If you believe in God, refute this! - Page 111

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Scenario #1: Jack, corn, cock, priest, maiden, cow, horn. farm, dog, cat, rat, malt and the house all are entangled but the imbecile observer is observing them as separate entities knowing fully well that there are known problems with observations / measurements that needs to be overcome.

My take on Scenario #1: The observer could be observing himself/herself/itself. Did I mention that I consider the observer an imbecile?!


Scenario #2: Jack, corn, cock, priest, maiden, cow, horn. farm, dog, cat, rat, malt and the house came about randomly.

My take on Scenario #2: I/we am/are wondering about it all unnecessarily, even though you have that nagging doubt that if hydrogen can transform into an iPad given enough time, why don't our bank accounts randomly reflect a 1 followed by 10 digits (at the least) or why can't pigs fly randomly? Why are there rigid laws/rules at our level when stuff can happen randomly at levels below ours? How did these laws/rules come about?


Scenario #3: Jack, corn, cock, priest, maiden, cow, horn. farm, dog, cat, rat, malt and the house are simulated just like FarmVille.

My take on Scenario #3: We need to find that team (probably headed by juvenile characters like Zuckerberg/Pincus) that is responsible for this abomination. At the same time, we want Zuckerberg/Pincus to also wonder how they came about. Yeah, serves them right! Guess we showed them!


Scenario #4: Jack, corn, cock, priest, maiden, cow, horn. farm, dog, cat, rat, malt and the house were created by some Dude with untold powers who decided in His own infinite wisdom to create all this, one fine day. Apparently this fine day is outside of our time (go figure!)

My take on Scenario #4: Nothing. I want to become that Dude. When is my turn?!


Scenario #5: Jack, corn, cock, priest, maiden, cow, horn. farm, dog, cat, rat, malt and the house exist in one universe, and don't in another universe. In one universe, the rat is killing the cat, the farmer is doing the cow, and the priest is shaving the maiden. In yet another universe, the cow is milking the dog, the house is worried and the corn is eating Jack. You get the picture.

My take on Scenario #5: It's a cop out scenario envisioned by some people who are tired of thinking.

Howdy Ninja boy ! You are just in time for the closing ceremony 😆

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Reason I brought up the subject of fields was to "resolve" electron indistinguishability.

And, as an afterthought, I wanted to emphasize the importance of fields from the point of view of disturbances happening in those fields; these disturbances are nothing but "virtual particles". Your statement about empty space creating matter / anti-matter of course deals with these very disturbances that I was talking about!

To understand "real particles" we need to understand why the vacuum state is unstable enough to produce these disturbances ("virtual particles"). These form the bridge between the "something" that is the physical universe and the "nothing" that is the vacuum (free space). To get to "nothing", the disturbances in fields have to be fleshed out.

K ....😛

@ Bold Blue: Because..Vacuum has energy ... As far as I understand that, the Virtual particles exist due to Vacuum Energy's density that produces the short wavelength electromagnetic noise .. And the Asymmetry is engendered when they exist in the event horizon of a black hole ( And absorbed there within Planck's time ) .



So I believe even the virtual particles creation is an implication of this underlying energy ( It's density ) ..the source of which again remains unknown ... ..So back to the square one ..

Vintu ..😳

Ps. The Energy element is difficult to get rid of. 😛

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Actually, it was upto Vintu to prove because he has been going on and on about energy creating us, but still let's analyse what I said.

Energy creating itself. How can something create itself? Creation means something coming into existence which did not exist before. Creation of energy means energy coming into existence and it did not exist before that. So, if it did not exist prior to its creation, how can it create itself? It cannot.

Creation was in the sense that theists use. Of course we possess energy and our body needs energy to be alive. But the matter of our body possess energy, it didn't create us.

Free ... 😆

@ Bold: I bet what I have been saying all along was not a double entendre ...Each time you get back after exiling ( Away from DM ) for a few days, you interpret the same lines in a different way ..😆 ..and come up with a newer skit ..😆

All that I had said was ...We are the PART of the energy ...Not that the energy created us.. Every single electron in your body has associated energy ( The same energy) ..Now does that sound wrong?

