markearthling

Hello All

 

As there seem to be so many conflicting ideas about this subject and

because many of these ideas seem to fall into the realm of speculation

I decided this was the best place for this post.

 

Various ideas/concepts of time travel seem to have been around

on this planet for a very long time so I think I'll skip

the history tour.

 

It seems possible as we are travelling forwards in time every

unit of time ( split/second, minute, hour day etc )

already that given time dilation/relativity that perhaps in the

future we may be able to "jump" forwards in time

by varying units of time

( although if future time is being set up each split/unit of time

then it is not clear that by jumping too far ahead

we may not land in some kind of "as yet undefined state" ?

We could end up by jumping forwards to a future time

which does not yet exist ?).

 

So forwards time travel may become possible for us in the future

BUT we may have a lot of work to do in solveing all the problems.

 

Some have suggested that time is like a loop in the

fabric/structure of space time. This may be so and needs further

examination.

 

From what I read it also seems to me that even if we could travel

to points in time in the past we very likely would only

be able to observe and not CHANGE events we witness there.

 

I once had a weird idea (and have since discovered that others

have similar ideas ) about time travel and time machines

i.e. Imagine a machine ( possibly with computing/storage capacity

way beyong any concepts we have now of supercomputing

( millions of cores or perhaps large scale cloud computing,

something fast beyond belief almost - Quantum Supercomputing ?)

which could take a Universal snapshot of the location/coordinates

of every sub atomic particle, atom, electron [matter], force

relationship etc in the Universe

( and we haven't covered dark matter, energy etc)

every given time period

(which could probably be variable).

 

Then there is the idea that each quantized snapshot

is sampled and stored in our time machine so we would have a

series of everything which has happened since a partcular point

in the past when we started sampleing the time snapshots

of our Universe. Now we have to somehow merge this series

of snap shots with the correspondingly dynamic nature

of the space/time continuum and all it's various energy/forces

and relative positioning in the continuum.

 

Our time travel pilots so to speak would have to be

translated into their quantum particles/sub atomic

and atoms/molecules etc.. A complex map like the

time travel snapshot series above

and merged with the snapshot info above

at a particular time in the past

( to come back we kind of reverse the process).

 

We not only have to create our merged snapshot

 

Series we literally have to be able to

 

Manipulate every sub atomic particle, force relationship

 

For all matter ( plus dark energy/matter etc)

 

In the universe ( or perhaps this could be

 

Done locally like only for the areas of space/time affected ?).

 

Definitely sounds to be in the realm of the impossible.

 

I do realise that the above sounds way beyond

possibly what science/tecnology could achieve

( in the future who knows ?).

Possibly sounds like the movie, The Fly/Time Tunnel.

If it were possible to go back and change

what happens in the past then we create

the various time conundrums/paradoxes

(what if I kill my father etc).

 

If such amazing technology were available in the

future then it could have other

applications like possibly

matter transportation/teleportation.

 

I realise the above is highly speculatory

just interested to know what others think.

So JohnB are we saying that these early blimp like UFOs

with the propellors (??? maybe for atmospheric use yes )

actually flew here from space ?

(propellorz in space !)

 

 

OR

 

would it be more credible to say that someone on

earth was experimenting with/building

early blimp like aircraft which may have predated

what Graf Zeppelin did

(and they successfully kept it mostly

a secret apart from some sightings) ?

 

Hey there Moontanman ! Yes I agree.

Basically the question I asked myself was :

 

Where did the concept/idea / shape etc.. of the flying saucer originally

come from ( in popular culture )i.e. did we first see them in the sky

(as per the Keith Arnold sighting in 1947) ? [we also seem to assume that

because of their aerial performance capabilities that they must come from

space and be of extra terrestrial origin - They could actually be from earth

and simply be new technology [black technology being tested by governments - and there is much that they don't want us to know - this idea already has great credibility ].

 

I don't necessarily hold with the idea that UFOs/saucers are actually

extra or inter dimensional craft. I can't see any evidence for this claim

although there is much on the web covering this subject.

 

Some people suggest that this is the era/period when the term flying saucer first entered the public consciousness ( around 1947 especially after the so called

famous Roswell incidents).

