Scotty99

Let me guess, elon musk? Maybe neil degrasse tyson? I know you think these people are smart, they have done some things and i actually like both of them as people. The thing is the truth does not take sides, gotta trust your gut on things like this.

Jack, what initially spiked your attention about the possiblity of a simulated universe in the first place? I mean, you obviously pondered the idea for a minute in order to have come to the conclusion you have.

Not necessarily suggesting that, is it not possible dark matter is more easily accounted for in a non relativistic universe? I honestly dont know the answer to this, just spit balling.

Well, a different theory Relativity is absolute genius but its goal is not to describe reality, merely possibilities. I think the theory that explains reality also takes cares of dark matter.

These things happen when you only have half the answers. BTW this editor is being weird today, its only saving half the stuff i type lol.

Sure, why not? I don't think what i stated in this thread is far away from what many scientists believe. I should have stated that in a different way, its a consequence of space only when looked at from the wrong angle. Dark matter is likely more easily explained with a different theory. I have been trying to keep up with news from the LHC since its inception, as far as i understand finding/producing dark matter has been at the forefront that entire time. I would not have had as much interest in the project otherwise.

In my estimation, there is one universe. The thing is, as our current understanding sits multiple universe's actually makes more sense in regards to what we witness in the cosmos. The important thing to understand is how much of our understanding from the past did we get right.

Well when i say good scientist i am merely projecting, if i can come to the conclusion that dark matter is merely a consequence of space surely others have as well. No one disagrees with the statement "dark matter exists" but as time goes on i would like to believe that many would agree with "dark matter is incalculable". I of course read the article, but to me the most important part of the LHC from its founding moment was to either find or produce dark matter. LHC still has a purpose but i feel the importance of whats left has taken my interest down quite a few notches.

I think the good scientists at this point recognize dark matter is merely an incalculable property of space, but i cant blame people for trying. I used to be super enthusiastic about the LHC but now i dont feel we are going to get any real answers from it.

Just curious, what did you take from the article strange? Personally i have always felt we are looking at the current problems in the cosmos from the wrong angle, instead of trying to prove dark matter exists we should be looking at alternative theories.

Why?

Not trying to hijack anything? I asked a simple question that you claimed experiments have answered, yet to see a response.

Please strange link me an experiment that expressly states we not only move in the universe but one that shows the 24 hour rotation around the sun. Ill save you some time, it does not exist.

Relativity is a genius theory, but remember strange it only describes possibilities of reality.

If there is an afterlife it would have to be a whole different thing. No memories to compare/contrast etc, it just couldnt work that way.

What is this unscientifc/paranormal stuff you keep talking about?

Still not adding up. I have only linked two videos, one from just a random guy (with no agenda that i can tell, just a guy that is into science) and one from max tegmark describing what we see in the CMB. Where exactly does faith come into this if not directed at me?

Mordred you are misunderstanding, lets clear things up. First the quote in question is this: Right here you are setting me up as a crackpot/religious person, EVEN when i have max tegmark at my side. I dont disagree that there are likely two sides of the story in this CMB debate, but "faith" is not something that is clouding my judgement. In fact how i got to where i am includes things like logic, deductive reasoning and occams razor, not religious text....

And another guy trying to do the same thing mordred was, childish is actually the best term i can come with to describe this type of posting. As an aside i am 37 and the only time ive stepped foot inside of a church had to do with a wedding or a funeral. My family was not religious in the slightest, but glad you seem to know me so well.

How am i judging anyone, if anything the reverse is happening here. There is nothing wrong with editing a thread (how could you even insinuate that is the issue?) its that you added the word "agenda" in your crusade to devalue this entire thread because i made the comment that i have not ruled out a creator in trying to understand our universe.

And you just edited your post to include the word "agenda". My goodness lol, is that really how most scientists are?

There you go again lol. You arent even aware you are doing it.

Thanks for clearing that up for me random poster on random internet forum, guess ill ignore my brain from now on. Why didnt i think of this earlier, could have saved me so much time. Its incredibly childish, you are attempting to devalue my comments because i havent wrote off the idea of a creator when trying to understand this place we call the universe. Maybe just maybe we need a creator to connect the dots. Im actually glad you brought up evolution. To try and give you an idea of how my brain works never once have i thought evolution and a creator were incompatible ideas, not even as a kid.

Why would you make a comment like that, seems rather childish. Many well respected scientists think in a similar manner as myself, are they disallowed to have a discussion because we leave open the chance for a creator in trying to understand the universe?