Physics and the Immortality of the Soul

[Lion Hearted Man]

whatever strawman city.

Or is it ad hominem?

You pick.

Do you even know what those fallacies mean, or do you just randomly shout out their names?

 

[createdtoworship]

Do you even know what those fallacies mean, or do you just randomly shout out their names?

Oh yeah, you?

 

[createdtoworship]

Why didn't you just post that then? Jeez. I mean, if I'd never heard of relativity, I'd be like...ooh, this Chuck guy is clever!...but since I have done a large amount of mathematical work and read a lot of papers on the subject even as a undergrad...including THE papers on the subject from 1905....I know that video wouldn't even qualify as the Cliff notes version of relativity. Anyhow...onto what you really wanted to talk about:



Yeah, I was aware of that already. I read it last year from the original paper. See here:

http://fisica.ciens.ucv.ve/~svincenz/330.full.pdf

So what?

photons can teleport! That supports my massless idea and resultant eternality of it.

 

[mkatzwork]

photons can teleport! That supports my massless idea and resultant eternality of it.

It's your massless idea now? Yikes.

The question still stands though...so what?

Classical information (the kind you're talking about) was not (and will not be) transmitted at superluminal velocities, and none of this speaks to the 'eternality' of information, unless you mean something else by 'it'...

 

[mkatzwork]

(incidentally, you don't understand what they mean by "teleport" either...we're not talking about the same photon going in a device at one end and appearing at the other end)

 

[createdtoworship]

(incidentally, you don't understand what they mean by "teleport" either...we're not talking about the same photon going in a device at one end and appearing at the other end)

thats okay, it's the stream of photons, one is destroyed but comes out the other side with the same light.

 

[createdtoworship]

It's your massless idea now? Yikes.

The question still stands though...so what?

Classical information (the kind you're talking about) was not (and will not be) transmitted at superluminal velocities, and none of this speaks to the 'eternality' of information, unless you mean something else by 'it'...

okay explain how light can teleport, I await your answer.

 

[mkatzwork]

thats okay, it's the stream of photons, one is destroyed but comes out the other side with the same light.

Er...um, not quite. A photon emerges at the other end with the same polarization (which isn't quite like other types of polarization but the term will do)...but still, no information in the classical sense (as you're thinking of information) has been transmitted at a superluminal velocity. And none of this has anything to do with what you're saying...so the point stands, so what?

 

[mkatzwork]

okay explain how light can teleport, I await your answer.

What do you mean by "teleport"? Are you thinking Star Trek? Quantum teleportation is something quite different....

 

[createdtoworship]

What do you mean by "teleport"? Are you thinking Star Trek? Quantum teleportation is something quite different....

go ahead and explain it then, or do you even comprehend the link you gave me.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Oh yeah, you?

Uh, yes. I read over that post and there were no strawmen or ad hominems. A strawman is misrepresenting the opponent in the debate, contorting their opinions to make them easier to refute. An ad hominem is an attack on the other person's character. None of that was in the post you quoted.

 

[mkatzwork]

go ahead and explain it then, or do you even comprehend the link you gave me.

It's basically a quantum telephone call...without the wire.
When you make a telephone call, the person on the other end does not hear the actual sound waves emanating from your lungs, they hear a reproduced version of it. This is a broad oversimplification of it but it's broadly what's happening.
The photon on the receiving end has the same properties as the sending end, but isn't the same actual photon.

This paper was significant because it was the first time it was done without losing "data", basically...

 

[Non sequitur]

go ahead and explain it then, or do you even comprehend the link you gave me.

Yes, he totally sounds like the person who doesn't understand this...

Good interneting!

 

[Michael]

Dark energy and inflation both have mathematical models to back them up; Now where's your mathematical model for talking snakes

Numerology and astrology have mathematical models too. So what?

FYI, I think I've been pretty clear that I'm not personally into a literal interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Michael]

First you do not know what the word Definition means and now you do not know what supernatural means.

On the contrary:

Definition of SUPERNATURAL

1
: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe;

You mean like "dark" stuff?

Related to SUPERNATURAL

Synonyms: metaphysical,

Gee, look what happens when we look up "metaphysics":

Metaphysics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A person who studies metaphysics is called a metaphysicist[4] or a metaphysician.[5] The metaphysician attempts to clarify the fundamental notions by which people understand the world, e.g., existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility. A central branch of metaphysics is ontology, the investigation into the basic categories of being and how they relate to each other. Another central branch of metaphysics is cosmology, the study of the totality of all phenomena within the universe.

Emphasis mine. Why is it that Wiki disagrees with you?

 

[mzungu]

On the contrary:
You mean like "dark" stuff?

Gee, look what happens when we look up "metaphysics":

Metaphysics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Emphasis mine. Why is it that Wiki disagrees with you?