 

In fact I believe that the idea of the flying saucer was around much earlier than this. Info over at Wikipedi suggests that the idea has existed in popular culture

and media since early last century ( around 1911 ) although I have not seen the evidence on this.

 

However, the following details the story of one american man named Ray Palmer

who was an early SCI FI magazine author and editor.

 

http://www.thejinn.n...ing_saucers.htm

 

Ray apparently got going with his SCI FI /saucer stories etc around 1938.

In fact many SCI FI magazines/fanzines carried saucer images and stories

which predate the period of the 1940s.

 

There was also a number of early flying saucer shaped flying vehicles

( mainly unsuccessful) which predate even the early work of

the SCI FI magazine world ( around 1929 for example a lenticular shaped

flying vehicle was invented ).

 

I have read references to various historical works/images from various places

around the world in other cultures and the claim is that earth has been visitted

before in the past, possibly by aliens in UFOs/saucers.

I have seen nothing that convinceingly or conclusively supports this claim.

 

My contention and claim is that it is more than likely that the idea/concept and

shape etc of the classic flying saucer was invented by a human mind here

on earth ( it didn't come from space ) and possibly early last century

( 1900s ).

 

However, I do keep an open mind on this subject and am open to the views of others on this.

 

One other interesting idea I have seen is that IF UFOs/saucers are flown by

extra terrestrials from space then perhaps they have been aware of our human

civilisation here on earth for quite a while.

 

The next question I ask myself is WHAT was happening in the world

around the period of 1947 which might prompt the beginning of many

UFO sightings/events/abductions etc.. ?

 

Answer we had just ended ( yes in 45 ) an extremely violent

world war where millions and millions were annihilated.

Then we dropped our atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

Would this have gotten anyones attention from space ?

 

Would ETs be interested/concerned about what we were getting up to

and maybe come here for a look see etc.. ?

 

There has been so much written about the extraterrestrial/UFO/abduction

etc phenomenon/scenarios that so many ideas have become very confused

and unfocussed and frankly the whole field of memes relating to these things

have begun to smack of the CRANK factor and lack credibility

on a wide basis.

 

I read Whitley Streibers Communion books in the 80s and saw the film

based on his work later. I was totally creeped out and I think

I was a little hooked by it all until later when the admissions

of fraud came out. Whitley and his supporters had simply done it for the

money folks, yep that's the truth.

( just like the Fire in the Sky / Snowflake story about the abduction

of a forestry worker in 1975 - it was shown by various investigators that

there were monetary incentives behind the motivation of involved individuals

to falsify their stories/claims ).

 

There has been so much hoaxing going on and almost a total lack

of conclusive evidence that less and less people bother to blink an eyelid

anymore when this subject comes up ( less and less people could care

about it at all ).

 

ETs from outer space ? Yeah Right ! Tell us another bed time story.

 

But I am interested in what anyone here thinks about it all.

 

 

michel123456

 

LOL ! Though I can see why you may have been a little confused about this.

I'm not sure if Jonathon and Neil Diamond know one another but maybe you could be right.

 

Ophiolite

 

I'm a little disappointed that you said I have only done a disservice to Jonathon

and not a GREAT disservice !

 

I agree, he is one of the great gulls of life.

 

I do think however, that you are being too hard on Jonathon.

He was a gull ahead of his time and he dreamed of breaking free

from the ordinary gullness of life and learning all he could

about new things and new capabilities.

 

He too was judged to be in breach of his groups expectations

and rules ( political correctness ) and was subjected to the

dogma of the group and expected to conform.

 

I must therefore insist upon recommending that all

members here investigate Jonathons' life and works

both immediately and fully ( see the movie again and it may

open your eyes).

 

The rodeo of life is like the show business stage.

There will always be snipers and hecklers to

knock our favourite artists off their pedestals.

 

So

watch

comprehend

learn

chill out

and enjoy

Life the Universe and Everything

 

?8O)}

 

p.s. Only lawn here ( high on life )

 

It's better to burn out than it is to rust. Neil Young

 

 

 

 

Is this anything like the Bogus Hadron particle ?

