • College Major/Degree
  • Favorite Area of Science

æτhεr φ's Achievements


Quark (2/13)



  1. http://boards.4chan....587535#q1587535 http://www.sciencefo...51219-morality/ There are also others on this board, these are my own. If you literally did come up with this idea now then it's really true, and the singularity is in action right now... Bring on the 4th reich. You claim "Time" alone created the "Universe". However time is the process from one to another. So for: Point A to reach Point B You require "love" or "attraction" Point A (love) Point B Time + Love^2 created the universe.
  2. æτhεr φ

    Free Speech

    =] What you're suggesting is Nazism.
  3. You're wrong. Time and Love created the universe, if you're going to be philisophical about it; however, you're making assertions without evidence to back up what you're saying. It's therefore not-science, unless you'd like to add the sequence of events that came 'after'. Your principle falls down as soon as you claim to put it simple 'binary attraction', when you claim a single element created the universe. That would be a queer creator and falsifies your assertion from the get go. My opinion, also use the search bar, I've noticed other people already posted this theory. Anyhow, you stole my idea.
  4. What about those people who aren't afraid of Death?
  5. The family learned at some point. Onto how "Morality" was created in my weird pre-educated opinion; which I'll soon lose in a weeks when I join college:- >>
  6. Once born a child doesn't know death, and once someone by definition "dies", the child wouldn't notice this process as death, but rather 'a part of life' - an event that happens during life. Once given education that child will be told about death, or even taught the definition by his/her parents. Does "death" really exist, or only in language? If so, when one by definition "dies" that person really just "lived" and possibly could "live on"? We're all born knowing life, so the definition of "life" isn't required, as once you're born, you sense it -- and know life. You never know death, until you die. So death is only a figment of 'word' and is not relative to pre-educated life? Maybe the belief in God, is really the belief in life after death - or no belief in death at all, just reworded? This isn't a religious post, I don't want to offend anyone in their religion, just my opinion... I'm unsure on the existence of God, agnostic. When a person believes in God, they usually do for a number of reasons, most of all, "eternal life" When a person doesn't believe in God, they usually believe that "death" exists. If this thread is now religious because of the second part then please tell me and I'll delete it. I don't want to make it off-topic.
  7. If time travel is possible in the future, then people - from the future, would have already travelled back in time. - Ricky Gervais I don't think it will ever be possible; furthermore I don't think we'll ever be able to defy the laws of the universe. My idea is that perhaps time as we understand it is actually standing still and the energy flowing backwards through the medium of "time" is percieved by us as progressing through time. -P.S; that's to OP, I didn't have time to read the whole thread.
  8. I realized after, it is astronomy that I meant. What is astrology btw? lol.
  9. if anti-matter exists, then does anti-space exist. This would kind of explain what nothing is composed of, and maybe combined with my morality belief explain why the universe is expanding. If something is composed of space/matter, then wouldn't nothing be composed of anti-space/anti-matter? If you picture an expanding universe, what exactly is it expanding unto? Think of the universe (vacuum w/e), and outside of it just white (being the anti-space, normal space is black or at least to us it is). The anti-S&M produces a kind of attraction with the normal S&M. If not, could you explain to me why exactly anti-space cannot exist or why it is improbable. Cheers!
  10. Nope. I'll leave it there, I just wanted to clarify. Don't worry I'm back to blogging now! Thanks for the clarification!
  11. Okay, I was just reading this timecube website and thought I'd ask you guys. It seemed correct but I guess you guys have more experience than me =]
  12. æτhεr φ

