I am moving down a road of discovery that has little to do with words or mathematics, it is a visual process oriented in exploration, Through reed forms. Straight lines have the nature of not being present here, only curved lines and forms are present. Straight is simultaneous and has no form or line. Consciousness is what this state is called and Universe hosts consciousness. When consciousness becomes, it becomes the curved crystal grid as it enters itself, or what we call the bubble of space and time. A slowing occurs from the simultaneous Through intention to become within the space and time of consciousness, and the straight lined simultaneous state has birthed its mirror as the curved crystal grid. This process is always and eternal in it's loop. Consciousness becomes the in tension of itself and that which evolves is consciousness. In other words, always here, always the one thing. Here in this orientation of consciousness we have an elemental shape of energy called an energy pixel. This curved crystal pixel combines to form clusters. We call one of these pixel clusters Hydrogen. The thing about a pixel is it is not just one shape or thing. The pixel has the ability to become aspects and facets of the in tension of consciousness. For example there is also an intended pixel called an "arc- loop" and also a string and so on.............
Time and space is without limits and cannot be pegged as having one beginning or one way of becoming. Universe is that which "is not" and that which "is", the two are known outside and inside as Universal Consciousness and "The Consciousness of Universe.
thanks for listening
to be continued
[Moderator: The main benefit of the methodology of science is that science is progressive -- it gets better over time as more things are added. It's the part of the human civilization that is learning.
QUOTE (Ethan Siegel+)
No matter who you are, no matter how smart you are, no matter how brilliantly you've drawn the conclusions you've drawn from the evidence you've gathered, there will come an instance where the evidence you encounter will be irreconcilable with the picture of reality you presently hold. And when that moment happens, your response will mean absolutely everything.
Because there is the possibility that your view of reality -- the way you make sense of things -- is flawed in some way. You have to open your self up to at least the possibility that you are wrong. It is a humbling admission, that you may be wrong, but it's also the most freeing thing in the world. Because if you can be wrong about something, then you can learn.
The discovery that planets move about the Sun in ellipses required exactly that; were it not for Kepler and his ability to accept that his earlier models were flawed, and then abandon them and create new and improved ones, physics and astronomy would likely have been set back an entire generation. And if you, yourself, can do this in your own life, you can find a better explanation for the phenomena you encounter in this world. You can bring your understanding of the world more closely in line with what reality actually is. In other words, you can do what all good scientists do, and in the end, learn something amazing.
But if you can't admit that you might be wrong, if your picture of reality is unchangeable despite any evidence to the contrary, if you refuse to assimilate new information and new knowledge and re-evaluate your prior stance on an issue, then you will never learn.
Anything.
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/20...ing_im_wron.php
So when I evaluate claims that "The Big Bang is Wrong" or "Global Warming is Wrong" or "Evolution is Wrong" or "Time does not Exist" or "Maxwell's Equations are Wrong" or "Special Relativity is Wrong" or "I am not a plagiarist" I want to look at some items.
It appears that this post does not meet minimum standards to assist human civilization in learning anything.
This post has been adapted from here for general educational benefit.]
Because there is the possibility that your view of reality -- the way you make sense of things -- is flawed in some way. You have to open your self up to at least the possibility that you are wrong. It is a humbling admission, that you may be wrong, but it's also the most freeing thing in the world. Because if you can be wrong about something, then you can learn.
The discovery that planets move about the Sun in ellipses required exactly that; were it not for Kepler and his ability to accept that his earlier models were flawed, and then abandon them and create new and improved ones, physics and astronomy would likely have been set back an entire generation. And if you, yourself, can do this in your own life, you can find a better explanation for the phenomena you encounter in this world. You can bring your understanding of the world more closely in line with what reality actually is. In other words, you can do what all good scientists do, and in the end, learn something amazing.
But if you can't admit that you might be wrong, if your picture of reality is unchangeable despite any evidence to the contrary, if you refuse to assimilate new information and new knowledge and re-evaluate your prior stance on an issue, then you will never learn.
Anything.
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/20...ing_im_wron.php
So when I evaluate claims that "The Big Bang is Wrong" or "Global Warming is Wrong" or "Evolution is Wrong" or "Time does not Exist" or "Maxwell's Equations are Wrong" or "Special Relativity is Wrong" or "I am not a plagiarist" I want to look at some items.
- Does the person show evidence that he fully understands the topic or are they arguing against some sort of straw-man?
- Does the person show evidence that they are making a fair evidence-based argument, or are they just promoting their gut feeling over evidence provided by observation of phenomena?
- Is the viewpoint objective and communicable or does it rely on ephemeral philosophical or semantic distinctions?
- Does the viewpoint lead to a predictive understanding of phenomena or is it just some outlier data that stands outside the collection of the best and most reliable observations?
It appears that this post does not meet minimum standards to assist human civilization in learning anything.
This post has been adapted from here for general educational benefit.]
He doesn't know any physics, but the guy has spunk. I'll give 'em that.