 

ROFL

Yes the works of L Ron Hubbard or so I hear,

 

From what I can make out Scientology is designed to hijack the mind

of the believer and the abrogation of the intellect and the pocket book

to a load of fraudulently bogus ideas/procedures/rituals and claptrap.

( they remind me of the Moonies and others )

 

That's about it really other than what others here think

on the subject.

There are too many database products out there to mention

here also many many programming languages used to

process data on the various computer systems.

 

It is likely that Barclays will make use of the Internet and

many other internetworking technologies and related

control/management software as well as the best

multi level security and IT people that money can buy.

They will use more than one database product (very likely).

 

On your 2nd question Of course their new system

will be crucially important to how well they can

perform in future financial markets.

 

That said, what is your application

or why does this interest you specifically ?

Oh come now Ophiolite

 

I think he would have been quite an open minded seagull

( although I can't remember seeing his brains fall out

even after those terrifyingly steep dives).

 

This after all is general philosophy.

 

However if you are implying that I have overdone things

then I am willing to wear that criticism.

 

 

Open yourself up to possibility and let your heart

and mind soar.

 

By the way I recommend a viewing/reviewing of this terrific old

movie ( to all and sundry ) from 1973.

 

I just purchased a DVD copy but remember seeing it on TV way

back then.

 

It is truly an inspirational piece of theatrical art.

 

Also switched me back onto the music of Neil Diamond.

Jonathon Livingston Seagull

 

 

( A film that will lift your spirits and make your heart soar)

 

also recommended are the literary works of Richard Bach

 

on which the film is based. Music soundtrack by Neil Diamond.

 

 

Open up your mind and psyche

 

And dare to dream

 

Dare to be your true self

 

The person you were born and meant to be.

 

Is there anything the human spirit and mind

 

Cannot conceive of and achieve ?

 

 

Can we fly like the birds and soar like the eagle ?

 

An ancient dream of man is coming true

 

As we learn how and another limitation slips away.

 

Can we fly higher and further and faster than we

 

Ever have before ? Can we dive steeper and faster

 

With more control than we ever did ?

 

The dream is slowly coming true.

 

 

Will we fly to the planets and eventually the stars

 

Pursuing the mysteries of space, time and the universe

 

Conquering all before us and eventually the mystery

 

Of life and creation itself (substitute "evolution" if you feel the need).

 

 

How far and fast will we travel then ?

 

Through the einstein rosen bridge

 

Or faster than light like the legendary tachyon.

 

We already travel with the arrow of time forwards

 

Into the unknowable.

 

But will visits to the future be "knowable" then

 

How about the past ?

 

 

Will we conquer the many dimensions postulated

 

By the string theory and breach the boundaries

 

Of our own universal donut as postulated by

 

M theory ?

 

Will we travel to other universes in the multiverse

 

And finally perceive the meaning of Big Bang theory

 

And the "intelligent" creation of all that

 

Lays before us ?

 

Or discover chaos out of which flows order

 

Like a final fractal crystallization ?

 

 

Will we discover intelligent forces of design and creation

 

Or just forces and global structure ?

 

Will the macrocosm finally shrink into the microcosm

 

And will humanity finally transcend it's form

 

And longevity

 

Organizational and societal woes

 

Over many thousands or millions of years ?

 

 

The future lays before us

 

Will we embrace all it offers

 

Or shrink backwards from the challenge

 

When we now stand at the edge of the sea of knowledge

 

So much lays within our grasp

 

To fulfill us physically, intellectually and spiritually

 

To make for a better life and world (s)

 

For more open and productive collaboration

 

And communication as a species

 

We can only go forward if we progress

 

Especially beyond the bounds of greed

 

And monetary gain.

 

 

Our progress and success depends on many things

 

But we should not capitulate

 

To the snipers of group expectation and

 

Political correctness and dogma in any form

 

From any source.

 

 

We are all different and we should

 

Recognize our differences and biases

 

We should be open about them.

 

 

The future can be ours if we are prepared

 

To work

 

And embrace all that it offers

 

And to never lose our child like sense

 

Of wonder.

 

 

It's better to burn out than it is to rust. Neil Young

 

 

Any discussion/commentary welcome.

 

 

HAL

 

I like your updated image (awesome colour etc for something 1200 years old).