You were saying that the Brain is the creator of everything ..Vitality and consciousness...

Now to your analysis ..Energy can't be created or destroyed ...But the newer hypothesis suggests that the total energy in the universe is ZERO ..Cause the positive energy in the matter is negated by the negative energy of the gravity ..But actual annihilation process is time consuming ..So we can assume that the energy doesn't exist ..We as a product of matter ...get to see the illusion of our existence before our delayed destruction...But all matter would be eventually negated ...ascertaining the Cyclic nature of the universe ...

Which again means that we are moving both forward and backward in time ( In wider scope of that word ) and there is no beginning or an end to anything ..


Vintu ...😛

OK, it's imperative to parse these two sentences:

1. An electron has charge
2. A photon has energy

When you say has, is it inside the electron/photon or enveloping the electron/photon?

if inside the electron/photon, where exactly?

If enveloping the electron/photon, how much radius?

This is where we get into force fields and lines of force, FYI.

So, going back to the statement from previous posts, if space has energy, then what is the field of that?!

If space is all that there is, then the field can't extend outside of space now, can it? How is it possible then to "contain" that energy within?

Back to the drawing board, people!

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

OK, it's imperative to parse these two sentences:

1. An electron has charge
2. A photon has energy

When you say has, is it inside the electron/photon or enveloping the electron/photon?

if inside the electron/photon, where exactly?

If enveloping the electron/photon, how much radius?

This is where we get into force fields and lines of force, FYI.

So, going back to the statement from previous posts, if space has energy, then what is the field of that?!

If space is all that there is, then the field can't extend outside of space now, can it? How is it possible then to "contain" that energy within?

Back to the drawing board, people!

K... 😛

@ Bold 1: ....I think its the Property of those particles ...Hence it can't be inside or outside ..Its everywhere ...Like Consciousness in the property of a living being ...and its everywhere ..all locations ..

@ Bold 2: Its the vacuum...thats expanding ...Although the energy of the density within would remain constant ..The cosmical constant that cause the galactic / stellar redshifts ...

And this vacuum field must be limited not Infinite..as derived from the cosmic constant ..the event horizon of the universe is 16 billion light years away ..So the accelerating mass / galaxies would escape that and the massive redshift might change their wavelengths to undetectable levels ..

My point is ... Vacuum has energy ...The Universe ( Observable ) has a horizon /a Virtual boundary ...So a state emptier than the vacuum ..which has ZERO density must exist beyond that ..And may be trillions of light years away from that another universe with vacuum with density might exist ...

Those galaxies that escape the current universe might exist in another universe after many trillion years ..

OR

If we ccnsider the flat / single infinite and open universe ...due to constantly decreasing mass of the vacuum, matter nuff to make more stars would exhaust ..The stars would emit all their energy and turn into black holes as the protons would decay..Black holes would
eventually disappear ...and what ll remain will be NEAR NOTHING ...😆


Vintu ...😛

Vintu, I was enunciating from the point of view of field lines and how the so called properties influence the regions of space around them





An electron has charge; it's a point particle as we know with no spatial extent. Yet, the lines of force influence the region of space around it.

My question was more related to the energy space itself has. What is the region of influence for the spatial energy? I think it gets circular to define the region in terms of the same region which has energy.

As for the cosmological constant, I think you are on the right track there even though what you said wasn't completely clear to me.

In short, I am looking into what exactly it means when someone says "vacuum energy". And what does that in turn mean in at the quantum scale.

It is possible that this is the reason space is expanding at the "outermost edges".

I think we need to separate space and energy. Space has energy is not a true statement IMO. Whatever is expanding the space is also a type of energy ("dark energy") as they put it, which means there is energy (first and foremost) and one "type" of it is responsible for "creation" of space (even though scientists deliberately avoid the word creation and prefer "expansion".