# Eric 5

Senior Members

162

1. ## Apparent Inconsistency in General Relativity

Alright, I have seen examples like this given to explain the distortion of spacetime. In all examples with the trampoline or stretched rubber what is required is gravity and a material that has it's edges secured so they will not move. Also in these examples an object is actually in contact with some material. Spacetime has no scientific data that states that it is a physical thing existing in a location. On and on the dialogue goes regarding spacetime as though this thing actually exists, yet no one has ever discribed spacetime as a physical thing. Spacetime is a mathematical construct. No mention anywhere that spacetime is a physical thing. Everyone who speaks of it in terms of being a thing that exists in a location has not actually looked to see if this thing is an actual entity. Anyone willing to do some research and find out for yourself?
2. ## Big Bang

A stretching of what? Can you give more data on what you want to communicate.
3. ## Multiple dimensions of time

I would like to hear what you have been writting on time. I do not think time is a physical thing. I say that the concept of time is only a manifestation of particles moving in space. Also, when it comes to the idea of dimensions. Do you think that dimensions are a real physical things?
4. ## Time Dilation

You want to clear this up and understand this time dilation/lenght contraction stuff? Answer these questions: Is time a physical energy? If you say that it is, please provide scientific evidence or a definition. In this lenght contaction idea, can you find any reference that states that the object actually contracts? You have two objects, one is made of iron, the other is made of foam padding. Both objects are traveling at near the speed of light. Both we are told contract at to the same lenght. It takes more energy to contract iron then foam, yet both contract the same. How is this possible? What forces are at worK? If you say that the objects APPEAR to contract you would be correct according to Einstein and S.R. They appear to contract, but acctually do not contract. There is no science that explains the forces that act on an object to contract it during high speed. Force is not mentioned. The objects do not actually contract. Just think about it, if an object were contracted by some force, what is the force that brings it back to it original lenght? And why is this force never mentioned?
5. ## Constant Time

Do clocks meaure a physical influence or energy that is motivating the clock? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Again. What do clocks measure? Look at how a clock works. Do clocks actually measure some energy called time? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged SWANSONT. Please provide scientific evidence of the mechanical workings of a clock that shows clocks measure some external energy or influence? This talk of time being some type of thing is not based in science. Look at the references concerning clocks or time and you will see that time is not a physical thing that exists as some form of enegy that can influence a machine such as a clock.
6. ## why is time called 4th dimension?

Just to be clear. When you say we see only three dimensions, do you mean that light is being reflected off these dimensions so that the light percieving organs (known as eyes) can "see" dimensions? What do you mean see? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged This is all about a mathmatical model. Not physical reality. Nothing in what you said describes a real physical thing. I only point this out so no one thinks that dimensions are a real physical entity. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged not real things. Just imagination. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged BOB. Is time a physical thing as defined by physics or any science?
7. ## length contraction and the space twins

I am going to help you out here swansont. What asprung means by "physical" is what is defined in any standard dictionary. Correct me if I am wrong, asprung. Physical means physical as defined by any dictionary. Swansont, are you going to take the stand that there is a physical contraction? YES/NO.
8. ## Ghost Hunters International

