(October 17, 2016 at 10:50 pm)Arkilogue Wrote:

(October 17, 2016 at 10:41 pm)chimp3 Wrote: It cracks me up when you say it "yields predictions".

Yes. Geometrically.  Just as a circular vibrating container of water predicts circular internal standing wave forms..it does not predict squares or triangle or an infinite number of other possible shapes...it structurally predicts only one shape, circular.

My model structurally predicts internal two part spherical standing wave forms with an inner nucleus and an outer border condition defined by a field of probable location.

You should probably lay out the equations which allow you such insight so that others might benefit. We have physicists and mathematicians here. Surely your work would benefit from their reviews.

Invite them to define the word, theory.

If their answer resembles 1 below, feel free to engage them in reasonable discussion, always remembering that "I don't know" is a valid answer to any question.

If their answer resembles 2 below, feel free to dismiss anything they have to say on any scientific topic as they clearly do not understand the fundamentals of how science works.

From Merriam-Webster:
1:  the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another

2:  abstract thought :  speculation

(October 17, 2016 at 10:48 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(October 17, 2016 at 9:51 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: Most simplistically: Pure, absolute existence/substance/all-ness. In deference to the universe which is dominated by void space and very very very little actual extant substance.

The state of equilibrium in an infinite "particle" before the symmetry break that results in it's expression as finite wave forms aka universes.  It still exists outside, above and below all the infinite universes.

For further specificity I label that "GOD" and it remains outside the void space universe. "God" is the finite self individuation/"only begotten son" that remains inside the universe.  Which wold have been the being born as Jesus.

You're defining your god here as everything, and nothing, simultaneously -- because the one is the other, when you sit down and think about it.

And you'll need to explicate exactly what you mean by "symmetry break", and how the "state of equilibrium" in an "infinite particle" results in "finite waveforms". Or, alternatively, you can simply plead to saladry.

Sounds to me more like you don't know yourself what you're talking about, and are just stringing words along to make your pretty feelings sound smart, too. If you want to call this god-thingy "ineffable", just get a goddamned thesaurus, look the word up, and be done with it.

But -- know that "ineffable" is a non-definition.

There is no "nothing" in my model, it is not required. Something is not nothing and nothing is not something. One is not the other unless you want to kick the law of non-contradiction right in the kibbles.

The only place I require "ineffable" as in "indescribable" is for the subjective state of the original mass aka it's mind/person/spirit. It is also not required to unfold the physical/objective/logical model of how this mass breaks symmetry and makes universes. Everything required is inherent in it extant objective nature as observed by a subjective consciousness, GOD's, you's, mine, or otherwise.

(October 17, 2016 at 10:59 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

Arkilogue Wrote:My model structurally predicts an internal two part spherical standing wave form(-s) with an inner nucleus and an outer border condition defined by a field of probable location.

Sorry, see bold corrections.

"What to say when somebody asks about the big bang "

I tell them my sex life is none of their business...

(October 17, 2016 at 11:01 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(October 17, 2016 at 10:50 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: Yes. Geometrically.  Just as a circular vibrating container of water predicts circular internal standing wave forms..it does not predict squares or triangle or an infinite number of other possible shapes...it structurally predicts only one shape, circular.

My model structurally predicts internal two part spherical standing wave forms with an inner nucleus and an outer border condition defined by a field of probable location.

You should probably lay out the equations which allow you such insight so that others might benefit. We have physicists and mathematicians here. Surely your work would benefit from their reviews.

Surely it would and eventually will. I'm 100% certain it can be expressed mathematically and someone will easily figure it out. But that person is not me at this time. The potential science/math/technological application of all this can tap into a great deal of power so I am focusing on the ideological and responsibility aspects first, lest we destroy ourselves with knowledge sans wisdom (again). In a nut shell I'm not interested in starting a "zero-point" energy arms race. But on the same hand we will destroy ourselves and this planet continuing to use explosive/resource consuming technology. Lot's of other factors involved in me even considering pursuing and publishing this at all.

I see the mathematic and technological developments as absolutely inevitable and once the genie is out of the bottle it cannot be put back in. So I aim to increase our consciousness before we are saddled with a power we could hardly be trusted to handle without self destruction.