    Flat Earth

    Could the Earth be flat, but bent by time? In a quad-helix time-like cube spinning 1/4, creating a full circle? Just a thought.
  13. taken from my blog http://diligovos.blogspot.com/ Universe Defined First I'll explain what the above title means. When a human explains morality, he/she explains it by definition -- which leads to confusion onto what is morally correct. Personally I think morality is man-made and doesn't really explain what true Good/Evil is. To find the truth one must essentially "go back" to the beginning of "thought" so to speak - before human application; when we essentially thought without 'word', and relied more on instincts than knowledge. The "universe-defined" morality. Word-World As humans in this current day and age, we live in a word-world; an environment controlled by the government and academia. We are born, and when we are old enough to attend school, we must do so to fit in with our civilization -- we have little choice in this process, as if we do not attend school, we are almost guaranteed a bad/depressing life. During school we are taught language and are educated with the current "beliefs" of the government; we're taught how to communicate and how to interpret situations. Once educated we experience an "accepted-reality"; considered real-life as we do not have enough power to change it, and see no problem with it. People walk around towns and cities relaying words at each other, or like myself right now, typing up blogs on computers to communicate with other people. It's an "accepted-reality", far from the, for no better word, "promised-natural" reality. Good/Evil I have a firm belief that all word is universe-defined evil. For the simple reason, we name parts of life we come across. For example: a tree. When you see a "tree", is it really a "tree" or is it a part of life? The tree not once told us that it's name was tree -- we named it tree, when really it equates: 0, and is nothing but a part of life, along with everything else we applied a name to. I believe that the name-less "tree" is universe-defined good which is equal to: 0. It is universe-defined good as if it wasn't, we as humans, also being made from the same good stuff, would not attract it and wouldn't be able to see/feel/hear it. Everything that is existent in nature/universe is good, as if it wasn't, we wouldn't attract it -- and it wouldn't co-exist with us. You -> 0 Tree -> 0 0><0 Binary attraction. We all know that good cannot exist without evil, both good and evil together as a pair equate: 0 "Good". We are able to make universe defined moral choices, either good or evil; however, we can make a evil choice for the greater good. An example being: 1. Evil: Cut down a tree. 2. Greater Good: Build a home. The evil version would be: 1. Evil: Cut down a tree. 2. Greater Evil: Laugh at the dead tree. Think of it as a swaying metronome, you can choose to swing to the evil side to bring force back to the good side, or simply continue to make evil choices and keep it stable at the evil side. Another example this time using larger scale events: 1. Evil: Send a nuclear bomb at another country. 2. Greater Good: Save your own people from death. And the evil version. 1. Evil: Send a nuclear bomb at another country. 2. Greater Evil: For the lols. Continued Evil In this accepted word world we are taught to follow a defined Good/Evil, which isn't relative to the universe defined morality -- in fact it is universe-defined evil. We worship "word", in doing so dismiss the "good". Therefore anyone that passes away unknowing, passes away evil. Without word we would only know good, and therefore wouldn't know death, as we would only understand life/good (0). There is no death, only human-defined death, which isn't a part of the universe. When you die, you either die knowing good, or you die knowing evil -- there is no heaven/hell, but rather good/evil. If you die knowing good, you are "good", and therefore you return or conjoin with everything that is "good", and if you worship or are knowing evil, you conjoin with what is evil. Think of the current life as the matrix -- where Morpheus asks you to pick the red pill to journey into the matrix, or the blue pill to stay in the real word, except you're force fed the red pill before you have a chance to understand the differences. As soon as you take this red pill, a book is laid in front of you, and your brain begins filling up with unnecessary information, like a virus, and you begin thinking using it. You then communicate using it, passing the virus on to other people, influencing them, etc etc. If you ever wondered why whenever you learn a new word, you start hearing it everywhere, that's why. It's a virus. Word = 1, and therefore is universe-defined evil. The con of man, although evil, is beautiful and I think rather than dismissing this accepted-reality, it should be Incorporated, truthfully, and should be explained to people instead of hidden. Humans Equating Zero "Good" The reason why a human equates: 0 and not 1, is because a human is composed of two opposite halves, a front and back and a top and bottom. Therefore is composed of binary "Good" opposites, just like the universe-defined good and evil. If we were "1", then we wouldn't attract all the other "Good" in the world, rather repenting it. Here's a diagram using numbers: 0 <--- You Land ---> 0 0 <---- Sky Dog ----> 0 Conclusion For now, this is all I can be bothered to write. Feel free to add comments, troll or debate. I enjoy this stuff. I'll add more to this blog often -- If you want to spread the word, feel free to. I'm not here for attention, in fact I'd like to keep my details as private as possible. This is for you guys, no shit! I really enjoy telling people this as I believe it to be true, and it seems legit! Many thanks to /sci/ for supporting me and giving me the needed drive to create this.
  14. If I were to cause a collision of two high-speed particles in glass sphere, and had a high-tech camera that could record or snap a shot of the sphere a split-second before it smashed into pieces, wouldn't I be able to predict exactly where the particles would end up? If not a collision then a explosion. If this is the case, then it would be the same with the Big Bang, if I was to go back in time and place a sphere over the point where it happened, I could then predict where the particles/matter would end up? So everything that is happening now was already predicted from point 1?
  15. Hey! I'm generally interested in learning science. Especially chemistry and astrology. Does anyone on this site have any books or places where I can learn the basics of each. I didn't gain much experience from school as I focused more on english & maths -- Thanks in advance.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.