0
   

A completed theory of everything!

 
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 02:26 pm
@Night Ripper,
the reason the Universe exists is because energy and matter can never not exist

otherwise we get into absolute nothing , which leads to absolute nothing , which leads to no change in absolute nothing for infinity
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 02:40 pm
@north,
north;143176 wrote:
the reason the Universe exists is because energy and matter can never not exist

otherwise we get into absolute nothing , which leads to absolute nothing , which leads to no change in absolute nothing for infinity
So why say it started 13 billion years ago?
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 02:55 pm
@xris,
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
the reason the Universe exists is because energy and matter can never not exist

otherwise we get into absolute nothing , which leads to absolute nothing , which leads to no change in absolute nothing for infinity




xris;143184 wrote:
So why say it started 13 billion years ago?



because mainstream astronomy and most astrophysists can't think out of the box of 100 yrs ago


xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:01 pm
@north,
north;143191 wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
the reason the Universe exists is because energy and matter can never not exist

otherwise we get into absolute nothing , which leads to absolute nothing , which leads to no change in absolute nothing for infinity







because mainstream astronomy and most astrophysists can't think out of the box of 100 yrs ago

but some astrophysists are taking Cosmic Plasmas more seriously

http://plasmascience.net/tpu/TheUniverse/.html
Whats serious about inventing alternative theories without abiding by the laws of observation. Why not conclude the pink unicorn created the universe from green cheese, you have no more proof of any alternative, than my unicorn. I will ask again why measure the universe when we cant decide on what nothing is?
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:05 pm
@xris,
www.TheUniverse

try this site

www.plasmauniverse.com


plasmauniverse.info/

try the last address it got me to TheUniverse in google which is where I wanted you to go

the other two may work or not

( I save the original in my favorites , and it works ) but I'll be darned if I can get the address from the site its self

frustrating
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:18 pm
@north,
north;143198 wrote:
www.TheUniverse

try this site

www.plasmauniverse.com


plasmauniverse.info/
I cant stand vague unknown ponderous links. Do your best without them please. No conjecture, the scientific journal are full of them.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:20 pm
@TuringEquivalent,
TuringEquivalent;143116 wrote:
If two universe are entangle as in a quantum mechanical multiverse, i don ` t see how they are dispointed universes at all. The effects one make in one universe would have a direct effect on the other, so this seem to implies that they have causal relation with one another. How is that disjointed? Also, they are are entangled, would that not mean there is a single wavefunction that represent the two entangled worlds. If so, then this wavefunction is one thing. How is this disjointed?
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:30 pm
@xris,
xris;143205 wrote:
I cant stand vague unknown ponderous links. Do your best without them please. No conjecture, the scientific journal are full of them.


the Cosmic Plasma theory was around even in Einsteins day , it was just too complicated

basically the Cosmic Plasma theory states that galaxies produce proto galaxies
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:39 pm
@north,
north;143218 wrote:
the Cosmic Plasma theory was around even in Einsteins day , it was just too complicated

basically the Cosmic Plasma theory states that galaxies produce proto galaxies
There are scores of theories but none are capable of scrutiny. Pin your flag to one and give it your best shot.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:58 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;143172 wrote:
That the universe exists for no reason seems to be the conservative answer. Going back to the earlier analogy for what the world rests on, while it may seem amazing that the world rests on nothing, it would be even more amazing if it rested on an elephant and a turtle which themselves rested on nothing. At some point you just have to accept that something exists without reason.
Night Ripper
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:07 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil. Albuquerque;143247 wrote:


Reasons are things people have. I have a reason to go to the store, to get milk. Apples don't need to have reasons to fall from trees, they just do.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:08 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:11 pm
@xris,
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
the Cosmic Plasma theory was around even in Einsteins day , it was just too complicated

basically the Cosmic Plasma theory states that galaxies produce proto galaxies






xris;143229 wrote:
There are scores of theories but none are capable of scrutiny. Pin your flag to one and give it your best shot.


have I not already done this ? I have
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:12 pm
@Night Ripper,
Night Ripper;143257 wrote:
Reasons are things people have. I have a reason to go to the store, to get milk. Apples don't need to have reasons to fall from trees, they just do.


---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 05:23 PM ----------

For you reason is in mind, for some in God, and for me, in Everything...(and minds are not needed to it, at least not the type of minds that we can conceive)
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:27 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil. Albuquerque;143259 wrote:
Of course, in order to be so it cannot truly move, grow or shrink, and has to be completely Determined...(Time and Space are not what they seam)


true

time is a measured movement produced by the interaction(s) of matter , time is not a real physical entity

and space goes hand in hand with the existence of something , material things



Quote:


done

[/QUOTE]
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:28 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
I find it all amazing, how concepts revolve round and around...the presumption of Conscientiousness and Reason reduced to the Human...anyway, such is life...

---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 05:33 PM ----------

north;143276 wrote:
true

time is a measured movement produced by the interaction(s) of matter , time is not a real physical entity

and space goes hand in hand with the existence of something , material things





done

north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:35 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil. Albuquerque;143280 wrote:
I find it all amazing, how concepts revolve round and around...the presumption of Conscientiousness and Reason reduced to the Human...anyway, such is life...

---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 05:33 PM ----------

Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:43 pm
@north,
north;143290 wrote:
understanding of the Universe
north
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:48 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
understanding of the Universe



Fil. Albuquerque;143293 wrote:


true on both accounts
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 04:48 pm
@xris,
xris;143160 wrote:
So whose being metaphysical, you or me?


No. I am just giving a stupid respond to a stupid question. I do that. I am only human.

---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 05:57 PM ----------

Fil. Albuquerque;143210 wrote:



Say what? There is nothing is the quantum multiverse case that exclude disjoint multiverses. This comes from your own misunderstanding. The quantum mechanics universes are all part of difference branches of the wave function for the evolution of the universe or multiverse. If you have two disjointed universes, then they must at least not be described by the same physics equation.

---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 05:59 PM ----------

north;143261 wrote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by north http://www.philosophyforum.com/images/PHBlue/buttons/viewpost.gif
the Cosmic Plasma theory was around even in Einsteins day , it was just too complicated

basically the Cosmic Plasma theory states that galaxies produce proto galaxies






A stupid question only merits a stupid respond.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 10:31:19