"If life can exist distinct from atoms, as you propose, how do we detect this atom-free life form...do i feel a sense of deja vu...going round in circles?" - StringJunky Maybe life is a force or energy that is not visible, makes no sound, has no taste, has no solidity. It is different then physical universe objects and energy. It is possible that life is something that does not need a vessel or form to be alive. Life could be that thing that is just that, life. I am happy to see that you have this purely scientific viewpoint. I hope that you keep this viewpoint at all times. You may be a breath of fresh air when it comes to disscusing science. We will see. Alright, so what are the options here concerning this topic? I see two basic paths to take here in an effort to figure this out, either life is made from atoms or it is not. Once this has been discerned then we can go from there. You say that a living system has never been discovered existing separately from atoms. You are right. A living system is a collection of atoms that are in a form that allow life to interact with the physical universe. You see living systems are made of atoms, but when life is no longer a part of that system, then that system is no longer alive yet still remains a collection of atoms. A dead body is a colection of atoms. Just to set the record straight, I am not a believer in any faith based religion. I say that atoms are not alive. I say grouping atoms together do not make them become alive. Lets say that I do not know exactly what life is. I am interested in finding out so I have to collect as much data on this topic and then throw out what does not fit or apply. Even if I do not know the answer right now, I may get a bit closer once the collection of data is sifted through to get rid of false, or inapplicable data. As it stands right now, atoms are not living things, and if atoms were living things the question would still be, what makes the atom alive. So, in our discussion we need to come to some agreement. Since we have not established what makes life or what life is, then lets see if we can agree on what life is not. I will say that atoms no matter the amount or configuration are not alive or will ever become alive and aware. Eventually if we throw out what life isnt we may end up with what life is. The collection of atoms is not life since life is not something that added or constructed. There are life forms, but the form is not life. It would be possible to make something such as a robot to act like a living thing, go through all the motions and even give this robot artificial intelligence. This robot may have all of the right moves and responses to act as though it is alive, but it is not alive. I think that you should not rely on the forms that are alive and put your attention on what is it that animates or is part of this form that gives it life. I have no beliefs. One last thing. You go by StringJunky, does that mean you have an interest in string theory? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged What kind of attitude is this? I do not agree with your point of view so there is no need for discussion? That is not science. Science does not move forward through agreement to one viewpoint, and no looking or thinking of other viewpoints. What evidence? Just show me a scientific explaination or definition that is evidence that life is made of atoms. No evidence has been given, only assumptions, or opinions. I have done research on this topic and I found that science has not come out and said that life is an atomic structure. You can resolve this debate by giving evidence of some sort that science says or agrees that life is made of atoms. A website, a definition, something. I am sure that you think that you are right in your assertion, great. The problem is that I am looking for what science says about this matter and not just what one person thinks. You seem to think that life is some form of atoms, fine, what science backs this up? Is there any? So am I. This attitude that you have is the same attitude I have. Please just give one scientific definition, experiment, explaination that gives compelling evidence that life is what you think it is. Use science to prove your point. Do not make assumptions and be quick to judgment. I have raised some questions that cast a doubt on this "life is atomic idea". Can you provide any science that states life is some configuration of atoms? I would like to see it.

No.
10. ## Ghost Hunters International

Thank you for your input. That video is a lesson in chemistry and the physics of these chemicals. Nothing about life. The whole video is based on the growth and reactions of vesicles. Vesicles are not living things. Go ahead and check it out. Vesicles are not living things, so the whole video has nothing to do with the beginning of life. Sorry, nice try. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Tell me what the difference is. You want to say life might be comprised of atoms. 100% atoms? 90% atoms and 10% something else? Please explain what you mean. No. You're making the claim here, and since lack of evidence is not evidence by itself, you are the one with the burden of proof. Good luck. Alright, lets get back on track here. I say that life is not an atomic structure. I say that all living things posses something else that separates the living from the non living. I will agree that all of the living things that we percieve have some form that is made of some atomic structure. This atomic structure is not the source of life or life itself. There is the structure and that thing or energy that animates that structure. Now, do you think that life is a 100% atomic structure? Simply put, I am stating that life is not a particle. Those that disagree with me say that a group of atoms make life. Do you think that life is some percentage of an atomic structure? The way I see this debate is either life is made of some percentage of atoms or it is not. Those are the two sides. Please correct me if I am wrong. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged So what is your point? Are you saying that atoms are alive? You gave an example of removing atoms from a life form would eventually terminate that life form. Those atoms that you removed do they die? What happens when you remove atoms from something that is non living? Does it die? What happens when you add atoms to non living things? Do they become alive? Adding more atoms to a living thing, does that make it more alive? You see you have to show some connection between the atom and life. Do you have any data that shows that atoms are necessary to have life and the difference between those things that are composed of atoms that are non living and those things that are alive and have a form of some sort. Are atoms essential to have life? Do atoms give life? What do atoms have to do with life? That is my question.
11. ## Ghost Hunters International