 

From this clearer image it does look like the headgear is actually hair

although I wonder why the beard is brown and the hair yellow ?

( maybe the crown at the top does indicate some kind of crown also)

 

I agree with what marat says above. I don't think it likely Jesus would have been

depicted in his time as he was just another Jo on the street (unimportant

to authorities etc).

Having another look at that 1200 year old irish image of Jesus

supplied by HAL above the images' headgear is a little rough looking

almost like a crown of thorns OR it could be some kind of

fancy tousled hat which they may have worn way back then

but it doesn't seem at all like what you would imagine a crown

would normally look like (although notice the Cross topping

the headgear which can be seen on other crowns found

in christendom/europe and perhaps UK).

 

Then again it may just be the persons' hair as has been suggested.

 

 

Cap'n Refsmmat

 

Pontius Pilate had a reputation as a ruthless governor; it's an open question

why he would defer to the opinion of the Jews when he could execute or

release whomever he wished.

 

Pontius Pilate may have been a ruthless governor as you said

BUT remember that people back in those times were VERY

superstitious. The romans had a pantheon of Gods themselves

which they made sure to placate with the necessary

sacrifices and religious ceremonies whenever possible.

At one stage in rome (and I am not suggesting that this relates

to the time frame we are discussing just the relevance in terms of the

roman religious mind set in general) there apparently was an

temple or alter set up to the veneration of what was described as the unknown

God (to ensure that their actions did not bring down the wrath

of a deity that they were not aware of).

 

So pilate, as ruthless as he may have been may also still

have been concerned about the consequences

of killing Jesus (what will the Gods or any unknown God

[ the Jewish God ?] do to me for this i.e. in the afterlife

he may have been disadvantaged because of this).

 

Remember that his wife warned him about killing Jesus

(of course another open question) because

"she had suffered much in a dream about him"

i.e. she warned him to not do anything against

that righteous man (the wording may in fact be

something like "have nothing to do with this righteous person".

 

On the subject of deferring to the jews as to who

he released or not yes he could have totally ignored

jewish wishes but perhaps he being superstitious

as most people/romans were in those times

and not wanting to offend any God/Deity

(and because he considered Jesus was not what he was made out

by the jews i.e. not at fault)

he may have decided to give Jesus a chance at freedom

so he threw the release question open to the jews

present in the crowd

(pilate may have considered this another way to gain favour

with the Gods, known or otherwise so as to not offend any

deity).

 

It could hence be possible that pilate (the ruthless)

had other reasons for not wanting there to be any roman record

of the audience/judgement and crucifixion of Jesus.

(reasons of superstition/religion).

Also the romans were hated by many jews and giving

them what they wanted may help him to govern

more easily in the future (reasons of politics and practicality).

 

The jews probably did not want any records kept

so if pilate did/ensured the same thing

then he may have been getting more on side

with the jewish establishment and furthering

his own cause of governance and that of

his mother state/empire Rome.

 

As an example of how much Jesus was hated by the jews

consider that he was crucified in the company of

criminals (one crucified on each side of Jesus at

Golgotha (place of the skull)).

The jews wanted him to be identified with criminals

and the implication is that he broke their most

sanctified religious laws and like any other criminal

he deserved the death penalty for his blasphemies

against God and their laws.

 

Apparently the romans put a wooden plaque

over Jesus head on the cross which

read something like "this is the King

of the Jews" but no way did the jews

want that read or repeated by anyone

as they did not recognise Jesus as their

Messiah/Christ and certainly did not want

this blaspheming criminal for their King

so they requested that pilate change

the wording of the plaque to

"This man said that he is the King of the Jews"

to discredit the idea BUT pilates response

was "What I have written I have written"

and that was that.

 

as

 

 

I am having trouble making these functions work in the posting/reply editor here.

 

Can we do these things here ( if so what I am doing wrong

or what procedure should I be following ) ?

 

I seem able to select/all but then I can't copy, cut (although paste seems OK) ?

I have to use backspace or delete to get rid of unwanted content.

 

any help much appreciated

The definitions above furnish one with a wider view and fill in most of the gaps.

