Now, Someone "tried" to school me, but only ended up explaining a couple things about quantum theory in which I was able to garner more information about. All I ever said about quantum theory is that atoms seem by scientific accounts of observation, to exist for the layman...in two places at once. An eigenstate of an atom only happens when observed...and so the wavefunction collapses and measuring of the actual place in time can then be calculated. Simply put, they know now where an electron molecule may be. I made a half-hearted example about Schrodinger's Cat only to compound what I meant by my uncertainty about what our existence actually "is." NOT to say I was an undergraduate from some prestigious philosophical university. Or an accomplished theorist with several years of quantum evaluations under my belt. Schrodinger, he was right about it not making any sense. That is all I meant for I believe our reality is not defined enough for my Pandora. "Someone" then tried to say suddenly I was a wanna-be professor and was trying to throw words around just to try and "scare" them. Entirely mis-calculating what I meant by the silly feline Ex.
Also, they basically made fun of a person who figured out religion is a scam made for money to be gained. They laughed in arrogance at my life-changing revelation and made it seem the most simple equation ever formulated. What they don't seem to realize is that they are not a true master, for a real master must acknowledge that his student does not possess his proficiency in whatever skill he may be teaching. Or there would be nothing for him to teach. Someone who does not understand yet basic fractions will in no case feel linear equations to be any more simple of an endeavor to accomplish. A mathematician professor arrogantly stomping around a room of his students is a beast of nature that would probably run in panic when his life was threatened. Also in the way the response was written...throwing around "Uncertainty equations" and "Wittgenstein's" was hypocritical by far. It seems someone presumed, and assumed ignorance, and so unwittingly was doing what they "thought" I was doing. Throwing around weighty words to try and "scare" someone they believed was ignorant of what they were explaining.
Astoundingly, there is more. The Big Bang "Theory" is indeed a theory, in both senses of what they partially explained. There is Creationism and Evolutionism and the Big Bang, falls under Evolutionism as it's parent. You see it does not matter if the Big Bang Theory, by the "scientific field" is defined as an (and I like this one) "Empirically Corroborated Set of Descriptions and Patterns." What matters is, IS IT A FACT PROVEN INSATIABLY? No...as a matter of fact it is not. Probable, but not proved without doubt. For then Creationist around the world will have to give up their ground. Not saying "their" view is any more probable than the cosmic nova, but you get the picture. So in saying, their "theory" is nothing more than that like I said in the first place. A theory. Speculation. Speculation of a set of patterns that give ample ground to debate validity...but still nonetheless a dam theory.
I take no regret from these conversations. I learn more with each passing individual. This is thoroughly enjoyable, and I am offended one would actually think that I would become ANGRY from just mere speculation of thoughts on an online site that discussed so many controversial and outlandish topics? Why, I would be mad at myself if that indeed happened. Flutterhigh, please get my memo, for I would be afraid you would never come back to lay down your Zeus hand on us poor mortals. I enjoyed your speel. Zilchy and Spunkkowsky it was. Either way I am not finished with this thread, and I am almost ready to continue my next installments of thought. I hope all that read this are enjoying all that has been said so far and are definitely ready for more. Biter!
IIN That I break religion down to make "everyone" agree with me?
← View full post
Now, Someone "tried" to school me, but only ended up explaining a couple things about quantum theory in which I was able to garner more information about. All I ever said about quantum theory is that atoms seem by scientific accounts of observation, to exist for the layman...in two places at once. An eigenstate of an atom only happens when observed...and so the wavefunction collapses and measuring of the actual place in time can then be calculated. Simply put, they know now where an electron molecule may be. I made a half-hearted example about Schrodinger's Cat only to compound what I meant by my uncertainty about what our existence actually "is." NOT to say I was an undergraduate from some prestigious philosophical university. Or an accomplished theorist with several years of quantum evaluations under my belt. Schrodinger, he was right about it not making any sense. That is all I meant for I believe our reality is not defined enough for my Pandora. "Someone" then tried to say suddenly I was a wanna-be professor and was trying to throw words around just to try and "scare" them. Entirely mis-calculating what I meant by the silly feline Ex.
Also, they basically made fun of a person who figured out religion is a scam made for money to be gained. They laughed in arrogance at my life-changing revelation and made it seem the most simple equation ever formulated. What they don't seem to realize is that they are not a true master, for a real master must acknowledge that his student does not possess his proficiency in whatever skill he may be teaching. Or there would be nothing for him to teach. Someone who does not understand yet basic fractions will in no case feel linear equations to be any more simple of an endeavor to accomplish. A mathematician professor arrogantly stomping around a room of his students is a beast of nature that would probably run in panic when his life was threatened. Also in the way the response was written...throwing around "Uncertainty equations" and "Wittgenstein's" was hypocritical by far. It seems someone presumed, and assumed ignorance, and so unwittingly was doing what they "thought" I was doing. Throwing around weighty words to try and "scare" someone they believed was ignorant of what they were explaining.
Astoundingly, there is more. The Big Bang "Theory" is indeed a theory, in both senses of what they partially explained. There is Creationism and Evolutionism and the Big Bang, falls under Evolutionism as it's parent. You see it does not matter if the Big Bang Theory, by the "scientific field" is defined as an (and I like this one) "Empirically Corroborated Set of Descriptions and Patterns." What matters is, IS IT A FACT PROVEN INSATIABLY? No...as a matter of fact it is not. Probable, but not proved without doubt. For then Creationist around the world will have to give up their ground. Not saying "their" view is any more probable than the cosmic nova, but you get the picture. So in saying, their "theory" is nothing more than that like I said in the first place. A theory. Speculation. Speculation of a set of patterns that give ample ground to debate validity...but still nonetheless a dam theory.
I take no regret from these conversations. I learn more with each passing individual. This is thoroughly enjoyable, and I am offended one would actually think that I would become ANGRY from just mere speculation of thoughts on an online site that discussed so many controversial and outlandish topics? Why, I would be mad at myself if that indeed happened. Flutterhigh, please get my memo, for I would be afraid you would never come back to lay down your Zeus hand on us poor mortals. I enjoyed your speel. Zilchy and Spunkkowsky it was. Either way I am not finished with this thread, and I am almost ready to continue my next installments of thought. I hope all that read this are enjoying all that has been said so far and are definitely ready for more. Biter!