Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I play plenty of games, not many First-Person-Shooters (or sports games, the horror) though so I haven't gotten to BF3 yetWhich games do you play? (don't tell me BF3)
Yes you are right about BF3. I totally enjoyed BF2 and then they spoiled it all by turning BF into a console style game.I play plenty of games, not many First-Person-Shooters (or sports games, the horror) though so I haven't gotten to BF3 yet
Right now the ones in my focus are Diablo 3, League of Legends and Dwarf Fortress (though the latter won't be done for the nearest 20 years).
Given the form of your question I take it you don't care much about BF3? Perhaps a bit outside your preferences?
There are several problems with your subjective "interpretation" of the redshift phenomenon. If it's related to expansion and acceleration(dark energy), it would mean that spacetime is expanding faster than twice the speed of light. That's physically impossible. "Space" never does any expansion tricks in the lab and objects made of mass cannot travel faster than C.
BF2, C&C and tomb raider (though some better than others), you've got good tasteYes you are right about BF3. I totally enjoyed BF2 and then they spoiled it all by turning BF into a console style game.
I also enjoy the Tomb raider games, Command and Conquer, etc.
My son is very much into league of Legends!
BF2 had amazing gameplay and strategy. Then they made BFBC2 which had very good destruction but less strategy and then they made BF3 which is made for consoles and ported over to PCs; It has less destruction than BFBC2 and almost no strategy and certainly has none of the features that made BF2 so successful. Don't buy BF3!BF2, C&C and tomb raider (though some better than others), you've got good taste
I'm not surprised that your son plays LoLit's one of the biggest online games right now, and growing.
Too bad about BF3 thoughso it's not a recommended game from your side?
Ok, thanks for the infoBF2 had amazing gameplay and strategy. Then they made BFBC2 which had very good destruction but less strategy and then they made BF3 which is made for consoles and ported over to PCs; It has less destruction than BFBC2 and almost no strategy and certainly has none of the features that made BF2 so successful. Don't buy BF3!
Also BF3 uses ORIGIN to be able to play and ORIGIN is basically SPYWARE! EA Games now know everything you have installed into your PC! Stay clear from ORIGIN and BF3.
So what? Deism predicts that God will not show up in a lab too. I still wouldn't consider deism to be a form of "science" or "physics", just a "religion" that requires faith in the 'unseen' forever and ever like mainstream cosmology "religion".
No, they do not. They have observational evidence for redshift not for expansion or acceleration. They certainly have no observational evidence that "dark energy" did it, even *if* we assumed that redshift is related to acceleration.
They don't! That observation by Chen et all in the lab two years ago pretty much destroys, certainly undermines their "interpretation' of the redshift phenomenon.
That depends on what you mean by "out of line". Their original prediction was a 'slowing' universe. Dark energy was added to "fix" a failure in their theory, and yet 'dark energy' has never "accelerated' a single atom anywhere in any lab.
It's certainly "out of line" with empirical measurements of plasma redshift in the lab.
Pffft. The standard model is more of a 'religion' and less empirical and therefore less "testable" than anything I've proposed. Whatever it actually "predicted" just went up in smoke in the lab.
I actually posted it to the appropriate thread as well.
It heard that!What kind of a silly handwave is that?
I didn't misrepresent it, I simply noted that it's lack of empirical support (qualification) makes it a religion rather than a form of empirical physics.
Assuming that's true, that's also true of my empirical theory of God concept as well. There are a few features that do not have empirical support (yet).
Ya know....
If you're going to blame me for misrepresenting mainstream theory, the least you could do is acknowledge the correct meaning of the term "monotheism". There is no such thing as a "Muslim God" or a "Christian God" or a "Jewish God". We all agree there is but one God, and many "religions" that describe that one God. If you're asking me if I'm skeptical of the Christian religion, it depends on how you define the "Christian religion".
The best way I could explain my beliefs is to say that I love Jesus and I honor his teachings. He is my personal Lord and savior. At one point in my life I was even skeptical of his teachings, but after applying them to my life, not so much anymore. I still have no faith in YEC or concepts like 'book infallibility" (of any religion), or eternal torment. I still consider myself to be a (universalist) Christian, but like I said, it depends on how you define "Christianity".
If you expect me to put any faith in the concept, the core parts should all be reproducible in the lab. That's definitely true if you expect to compete with PC/EU theory over the long haul. EU's key "predictions' all show up in the lab, and none of it requires "faith in the unseen" in the lab. Even my concept of "God" kicks the empirical hell out of mainstream cosmological dogma.
True enough.
I suppose that's the core difference between having a position of strong atheism or theism, vs. having a weak atheistic stance. You're just afraid of commitment.
FYI, that's exactly how I got into discussions with astronomers.Careful now, it's a lifelong and frustrating process if you're trying to remove all ignorance from the entire human race.
I agree. It's better than most astronomy forums as well by the way. I actually have more freedom to discuss my whole range of beliefs and I'm unlikely to be banned for my cosmological heresy here.
One thing I've noticed about most of the folks that "lack belief' on this particular forum is that they are typically very adept at getting their points across without a lot of emotional baggage and without a lot of personal insults. I think that's an admirable quality. Unfortunately I have a few things to learn yet along those lines. I'm trying. I do appreciate the feedback, but you'll need to be a bit patient with me. I've still got some things to learn and bad habits can be really hard to break.
No one takes Tipler seriously.Frank J Tipler has a book called "the physics of immortality"
and on the preface states:
"The "omega point" is a beautiful pure physics construct, and it should not be sullied by calling it "God".
what do you think he means by this?
Pseudo-science is the most appropriate word to describe his work!Frank J Tipler has a book called "the physics of immortality"
and on the preface states:
"The "omega point" is a beautiful pure physics construct, and it should not be sullied by calling it "God".
what do you think he means by this?
Ignoring your usual obsession with labs - this statement is entirely false. Only a novice claims that current inflation theory violates general or special relativity.
When you actually study it in detail - there is absolutely no constraint on the expansion of space-time within relativity - the mathematics of this is always expressed in terms of comoving coordinates, as I think you probably know. Not sure why you're throwing in such a basic error and ill-formed phrases as 'objects made of mass' - when otherwise your points are somewhat less easily refuted without resorting to fairly advanced ideas.
Space can be warped compressed and stretched!
God-Energy confirmed:Space can be warped compressed and stretched!
Space and time are inseparable. it has been proven many times that spacetime is affected by relativity. Sorry but you are wrong: Time-Warping Occurs in Daily Life | Wired Science | Wired.comSpace doesn't do any magic expanding tricks in the lab, and you and I both know it. Spacetime can be "compressed and stretched", but space isn't even physically defined in GR in the first place! *What* exactly (physically) in "space" is even capable of 'expanding'?
"Distance" can increase as objects *move*, but space doesn't do any expansion tricks in the lab, not ever.
Space and time are inseparable. it has been proven many times that spacetime is affected by relativity. Sorry but you are wrong: Time-Warping Occurs in Daily Life | Wired Science | Wired.com
No one takes Tipler seriously.
I imagine these same people would think Gene Ray an idiot savant.I know several people who do, maybe in your circles they don't. Which is understandable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?