I am just saying that there is no science that states atoms or groups of atoms become alive. Science has not given the chemical formula for life. I say that life is not made of atoms. Some on this thread are convinced that life is made of atoms. My claim is backed up by lack of scientific evidence that life is a chemical composition. There is no science that gives validity to the idea that life is made of chemicals. Those that believe that life is some type of atomic structure would just have to provide scientific evidence that backs up that claim. My statement that life is NOT made of atoms is proven by the fact that there is no evidence to the contrary. Those who claim that life is an atomic structure DO have to provide proof that life is an atomic structure or that atoms have the ability to become alive. So, yes you do need to prove your case. Why not just prove your point instead of avoiding the question. I would like to point out that no one has provided any evidence that life is an atomic structure, despite my many requests for this evidence. Is there anyone here who that belives life is made of atoms show any proof of this? It is time to put up some data that proves life is an atomic structure. As it stands right now I have not been shown that I am wrong.
12. ## Ghost Hunters International

We are discussing atoms becoming alive. Just show the science. What kind of science is this? You say life is made of atoms. What is the chemical formula of life. Please just give the science. COME ON MAN! Just keep this simple. Where is the science? According to that logic everything in this universe is alive. Look, just show the chemical formula of life and stop assuming. If you say life is made of atoms and this is a science forum then where is the science that backs up your claim? This is so simple. Why has no one just provided the science? Have you noticed that no one has provided any scientific evidence that life is made of atoms? So what started this cellular respiration? What causes a group of atoms to decide that in order to survive it must have cellular respiration? There is a group of atoms and then through some supernatural phenomenon it becomes necessary for this group of atoms to exhibit and depend on cellular respiration. Yes living systems exhibit cellular respiration. What is the science behind this? What would cause a group of atoms to construct some system of interacting with O2, yet some groups of atoms do not make this step? What is the force of energy that gives the impulse to a group of atoms to make them dependent on cellular respiration? Why would a group of atoms which are not dependent on respiration decide to now be dependent upon respiration? Seems a bit far fetch as far as science is concerned. So according to your logic, a group of non living atoms decide that they need to have respiration in order to live, yet they were not alive before this decision. This is a science forum. I have asked for the science to provide evidence that life is made of atoms. No one has provided empirical scientific evidence. You and others are making this more complicated then need be. Just show the evidence. Where is your proof? I raise some simple questions and you find it Herculean. You find this to be hard and too big to handle because you are having a hard time propping up your belief that life is made of atoms. Yet you could make this so simple by providing scientific evidence. Your lack of evidence strengthens my case. I ask for scientific evidence and none is given. Just look at how this strengthens my case. I say that there is no scientific evidence that says atoms or a group of atoms are alive, no one has provided any evidence, yet they think that by ignoring me or saying that I am being Herculean is some kind of proof that they are right. REALLY! Where is the science? Why the lack of science? You say life is made of atoms, where does science say this? You are going to have to realize that you know that there is no science to back up your claims. You might as well just admit it and say that your idea that life is made of atoms is based on faith. FAITH: A belief in something as true without having complete evidence or understanding. Show the evidence or understanding.

