Explaining the God particle

[dad]

Yes we can. If the laws of the universe were so different there, then we wouldn't be seeing things like doppler shift etc.

Why not? We see them...here.

Care to answer the question?

What remains unanswered?

 

[Elendur]

Just after the time when we see animal sacrifices restored, then taken away in Israel..and the final world leader sets up something in the holy place there in Israel called the abomination of desolation. Then will begin a short time of trouble so great the world never has seen anything like it, nor will it ever again.

That was very unspecific. Not a very good prophecy.

Oh well, thanks for answering.

 

[Tiberius]

Why not? We see them...here.

We see them affecting things from over there.

What remains unanswered?

Let's say a star billions of light years away gets brighter, then dimmer, then brighter, then dimmer and so on. We can measure how long it takes for that to happen can't we?

 

[dad]

That was very unspecific. Not a very good prophecy.

Oh well, thanks for answering.

Israel is the center of events from the bible prophesy perspective. They will have their history start up again after a long pause. The last 7 years of world history. Their final trails and troubles will happen then. The worst time is the final 1/2 of this 7 year period. That starts when those living at that time see the abomination of desolation stand in the sacred place there. The animal sacrifices will be stopped...and a whole rapid sequence of events unfold.

This final 3 1/2 year time is known as the Great Tribulation. The things that happen in that time are so astounding that I posit that this present state will have ended, and new laws be in place much like the pre flood time. Things like the stars and sun going right out. Angels and demons on the earth, every mountain on earth leveled..etc etc.

 

[dad]

We see them affecting things from over there.

Effects we try to explain with earth laws and nothing else.

Let's say a star billions of light years away gets brighter, then dimmer, then brighter, then dimmer and so on. We can measure how long it takes for that to happen can't we?

[/quote]No! The distance can't be known to start. No step on the cosmic ladder works unless earth space and time extend all the way out! No sizes then are known either....composition...etc etc.

As for what we see...notice it is here?? We see it here, and in our time! Our space! We can say that a star blinks every 2 days or something..our time. Not a lot more than that.

 

[Tiberius]

Effects we try to explain with earth laws and nothing else.

Laws which match what we see perfectly.

No! The distance can't be known to start. No step on the cosmic ladder works unless earth space and time extend all the way out! No sizes then are known either....composition...etc etc.

Idiocy. If you see a light flashing in the distance, are you able to count how often it flashes without knowing how far away it is?

As for what we see...notice it is here?? We see it here, and in our time! Our space! We can say that a star blinks every 2 days or something..our time. Not a lot more than that.

Does the transition into our local space and laws (assuming you are correct) change the rate at which things happen?

 

[dad]

Laws which match what we see perfectly.

Since we see it all from here, our laws would be a factor. There are many mysteries in cosmology actually though.

Idiocy. If you see a light flashing in the distance, are you able to count how often it flashes without knowing how far away it is?

That works for lightning and thunder. That would be on earth if you notice.

Does the transition into our local space and laws (assuming you are correct) change the rate at which things happen?

Well if you mean time...one would assume so. The way time is seen here need not be the way that time corresponds to an event at source in deep space. You just don't know.

 

[davidbilby]

Well if you mean time...one would assume so. The way time is seen here need not be the way that time corresponds to an event at source in deep space. You just don't know.

Time is not constant, rather it is relative. That does not stop us or forbid us in any way from observing what we think are distant objects, from Earth and from our solar system (which we've already managed to leave, essentially) - and extrapolating predictions about their behavior; and then observing to see if those predictions comes true.

Yes, this is done from Earth and from relatively near space - but those predictions have still shown to be accurate. There has not been a single instance of a corroborated calculation arising in observations of the distant universe that doesn't jive with the combination of Einstein and Newton's work.

You can say "but that's past my unspecified distance where you can't know what's going on", but if it is possible something 'else' is going on that is contrary to what is observed (the only rational conclusion if you say we cannot "know" what is going on, because either what we see is happening or it isn't) - then one has to ask - "why the discrepancy?".

