Atheism and the Conversion Factors
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-06-2015, 03:06 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
I see you guys did not made any attempt to reduce your mental capacity. I agree that you cannot separate space from time. Space and time is one according to the theory of Relativity. According to this
theory our universe contains 4 dimensions, length, width, high, and time. I cannot separate space-time but I can add more space as long as said that those extra dimensions are hidden from us. I'm going to say that there is another 3 extra dimensions that is hidden from me. Not only that they are hidden but in a form of asymmetry. This is the way I would do my mental reduction. This is also inline with string theory. String theory suggests that our universe lives in a 4 dimensions brane and that there are 3 extra, hidden dimensions in form of asymmetry. Only a graviton can travel to the extra hidden dimensions.
Now if you believe that Relativity is telling the truth then you are also believe in a deterministic universe. If you believe in a deterministic universe you will not notice that God plan out everything. You will also not notice that you are living in a computer simulated universe. With only 4 dimensions to play with there is no way out of this. Atheism as we know it will end.
What is it in a deterministic, Relativity, 4 dimensions universe has that prevent us from knowing God's works or a computer simulation? It is the equivalent principles. It is not the uncertainty principles. Don't make that mistake. If you think Relativity is telling thet truth, you can fly into a black hole as though nothing happened. But something did happened you just wouldn't notice it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2015, 03:37 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
(14-06-2015 03:06 PM)5senses Wrote:  I see you guys did not made any attempt to reduce your mental capacity. I agree that you cannot separate space from time. Space and time is one according to the theory of Relativity. According to this
theory our universe contains 4 dimensions, length, width, high, and time. I cannot separate space-time but I can add more space as long as said that those extra dimensions are hidden from us. I'm going to say that there is another 3 extra dimensions that is hidden from me. Not only that they are hidden but in a form of asymmetry. This is the way I would do my mental reduction. This is also inline with string theory. String theory suggests that our universe lives in a 4 dimensions brane and that there are 3 extra, hidden dimensions in form of asymmetry. Only a graviton can travel to the extra hidden dimensions.
Now if you believe that Relativity is telling the truth then you are also believe in a deterministic universe. If you believe in a deterministic universe you will not notice that God plan out everything. You will also not notice that you are living in a computer simulated universe. With only 4 dimensions to play with there is no way out of this. Atheism as we know it will end.
What is it in a deterministic, Relativity, 4 dimensions universe has that prevent us from knowing God's works or a computer simulation? It is the equivalent principles. It is not the uncertainty principles. Don't make that mistake. If you think Relativity is telling thet truth, you can fly into a black hole as though nothing happened. But something did happened you just wouldn't notice it.