15. ## Ghost Hunters International

Not reasonable? This is science. Science is exact. If you think that life is a bunch if atoms then just tell me where you got this idea. Did you make it up? Or is it a scientific fact? Fact or opinion? Which is it? Are you serious? You are saying that there is no universal definition of life. WOW! So what are the definitions of life in all the standard scientific dictionaries, just made up private definitions? There are standard universal definitions of life. If life is a bunch of atoms show the scientific evidence or at least where you are getting this idea. Can you logically describe how atoms become alive. Just provide that and then we can go from there. You telling me that a bunch of atoms become alive is not scientific evidence. You say atoms can become alive, great, so how did you come to this conclusion? No, I am not looking for an example. Where is the science? You say it is so. Is that fact or opinion? FACT? If so then please provide evidence. OPINION? I really do not mean to be rude here, but you do not know what you are saying. In fact you have shown that you are either truly ignorant or are careless with your statements. THERE IS AN EXACT FORMULA TO MAKE A WORKING COMPUTER. Man makes computers everyday. Man knows exactly how to make a computer. Every part of a computer can be exactly identified and described exactly by science. Computers are made of matter and are non living. Trying to prove your point regarding life is made from atoms by making some comparison about computers is like trying to prove life is made of atoms by talking about rocks or plastic or spark plugs or TVs. Stick to the subject. Does science provide evidence that atoms are alive or a group of atoms become alive? Y/N. Stop with your comparisons. Where is the science that shows atoms are alive or that a group of atoms become alive. I am a scientific purist, 100% science is the only acceptable answer. If you want to discuss how you THINK atoms become alive, well that is fine, just state that this is your opinion and has no basis in science. If you know of science that states empirically that a group of atoms become alive, then just provide the evidence. This is so simple I just don’t see why people continue to state their opinion when there is science to back up their point. There is science that states atoms become alive right?

17. ## Ghost Hunters International

[ Which came first? The atom or the living system? Alright, excuse me for being specific, but this is a science form, which part of the atom is alive? Do all of the parts of an atom come together in a specific form and become alive? Look, atoms are either alive or not. A finger that is part of a living system will die when other living things interact with it, such as gangrene. Atoms do make the structure of a living form. But they also make the structure of non living and previously living forms. You see the system already has to BE ALIVE before the atoms are added to or become a part of that system. According to what you said atoms arealive when they are part of a living system, what gave this system its kick start? The addition of atoms? Do you add atoms to a non living system and then that system and the atoms become alive? A living system is 100% atoms? If so how did the atoms in the first living system become alive? This gets at the basic question of how did life start. If it is necessary to have a living system for the atoms to be a part of, and if all life is made of atoms, then was there always life and living things, or did an atom, electron, proton, etc become alive so as to make a living system. You see, in order for your above statement to be true, living things had to exist forever, or an atomic particle became alive. There is this huge jump from non living to living. If atoms are alive then they could start their own living systems. If atoms are not alive then they can only become alive after they become a part of a living system. That is a nice thing to mentally chew on. [ I agree, consciousness is a function of advanced life forms. All living things are aware of their environment. More advanced life forms have more advanced awareness. All living things are aware to some degree. [ In plain English this means what? I am not saying “you” or ”I” of consciousness. Consciousness is a description of a level of awareness of a living thing. Not all things that are aware have brains. There is your body, your organs, your thoughts and such. These things are possessed by or made by something that has the concept of not being these things but being a part of these things. This idea of “I” refers to the awareness of something that it is a distinct thing that is different from other things. This “I” has the concept that it is an individual separate thing from other things. What is your take on the idea that man is made of a body, mind and spirit? [ Consciousness is a function of LIVING THINGS. Consciousness does not come before life. Non living things do not become conscious and then become alive. Computers would have to be alive before then are conscious. [ So is all matter. If a living system were entirely physical then it would be matter. There would be no difference at the sub-atomic level between the living and the non living. This is not the case, so what is that thing that separates those things that are alive and those things that are not? [ Sounds like you have been exposed to the theory of Biocentrism. Is that what you are getting at here? [ First of all, the actions of this computer are for the benefit of who? Would it be aware that it is doing all of this stuff a brain could do? A living person made a computer to act according to how man thinks a brain works. Man will say the computer is acting like a brain, the computer will not have any idea that it is acting like a brain. Man makes a machine to do a specific function and that machine then does that function. The computer would just be programmed to act like a brain. Just like it is programmed to do other things that do not make it aware, or conscious. Again, only living things are aware of their surroundings, living things have a need to be aware of their surroundings because they want to continue to live and want to avoid non survival elements in their environment. All living things are aware of where the survival things are and will move toward these survival thing or do survival actions in order to live. All living things will move away from or perform action to avoid non survival things, The key point here is that LIVING things are aware or conscious. A computer has no need or desire to CONTINUE to live. Computers do not avoid death. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Great! So you say atoms are alive. Does that include all atoms? Since this is a science forum and not an opinion forum, could you please post the science that confirms that atoms are living things. I do not think you actually thought about the implications of what you are saying.

