How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)

[Arkilogue]

So I repeat the test you've already done. Like I said, that's not a retest. I can't falsify it because you already know the answer.

I might as well say, "The universe is designed if there are two apples in this bowl. It can be falsified because there might not be two apples in the bowl. But go ahead and recount them as many times as you like."

Falsify about it? You've just made a model which fits this universe and declared it correct. That's not even a test. I want to know how you know what potential universes are like. You're just basing it on this universe. So it's not surprising you get the answer you want. You could just as easily prove it isn't designed, if it meets the same criteria, because you'll get the same result. You're drawing no connection between the two things because there is no further independent test you can do.

I didn't make it to fit this universe, I "made" the model first. It comes from naturally arising geometric self limitations and they describe/predict the structures, forces and fields found in each universe. They also happen to describe the one's in this universe and elegantly solve for many of the remaining mysteries like the matter/anti-matter asymmetry.

I'm 100% certain it can be expressed as a mathematic equation, I simply don't have the skill to yet....and I may never.

---

This isn't science. It's not a new way of doing science, it's just assuming your conclusion. You're just saying "Designed stuff would act this way. Oh look, it acts that way." I can just as easily say the contrary. Where is your non-designed control data for comparison? And I mean actual data, collected from another actual universe?

I'm not saying "designed stuff would act this way" I'm say a round vibrating container of water predicts a round internal standing wave, a square container predicts a square wave, a spherical container predicts a spherical internal standing wave-form. What are atoms?

A maximum density sphere pack of equal sized spheres predicts an expansive spatial constant of no more than 74% on each sphere

There is no need or possibility of data from another universe.

---

Ark, I don't know if what you're saying makes sense, but I do know if it does, it doesn't mean it's correct. You've yet to provide some evidence for your claims. No equations? No tests? No labs? Not peer-reviewed?

Because most of it has already been done and I am comparing data already collected by others. The model has greater predictive and explanatory power than the BBT or the Many Worlds theory through a more elegant solution.

Correct, incorrect, certainly both in many places......it's a good idea and I'm still hammering it out into the proper language and delivery.

But next time I book an evening at the LHC to find the forth density family of matter, I'll let you know. So far the surety there isn't, is at Sigma 5.3