[Image: 288cjtd.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
29-06-2015, 02:49 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
The 4 Dimensions of Relativity could be describe as the SELF or the I or the THEORY OF. It also can be an idea or inception created by the mind and inside a 4 dimensions brain world. It has nothing to do with something that is out there. In fact it is blind to the outside world. This is not a momentary blindness but an eternal blindness. The mind is blind. If the mind is
forever blind can it tells wether the cat is dead or alive? In other words if you close all your five senses to the outside world can you tell wether the cat is dead or alive? The answers is no and according to quantum you should treat the cat as both dead and alive at the same time. Here you/the mind can no longer tell the initial state or the final state. Thus the outside world is considered random when you are not watching/looking/observing. But as soon as you do the looking or turn on your five senses things begin to fixed itself as though there is an explanation for every thing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 02:56 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
When you are looking or make an observation you are taking the OR. The cat is dead OR alive. Observation is interaction. Interaction between the out side world, the senses/receptors, and the inner brain world of Relativity. Here in formation must enter through one of yours senses. There is no other way around it. Even if you use any tools, instruments, a piece of metal, a stick, an electron, a proton, or anything, those things are considered as part of the sensors and receptors. Think of a blind person, while his sensors of sight is damaged he still uses the others 4 senses. Notice when he uses the wooden stick to feel his way across the path before him. The wooden stick is said to be part of his receptors in his hand. If the wooden stick is made of a composite of materials those materials are considered as part of his receptors in his hand.
While the blind man can operate the OR on the 4 senses his sense of sight will always operate on the AND. The AND has nothing to do with observation, measurement, or testing. There is no tool to do any of that. It's the mind vs something out there with no name. What's out there is always hidden from the mind or the theory. Talking about the blind man sight only here, since he don't have the tools to make an observation or measurement he in theory can imagine what is out there. He can use physic, thought experiment, mathematic, logic in forward or in reverse but that doesn't make anything out there real. If he imagine a tree out there Quantum will immediately put an invisible wall between his mind which contains a tree AND the environment which contains a possibility of a tree. Both concepts is equally true but none are real. What is this invisible wall? The uncertainty principle. If we are talking about black hole it is the event horizon. Relativity control the mental programs or the theories in this case a word "tree" in the blind man mind. Quantum turn this around and put a limit on precisely that idea. In other words Quantum wants to know is the word " tree" correlate with something out there or it just an empty word inside the mind.
How do we know a tree is a tree or the cat is dead or alive? For sure we can't just abstract our way into the box and say, "Oh the wave functions already collapse " without opening the box and look. The box represents the uncertainty principles and if you begin to theorize and abstract your way in Quantum is simply going to put up more invisible walls. What in the box is purely potential, nothing happened, no measurement, no observation, no interaction, and no wave functions collapsed. The only way is to open the box and look. I guaranty that one or more mechanical part will not work as planned.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 01:38 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
Before I begin to open the box lets mention something about science. To open the box and look at mean the same thing as to make an observation in science. But most importantly is creating the necessary tools and instruments to make those observation. The procedures and theories to make those instruments come from the mind and exist in the mind. That's Relativity.
Now let set up systems rather than theories. A Relativity system, a Quantum system, and a Quantum Gravity system. The order of operation must be like the above with Relativity first.
Let's say that you are at work 10 miles from home. All a sudden someone asked ,"What is on your mind? " You say,"I am thinking of my house."
Ok, the Relativity system here is a house that exist in the mind. But there is another house 10 miles away that exist out there in the environment. According to the Quantum interpretation neither one is real. The one in the environment is a composite that is a product of many material. If the house catch on fire at
this moment no one would know. The one inside the mind is just a memory. A Quantum system is going to take the Relativity subject, the house, and entangle it with the one out there. The house inside the mind is said to live in the 4 dimensions brain world. The outside house lives in the 3 dimensions hidden. It is hidden because a Quantum system has put the event horizon and the uncertainty principle between the two houses. The two sets of dimensions are completely separated and the only connection here is entanglement. Here the situation is the same as the cat in the box. When you are not looking, listening, etc
the house is said to both exist and not exist. The cat is both dead and alive. The tree is said to fall and not fall at the same time. Thus a Quantum system take a Relativity subject and makes a wave functions which has the same meaning as randomness. How about term pure potential? There is nothing happening inside the box that causes a wave functions to collapsed. At this point it is a Quantum system and it's making a wave functions. It is no about collapsing. If anyone said there is, you has simply abstract your way into the box. Can you reason and think your way into the box. No. The only way is to disentangle by direct observation or measuring live. Any measurement that is not live is considered as a memory in the brain world of Relativity. So the information has to go from the object, through,the sensor/instruments/receptors, and combine with the recognition programs in the brain. This would be a 10 dimensions Quantum Gravity system because it unify the inner world and the outer world. This system tells the observer exactly when, where, and how an accident occurring. Well what do you think of the sensation of pain is when you hit something? How do you know that you hit something?
Well there is more than that, but I have to disappear now....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2015, 12:02 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
Let put the three systems into a process. I called this DUE PROCESS. Going from theory to observation/measurement means going from a Relativity system to a Quantum system to a Qgravity. How about going from observation to theory? That's also possible. Due Process also said if you want to know if a cat is dead or alive you must open the box and look. If you want to know if your house still exist you must go and take a look. If you want to go to the moon you must build a rocket. Building a rocket means going from thought/theory to physical things.
Lets see what each system is capable of and how they work together. We start with the brain system,
which is a Relativity system. Lets ask the self or the I; what do l want to do? The l said
1) l want to see a box.
2) l want to make an aluminum box.

