|
|
Post by Acolyte on Oct 4, 2008 2:02:07 GMT
But I do. If it can be modelled applicably it's ok with me. Dressing ignorance in mathosophics(CERN) isn't, though. With plain transformers I can get remote lighting at least. I'd love to have a 6Bn budget, I bet I could light the sky. Hey elien, you've had a shot at CERN a few times now - what is it you have against the project or organisation? Is it to do with the Electric Universe hypothesis that you think it such a waste or is it something else? Just curious... Personally I think it'd be better if China had control of the LHC project - those who spend $6Bn & have multiple breakdowns before things get started would be currently awaiting firing squads.  Nw THERE'S motivation for getting things right first time. |
|
|
|
Post by kaidaw on Oct 4, 2008 3:23:11 GMT
acolyte,
Nah, no snobbery. I had full majors in math, chemistry and physics as an undergrad [Could not make up my mind.], so I can't believe in math uber alles. [Besides, I took a couple courses that were offered with three different names and you could take the very same course/class as Math 314, Physics 318, or Chemistry 321.
I was simply saying that math is about as cut-and-dried and non-controversial as you can find. By comparison, all other sciences have a lot of uncertainty, often imprecision, room for doubt. So, if someone is claiming that concepts like infinity and curves (!) are metaphysical....
|
|
|
|
Post by kaidaw on Oct 4, 2008 3:39:28 GMT
acolyte,
"I agree Science has been 'hard-nosed' about facts, but fact is, it fails to come up with facts & we've had to make do with best theory that fits what we can test."
Sorry, but I think you got an inverted idea of what I was trying to say when I said: "I want my science to be hard-nosed, prove-it-to-a-skeptic science."
I was trying to point out two "bad" ways to look at science "fact", and one good way. NO #1: I believe that this is incontrovertible science fact. NO #2: Scripture revealed this as scientific fact. YES: It is the best hypothesis that I have seen so far, it has not yet been falsified,
and it seems to be robust enough for successful prediction (so far).
Now, I have no problem using electricity and even designing new things that use it in novel ways, even though I would be hard pressed to define the fundamentals of charge. And, I am unlikely to bother to waste my effort trying to pull two quarks apart, though I have no objections if someone else does (try); by so doing, they are not threatening my religious underpinnings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Oct 4, 2008 5:53:41 GMT
acolyte, Nah, no snobbery. I had full majors in math, chemistry and physics as an undergrad [Could not make up my mind.], so I can't believe in math uber alles. [Besides, I took a couple courses that were offered with three different names and you could take the very same course/class as Math 314, Physics 318, or Chemistry 321. I was simply saying that math is about as cut-and-dried and non-controversial as you can find. By comparison, all other sciences have a lot of uncertainty, often imprecision, room for doubt. So, if someone is claiming that concepts like infinity and curves (!) are metaphysical.... I'm not so sure about curves - I've seen some very metaphysical curves in my time. Those Jolien curves are pretty far out - I'm not sure if I could come up with a scientific reason as to how such a Great Attractor came to be Earthside. *leers* I think I understood the points you were making about how to view facts. Just that, to me, the vagaries in the basics of the universe mean that even as we make use of those basics, we do so in faith that they will work as advertised. Then there's the faith in ones own view of reality, the kind that allows one to push ahead in spite of any nay-sayers or obstacles until finally, comes the breakthrough and the theoremh stands. |
|
|
|
Post by kaidaw on Oct 4, 2008 18:35:36 GMT
acolyte,
I am afraid I am too old to know what Jolien curves you are talking about, but I would suggest they are easily explained. Since you referred to her/them as Great Attractor, it is clearly an evidence of forced genetic drift.
And, please be sure that I am not trying to deny the role or importance of faith. Far from it. I just rely on it far more than you when it comes to the Creator, and far less than you when it comes to science!
|
|
elien
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by elien on Oct 4, 2008 20:19:36 GMT
The el hypothesis is my belief but that is not the reason for my mocking of cern.
