I discovered that every thing that differentiates the parts of the spectrum is degrees and rates of rotation in angular momentum. no longer does energy have to be a particle and / or a wave or have any of that analogy baggage. It completely destroys string theory except for the spectrum that predates string theory. It finally explains how a prism breaks up white light into the colored component parts and it introduces time to the distances traveled thought the prism to pass though with variable rates of angular momentum. Ah but the confusion is where the angular momentum resides. Not in the photon pulses but rather in the mater which leaves it imprinted. Which leads to the new law of physics: The new law of sympathetic resonance of mater. Which means something at a great distance cans send an energy pulse that only will resonate with certain materials that are like the ones from where the pulse was originally sourced and generated. Which is like a mirror that is radiated everywhere from the source. May be you don't get it. Don't worry it is so simple no one has to be a genius to see it is amazing. It means you are alive because you have energy from something else equally alive elsewhere....or if energy if you don't like the analogy
what we see is what we detect because we can detect it or otherwise just absorb it. when we detect it we take energy that is imprinted and relay it much the way our television screens take a coded signal and relays it accurately as broadcast or sent via a cable or other signal. this is not to say the universe is a giant tv screen but it is to say our eyes do not perceive the whole spectrum nor do other material objects . imprinted photons relay the angular momentum from which they are generated in what is otherwise just pure linear momentum though not at all detectable without the right detecting materials that resonate under the right conditions. It was Kepler , I think, who talked about the harmony of the heavily bodies. he was right about resonance in this sense. I was correct about the Young double slit experiment being a fallacy. And this will help correct it. Light does not interact with light to give an interference pattern but it can interact with the material interface / screen atoms to behave to cancel out angular momentum. There is more to the theory but the empirical experiments will prove I am correct , they already do. We don't detect xrays with our retinas and xrays can collide with physical materials that cause them to resonate so as to generate an electric charge from which we are able to say they are detected and even counted as individual photons. What it also shows is that an xray can move though the universe with the power of an xray collide with mater and be absorbed and re-reflected as an xray which means the imprint can reimprint xrays. This is then true across the entire spectrum and probably includes gamma. It means the larger massive bodies like planets can absorb gamma rays and then later reproduce them even millions of years later so long as the imprint of angular momentum can be preserved or generates higher independent levels . It can mean that there are spectral range collectors in the universe and closer to home too.
Monday, November 9, 2015
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Dimensional Reality : Rules Of The Game.
Move over Euclidian geometry. Lexian geometry is here to take your place. Of course it is named after me , though of course I neither discovered nor invented it. Aliens fed me this information from the distant future though the miracle of a television wormhole. And Isaac Newton completely confirmed the authenticity of the proof. Here are the Dimensional Reality Rules of the Game:
1. There really is no order of the basic dimensions of the cosmos. All dimensions are in constant "interaction " or our mental relationships as they apply to the practical interpretation of reality. If there is a first dimension it is a point, a singular point and no other points. That is pretty clear. A singular stand alone points exists with absolutely no other points of reference. It stand alone in a completely compact all inclusive point size container of nothingness. There are no other metrics. The size of a single point is infinitely small and if there was actually ever a point where the entire universe is fantasized as having been a single point before the fanciful big bang it would have been as infinitesimally tiny as that single point having no other dimensions but a point. Blame this on Euclid not on Lex.
2. The next dimensional geometric reality is the appearance of a second point. It can be one of those unpredictable quantum points that comes and goes popping in and out of reality for all I care. When the second point shows up it is as infinitesimally tiny as the first point. Between the two points at any distance can be a line and many other points can occur along the line such that there is a metric means of proportioning distance or distances between points along the line. The line has no metric off the line and it does not exist in space it can simply be the same singular point we started with in space and time but it not certain that either space or time would in anyway exist with just a line any more than it would with a singular point. The line would have no outside ability without a third point outside of it to have any sense of direction to give it that perspective any more than the single point would have. Direction or sense of direction at least on a plane would take at least three points and that is triangular by definition.