Well this is very, very simple. 1) All I have to is open our eyes and start looking for a box. 2) Is a little harder but is possible. All I have to do;
a) Use a CAD to draw a blue print with dimensions.
b) Sent the drawings to the machine shop.
c) Wait for a week or so until its done.
d) The aluminum box comes from the machine shop
in a cardboard box.
e) Now I ask myself does the aluminum box exist if I
don't look at it?
According to Due Process here if there is no observation being made at the aluminum box, then the box exist and not exist at the same time. Notice that no Quantum system would answers the box does exist. Also no Quantum system would answers that the box does not exist. Most of us would answer and offer a different answer. For example; if the aluminum box exist it exists it does matter if I look at it or not. This kind of respond tell me that there is circular reasoning going but it doesn't explain anything about the meaning of physically existing.
Can we considered the aluminum box as a hidden variable because it is in fact hidden inside a bigger box? Well how do you know it is hidden inside a bigger box? All I know is that l sent the design to the machine shop and it came back in a cardboard box. Everything here is an assumption that the aluminum box is in the cardboard box. What physically exist is the cardboard box. Its a brain system interacting with the receptors and interacting with the cardboard box. That's is a live measurement in the 10 Dimensions. As far as the aluminum box is concerned it is still in the 4 Dimensions brain world of Relativity. From start to finish it still trapped as an idea inside a brain. The brain is said to extend from the designer brain to the automated manufacturing. Thus it's a bigger and more complex brain. Like a computer and a Turing machine that it is, it can connect with each other to amazing complexity. This is possible as long as the designer did not look at the final product. So what is the difference between looking at his invention vs not looking at his invention? Well there are a lot of things to explain but the most important one to pick out is that when the designer did not look at his invention all mechanisms and circuitry flip into multiple connecting switches. Very much like a transistor switch inside a computer where the outcome is BINARY. But if the designer looks at his invention then all mechanisms flip into multiple connecting sensors/detectors. Thus our perception of what a detector vs a switch is need to be re-examines. What is a three-way entanglement? The brain entangle with the sensor/detector and entangle with the object out there. Here a switch can flip into a detector for measurement. But it can also flip back into a switch for computing. A wave and particle duality is the same concept.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2015, 06:14 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
In a Quantum system complexity is not the only thing that increase over time. Entropy also increase over time. As we will see entropy and complexity come hand in hand. Complexity is multiple switches that lives inside two complementarity brains or two entangled brain. For example to make an aluminum box it takes two brains. One brain start with my brain. Inside my brain are switches called synapses working together to computer. Synapses are biological switches but nevertheless they turn on and off like switches. There are many kinds of switches that most of us knew. There are mechanical switches starting from a piece of metal to motors and gears. And there are electronic switches. And if you think about it the whole universe can be covered and operated by switches. But switches can become sensors depending on what system you in. If you are in a Relativity system/4D brain world the switches are switches and anything you called a sensors or detector must be called a switch. For example the synapses in my brain can be a sensors or switches. But it must be called switches because it's inside a brain and use for the purpose of computing. Who decides to switch from sensor to switch or from switch to sensor? Something outside the brain world. Lets imagine the blind man again. Since he is blind he could not see. In other words his eyes sensors is disabled. He can open and close his eyes lids. Then the eyes lids become switches and part of his computing brain. The eyes lids are slave to the mind. Notice that the eyes lids are not sensors until it hit something external. The blind man can also move his eyes ball up or down. As soon as he does that the eyes ball become switches and part of the brain world. Again if the eyes ball hit something external they are converted to sensors which are used for measurement and detection. But measurement and detection are in the Quantum Gravity system. What about when the blind man uses his walking stick? When does the stick become a switch or a sensors?
