SimonFunnell

Well if I am claiming to have realised Einstiens dream would that not imply, by implication, that I have a model?

Are you suggesting I do not have a model?

No, I do not know what a cellular automata is. I am just saying random things that pop into my head for no apparent reason.

Why do keep saying I need a model?

Well would you like me to substantiate it with evidence and argument thus proving without a shadow of a doubt that I have indeed realised Einstein's dream?

I have been called a crack pot straight up: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/96825-the-real-genius-of-einstien/?p=934265 I have also been attacked as a creationist, when I am not.

Well with the utmost respect, that is just simply your own personal philosophy. Actually it is not your own personal philosophy, it was a philosophy that was sold to you by some authority figure and that you brought into.

I have repeatedly attempted to engage in sincere and civil discourse with people on this forum only to be met with vile, vulgar attitudes from cocky, arrogant brainiacs that think they know it all. Now I respect peoples intelligence, I do, but the lack of wisdom is shocking. I have stated I have realised Einstein's dream of a theory of everything, namely the universe is a kind of cellular automata. Now I assume you are arrogantly wanting me to 'prove' it to you with the divine language of nature, the mathematics you worship, would I be right?

Well as I understand it, Einstein had come up with the theory of relativity which worked but he wasn't happy with it, it didn't feel right so he abandoned it in favour of other ideas but he realised that it revealed enough of the mystery without revealing to much so much so to advance human understanding of the universe in such a way that they would make progress while he worked on the two problems with his theory: Namely that, while having a complete mathematical model of the universe, when he looked at the laws they seemed to everywhere yet no where, I mean they are constantly coming into and out of being as if by magic. That cant be right, God doesn't roll dice, the universe can't be run on magic, there has to be some sort of logic behind it all, some sort of reason for how such magic might occur. The second problem was decay, stars are decaying, their energy was spiralling outwards and there was no mechanism for the dispersing energy to reconstitute into a star, the system only went in one direction, it could not go backwards and forwards at the same, it was either one way or the other, it could not possibly move in both directions at the same time. Now, on relativity, its a red herring. What are variable units of time about exactly? You can't have variable units, units are defined by virtue of the fact they are all the same, that is self evident logic. So variable units of time are not units at all, they are something else entirely. Consequently, how did he manage to get away with this? Well he surrounded the mathematics with deep, rich, profound philosophical game play so as to convince some scientists that, you know the ones, people like Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins who actually think science doesn't need philosophy, that variable units of time where possible despite giving rise to things such as time travel which is an absurd idea considering the sublime architecture of the universe. They are very intelligent but not very wise, their philosophy is really poor and they make terrible role models. And the big bang, developed with his priest friend, was to try and inspire scientists to think about the problem of how something can out of nothing. Anyway, what do I know, I have no idea what is going on.

Yes there is, the book of the life, the mad, beautiful, brilliant universe.

Ok, I have realised Einstein's dream of a theory, the universe wasn't created mysteriously and magically out of nothing, that is complete nonsense, there is no logic behind that. The universe is a kind of spatially infinite and eternal cellular automata.

We do, except he only shared it with the most wisest of people because while he was a brilliant mathematician his real passion was philosophy.

I am an extremely well known person in spiritual circles conversing with some of the worlds most elite, diligent, enlightened religious scholars and I was told a very interesting story about Einstein. The field of physics and astronomy are currently hoping to realise, a some point in time, Einstein's dream of a theory of everything. Well I have been told that he did in fact have a theory of everything, that is a complete and logically coherent mathematical description of all the forces in the universe uniting the macrocosm with the microcosm under a very simple philosophical framework. Would you like to hear more about this story?

I will achieve my dream, consider the following:

Ok, well let me introduce myself, my name is Simon Funnell, you can read my resume here: http://www.synthesisacademy.org/organisation.html I am currently launching a political party to unite the whole of the UK in preparation for the Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic games. https://www.facebook.com/TheProvidentParty I plan on being Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Of Great Britain as well as establishing a small university dedicated to martial arts here in busy and beautiful Birmingham, the heart of the country. I have a simple dream, it is to see every child on the planet with food in their stomachs, knowledge in their minds and courage in their hearts. And I am deadly serious when I say that, I mean what I say. Would you like to kindly introduce yourselves please? Thank you.

Sorry, do you think I am sort of troll?

I notice a lot of atheists are always insisting we religious people study your wacky science. Another thing I have noticed is that because atheists have never studied religion, they are basically ignorant of its science. Discuss.

God, I have been reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis It is littered with the word create. Ok, lets go with emerge. I will think about this more and get back you.

I am not sure that is the right word, emerge seems to suggest something rising up out of something, which somehow paints the picture of cell composing itself on its own accord rather than a result of other factors bringing it into being.

Do you want to suggest another word?

So just to confirm, the universe has the power, or the capability, to create. It has creative power.

First off, before me suggesting anything, can we please find the correct language to use in talking about the matter. You know, sorry to go over it again, do you agree with the following statement: Did the universe at some point create life. If you don't agree, suggest other language and I will consider your proposal. Surely we can agree on something as simple as this?

If I am making things difficult, please accept my sincerest apologies. However, I too feel the same, that other people are making it very difficult. If we both feel this way, why don't we make it easy instead? Like before getting into subjective opinions which amongst us may differ, lets focus on the objective facts that we agree on. Once we have the objective facts agreed, we can then move onto subjective opinions, I really believe this would help.

The emergence of life?

I don't believe in creationism?