I hate the promoting of THEIR fiction while killing fellow "competitors" with mud.
Science is in hibernation for almost a century because fear and vanity took over.
We, the pioneers, fear the unknown. We must regain faith and high powered EM.
|
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Oct 5, 2008 3:47:35 GMT
acolyte, I am afraid I am too old to know what Jolien curves you are talking about, but I would suggest they are easily explained. Since you referred to her/them as Great Attractor, it is clearly an evidence of forced genetic drift. And, please be sure that I am not trying to deny the role or importance of faith. Far from it. I just rely on it far more than you when it comes to the Creator, and far less than you when it comes to science! Too old to know about Angelina? So what was it you told Methuselah when you last saw him? ;D I guess it's different kinds of faith. Faith in a creator is OK until one begins to believe that the faith means it's true. Faith in a Creator is, currently, faith in a particular version of the unknowable. It's a dicey bet at the best of times - which Creator does one choose? The Christian version is a johnny-come-lately on the scene. You'd expect that those people closer in time to the origin would have a better idea of what the Creator would be like. Until the usurpation by the Hyksos/Hebrews to place a single male figure as The God, there was an almost across-the-board choice of either female or pantheon - note that almost all religions that proclaim a male as head of their Gods post-date the coming of the Hyksos/Hebrew creed. As does war apparently. Excavation from ancient times shows Caral to not have been created because of war. The wars talked of from times prior to Egypt, & even the early Egyptian times, speak of battles between the Gods rather than those of Man. Personally I think, while there may have been a Creator, we are all a part of the beingness that set it all going. We now make or break this universe and while their may be a Plan, it is something to come to fruition later, shaped by how we live & who we are. For me it doesn't make sense that there's some giant being sitting in judgement on us all, tweaking the invention to make it run while simulataneously failing to make anything better for the operators of Her/His invention. Too many have miserable lives, suffer under impossible loads & die needlessly at the behest of some insane megalomaniac for me to accept ther's a God who loves us watching it all go down. Having fatih there is a Creator active & running the show would send me to work for the other side; whatever it is it couldn't do a much worse job. So I will stick (for the moment) with my thoughts about an Origin who made a Game & then made Herself into the teams to go play the Game. At least that way, there is hope that we can influence the outcome, that we can make of this Universe something better than it is. That way I can be reassured we aren't locked in the same cosmos with a crazed schizophrenic who demands our worship or we go to eternal damnation - and He loves us beyond understanding. |
|
elien
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by elien on Oct 5, 2008 10:12:08 GMT
Actually the ancient greeks managed the unknown with much more logic.
They believed in chaos, form and somewhere in the seams lies the holy el.
It was a triad system that transmuted into Christianity itself, same authors.
That was beautiful, make sure you stick to that because the next level is about to start.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaidaw on Oct 5, 2008 15:13:36 GMT
Let's assume there is a Creator who wants to be known by His creation.
He has two choices: They are programmed robots, or they are free agents. Since programmed robots are no fun, and not in evidence, we know the selection, if one occurred.
For His creation to be free, it must be free to choose, there must be something to choose between. We need labels for those things. We will choose X and Y for the labels, to avoid bias. But we need to be aware the Creator's being exudes X-ness.
Nonetheless, both X-ness and Y-ness must exist in abundance, or His creation is not free to choose. If He wipes out Y-ness, then there is no ability to choose; if He does not wipe out Y-ness, it will be held against Him for not wiping it out.
If the created are intelligent, and see clearly that His set of values is good, then they are no longer free agents, but slaves to X-ness. Everyone else feels wise because they are not slaves; they are free to choose, and simultaneously free to curse the Creator for exposing them to Y-ness.