 

I particularly like the contributions of missisippichem and Ophiolite

(all are good though).

 

If I had said below (taken from above) above

 

Knowledge, though it is valid and very usefull (crucial

to our survival and progress in life etc)

should not on it's own be misconstrued to be Wisdom.

 

Wisdom is the sum of our resources/knowledge/abilities and

what we choose to do with these resources/knowledge/abilities

(how we apply our resources etc).

 

If I had said this above originally my meaning may have

been more clear/complete.

 

Though I am not trying to be exact i.e. make the definitive definition

as Ophiolite pointed out there is no standard definition.

My view is only one amongst many views on this.

 

I take resources/knowledge/abilities to cover most of the things discussed

above such as experience and recognition of limitations.

I thought I was trying to cover most of these things

by using the wording ,"wisdom is the sum of our resources"

(trying for a catch all - but of course there is no point in shooting for something

that doesn't exist).

ajb

 

Thanks for what you said I get it that these things may not be pure energy.

 

 

Energy is really a property of "stuff" and so you should not think of atoms or

photons as being pure energy.

 

I am not criticising what you said it's just that I'm

not sure what exactly you mean by "stuff" ?

 

Also I am having problems making this quite facility work.

 

Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong ?

 

Sorry that was "quote facility".

Perhaps I should have posted this over at Speculations ( Capnreffsmat/Swansont ?)

 

Sorry about that (I guess it is mostly speculation).

 

I will know infuture what to do.

 

If you want to move it (or perhaps there is no merit in

what I am trying to express)

that is fine by me.

 

thanks

Some very cogent arguments/info above.

 

On the subject regarding the authorities at the time of Jesus

( both religous jews/rulers from various preisthoods and roman authorities)

it seems likely that the roman authorities would have been the ones

to keep any records about jesus seizure/crucifixion although

I think Jesus was seized in the garden of Gethsamane by jewish

guards from the local temple (if I have this right).

 

He was then taken for an audience with a jewish high preist

and others to try him and then later taken to the roman

governor Pilate for an audience to determine his fate.

Pilate could not find any fault with the prisoner

but as the jewish crowd were baying for his blood

Pilate capitulated and with a symbolic gesture of

the public washing of his hands for all the crowd to see

he publically absolved himself from the responsibility

of what he could see as the killing of an innocent man

(he washed his hands of the responsibility).

 

Supposedly the jewish crowd were given the choice

of release of a prisoner and the choice was between

Jesus and Barrabas (a known criminal).

The crowd chose Barrabas.

 

On the subject of any records that might have been made back

then one might expect that the romans were likely to do this

and of course there would be a high likelihood such

documents have been lost over such a length of time.

Although as Pilate may have considered this

a distastefull (he had to wash his hands of Jesus and

supposedly his wife warned him to have nothing to do

against that righteous man) affair is it possible that

Pilate ensured that no roman records should be made

or kept (possibly thinking about his reputation?).

 

The romans could also have kept records of their

crucifixions but again perhaps this was

expunged from any record for the same reason.

 

In the case of the Jewish leaders and religious people

Jesus was a bit of a threat to their religious

power base and position

(apparently Jesus was not the only itinerant preacher

who had raised their ire before and possibly not the last)

his position/actions seemed a direct challenge to

their authority/establishment.

His teaching seemed to suggest he thought himself

the Christ/Messiah prophesied long ago

in the hebrew religious documents/literature

and his seeming claim to be the Son of God

was considered by the various priesthoods

as being outright blasphemy

(a position worthy of the death penalty).

 

The Jewish leaders/priesthoods hated Jesus,

his position, his following and the reports

of miracles that came in

(perhaps they were a little scared of him who knows).

 

If they accepted him as their newly identified/arrived

Christ/Messiah they would also probably

be obliged to make him King (of the Jews).

Jesus was as such hated on many fronts by the

Jews.

 

They wanted him dead quickly and expunged from the

record as efficiently as possible.

It doesn't seem likely that Jewish authorities

would bother making any lasting records

of Jesus life/activities etc for the above reasons.

 

It is possible that someone may have bothered

to make a picture/portrait of Jesus in his time

or perhaps just a symbolic image like the old one

above. However one wonders if people would

have thought to do that way back then ?