If we see something that is not actually there, then we are being shown a show. A performance. I cannot imagine anybody believing seriously in a god that sets up a theatrical light show purely to bamboozle such a tiny, irrelevant corner of the universe.

By the way, I read your posts with some fascination...particularly, I'd like to ask you - where is this point that things cease to be 'Earthly' and become "Heavenly" or whatever else you want to call it? You seem to have a pretty clear idea of where it must be since you can define what is one and what is the other. Where exactly is the 'human ignorance termination shock'?

db

 

[Tiberius]

Since we see it all from here, our laws would be a factor.

Why? Does a fish looking at the fireplace conclude it's all fake because wood can't burn under water?

There are many mysteries in cosmology actually though.

True.

That works for lightning and thunder. That would be on earth if you notice.

Did I say lightning?

If a light located a hundred light years from Earth flashes once a minute, what mechanism would speed that flashing up to once a second when we here on Earth look at it?

Well if you mean time...one would assume so. The way time is seen here need not be the way that time corresponds to an event at source in deep space. You just don't know.

More assumptions? You claim you are right and I am wrong, and all you have are assumptions? Pitiful.

 

[Supreme]

MOD HAT ON

The thread has just had a clean up. If your post was removed, it was likely to be of a flaming nature. Keep the debate mature, polite and free from flaming please, guys.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[dad]

Time is not constant, rather it is relative.

Oh? Who made that rule?

That does not stop us or forbid us in any way from observing what we think are distant objects, from Earth and from our solar system (which we've already managed to leave, essentially) - and extrapolating predictions about their behavior; and then observing to see if those predictions comes true.

Many things are not predicted, not all come true. The best explanation for this and the 95% dark stuff you had to declare to try to hammer the 5% into an earth state reality, is that you are partially informed.

Yes, this is done from Earth and from relatively near space - but those predictions have still shown to be accurate. There has not been a single instance of a corroborated calculation arising in observations of the distant universe that doesn't jive with the combination of Einstein and Newton's work.

In your mind, maybe. However, you have not shown such details here.

You can say "but that's past my unspecified distance where you can't know what's going on", but if it is possible something 'else' is going on that is contrary to what is observed (the only rational conclusion if you say we cannot "know" what is going on, because either what we see is happening or it isn't) - then one has to ask - "why the discrepancy?".

No. What is observed is observed here and whatever is from far away has to comply while here, or it doesn't get the entry visa.

If we see something that is not actually there, then we are being shown a show. A performance. I cannot imagine anybody believing seriously in a god that sets up a theatrical light show purely to bamboozle such a tiny, irrelevant corner of the universe.

Me either. We are the hub, the raison d'etre. The big cheese. The coming HQ of the Almighty. The planet where He made man and came and died for us. Your degrading dreams cannot be supported.

By the way, I read your posts with some fascination...particularly, I'd like to ask you - where is this point that things cease to be 'Earthly' and become "Heavenly" or whatever else you want to call it?

A few things...who know that there is such a point? And if there is, how would we detect it? If time for example started to be woven in differently at some point how would we be able to know? If there were laws in place somewhere over man's rainbow, that accommodated more than just the physical, how would we be able to know?

On earth, I think we can draw a line in the sand so to speak. 4400 years ago or so, would have been the change for the earth zone.

 

[dad]

Why? Does a fish looking at the fireplace conclude it's all fake because wood can't burn under water?

I suspect a fish would be concerned with other things. The light from the fire, of course would be somewhat affected entering the fishbowl.

If a light located a hundred light years from Earth flashes once a minute, what mechanism would speed that flashing up to once a second when we here on Earth look at it?

That depends if the clocks out there ran on earth time. What we can say is that the light inside our earth zone from there would have had it's time set to the here and now!

 

[davidbilby]

On earth, I think we can draw a line in the sand so to speak. 4400 years ago or so, would have been the change for the earth zone.

snip odd argument.