Really? First of all metaphysics is NOT SCIENCE it is based on PHILOSOPHY!
Doesn't anyone understand English in America?
Metaphysics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the branch of philosophy dealing with theories of existence and knowledge. For the work of Aristotle, see Metaphysics (Aristotle). For the definition relating to the supernatural, see Supernatural.

Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world,[1] although the term is not easily defined.[2] Traditionally, metaphysics attempts to answer two basic questions in the broadest possible terms:

1. "What is there?"
2. "What is it like?"[3]

A person who studies metaphysics is called a metaphysicist[4] or a metaphysician.[5] The metaphysician attempts to clarify the fundamental notions by which people understand the world, e.g., existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility. A central branch of metaphysics is ontology, the investigation into the basic categories of being and how they relate to each other. Another central branch of metaphysics is cosmology, the study of the totality of all phenomena within the universe.
Prior to the modern history of science, scientific questions were addressed as a part of metaphysics known as natural philosophy. The term science itself meant "knowledge" of, originating from epistemology. The scientific method, however, transformed natural philosophy into an empirical activity deriving from experiment unlike the rest of philosophy. By the end of the 18th century, it had begun to be called "science" to distinguish it from philosophy. Thereafter, metaphysics denoted philosophical enquiry of a non-empirical character into the nature of existence.[6]

 

[Michael]

Really? First of all metaphysics is NOT SCIENCE it is based on PHILOSOPHY!
Doesn't anyone understand English in America?

It seems that the problem has more to do with your unwillingness to get real, than anything related to a reading or comprehension problem. From your own definition of "supernatural":

Definition of SUPERNATURAL

1
: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe;

Dude, what is "dark energy" and/or "dark matter" if not something "beyond the observable universe? All they actually "observe" is redshifted photons, not "dark energy".

It seems that you simply don't want to ACCEPT the fact that "dark" things are in fact supernatural constructs that are "beyond the visible observable universe." They are literally INVISIBLE supernatural constructs.

 

[mzungu]

It seems that the problem has more to do with your unwillingness to get real, than anything related to a reading or comprehension problem. From your own definition of "supernatural":



Dude, what is "dark energy" and/or "dark matter" if not something "beyond the observable universe? All they actually "observe" is redshifted photons, not "dark energy".

It seems that you simply don't want to ACCEPT the fact that "dark" things are in fact supernatural constructs that are "beyond the visible observable universe." They are literally INVISIBLE supernatural constructs.

 

[Michael]

Double facepalm indeed. Apparently you just can't come to terms with the fact that "dark energy" and "dark matter" are not actually "observed" in nature. Only redshifted photons and galaxy rotation and lensing patterns are actually observed. The invisible and exotic (never been seen on Earth) properties of these epic sized gap fillers of Lambda-CDM theory are what make them "supernatural" constructs. The non existent nature of "inflation" today, also makes it a "supernatural" construct. All these things exist OUTSIDE of our "observed" universe. They are not actually observed because they are either "dark" or now dead! String theory is CERTAINLY a "supernatural" construct because it claims there are MULTIPLE additional dimensions of spacetime. Holy cow, talk about selective application of terms. God concepts aren't even limited to "supernatural" concepts in the first place, and "science' dreams up more "supernatural" constructs than "religion". At worst case religions tend to believe in only ONE supernatural entity, whereas "modern astronomers" have a whole TRILOGY of supernatural sky gods in their "science/religion" that are entirely IMPOTENT in the lab!

 

[mzungu]

Double facepalm indeed. Apparently you just can't come to terms with the fact that "dark energy" and "dark matter" are not actually "observed" in nature. Only redshifted photons and galaxy rotation and lensing patterns are actually observed. The invisible and exotic (never been seen on Earth) properties of these epic sized gap fillers of Lambda-CDM theory are what make them "supernatural" constructs. The non existent nature of "inflation" today, also makes it a "supernatural" construct. All these things exist OUTSIDE of our "observed" universe. They are not actually observed because they are either "dark" or now dead! String theory is CERTAINLY a "supernatural" construct because it claims there are MULTIPLE additional dimensions of spacetime. Holy cow, talk about selective application of terms. God concepts aren't even limited to "supernatural" concepts in the first place, and "science' dreams up more "supernatural" constructs than "religion". At worst case religions tend to believe in only ONE supernatural entity, whereas "modern astronomers" have a whole TRILOGY of supernatural sky gods in their "science/religion" that are entirely IMPOTENT in the lab!

I already gave you the dictionary definition of the word "SUPERNATURAL" yet you keep beating a dead horse

It is obvious that you prefer to live in a make believe world of fairies and polka dotted pink unicorns! Personally I am too old for such games and unless you have something of substance to add to this thread then I shall simply ignore you!