3. When a third point appears and it is off the straight line between the first two point the dimensional reality of the plane becomes apparent. It allows for a Cartesian metric to be invented that can stretch vast distances but only on what really is a triangular area between point. Directionality again would only exist within the triangle and not outside of it without a fourth point off the plane to make it 3 dimensional.... but wait this is the third dimension in a sense the fourth dimension that is usually thought to be time then flips out to the fifth or beyond.
4. The fourth point creates 3 dimensional metric dynamics. Not usually considered the forth dimension it may be exactly that how ever four points must be off a single line and be aligned on at least 2 separate lines that are not parallel to form 3 dimensional reality. If we have four separate points on two parallel lines we might remain a plane and need a fifth point until we have properly identified a point off of a plane.
4. Moving a point off the surface of a plane in all directions introduces us to the Lexian Probability dimensional reality . That is because the point can be located any distance from the plane to alter relationships of the geometry.
5. Time then becomes an integral dimension because plane rotation verses the point or points off the plane because probability requires time for what we usually can an event (in probability) to occur.
These dimensions then present a matrix of probabilities that we can predict or try to. Going back though the list from 1 to 5 it becomes immediately clear that points and lines are completely imaginary philosophical ideas that are not observed in reality unless maybe some quantum particles as observed act like points but that is not clear from any evidence. It might work somewhat by analogy.
If there is a 6th dimension according to these rules having the interacting relationships of points, lines, planes, time and probability the only dimension left is our conscious ability to understand this. Which is defined by the word perception or conscious perception because animals may perceive what we do but their dimensionality is all about instinctive behaviors.
Next all we need is proof that probability is a basic dimension of cosmic reality. We find that with a controlled experiment. We have more than one hour glass / sand clock. One we turn over to put all the sand on top and let the san flow into a slump pile though the glass oculus. The second one we don't turn over but we just shake it vigorously and we get no slump pile as we do in the normal turned upside down hour glass. The slump pile appears every time we turn it over in the presence of gravity here on earth. up in space in zero gravity and the sand grains have no need to fall and may float around like bubbles in a carbonated cola drink, semi suspended in the drink
Whops I was just falling asleep writing this dribble and Isaac Newton pops out of the worm hole on an alien anti-dimensional platform to correct it. I am not sure I completely understand it but I can tell you what he says:
"You have made many mistakes. First of all any point can be in motion or in a state of rest even if it has no substance and exists only in your imagination. Until you add energy as a dimension there is no way to prod a point into motion . Energy of course is another basic dimensional variability. A single point can have all the energy and even all the mass you can imagine , not exist and have no external dimensions without some metric even if you fantasize you are the observer. Two points can make a line and it can spin about a central arbitrary point on the line as rotation and become a circle or a sphere. Energy , Time, probability are all variables in forming dimensions. Two points , void of mass and nothing but imaginary proximity to each other can also be found to rotate around each other if both have energy which can impart it self as a charge. Together rotating around each other simultaneously is as good as elliptical. Three points with energy and resulting motion can rotate around the other two simultaneously with each of the other two doing the same and the name for that is a tripoly-eclipse. (something some day you will understand makes water a special molecule) Essentially the dimensions are Newtonian not Euclidian. Where energy translates to mass, form, charge, even gravity, acceleration and a large variable number of 'forces' that impact points , lines , planes and figures." Probability is then a very key dimension. :Probability requires time and energy as variables to play out it's 'event horizon.' Dimensions of reality are then probability , time, energy , your geometric possibilities and all of these together can define mass and gravity as probabilities calculated from observed relationships. If points are actually particles these can be vested with energy and then acceleration , force mass and even underlying gravity. Euclidian geometry fails because planes are spherical and lines can become so too it rotated at a central point. The Euclidian model is also probability driven but in nature we observe spherical nature and elliptical nature not square and not often triangular.