 

On the very old image of Jesus above

I also wondered why he might be portrayed

wearing a crown and rich clothing (robe) ?

 

Jesus was a religious/spiritual figure

who was venerated by many as being

or existing at a very high plane or level

(in heaven he supposedly sits on the

right hand of God / Lord of Lords

and King of Kings).

By some he was/is considered to be

the Son of God and also

possibly by some as the true Jewish

Christ or Messiah and hence

King of the Jews.

 

So possibly Jesus was being portrayed

as a richly dressed King in that old image

above (open to discussion).

I guess you are right.

 

Thanks for the references.

 

I still have some reading to do.

 

I have my L plates firmly affixed to my rear bumper

StefanCOA

 

In general what you are saying above seems to be quite reasonable.

 

On the subject of dictionary definitions maybe someone should

take this up with the dictionary makers because there are

a lot of lay people out there who have the wrong

impression of things scientific (lead up the garden path)

because of what the dictionary makers print and because

most lay people read ordinary dictionaries.

 

I always thought that a theory (scientific or otherwise)

was simply a set of ideas about the reality of things.

Now I have been informed otherwise.

 

Of course there are better sources of information

like libraries and other repositories of

scientific literature. And now we have the net

(we are lucky these days).

 

But we all have plenty of reading/work to do

weeding out the good stuff from the rubbish.

I was reading over at science news about "The End of Space" by I Got Wisdom (or some such )

but not allowed to comment (topic locked). Since God showed this to "Got Wisdom"

I won't bother to pursue this one too closely.

 

One thing did bother me and that was that on The Onion they were talking about the

Hubble Kaleidoscope (Is A Kaleidoscope for real ?) and how astronomers have recently

observed total "Weirdness" out in space with this thing. What is the Hubble Kaleidoscope

and is The Onion reporting valid/serious science/astronomy news ?

 

I went over to

 

http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/penprase/BEPresearch.website/Default.html

 

This one has links to something called project Kaleidoscope

 

http://www.pkal.org/collections/About.cfm

 

This one seems to be the home for project Kaleidoscope which is some kind

of educational program ?

 

On M Theory

 

I think that M (Membrane) theory says that the universe has a 3 dimensional

(I think there may be more than three dimensions ?) donut like shape

and I think that einsteins' work says that if you travel far enough in space

that you just come back around on your path until you arrive back at your starting

point (like in a loop).

 

So maybe we could actually see an end to space/our universe

(as I think M theory proposes that there are many universes

which could exist side by side in some kind of bubble structure)

using our most powerfull scopes if an end is actually there

(or would light travel also in a giant loop around the universal donut

and so we could never break out and see any end of space even

though it could be there ?).

 

I think M theory also proposes that because there are multiple

universal donuts that these may collide and where their

edges intersect/collide (the point of collision)

possibly a singularity is produced which releases such an enormous

amount of energy from the impact that a BIG BANG occurs

and a new universe is made in the multi universal bubble

structure (mat ?) and so the new universe expands, grows

and develops like ours did supposedly around 15 billion years ago.

 

Just like string theory, M theory is fascinating

and I realise there must be much more to add to this story

( wide open to debate).

 

DrRocket

 

Needs a puppy bed.

 

 

Howdy all

 

I remember years ago when I was working in a new IT job I read some literature

from a computer company (in the US I think).

They were putting out stuff like the early Microsoft Co did like database, spreadsheet

and wordprocessing software ( for CP/M systems if I remember correctly ) etc..

 

Basically someone high up in the company was making a commentary on the

companys' products and their utility and usefullness.

 

The guy was saying that technology was now leading us into a new age

of Wisdom (which is perfectly OK to say).

 

I thought his statements though were a bit over the top

(just like when we are informed of new technical breakthroughs which

have just been IDed in the lab and all the benefits they will bring

when in fact these new things may not deliver for another 50 years or more).

 

I don't think wisdom is tied to technology or knowledge alone.

 

I think of wisdom in the following way :

 

Knowledge, though it is valid and very usefull (crucial

to our survival and progress in life etc)

should not on it's own be misconstrued to be Wisdom.