Again the blind man can blindly poke his way out. But without hitting anything external the walking stick is said to be a switch. Part of a combination of switches starting from his brain cells to the muscles of his arm his hand, the bones, and the stick. All switching according to the mind and part of the mind.Nothing here is said to be outside the brain world. Blindly poking around does not look intelligent to those who has eyes but it is computation complexity. What they saw is the limit of computation and complexity from a Quantum Gravity system perspective. Now let say that the blind man and his stick finally hit something. As soon as the tip of the walking stick hit the external object the stick and what ever it connect to become sensors. If we focus on the point of contact and the sensation it has it tells us that reality is not the internal brain complexity/switches nor the outside world but the boundary between the two world. Which is at the event horizon itself. That's just a 2 dimensions thin sheet.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2015, 06:28 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
(19-12-2015 06:14 PM)5senses Wrote:  In a Quantum system complexity is not the only thing that increase over time. Entropy also increase over time. As we will see entropy and complexity come hand in hand. Complexity is multiple switches that lives inside two complementarity brains or two entangled brain. For example to make an aluminum box it takes two brains. One brain start with my brain. Inside my brain are switches called synapses working together to computer. Synapses are biological switches but nevertheless they turn on and off like switches. There are many kinds of switches that most of us knew. There are mechanical switches starting from a piece of metal to motors and gears. And there are electronic switches. And if you think about it the whole universe can be covered and operated by switches. But switches can become sensors depending on what system you in. If you are in a Relativity system/4D brain world the switches are switches and anything you called a sensors or detector must be called a switch. For example the synapses in my brain can be a sensors or switches. But it must be called switches because it's inside a brain and use for the purpose of computing. Who decides to switch from sensor to switch or from switch to sensor? Something outside the brain world. Lets imagine the blind man again. Since he is blind he could not see. In other words his eyes sensors is disabled. He can open and close his eyes lids. Then the eyes lids become switches and part of his computing brain. The eyes lids are slave to the mind. Notice that the eyes lids are not sensors until it hit something external. The blind man can also move his eyes ball up or down. As soon as he does that the eyes ball become switches and part of the brain world. Again if the eyes ball hit something external they are converted to sensors which are used for measurement and detection. But measurement and detection are in the Quantum Gravity system. What about when the blind man uses his walking stick? When does the stick become a switch or a sensors?
Again the blind man can blindly poke his way out. But without hitting anything external the walking stick is said to be a switch. Part of a combination of switches starting from his brain cells to the muscles of his arm his hand, the bones, and the stick. All switching according to the mind and part of the mind.Nothing here is said to be outside the brain world. Blindly poking around does not look intelligent to those who has eyes but it is computation complexity. What they saw is the limit of computation and complexity from a Quantum Gravity system perspective. Now let say that the blind man and his stick finally hit something. As soon as the tip of the walking stick hit the external object the stick and what ever it connect to become sensors. If we focus on the point of contact and the sensation it has it tells us that reality is not the internal brain complexity/switches nor the outside world but the boundary between the two world. Which is at the event horizon itself. That's just a 2 dimensions thin sheet.

