[Guille]

I think you should read the book "The Big Questions" because this one presents exelent presentations of philosophical theories and why they came out, and givs the problems for each theory. Then you woudl understand why not all acts are controlled by the past.

Now, about E=mc^2 , of course that matter has mass, but how can energy have a body? I thik this is why I don't understand your concept.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear GUILLE and friends,

-Sorry I could not yet read “Big questions” now; would you please conclude its point that involved? So we could continue our discussion work. Anywhere who ever say that there is something that does not follow “causes and effect” principle, I strongly oppose it. My concept is very simple that is, anyone which claimed that they have scientific minded but do not believe in “Effect without cause” then how could they differ from mystical people (who was blamed to be unscientific)?

-Body has energy because body’s mass in the condensation of vacuum energy! As I suggest in my last post you should read detail in my article “Completed Maxwell electromagnetic field theory” in the topic “Electron – a tiny black hole”. Actually it is very easy and straight forward and below is a short conclusion;

We have prove by theoretical verification that electron is a tiny black hole, and also for proton. And because body’s mass is composed of electron, proton and neutron (electron + proton), then it is the answer why body’s mass has energy (which you asked for), isn’t it?

Sincerely yours,

Nimit Th.

[Guille]

Vacuum Mechanics,

There are several approaches given in the book against and in favor of the cause and effect theory. For me, the est against approach is the one that says taht there are two kinds of events: caused events and agent events. They believe that any body able to choose, i.e. that has a mind, is an agent, and, that agent, have the ability to do things without a cause. All the other events are caused.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear GUILLE and friends,

-Thanks for the information. Anyway, I thought that in conclusion there are two choices: “cause and effect” and “effect without cause”. The first choice is for scientific and the second is for mystic.

By the way, we knew that according to quantum mechanics, which said that its nature is a “probabistic theory” (not a “deterministic theory”). And we could say that this will lead toward to the concept of “effect without cause”. I am not so happy about it because this would be the biggest disaster in physics! So I have tried to solve the problem and will show that it is not correct. And this will be explained in my next paper title “Completed quantum mechanical theory” which is expected to finish soon.

Sincerely yours,

Nimit Th.