1. There really is no order of the basic dimensions of the cosmos. All dimensions are in constant "interaction " or our mental relationships as they apply to the practical interpretation of reality. If there is a first dimension it is a point, a singular point and no other points. That is pretty clear. A singular stand alone points exists with absolutely no other points of reference. It stand alone in a completely compact all inclusive point size container of nothingness. There are no other metrics. The size of a single point is infinitely small and if there was actually ever a point where the entire universe is fantasized as having been a single point before the fanciful big bang it would have been as infinitesimally tiny as that single point having no other dimensions but a point. Blame this on Euclid not on Lex.
2. The next dimensional geometric reality is the appearance of a second point. It can be one of those unpredictable quantum points that comes and goes popping in and out of reality for all I care. When the second point shows up it is as infinitesimally tiny as the first point. Between the two points at any distance can be a line and many other points can occur along the line such that there is a metric means of proportioning distance or distances between points along the line. The line has no metric off the line and it does not exist in space it can simply be the same singular point we started with in space and time but it not certain that either space or time would in anyway exist with just a line any more than it would with a singular point. The line would have no outside ability without a third point outside of it to have any sense of direction to give it that perspective any more than the single point would have. Direction or sense of direction at least on a plane would take at least three points and that is triangular by definition.
3. When a third point appears and it is off the straight line between the first two point the dimensional reality of the plane becomes apparent. It allows for a Cartesian metric to be invented that can stretch vast distances but only on what really is a triangular area between point. Directionality again would only exist within the triangle and not outside of it without a fourth point off the plane to make it 3 dimensional.... but wait this is the third dimension in a sense the fourth dimension that is usually thought to be time then flips out to the fifth or beyond.
4. The fourth point creates 3 dimensional metric dynamics. Not usually considered the forth dimension it may be exactly that how ever four points must be off a single line and be aligned on at least 2 separate lines that are not parallel to form 3 dimensional reality. If we have four separate points on two parallel lines we might remain a plane and need a fifth point until we have properly identified a point off of a plane.
4. Moving a point off the surface of a plane in all directions introduces us to the Lexian Probability dimensional reality . That is because the point can be located any distance from the plane to alter relationships of the geometry.
5. Time then becomes an integral dimension because plane rotation verses the point or points off the plane because probability requires time for what we usually can an event (in probability) to occur.
These dimensions then present a matrix of probabilities that we can predict or try to. Going back though the list from 1 to 5 it becomes immediately clear that points and lines are completely imaginary philosophical ideas that are not observed in reality unless maybe some quantum particles as observed act like points but that is not clear from any evidence. It might work somewhat by analogy.
If there is a 6th dimension according to these rules having the interacting relationships of points, lines, planes, time and probability the only dimension left is our conscious ability to understand this. Which is defined by the word perception or conscious perception because animals may perceive what we do but their dimensionality is all about instinctive behaviors.
Next all we need is proof that probability is a basic dimension of cosmic reality. We find that with a controlled experiment. We have more than one hour glass / sand clock. One we turn over to put all the sand on top and let the san flow into a slump pile though the glass oculus. The second one we don't turn over but we just shake it vigorously and we get no slump pile as we do in the normal turned upside down hour glass. The slump pile appears every time we turn it over in the presence of gravity here on earth. up in space in zero gravity and the sand grains have no need to fall and may float around like bubbles in a carbonated cola drink, semi suspended in the drink
Whops I was just falling asleep writing this dribble and Isaac Newton pops out of the worm hole on an alien anti-dimensional platform to correct it. I am not sure I completely understand it but I can tell you what he says:
"You have made many mistakes. First of all any point can be in motion or in a state of rest even if it has no substance and exists only in your imagination. Until you add energy as a dimension there is no way to prod a point into motion . Energy of course is another basic dimensional variability. A single point can have all the energy and even all the mass you can imagine , not exist and have no external dimensions without some metric even if you fantasize you are the observer. Two points can make a line and it can spin about a central arbitrary point on the line as rotation and become a circle or a sphere. Energy , Time, probability are all variables in forming dimensions. Two points , void of mass and nothing but imaginary proximity to each other can also be found to rotate around each other if both have energy which can impart it self as a charge. Together rotating around each other simultaneously is as good as elliptical. Three points with energy and resulting motion can rotate around the other two simultaneously with each of the other two doing the same and the name for that is a tripoly-eclipse. (something some day you will understand makes water a special molecule) Essentially the dimensions are Newtonian not Euclidian. Where energy translates to mass, form, charge, even gravity, acceleration and a large variable number of 'forces' that impact points , lines , planes and figures." Probability is then a very key dimension. :Probability requires time and energy as variables to play out it's 'event horizon.' Dimensions of reality are then probability , time, energy , your geometric possibilities and all of these together can define mass and gravity as probabilities calculated from observed relationships. If points are actually particles these can be vested with energy and then acceleration , force mass and even underlying gravity. Euclidian geometry fails because planes are spherical and lines can become so too it rotated at a central point. The Euclidian model is also probability driven but in nature we observe spherical nature and elliptical nature not square and not often triangular.
Friday, May 15, 2015
Geometry of Nature Verses Human perceptions of natural symmetry.
The idea that probability is a basic dimension in reality and not something we just perceive artificially brings up questions about what we think we know is probable. In nature elements and molecules are prone to crystalize. They assume distinctive predictable shapes as crystals grow where and when they do. We have tables that show the expected shapes and it may or may not be the case the crystals form in the same shapes in different environments say with less gravity on a smaller planet or much more in a much larger planet. Some of that can be tested in the lab increasing pressure and temperature to mimic higher gravity. So we have a pretty good idea about what shapes are likely to be assumed by crystals of various combinations of elements and molecules. What we cannot as easily predict is how crystals will grow independently and in formations of multiple crystals. The variables are so many that we have collections of rock mineral crystals of many different diverse variations. Man made crystals tend to have similar and completely different fofms that are not found in nature including various diamond cuts for raw diamonds. crystals are not all symmetrical when we find them in nature but they do have some modulus of symmetry we can assume is a form of symmetry. It is like looking at all the visible structures in the universe as seen by our various telescopes. We see the same sorts of structures near and far. Most famous are spiral galaxies we see as close as 1-2 million light years away and as far away as 10 billion light years away. We accept what we see with our high power telescopes as being straight forward what we think we know as opposed to something other than what we think we know. At the same time we are willing to accept ideas that time is not absolute and that time space may just be showing us an illusion. It seems entirely possible that we see in any moment time warped structures that are actually stable except they are beyond
Saturday, May 9, 2015
Why not use the super collider at CERN to prove that probabiliy is one of the most basic dimensions of the cosmos?
What I find most interesting about super collider experiments is the ability to predict the types of outcomes expected. The hole idea is to have some standardized means of detection that actually may preclude having any unexpected detectable events. It seems strange that with an array of macro level detectors that sub-sub-sub particles are going to be detected and not just pass though , between or beyond detection? To the extent that the results are predictable might really be more important than exactly what might be deduced as happening. The actual results are in a sort of black box from which a lot of inferences are required to try to understand what ever happens inside that box. Predictability is a sure sign that probability is acting as a sequencer of events. Meanwhile I am wondering why we don't grow crystals guided by some computer medium. I am thinking of a 3-D equivalent of a flat screen tv matrix. Crystals develop their characteristic geometric faces because they are in a medium for growth and not outside of some medium. It is important when looking at a quartz crystal to realize it did not assume it's characteristics out in some vacuum. Those perfect looking geometric facets of crystals form at an interface with the medium. I was looking for probabilities when it comes to quartz crystal growth because those crystals tend to grow in the company of many others exactly like the rest with plenty of variation deviations. I still can not find any mathematic formula to generate crystals as a computer simulation.
Friday, May 1, 2015
What happens when all the basic assumptions of a theory are wrong? The theory still exists.
This conditional probability thesis blog is about probability itself being a fundamental "dimension" of the universe. Go back to the beginning of the blog to see it there. As it goes we have the top three dimensions. point, line , plane , the fourth dimension that is volume and then we have time which is really the same thing as distance. This comes from Euclidian geometry as I have understood it. Then come other times of dimensions one of which is of course something like or is gravity, space-time as some see it or as I see it dimensional expansion / dimensional contraction. This is where you have a distances defined by mass of something like a sphere where the spokes of the radius can actually contract with rock crushing power as we see first hand here on earth. If the earth had less density because of some ability to have less gravity the diameter of the earth could be many times longer than it presently is. Of course I am not saying any of my assumptions are wrong but I do find in my experiments that photons have no mass at all because they do not retain nor transfer momentum to mass when absorbed. I found that blows up a major assumption that led to one of the theories of relativity. I discount the idea that black holes are going to absorb light because light has mass and cannot escape gravity of the magnitude a black hole is supposed to have. Already black holes get brighter and brighter where they are detected and the theorists who still see them there find an area where there is nothing visible and say "see there is a black hole. Nothing is visible in the middle there." Good for them. The theory is safe.
Gravity according to relativity and the existence of a frames of reference illusion is crushing rock to make planetary spheres and crushed rock being crushed and melted is highly activated meaning it has measurable kinetic energy which tells me that gravity at it's source the center of a sphere like that of earth is not slowing time , as I know time, down but rather speeding it up. That does not mean that Einstein is wrong about everything it simply reverses the intellectual mind experiment saying that mass is not creating gravity but gravity is creating mass and perhaps time/ space time is being created by gravity and not the other way around. Which is more like the Original Newton model where gravity is a force. I found empirical evidence that seems to support this in my new laws of physics dissertation that is still uncorrected sorry to say but online somewhere. The question about time is what time is it from the perspective of the cosmic time keeping mechanism? So far as I am concerned yes the universe could have been created in seven days. Why? Because simple logic. Before the first day there were no days to measure days by and then there was light which implies a big bang or the sun was born but there is no earth going around in a circle yet no orbiting planets yet so days , years are months and millennia are completely undefined. A day can be billions or trillions of years as we know it. That way in 7 days as reported in that ancient story, it is entirely possible and likely that it only took seven measured days for creation . The bible does not say the days are units we know as days because the story clearly says nothing had been created yet least of all clocks.
So I see a planet like the earth and a star like the sun as probability generators. We like to think of clocks as regulated time pieces. For me these massive things in the cosmos are the cosmic clocks we have and they set time in their relationships with each other and with the forces that shape them. I have to wonder if the greater galaxy even has the same time scale or perception of time that we do. It is entirely possible that other beings elsewhere in the cosmos count our years as seconds in their life spans. Why not? why would we assume our time scale is universal when we know a Jupiter year is a lot longer than an earth year and then we look at that planet and see regular wind speeds over ten times the higher range of earth wind speeds on average. That may not seem like some coincidence being a longer year with higher wind velocity but it does say that our sense of dimensions is based on how we experience life where we are.
The thing that gets interesting now is that probability is about the outcomes that time allows to happen. Without time there is no need for probability analysis as there are no changes that can be expected otherwise. Time itself is a probability work sheet. With a clock, a regulated clock, we all bet that the clock will be on time , keep time which it does not do which is why clocks need to be reset from time to time. If time can get stuck in a clock than there is an issue of probability there.