To demolish your entire assertion completely is not hard, because it's not original, and has been demolished many times before.

Consider this: (for the sake of argument - I think this particular argument is as errant as your fishbowl idea, but I'll pose it just to demonstrate)

You cannot know anything to any degree of certainty beyond your own mind. You are in the "Dad" fishbowl. It is not possible to know anything outside of the "Dad" fishbowl, that is, the fishbowl of yourself, your own being, your own consciousness or whatever you'd like to call your sentient self. You can observe whatever you want to observe, taste whatever you want to taste, smell whatever you want to smell, touch whatever you want to touch and hear whatever you want to hear, but you cannot corroborate this evidence because you have no way to know that everything you see beyond the "Dad" fishbowl isn't a figment of your imagination.

If you pick up what you think is a tomato in what you think is a supermarket, you cannot know that it is, despite all the evidence you have that points to the fact it is a tomato. What you observe is observed in your own mind, and whatever is from beyond your own mind has to comply whilst in your mind, or it doesn't get the entry visa.

What you can say is that any concept inside your "Dad" fishbowl supposedly from anywhere beyond your own fishbowl would have had its properties set to match that which is in your fishbowl.

You have no conclusive proof, (the same proof which you would ask from us for something beyond what you call our 'fishbowl') that any of us exist, that this forum exists, that your computer exists, that the universe exists, that God or the Bible exists. Holding it, reading it, is not enough to know that it wasn't a creation of your imagination. The fact that you see this forum and it complies exactly with what you expect (you wake up the next morning to find the world as you left it and replies to what you think is your input) is not proof that it exists.

Essentially your position, taken to its logical endpoint, is either a Matrix-like world created by something (if you would like to remain a creationist!), or you are a solipsist.

Can you prove to me, to the same level of "proof" that you demand when you ask for evidence of a same state past, that there is any evidence of the existence of anything beyond your own mind?

 

[Tiberius]

I suspect a fish would be concerned with other things. The light from the fire, of course would be somewhat affected entering the fishbowl.

Just as you're more concerned with your fables rather than reality...

And way to avoid answering my question. You put politicians to shame with your skills at evading unpleasant questions.

That depends if the clocks out there ran on earth time. What we can say is that the light inside our earth zone from there would have had it's time set to the here and now!

How would time be changed by distance?

 

[dad]

snip odd argument.

To demolish your entire assertion completely is not hard, because it's not original, and has been demolished many times before.

False. A different state past is original, and forget about demolishing anything here.

Consider this: (for the sake of argument - I think this particular argument is as errant as your fishbowl idea, but I'll pose it just to demonstrate)

You cannot know anything to any degree of certainty beyond your own mind.

False. Don't assume your level of certainty represents all men.

If you pick up what you think is a tomato in what you think is a supermarket, you cannot know that it is, despite all the evidence you have that points to the fact it is a tomato. What you observe is observed in your own mind, and whatever is from beyond your own mind has to comply whilst in your mind, or it doesn't get the entry visa.

Maybe it would help if you splat the tomato on your face...then it will take on reality that is hard to argue with.

Essentially your position, taken to its logical endpoint, is either a Matrix-like world created by something (if you would like to remain a creationist!), or you are a solipsist.

Nope. Nothing like that. You are groping in the dark. I merely observed the real limits of man's ability and knowledge. I also saw the ancient record of God in the bible.

Can you prove to me, to the same level of "proof" that you demand when you ask for evidence of a same state past, that there is any evidence of the existence of anything beyond your own mind?

So you want to equate so called science's ability to prove it's basic premises with some man that has trouble with reality. OK. There may be something there.

 

[dad]

And way to avoid answering my question. You put politicians to shame with your skills at evading unpleasant questions.

Nothing unpleasant about mopping the floor with the competition on faith based claims. The problem is, all that was needed here was a science case. Failing that, we can look at the OP, and clearly realize that kinds are not within the ability of science to discuss intelligently.