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2016/10/sc...-will-too/

In an interview in the Sunday Times, physicist, TV show host (Stargazing Live) and former D:Ream keyboard player Brian Cox theorizes that civilizations which evolve to the point of having the technological and scientific capabilities to travel to other planets will instead use that knowledge to destroy themselves before their governmental systems have a chance to coordinate the endeavor.

"One solution to the Fermi paradox is that it is not possible to run a world that has the power to destroy itself and that needs global collaborative solutions to prevent that. It may be that the growth of science and engineering inevitably outstrips the development of political expertise, leading to disaster."

In other words, those who develop the power to destroy themselves are doomed to do it.

That's one hell of a god who made us then, don't you think? Almost makes you think he prefers us dumb, wouldn't you say? All of us except you, right?

Better get cracking on your "logic" and hypothesis, there -- time's running out.

Still waiting for something more than gobbledygook here. I'm already havig a salad with my dinner -- chicken leg-quarters smoked over pecan, rice, and yes, a nice salad.

You salad of verbiage is not necessary, and sure not conducive to insight.

(October 17, 2016 at 11:39 pm)Arkilogue Wrote:

(October 17, 2016 at 11:01 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: You should probably lay out the equations which allow you such insight so that others might benefit. We have physicists and mathematicians here. Surely your work would benefit from their reviews.

Surely it would and eventually will. I'm 100% certain it can be expressed mathematically and someone will easily figure it out. But that person is not me at this time. The potential science/math/technological application of all this can tap into a great deal of power so I am focusing on the ideological and responsibility aspects first, lest we destroy ourselves with knowledge sans wisdom (again).  In a nut shell I'm not interested in starting a "zero-point" energy arms race. But on the same hand we will destroy ourselves and this planet continuing to use explosive/resource consuming technology. Lot's of other factors involved in me even considering pursuing and publishing this at all.

I see the mathematic and technological developments as absolutely inevitable and once the genie is out of the bottle it cannot be put back in. So I aim to increase our consciousness before we are saddled with a power we could hardly be trusted to handle without self destruction.

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2016/10/sc...-will-too/

In an interview in the Sunday Times, physicist, TV show host (Stargazing Live) and former D:Ream keyboard player Brian Cox theorizes that civilizations which evolve to the point of having the technological and scientific capabilities to travel to other planets will instead use that knowledge to destroy themselves before their governmental systems have a chance to coordinate the endeavor.

    "One solution to the Fermi paradox is that it is not possible to run a world that has the power to destroy itself and that needs global collaborative solutions to prevent that. It may be that the growth of science and engineering inevitably outstrips the development of political expertise, leading to disaster."

Oh great one! Please fly away and when we are worthy please do pay us a visit!

(October 18, 2016 at 12:30 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: That's one hell of a god who made us then, don't you think? Almost makes you think he prefers us dumb, wouldn't you say? All of us except you, right?

Better get cracking on your "logic" and hypothesis, there -- time's running out.

Still waiting for something more than gobbledygook here. I'm already havig a salad with my dinner -- chicken leg-quarters smoked over pecan, rice, and yes, a nice salad.

You salad of verbiage is not necessary, and sure not conducive to insight.

My understanding of the GOD who made us is that we/universes are the result of a self expression of that GOD and there is nothing that can stop the precipitous fulfillment of that Word. In my model we are all doomed to perfection and eternal life. You might not prefer that hypothetical option either. I have exactly the same inherent capacities as everyone else. I have simple developed and specialized differently...largely due to environmental pressure of the current world state of strife and suffering being a religious mess.

The way I convey might not resonate with you but it does with others...so I am here learning new tongues and thank you for the reflections. If you have any specific questions or places you want clarification or to take me to task, I welcome it.

(October 18, 2016 at 12:33 am)chimp3 Wrote: Oh great one! Please fly away and when we are worthy please do pay us a visit!

"Just because you can doesn't mean you should."

I'm not great, the universe is great and what I have found makes it even greater in my eyes and the personal me even smaller in the direction of infinitesimal crush. This thing kicks my ass daily.

If I were eager for the fame and fortune ego trip, I would be all over the math/science/patenting/marketing of all this....rushing head long blinded by pride into self and world destruction.

Every single new science/technology has been employed one way or another to kill Man. You can toss your monkey shit at me all day and all night, I don't want the ramifications on my conscience....even though they still would be by proxy. C'est la vie.