i might have a few obscure qualities hidden somewhere, its hard to tell in the middle of nay sayers who feel one should stick to one topic. I personally think it's not the truth , because tends to be a relative concept, but its the power of the question and the will to use it that matters more. anyway, its a long way to go still, but your work is really top-notch man
well, you deserve more than i can hand out lol its hearfelt and honest, its like doing gods work in the 2018s (metaforically ofcourse, i dont believe in gods who care, i have my own theory on how anything of divine magnitude, if exist would have a hard time noticing microbial scum like the like of us without using a divine electron microscope lol so if that god of theirs exists its probably not even aware unless its actively looking :p)
but i also leave everyone to their beliefs as long as they dont shove theirs up my aa, down my throat heh
for all i know the ancient ones designed it so when the universe breathes in again the supermassive black holes will collect all data like a cosmic zipfile, makes it easy for aliens of divine magnitude to come back in a few hundred billion and collect the data from their 'little experiment'
yea m.... noting crazier than von danichen would cook up ;-)
shakespeare would disagree between heaven and earth and einstein never let the lack of fact stop him from being right before he could prove it lol but its a super-scientist thing to say i suppose :)
it's like atheists would go : god has not been proven therefor there is none
thats why i prefer the polytheist agnostic approach : "i dont know" ;-)
I am not forbidding myself to investigate speculative theories. I am just saying that data is there and data must be accommodated. By saying "I believe in facts", i was meaning I believe in what data tells me. Data does not forbid anything new. However, anything new must accounted for all data accumulated so far. Otherwise, this is cheating.
i though the essence of quantum physics was the god plays dice so if thats not cheating i dont know what is :) i should save my verbal ballistics because i can barely keep my eyes open. I know this much though, all seekers are looking for the same truth, all social activists are striving for the same goal. The approach and the modus operandi might be different. Some might not even get along or come out on opposite sides of a classic axis but in essens at the very core it all want's to go to "the one". ... balance if you like. In sociology you have the micro, the meso and the macro scale, they didnt get to the quantum yet because wether they like it or not its a science but not an exact science, like psychology unless you are a hardcore disciple of neurobiology and neuroscience which would say its all chemical
which is true, to a certain exten, actually 100% to physical extent, but it's not the only way to interpret. All things come to balance i wanted to say, all around, the concept of gravity in physics is just that, planets don't revolve , they "fall" right ? but why don't they fall through, because they want to center, everythings attracted to the common pivot point. Water comes down a stream, its looking for equilibrium, its looking for a state of rest, no more or less than the moon falling in orbit around the earth is actually a massive object looking for a state of rest (which it won't find because it keeps falling) and that i think is what everything does (and there i go all mystic again but as far as i understood there's plenty of astrophysicists i heard on ted who aren't really opposed to buddhism (not that i am one) so in some way it must be compatible for some people. As for the data , even the best statistic can usually be seen in several ways depending on a point of view as for particles , i dont know enough about that but what i think i understood is that they can't really be put in clear spreadsheet data, only in vectors and approximation, probability
which is also numbers but not exact numbers, which doesnt mean im saying you can't get info from a set of percentages just like you could from a set of clear integers but it leaves room for interpretation.
Sometimes something comes along that shakes it all up. Like my favourite weirdow, Einstein who got scorned more than enough before actually being accepted as "the new messiah" if i may say so, for lack of evidence and clear numbers, but still didnt stop
'believing' :) in what he SAW even before he could back it up
it' s a wonderful world you live in, i hope you can crack time in my lifetime
i know its against "the laws" but i wouldnt mind getting a decade or two back to have more time to catch up lol
i might have a few obscure qualities hidden somewhere, its hard to tell in the middle of nay sayers who feel one should stick to one topic. I personally think it's not the truth , because tends to be a relative concept, but its the power of the question and the will to use it that matters more. anyway, its a long way to go still, but your work is really top-notch man
I agree with that: one topic always brings something more, and so on :D
Thanks for the nice comment on my work, btw ^^
well, you deserve more than i can hand out lol its hearfelt and honest, its like doing gods work in the 2018s (metaforically ofcourse, i dont believe in gods who care, i have my own theory on how anything of divine magnitude, if exist would have a hard time noticing microbial scum like the like of us without using a divine electron microscope lol so if that god of theirs exists its probably not even aware unless its actively looking :p)
but i also leave everyone to their beliefs as long as they dont shove theirs up my aa, down my throat heh
for all i know the ancient ones designed it so when the universe breathes in again the supermassive black holes will collect all data like a cosmic zipfile, makes it easy for aliens of divine magnitude to come back in a few hundred billion and collect the data from their 'little experiment'
yea m.... noting crazier than von danichen would cook up ;-)
I personally believe in facts. The rest does not really matter ;)
shakespeare would disagree between heaven and earth and einstein never let the lack of fact stop him from being right before he could prove it lol but its a super-scientist thing to say i suppose :)
it's like atheists would go : god has not been proven therefor there is none
thats why i prefer the polytheist agnostic approach : "i dont know" ;-)
I am not forbidding myself to investigate speculative theories. I am just saying that data is there and data must be accommodated. By saying "I believe in facts", i was meaning I believe in what data tells me. Data does not forbid anything new. However, anything new must accounted for all data accumulated so far. Otherwise, this is cheating.
i though the essence of quantum physics was the god plays dice so if thats not cheating i dont know what is :) i should save my verbal ballistics because i can barely keep my eyes open. I know this much though, all seekers are looking for the same truth, all social activists are striving for the same goal. The approach and the modus operandi might be different. Some might not even get along or come out on opposite sides of a classic axis but in essens at the very core it all want's to go to "the one". ... balance if you like. In sociology you have the micro, the meso and the macro scale, they didnt get to the quantum yet because wether they like it or not its a science but not an exact science, like psychology unless you are a hardcore disciple of neurobiology and neuroscience which would say its all chemical
which is true, to a certain exten, actually 100% to physical extent, but it's not the only way to interpret. All things come to balance i wanted to say, all around, the concept of gravity in physics is just that, planets don't revolve , they "fall" right ? but why don't they fall through, because they want to center, everythings attracted to the common pivot point. Water comes down a stream, its looking for equilibrium, its looking for a state of rest, no more or less than the moon falling in orbit around the earth is actually a massive object looking for a state of rest (which it won't find because it keeps falling) and that i think is what everything does (and there i go all mystic again but as far as i understood there's plenty of astrophysicists i heard on ted who aren't really opposed to buddhism (not that i am one) so in some way it must be compatible for some people. As for the data , even the best statistic can usually be seen in several ways depending on a point of view as for particles , i dont know enough about that but what i think i understood is that they can't really be put in clear spreadsheet data, only in vectors and approximation, probability
which is also numbers but not exact numbers, which doesnt mean im saying you can't get info from a set of percentages just like you could from a set of clear integers but it leaves room for interpretation.
Sometimes something comes along that shakes it all up. Like my favourite weirdow, Einstein who got scorned more than enough before actually being accepted as "the new messiah" if i may say so, for lack of evidence and clear numbers, but still didnt stop
'believing' :) in what he SAW even before he could back it up
it' s a wonderful world you live in, i hope you can crack time in my lifetime
i know its against "the laws" but i wouldnt mind getting a decade or two back to have more time to catch up lol
I am sorry but I am a bit lost here... Dunno what to tell.
The quantum world is probabilist. Fine. This does not prevent us from making predictions to confront to data. We just need a lot of data. :)