20. ## A Universe without Time

There are many clear scientific definitions for time. Look around you, what is your experience with time. Take a scientific approach to time. You can find out for yourself what time is. It is either a physical thing as defined in any scientific reference book, or it is not a physical thing. If you let go of your preconcieved ideas about time and take an unbiased look at the subject of time you will find the underlying nature of time. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged You are correct. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged As YOU see it? Stick to science. What does science say about time? There is no standard definition of time that says it is a force of nature. You are just making up stuff.
21. ## Ghost Hunters International

We are on the topic of ghosts, I raised the question of life. I said atoms are not alive and you talk of what atom makes water wet, what atom makes a tree grow, and plant ghosts. Do you agree that atoms, electrons are not alive? A computer is a structure of many atoms, one atom or a million atoms, makes no difference the computer is not alive. All of those functions that a computer can do have to be done by an outside influence. The computer does not think or decide what to do. Do you agree that atoms, electrons are not alive? One of the easiest ways to unravel a mystery or start to solve a problem is to throw out what does not fit or apply. Many people believe that life is a form of some sort, like a flesh body, a vegatable structure, some kind of structure made from atoms. Some people believe that life is a brain, or that we are a brain. This too is a thing made of atoms. So the question is..... are atoms, electrons alive? This is a basic stepping stone in moving toward answering the question of what is life. Do you agree that atoms, electrons are not alive?
22. ## A Universe without Time

When you say observe time are you literally implying that time is percieveable with our eyes? Everybody can get the idea of time passing in a dark room with their eyes closed. No light. You must elaborate on what you mean by observe time.
23. ## Ghost Hunters International

There are many things that are made of a bunch of atoms and are not alive. If we are 100% atoms then that would make atoms alive, again there are many things that are made of 100% atoms and are not alive. What is it that makes something alive. Look, you are alive, what atom or brain cell do you think makes you alive? I noticed that you said that when electrical activity in YOUR brain stops you die. Who is this your? Who is the owner of this brain? There are many things on this planet that do not have brains that are alive, looks like being alive does not require a brain. Do you think that you are a brain? If so, still understand that brains are not life. Adding a brain or electricity to organs such as a brain does not make life. Atoms are not alive. Electricity is not alive. The brain is made of 100% atoms. There has to be something that more to this what is life thing. A computer is never alive even when it is plugged in. A computer is not conscious. Life is something other then atoms and electricity. Think about it, and when you do ask yourself who or what is doing this thinking.
24. ## A Universe without Time

There are many clear definitions of time. Look in any scientific dictionary. Time has been defined by science and there is no confusion or mystery regarding how science defines time. Time is a consideration brought about through the perception of motion. Time is not a physical thing that moves clocks or exists in any form. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I know how to read a clock. If you think clocks measure time, then please give the reference that describes this process, I have asked people on this forum before to give some explaination of how a clock actually measures time and no one has given a description. So now is your chance to tell me and the rest of us how exactly a clock measures time. Maybe you can start by explaining what form this thing (time) is made of, and then go into the description of how this thing can influence a physical device like a clock. You say clocks measure time, where is the scientific description of this occurence?
25. ## Ghost Hunters International

What does it mean to die? What makes something alive? Do you think that we are just a bunch of atoms and that is it? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged The idea of turning into a ghost would need more explaination. One minute you are not a ghost and then you are, that is what I am saying is strange. In order to get to the heart of the matter regarding ghosts you would have to figure out what is life. Is life just a bunch of atoms or is there more to it?
×