Forward-error correction and systems, while compelling in theory, have not until recently been considered unfortunate. In our research, we argue the exploration of context-free grammar. In order to realize this intent, we concentrate our efforts on showing that kernels and symmetric encryption can interfere to answer this quagmire.

End-users agree that large-scale information are an interesting new topic in the field of networking, and statisticians concur. For example, many heuristics evaluate real-time modalities. To put this in perspective, consider the fact that seminal cyberneticists continuously use spreadsheets to overcome this quagmire. Therefore, XML and hash tables connect in order to accomplish the investigation of XML.

To our knowledge, our work in our research marks the first heuristic synthesized specifically for interactive archetypes. Even though such a claim is always an important objective, it never conflicts with the need to provide DHCP to end-users. The flaw of this type of method, however, is that the UNIVAC computer and the Ethernet are never incompatible. The basic tenet of this approach is the visualization of hash tables. Existing decentralized and replicated solutions use pseudorandom configurations to learn the emulation of model checking. This combination of properties has not yet been improved in related work.

We probe how e-business can be applied to the exploration of B-trees. Existing read-write and event-driven frameworks use optimal technology to visualize probabilistic models. Two properties make this solution ideal: GNAWER is impossible, and also GNAWER controls the understanding of model checking. Unfortunately, gigabit switches might not be the panacea that mathematicians expected. Along these same lines, for example, many algorithms cache replication. Thus, GNAWER is derived from the understanding of erasure coding.

Multimodal frameworks are particularly unproven when it comes to the simulation of context-free grammar. Indeed, evolutionary programming and red-black trees have a long history of cooperating in this manner [1]. The drawback of this type of solution, however, is that the memory bus and scatter/gather I/O are usually incompatible [1]. Combined with the construction of interrupts, such a hypothesis simulates a heuristic for read-write models.

The properties of GNAWER depend greatly on the assumptions inherent in our methodology; in this section, we outline those assumptions. It might seem perverse but is derived from known results. Figure 1 plots the architectural layout used by GNAWER. though statisticians generally hypothesize the exact opposite, our application depends on this property for correct behavior. Despite the results by David Patterson et al., we can show that the acclaimed distributed algorithm for the analysis of the Internet by Martin et al. [1] is NP-complete. Along these same lines, we hypothesize that the investigation of local-area networks can locate the deployment of XML without needing to locate Bayesian epistemologies. This is a structured property of GNAWER. consider the early methodology by L. Zhao et al.; our framework is similar, but will actually overcome this problem.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
19-12-2015, 09:49 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
After reading much of this thread, I suddenly have a great urge to play MadLibs.

[Image: fdyq20.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like LostLocke's post
07-01-2016, 07:42 PM
RE: Atheism and the Conversion Factors
You are right Mr Chas. My last post looks like words salad. I have to find another way to explain this story. Lets go back to Shodinger's cat again to see how we can identify the three systems l am talking about. The Relativity system, the Quantum system, and the Quantum Gravity system. Note these are systems not theories. A Relativity system is a system that compute using brute logic. Very much like a CPU. A Quantum system is a system that also compute using brute disorders and chaos. The more the mayhem the more the computing power. Also known as a Quantum jittering. But imagine a big rock, by chance, it fall off a mountain peak and start breaking. At the top most of the fall or farther away from gravity there are less pieces then at the bottom. Thus at the top there is less disorders than at the bottom. At the bottom, is more chaos, more possibility, and more computing power. As time passes entropy increase, computing power increase, and so does complexity. Instead of calling a Quantum system a random or a chaos computer let calls it a computer that scramble information. A slow scramble would be some random event that happening close to the event horizon. This place has less gravity than the one close to the singularity of a black hole. The area next to the singularity is called fast scrambling. If you take a picture close to the event horizon it would be clearer than the one taken close to the singularity. The best picture would be at the event horizon. Which is clear and not scrambled. A Quantum Gravity system is the only system that can put us inside the event horizon. When you in your room and able to use all your 5 senses on it this is what is like to be inside the event horizon. The rest of the stuff that is outside the room or out of the reach of your 5 senses it is considered scrambled. Instead of seeing tables and chairs you would see blur wave interference. Which is a wave functions and a Quantum system again. A Quantum Gravity system is the system that collapse that wave functions. A system that make measurement is the same thing as a recognition system. For examples, smell recognition, sounds recognition, images recognition, touch recognition, and taste recognition. Only these systems can collapse a wave functions.

Man l haven't reach that cat in box yet!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: