View Single Post
Re: String Theory vs. Loop Quantum Gravity
Old
  (#5 (permalink))
Lloyd Gillespie
9th degree Black Belt
Lloyd Gillespie has a spectacular aura about
 
Lloyd Gillespie's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,579
Thanks Given: 114
Thanked 44x in 42 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rep Power: 26
   
Re: String Theory vs. Loop Quantum Gravity - 09-03-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by baudrunner View Post
Religion has nothing to do with it.

Your injection of thermodynamics is true, it is a form of polarization during the creation process but it of itself is not the reason the creation process began.

And by the way, I have not contradicted any science in my post. All the true science that explains how and why we and this came to be will not in any way supplant or replace my description. It will just be science that supports the ideas I have given and which supplements them.

I used the word premonition to describe the initial event because it comes closest to describing a unified solution to the theory of anthropocentrism.
  • Hey Baud, stop taking everything I say so personal, it defeats the purpose of scientific investigation. I was simply trying to point out that anthropocentrism and premonition were religious ideas and not scientific reasoning. To take any ideas that can't be scientifically presented with honest math and logic only leads the discussion in the direction of unfounded beliefs, which are totally useless to scientific investigations, as is consciousness, except for the cognitive advances made over recent years, and by cognitive I mean real testable evidence, not premonitions of.
  • When anyone takes ideas like consciousness, intuition, premonition or statements of conjectured nothing, and try to say the universe just happened, it is the same foolish mistakes many have made for thousands of years. Real, true and honest science must be testable and provable, or at the least, logically provable science, not mere religious conjecture. Even if I were to be foolish enough to accept your premonition conjecture, to be scientific, you would have to mathematically and logically explain how premonition was created and functions___you can't, because it's religious BS. Even if I exaggerated this further like Leibniz did, the mind of any god must be explained itself, to have any scientific validity___otherwise it's just religious BS. BTW Leibniz failed the explanation also, and most likely because he was also looking for the anthropocentric genie___IT AIN'T There!!! It's a scientific universe that produced life, spirit and everybody's dumb consciousness.
  • And finally, I'm not going to be scientific with somebody who has no scientific recognition of science___99% of the world's citizens speak nothing but emotional dis-honesty, few speak logical honesty___you're still in the first category. I make mistakes, I agree, I'm human too___but I always try to correct them to scientific, mathematical and logical honesty. I don't continue to adhere to my immature emotional dis-honesty.
regards


"To develop the skill of correct thinking is in the first place to learn what you have to disregard. In order to go on, you have to know what to leave out; this is the essence of effective thinking." Kurt Godel
"Time and space are modes in which we think and not conditions in which we live." Albert Einstein
"The uncertainty principle is an absolute, finite, universal constant." L.G.
"The tick-tick-tick of the cesium atom is a sliding-time-scaler constant of all finite universal motion." L.G.
  
Reply With Quote