Gravity according to relativity and the existence of a frames of reference illusion is crushing rock to make planetary spheres and crushed rock being crushed and melted is highly activated meaning it has measurable kinetic energy which tells me that gravity at it's source the center of a sphere like that of earth is not slowing time , as I know time, down but rather speeding it up. That does not mean that Einstein is wrong about everything it simply reverses the intellectual mind experiment saying that mass is not creating gravity but gravity is creating mass and perhaps time/ space time is being created by gravity and not the other way around. Which is more like the Original Newton model where gravity is a force. I found empirical evidence that seems to support this in my new laws of physics dissertation that is still uncorrected sorry to say but online somewhere. The question about time is what time is it from the perspective of the cosmic time keeping mechanism? So far as I am concerned yes the universe could have been created in seven days. Why? Because simple logic. Before the first day there were no days to measure days by and then there was light which implies a big bang or the sun was born but there is no earth going around in a circle yet no orbiting planets yet so days , years are months and millennia are completely undefined. A day can be billions or trillions of years as we know it. That way in 7 days as reported in that ancient story, it is entirely possible and likely that it only took seven measured days for creation . The bible does not say the days are units we know as days because the story clearly says nothing had been created yet least of all clocks.
So I see a planet like the earth and a star like the sun as probability generators. We like to think of clocks as regulated time pieces. For me these massive things in the cosmos are the cosmic clocks we have and they set time in their relationships with each other and with the forces that shape them. I have to wonder if the greater galaxy even has the same time scale or perception of time that we do. It is entirely possible that other beings elsewhere in the cosmos count our years as seconds in their life spans. Why not? why would we assume our time scale is universal when we know a Jupiter year is a lot longer than an earth year and then we look at that planet and see regular wind speeds over ten times the higher range of earth wind speeds on average. That may not seem like some coincidence being a longer year with higher wind velocity but it does say that our sense of dimensions is based on how we experience life where we are.
The thing that gets interesting now is that probability is about the outcomes that time allows to happen. Without time there is no need for probability analysis as there are no changes that can be expected otherwise. Time itself is a probability work sheet. With a clock, a regulated clock, we all bet that the clock will be on time , keep time which it does not do which is why clocks need to be reset from time to time. If time can get stuck in a clock than there is an issue of probability there.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Blowing A Hole Wide Enough To Swallow A Mile: Decoding God and the wrong approach to scientific beliefs.
What is superposition? - What is quantum? - What is quantum theory?
Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment . What happens when the thought experiments predetermines the fate of a cat? Your thoughts have influenced the outcomes by defining probabilities and by fabricating the narrative or if you prefer the outcomes/ by cause and effect. Sure there are a large number of permutations. Say the outcome of a cat being alive or dead is 50/50 That means a very rough estimate with an infinite number of trials for anything to be exactly 50/50 and for 50/50 there can be an infinite number of variables. Perhaps an infinite variables will lead to such round numbers. If you flipped a coin enough times and it had to hit the ground first after trillions of trials it will become impossible to determine which worn side of the coin was heads and which used to be tails. 50/50 is a blended notion not one necessarily observed in nature with all of the natural complexities.
The fascinating thing about Schodinger's cat is the though proposal having a fixed number of combinations that include. Alive and Dead. Dead and Alive, Not dead and Alive, Not Alive and dead, Both dead and Alive. These do not even include the added variables of atomic particles , poisons, breaking glass and thinking about it all. God himself is a thought experiment. Either God has a name or does not that already increases the number of variables . To think that DNA coding is the work of a higher power unless you are talking about raw probability of conditional variables with variable outcome is missing the higher spirit of the analysis. If God exists he is a probability generator and that alone can build a systematic code like DNA that creates its own probabilities.
Friday, April 3, 2015
Spinoza's Notion that God is Nature is almost the proper definition....Almost ...that is except that If there is a God he or it is total probabilty of multiple variables.
Assuming the theory of the big bang is correct. I certainly am no believer , but assuming this big bang happened and it was the cause of all subsequent effects and the cosmos and that that is Spinoza's notion of God being nature then it is a theory that needs major modification because for the big bang to have ever happened is a pure mater of probability. As the theory goes. In Nature, all of mass and energy were originally deposited in the singularity of a super dense gravitational mass, a super sized black hole containing virtually everything in the entire Universe so the theory goes. That is almost poetic. Which maybe why the sad old theory of the singularity that goes big bang is so enticing to so many.