Where is this logic wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Oct 5, 2008 23:13:49 GMT
Well, we're probably a little of the 'electric' track, but hey, I started it... ;D Those values are a little skewiff methinks. For example we're assured He knows the beginning from the end. So he knew in advance the choice Adam & Eve would make. That's hardly a fair test. Or he didn't know beginning from end & so we don't have omnipotence. To set a test that you know the subjects WILL fail, simply adds another level of cruelty to the 'punish forever' result to the test. Not only did they get punished, every human ever born from that moment on is burdened with the punishment. Makes a mockery of a 'Just God' doesn't it? Then there's the question of why Jesus was sent. How come, if He knows beginning from end, He didn't simply send the Christ along in the first place? Why did millions have to die under law before the better system came along? Are there other forms of intelligent life out there? If not, the Universe is a mighty big & lonely place & most of it is going to be out of reach to us before we can ever get there. If there are, the problems multiply. Did He create them as He did us? Did any of them fail the test also? If none did, the test seems unfairly weighted against humans. If all races fell, the test is bogus in extreme. If some did & some didn't then that would explain why God ain't around much any more - He has His companions and perfect races. If only some races fail the picture becomes rather hirrible. How many times has The Christ appeared & died for redemption of the sinners? One gets a picture of the poor Crhist going from world to world, suffering over & over as God tries to mop up his failed experiments. Apparently it's OK to steal, lie, cheat & murder - God had the Hebrews do all that & more. David was one of God's finest yet he had no problems sending men off to die so he could have their wives. The hebrews got to invade otherwise peaceful cities, killing & taking the women for their own. Now while God didn't tell David to go do such things, he did tell the Hebrews to go invade, kill and abduct. It's all just way too messy for me to accept this Christian idea as the god of All - too many errors, too many times where the supposed ideals & standards were broken by Him. As an aside..., just to show some of the strangenesses in the Word of God, from Michelle Oshen's page Why Can’t I Own a Canadian? October 2002 Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as informative:
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:
When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?
Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted fan,
Jim ;D  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by france on Oct 24, 2008 11:20:49 GMT
To give more sense in your thread you can read this solar information by the both ESA and NASA : sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/1999_01_03/The Source of the High-Speed Solar Wind
[img]http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/1999_01_03/SOLWIND1sm.JPG[/img]
Also available: High-resolution TIFF image. Variation on the above image: JPEG, TIFF
Animations: Solar wind emerging from network: MPEG, QuickTime. Doppler shift and Coronal Hole: MPEG, QuickTime.
Caption: Like water gushing through cracks in a dam, "fountains" of electrified gas, called the solar wind, has been observed by scientists flowing around magnetic regions on the Sun to begin their 3 million kilometres per hour rush into space. Scientists have identified regions on the Sun where the high speed solar wind - a stream of electrified gas affecting Earth's space environment - originates. Using ESA's Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft, American and European scientists, have observed solar wind flows coming from the edges of honeycomb-shaped patterns of magnetic fields at the surface of the Sun. These observations are presented in the 5 February issue of Science magazine. The research will lead to better understanding of the high-speed solar wind, a stream of electrified gas that affects the Earth's space environment.
The "zoomed-in" or "close-up" region in the image above shows a Doppler velocity map of million degree gas at the base of the corona (solar atmosphere), where the solar wind originates. Blue represents blue shifts or outflows and red represents red shfts or downflows. The atmospheric motion toward us, away from the solar surface, is seen as a blue shift, and is the beginning of the solar wind.The blue regions are inside a coronal hole, or open magnetic field region, where the high speed solar wind is accelerated. Superposed are the edges of "honey-comb" shaped patterns of magnetic fields at the surface of the Sun, where the strongest flows (dark blue) occur. These flows begin at 20,000 mph at the surface, and accelerate to over a million mph as they stream toward the Earth.
The solar wind comes in two varieties : high-speed and low-speed. The low-speed solar wind moves at "only" 1.5 million kilometres per hour, while the high-speed wind is even faster, moving at speeds as high as 3 million kilometres per hour.