How would time be changed by distance?

Well, we know it is even in earth space! Look at the experiment with the clocks on the airplane. Change with distance is proven. (of course the full reasoning is to be debated, but the effect is known and tested).

If space were different far far away, and the fabric of space and time as well, in what way could time not change as one left earth and vicinity??

 

[davidbilby]

False. A different state past is original, and forget about demolishing anything here.

Good, I thought you had nothing to argue with and that proves that point nicely. (ps. you have no evidence that a different state past even exists - you cannot know it out of your fishbowl or out of ours - so how could you judge its originality?)

False. Don't assume your level of certainty represents all men.

What evidence do you have beyond your own assertions that anything else exists beyond your own Fishbowl?

Maybe it would help if you splat the tomato on your face...then it will take on reality that is hard to argue with.

What proof would that give you? You would have the various sensations - perhaps of all five senses even - but that would give you no proof of anything beyond your own fishbowl. Everything you are seeing is conforming to what is in your fishbowl.

(NB. just to remind you...this is not what I personally believe but the only logical extension of what you believe - you're the one arbitrarily setting the boundaries of what we can know and what we can't know, so if you're upset that someone else can then arbitrarily move that boundary to show you how silly the idea is...not my problem!)

Nope. Nothing like that. You are groping in the dark. I merely observed the real limits of man's ability and knowledge. I also saw the ancient record of God in the bible.

What proof do you have, again, that the Bible is anything other than a figment of your own imagination? You are in the "Dad" fishbowl, remember; your observations can only conform to your fishbowl.

So you want to equate so called science's ability to prove it's basic premises with some man that has trouble with reality. OK. There may be something there.

Good attempt at obfuscation, but that's a meaningless point - I'm not even sure what it is you are trying to say, and not sure you are either. The whole previous challenge still stands.

Do you have any evidence, to the same standard of evidence that you ask for when you ask for evidence of a same state past, that anything exists beyond the "Dad" fishbowl?

If you say we cannot know what is in deep space, I can say with equal (only equal, mind you) authority that you equally cannot know for sure what is outside of your own mind, and maybe not even that.

 

[Tiberius]

Nothing unpleasant about mopping the floor with the competition on faith based claims. The problem is, all that was needed here was a science case. Failing that, we can look at the OP, and clearly realize that kinds are not within the ability of science to discuss intelligently.

We know you sure don't.

Well, we know it is even in earth space! Look at the experiment with the clocks on the airplane. Change with distance is proven. (of course the full reasoning is to be debated, but the effect is known and tested).

If space were different far far away, and the fabric of space and time as well, in what way could time not change as one left earth and vicinity??

Ah, you have shot yourself in the foot!

Are you suggesting that relativity works in deep space the same way it works here on Earth? FALSE!!! It's a different state!!!! No relativity!!!! So explain how time can be different!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[davidbilby]

If space were different far far away, and the fabric of space and time as well, in what way could time not change as one left earth and vicinity??

Since space is merely defined as a extent, by definition without boundaries, it cannot be 'different' in the sense that you are asking; it can either be, or not be. It is our definition of the extent of what we see, not a predefined thing we went..."ooh, look, "space"!

We define it. If you want to say something else exists beyond the fishbowl, it is not space, it is not part of the extent, but part of another extent...

The problem is, it looks an awful lot like the space in the fishbowl. Exactly like it, in fact!

 

[dad]

We know you sure don't.



Ah, you have shot yourself in the foot!

Are you suggesting that relativity works in deep space the same way it works here on Earth? FALSE!!! It's a different state!!!! No relativity!!!! So explain how time can be different!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nope, not even close. I do not even acknowledge that relativity is the whole cause for the time change in clocks in airplanes that was seen.

I am suggesting science does not so much as know what time IS let alone what time it is in deep space! Forget getting fancy with how time is woven into the fabric of space/time far away...that is above the pay grade of lowly earth state science.