 

Wisdom is the sum of our resources and

what we choose to do with these resources

(how we apply our resources).

 

This is my definition of Wisdom.

 

I know that others will have different approaches/thinking on this subject

 

and so I am interested to learn what they think about it.

Interesting stuff above especially what was said about Josephus.

 

This is a serious subject but then I thought

 

on a lighter note

 

In the Life of Brian

 

Brians' mom said he was a VERY naughty boy !

When subatomic particles are discussed what exactly are we talking about ?

( as I understand it things like protons/neutrons (nucleus), electrons,

quarks, gluons ( hadrons ?) etc are all considered to be subatomic particles ?).

 

According to the einstein equation (E=MC^2) am I right in assuming

that an atom is pure energy ( over simplistic ? ) and it's mass can be

fully converted to energy ( 100% efficiently or possibly not [ other products

of light, heat, sound, radiation etc ]) ?

 

So are subatomic particles like little packets of energy or if not do we know

what they are ?

 

Would it be valid to consider all mass from micro to macro level

as "mass energy" ?

 

 

The structure of the atom as we think we know it is very interesting.

(protons and neutrons in the nucleus and other subatomic particles

and electrons orbitting in valence shell orbits on the outside).

Are we correct in thinking that the electrons actually do

orbit the nucleus ? Where have we discovered this ?

 

Is the old "drop" theory of atomic structure even considered

anymore (I think that's what it was called) ?

 

Is it possible that the atom might have something in it like

an energy gradient which varies from most dense in the nucleus

to less dense at the outside where the electrons are ?

i.e. if the "gradient" is not at it's max and has room

for the energy of one more electron (empty valence shell

at the outside) then it accepts an electron. ?

 

If the atom was actually like a blob of energy with an energy gradient

from nucleus to outside then when we atom smash aren't

we knocking little blobs of energy off the atom which spin this way

or that (depending on the energy level of the particles smashing the

atom then we get smaller or bigger blobs of energy breaking off ?) ?

 

So are the sub atomic particles themselves some kind of

localised energy gradient which exist separately inside the

atom or do they not actually exist and are maybe just

part of the atoms' gross energy before they are knocked

off as energy blobs by the smashing process ?

(maybe electron flow is like some form of energy blob

exchange ?).

 

or maybe subatomic particles are something else altogether.

Mooeypoo

 

Isn't this the right place for speculation about evolution or should crazynutsx

have posted elsewhere ?

 

Is he actually soapboxing as you said above or is he just presenting a general

speculatory subject regarding creationism vs evolution ?

 

Just wondered.

 

Mooeypoo

 

Whoops, sorry.

 

I see it was moved from somewhere else to here.

 

 

 

Mooeypoo

 

It is time for me to bite the bullet and fully apologise (which I do unreservedly)

for the things which I unfortunately said above.

 

I have been talking to Ophiolite and he showed me that my actions have

also insulted others here and the thread above

displays this to all above. I got off to a bad start and have not cast

myself in a good light to others here as well but only have myself to blame for that

(definitely the wrong thing to do).

 

My conduct above is an example of how not to proceed in an attempt to

communicate with others (very poor attempt on my part).

As such I am the one who stuck his metaphorical foot into his mouth

and so I am prepared to wear the consequences

of my actions. I deserve the fact that this thread is still up

(it could have been removed but probably serves well

as a reminder/warning of the consequences of this type of conduct).

 

A shame as the science discussion/content on this thread

has been very good/enlightening.

 

I am usually an effective communicator and do not normally go out

of my way to insult others where I can avoid it

BUT here I think I messed up badly and for some reason I was

too pushy and determined to get at the material/answers I wanted.

We all have biases and yes I have mine as well

(no excuse).

 

I can see you (and others) were only trying to get through to me but

I was pig headed and stubborn.

 

You are obviously very well educated and knowledgeable

( I will get back to you regarding your post on Radiometric Dating

on Earth Sciences). What I said was wrong and I regret saying what I did

and you obviously are an honest person.

 

So that's it basically. I will not make the same mistake again.

 

Thanks again for your forbearance/patience and very helpfull posts.

 

?8O)}

 

 

 

Interested to know what others think about this.