As it flows past Earth, the solar wind changes the shape and structure of the Earth's magnetic field. In the past, the solar wind didn't affect us directly, but as we become increasingly dependent on advanced technology, we become more susceptible to its effects. Researchers are learning that variations in the solar wind flow can cause dramatic changes in the shape of the Earth's magnetic field, which can damage satellites and disrupt communications and electrical power systems.
Links:
ESA Press release
Instruments: Solar Ultraviolet Measurements of Emitted Radiation (SUMER); Extreme ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (EIT);
Taken: 26 September 1996
Picture credit: SOHO/SUMER and SOHO/EIT (ESA and NASA)
I put this link into thread of solar activity |
|
|
|
Post by Maui on Oct 26, 2008 16:08:40 GMT
STICKY TAPE PRODUCES XRAYS
I just found this -- I don't watch TV, so I'm not sure if this is in the news. These guys actually borrowed five dental xray films and xrayed one of the researchers fingers the FIRST time they tried unrolling tape in a vacuum. They figure that by developing the technology, they can revolutionize simple xray technology!
(Published online 22 October 2008 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2008.1185 )
Sticky tape generates X-rays
How weird is that?
Katharine Sanderson
"Sticky tape emits light - and X-rays - as it unpeels.
Carlos Camara and Juan EscobarChristmas could bring with it a new hazard as you wrap your gifts – X-ray-emitting sticky tape.
Researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, have shown that simply peeling ordinary sticky tape in a vacuum can generate enough X-rays to take an image — of one of the scientists' own fingers..."
Only in a vacuum -- otherwise the air discharges the energy before it builds up to xrays. The Los Angeles TIMES and other media have the story...
Here is my take -- this relates to unexpected and unusual bursts of energy, as is predicted by our "new" view that the universe is not random but shows "Levy flights." That is, the "old" view of the universe was ruled by Brownian motion -- behaving as loosely spaced ball bearings on a vibrating tray. But Levy proposed in the 1920's that instead there are additional "giant leaps" that occur. It has been easy to view this in human systems, but almost impossible to find in nature... only recently did Italian scientists show Levy motion of photons in glass sprinkled with titanium.
And here is a problem: the use of random numbers permeates all kinds of problem - solving algorithms. All of those computer programs need a new set of data!
Pasted from <http://www.almanac.com/forum/read.php?8,266738>---------------- For 217 years, THE OLD FARMER'S ALMANAC has predicted weather induced by solar activity. Now, we must learn to predict volcanic activity that is induced by the sun, because induced volcanism is what we have found elsewhere in the solar system. Volcanoes can have an atmospheric cooling effect ten to one thousand times the greenhouse effect, according to the EPA. (From “The Detection of Climate Change Due to the Enhanced Greenhouse Effect: A Synthesis of Findings Based on the GDEX Atmospheric Temperature Workshop;” EPA, 1991, p.12.) Phillip S. Bose Department of Fusion Energy Research Pacific Technologies
|
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Oct 26, 2008 19:39:03 GMT
My wife recently got a nose piercing. Part of the initial care was, for a few weeks she had to put bandaids over it at night for protection. What we noticed was, peeling the backing of the bandaids in the dark there's a bluish soft light generated. It's not strong & it didn't happen every time - at least there was one time we didn't see it. I'm not sure what it was - I put it down to chemical effects in the adhesive as it was softer light than sparks from static.
I'd forgotten it till I saw maui's post...
|
|
|
|
Post by julian on Nov 6, 2008 9:28:28 GMT
Kaidaw, If you design new electrical apparatus, have you come across www.cheniere.org/ Tom Bearden's theories and completed works give totally new insights into electrical theory and practice, definitely worth a good look.  |
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Nov 14, 2008 1:32:37 GMT
Kaidaw, If you design new electrical apparatus, have you come across www.cheniere.org/ Tom Bearden's theories and completed works give totally new insights into electrical theory and practice, definitely worth a good look. The odd thing is how effectively all those technologies have been suppressed and yet Bearden's site and DVD store is still up? |
|
Nw THERE'S motivation for getting things right first time.
;D 
