[dleviwing]

The data and imagery are not in question; the interpretation of it is, along with the inference that it proves their hypotheses. As yet the proof is not conclusive, if it were, we would not be discussing it. The singularity as currently defined, cannot exist. What is the real state of the stuff of a black hole? Maybe it’s just a cluster of quarks. Everything is still in the guessing stage of science theory when it comes to cosmology of these types of events.

[mkirkpatrick]

Seems like I"ve attracted some heavy weights onto this thread thats fine,all our indeed
most welcome,the final analysis though is about matter and the crystallization of ideas into
form.
That is the bottom line here.To search through the outer appearance of form to reveal its
inner drivers,to unravel the cohesion of unified pathways,thereby boring deeply into matters form,to find the intention laid bare?


Crystallization is the furthest outreach of intentions will,and is the result of cohesive
distillation of varying ideas!

tbc

regards michael.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

No David, I'd say you should catch up on the cosmology data___there's been plenty of proof, since the `40's. You see, I can accept the collected macroscopic evidence as absolutely true science, also. "Maybe it's just a cluster of quarks."? I had thought your physics a little further advanced than that! Like many too far caught in Einstein, you are a bit too far caught in Feyneman. Who currently defined your singularity? Why would the stuff of a black hole dark matter singularity be any different than other star singularities? I'm a singularity, an individual, and I've got trace elements in me of all other singularities___what's the big deal?

Sorry for the intrusion, Michael.

Originally Posted by dleviwing The data and imagery are not in question; the interpretation of it is, along with the inference that it proves their hypotheses. As yet the proof is not conclusive, if it were, we would not be discussing it. The singularity as currently defined, cannot exist. What is the real state of the stuff of a black hole? Maybe it’s just a cluster of quarks. Everything is still in the guessing stage of science theory when it comes to cosmology of these types of events.

[mkirkpatrick]

Thats okay Lloyd,you are welcome on this thread,what say you on crystallization?And
what is your stance on the solidification of ideas into form?



regards michael.

[dleviwing]

Sorry Lloyd, but do you really believe you understand what you are saying or are you just having a senior moment? I think you're just being an annoying heckler. Go ahead and answer Michael's questions.

[Graybeard]

Dave, Lloyd ..... I followed up on the 'Dark Matter' link. I went to the NASA site. I checked who is in charge of the Chandra X-Ray mission and its mission statement.

There can be no questions about the creditentials.

I then did my best, using the NASA site and the Wikpaedia, to understand why they reached the intrepretation that they have, albeit, possibly media-hyped along the way.

If you don't agree with the intrepretation of the gravitational lensing used to capture the image, how do you explain it ??

In the 'Final Analysis' (for you michael ) what is your intrepretation ?

greg

[mkirkpatrick]

Greg my interpretation will be as ever completely unorthadox,dark matter to me is really
etheric matter,which is ever so slightly "out of phase" with the rest of the "normal space
Time continuum,this is why it is so difficult to detect,we can "see" its effects,thats all.
The two co-exist,etheric matter,and ordinary physical matter,because they are out of phase with each other,they can both occupy the same space at the same time???

That said I shall return to the thread premise of the final analysis
in the next post.

regards michael.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by dleviwing Sorry Lloyd, but do you really believe you understand what you are saying or are you just having a senior moment? I think you're just being an annoying heckler. Go ahead and answer Michael's questions.

Oh, I understand it completely David. It's just you and I have different interpretations of how the initial singularity we both agree exists, of absolute matter motion, passes from it's initial state to the present state. I see it as absolute singularities all the way down, and you believe in quantum flux, through fluffy singularities, I suspect. I lean more toward standard models, and you more toward quantum models of universal evolution. These are just two different theories of universal evolution. My model has sound explanation for universal motion___I'm yet to hear your's, though I've asked you several times. This is an impass until you're willing to answer.

p.s.: David, check out this site about the advances in low temperature physics: http://spindry.phys.northwestern.edu/cryst1.htm

Michael;
as you most likely already know, I am a finitest. I see the world the opposite as you. You see thought producing matter, and I see matter producing all thought and information, except for the physical actual object information of matter motion. You know you'd be quite a magician to pull this trick off. Show me something solid you have created with your thought. Oh, it's true if I have an idea to build a house, I suppose that's a solidification of idea into form. I live in the real world of objects, Michael___not in the world of exaggerated imagination, though I can exaggerate my imagination to uncover new ideas, but I always purify my final ideas through scientific logic, as best I can. IMO Michael, there is no solidification of ideas into form, in the way you mean it.

Crystallization as a subject of itself is very interesting, and on the leading edge of cognitive scientific advances. Did you see my post about the TV Rock? Ulexite, I believe, one of the most interesting sights I've ever seen. You can watch electron and photon packets move in it, in slow motion.

Sorry,
Lloyd

[mkirkpatrick]

Lloyd are you sure that you are fully aware of what you are saying?You said that I see
thought as producing matter,you see matter as producing thought,but Lloyd are they
not one of the same?Is it not a two way street here!If it flows one way Lloyd then by that
very principle it must flow the other way too!

You see Lloyd we do think alike after all-God bless you,my brother!


regards michael.

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Greg my interpretation will be as ever completely unorthadox, Dark matter to me is really etheric matter,which is ever so slightly "out of phase" with the rest of the "normal space Time continuum,this is why it is so difficult to detect,we can "see" its effects,thats all. The two co-exist,etheric matter,and ordinary physical matter,because they are out of phase with each other,they can both occupy the same space at the same time???

Michael .... Etheric Matter and Dark Matter ... a rose by any other name

This is a very good description. But it is based on Science ... not Intelligent design ??

Michael ... have you changed sides ?? c'mon fess up ....

Greg