But wait for the big bang to have come from this massive density of infinite singularity of mass and energy it had to reach critical mass in the same sort of way that a nuclear bomb will have to have critical mass to begin with and after that it needs a trigger or a point of no return from which there is no other future prospect than a big bang to have that big bang. Many conditions have to be met by the theory of the big bang in order for any of it to have ever happened. First, somehow, somewhere, at some time, all of the elements of mass and energy had to come together and become compressed in one entity before something triggered the massive explosion called the big bang. That is a sequence or even a code much like the reels in an old fashioned slot machine designed to simulate natural probability. First all conditions have to be right each one clicking into place like the characters on the reels lining up and having each to satisfy the conditionality of multiple variations that are possible until eventually the jackpot is hit and there is a big bang.
Say the president never really intended to negotiate with Iran and instead of having peace talks actually intended to bomb all their nuclear facilities without warning, First he would need to have the nuclear weapons necessary for the job selected and put into place with code to launch them and code to direct them on missiles directly to their targets and there have to be codes and keys entered to get the nuclear bomb to have its big bang with variables as to when , where, delivery , timing plus the bomb has to be loaded and ready with critical mass. So the same with the theory of the big bang. All about conditional multi-variable probability that there should be a big bang or just a small big bang over Iran. If A and B then C? God then has to be probability as the determining factor of everything that the periodic table can and DNA can code into existence. That does not sound very scientific until you put it into a mathematic formula to define god which then has every thing to do with those simulation casino slot machine reel configuration where in order to receive the major big bang jackpot all the reels have to line up such that aces or cherries all line up on a line that is also happening to be yet another conditional probability for a jackpot to occur. So it goes like this: If all the conditions are met a big bang is likely if not inevitable because that is not necessarily known. Maybe something other than a big bang could have otherwise happened instead?
One can open a combination lock on a safe by knowing a set of calibrated moves for the dial of lock. These safes can only be opened with the right combination of numbers...
But wait for the big bang to have come from this massive density of infinite singularity of mass and energy it had to reach critical mass in the same sort of way that a nuclear bomb will have to have critical mass to begin with and after that it needs a trigger or a point of no return from which there is no other future prospect than a big bang to have that big bang. Many conditions have to be met by the theory of the big bang in order for any of it to have ever happened. First, somehow, somewhere, at some time, all of the elements of mass and energy had to come together and become compressed in one entity before something triggered the massive explosion called the big bang. That is a sequence or even a code much like the reels in an old fashioned slot machine designed to simulate natural probability. First all conditions have to be right each one clicking into place like the characters on the reels lining up and having each to satisfy the conditionality of multiple variations that are possible until eventually the jackpot is hit and there is a big bang.
Say the president never really intended to negotiate with Iran and instead of having peace talks actually intended to bomb all their nuclear facilities without warning, First he would need to have the nuclear weapons necessary for the job selected and put into place with code to launch them and code to direct them on missiles directly to their targets and there have to be codes and keys entered to get the nuclear bomb to have its big bang with variables as to when , where, delivery , timing plus the bomb has to be loaded and ready with critical mass. So the same with the theory of the big bang. All about conditional multi-variable probability that there should be a big bang or just a small big bang over Iran. If A and B then C? God then has to be probability as the determining factor of everything that the periodic table can and DNA can code into existence. That does not sound very scientific until you put it into a mathematic formula to define god which then has every thing to do with those simulation casino slot machine reel configuration where in order to receive the major big bang jackpot all the reels have to line up such that aces or cherries all line up on a line that is also happening to be yet another conditional probability for a jackpot to occur. So it goes like this: If all the conditions are met a big bang is likely if not inevitable because that is not necessarily known. Maybe something other than a big bang could have otherwise happened instead?
One can open a combination lock on a safe by knowing a set of calibrated moves for the dial of lock. These safes can only be opened with the right combination of numbers...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)