Mike Smith Cosmos

Interesting, Tonight [16th Aug 2013 ] the Royal Albert Hall in London were the promenade concerts. It was absolutely full with Hundreds , upon hundreds of cultured individuals Listening to an electrifying performance of two of J.S. Bach Oratorios , sung by the Monteverdi Choir. The production of such major works appreciated by so many cultured individuals must indicate something. It was a riveting,electrifying performance of a riveting , inspirational work by Bach. [ He inspired by whatever he was inspired by. ] That was a STRAW POLL if ever there was one

Nature has utilized these " tubes of opportunity " to perform the functions of life, both as survival and usefulness to the environment. 1. Carbon dioxide absorbtion , oxygen generation. lumber production , transpiration of water , redistribution of minerals. 2. Grass ingesting , food generation, mineral redistribution ,oxygen taken in , carbon dioxide expelled. Tubes keep contaminants out and function in. Very early on In the Human Embryo ,one of the central things developed is THE NEURAL TUBE From Wikipedia Among other things we go on to become a set of walking, talking, thinking TUBES

As the proposal by Zorro is that the aggregate of all proven scientific phenomenon has been 'allowed/given access to' , for the purposes of explanations [ if that is what he meant ] as some form of illumination of "Creations" or a "Creation procedure ", , Should it not be proved or disproved as with the normal science issues. Namely by discussion of the points proposed. Evidence provided . This is what is proposed, as opposed to a particular religion /religious forum . We are after all NOT discussing a religion but the very STUFF that science itself is investigating and trying to get to the bottom of . Surely it was in open Forum that Darwin had to put his points across, Why not make this proposal as open as Darwin's bombshell.. If the proposal is deemed right then it is in the right place, If it is deemed wrong then , well, as they say " God Help somebody ."

Perhaps its time this whole thing was brought to a head. It sounds like most people worldwide are running around like' headless chicken' , on this subject. Of God, Darwin, Higher Power, Theism, Atheism, Don't Know .

Are you saying , if you keep it to " higher power " , its 83% . If that is the case then we are down to definitions . That is interesting ?

O.K. fair enough. I just think going down the route of thinking Maths is capable of describing everything, or even As Mike Tegmark proposes everything is maths., is a wrong turn. Pushing the power of maths Way too far. I was trying to suggest that one of its many shortfalls was its Mainly Based on Number, and number tends to be discrete, [ one number here and one over there ] no matter how small a distance over there can be. I am lost in a fog of manifolds, R to the n , and x.>z>y 's now . I have been led up a maths alley and mugged ! Mike

Well if you propose ,that the universe can be entirely mapped at every coordinate point . But not just mapped described in every possible mathematical way by functions of every sort you are back to the philosophers like La Place, Decart, Berkley who went into the ideas of knowing and predicting everything that will happen. This , I thought we had all moved on from , as being just nonsense ?

What the heck is R [math]\mathbb{R}^{n}[/math]. is that R to the power n if so what is R Mike

Then surely you would end up like physics with something like Plank's constant. Very very very small but still NOT continuous? and then if you went out 3 dimensional ( x,y,z) although the fragment would be minutely small , nonetheless it would still be " particular" if that is a word ? Mike

I have come across this NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC VIDEO which gives a good visualisation as to what happened in those very early PRE CAMBRIAN times ,when the Earth was being formed. THE STORY OF EARTH PART 1 to 6 by National Geographic Link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4pt0fFn_a4 Obviously nobody knows exactly how it happened . But this has brought a better picture for me . Mike

The secret is , to go looking for these " tubes of opportunity ". Then experience the various opportunities the universe has to offer.

Zorro Comments Above :- It's difficult to read through the many pages of this thread, and his thread posts on ( theistic scientists by unit 3 +) without tripping over all the Ack, Ack, fire. But this opening statement by Zorro seems to be suggesting Science is a tool for exploring and explaining the Universe in a way that enables an appreciation of God. I asked ( on one of Zorro 's threads ,) how many scientists believed in a higher power , which seems to be unresolved. I think there is a " Kings suit of clothes" phenomenon at work here. While a number of prominent scientists speak openly of their detestation of anything to do with a god ( Like Richard Dawkins, and a few others) Who wants to stand up and say " look , the king has got no clothes on" . I propose that IF a prominent Scientist Said openly that they had a change of heart say with good reason , a lot of other scientists would jump ship fairly quickly. [ perhaps the percentages would become clearer and include the 'behind the scenes' believers in a higher power ] I have read a few books lately , by well known science names , where respected scientists are HINTING at something for and with due reasons . Just hinting, but with arguable reasons. Perhaps their reasoning and hints are a pre-cursor to something else, BUT ..may be not. Mike

A trivial example of a simple Tube of opportunity is illustrated below :- In Italy while contemplating these things, sitting in a chair in the garden, looking at the view, my eye was drawn to this young olive tree. There appeared to be a Green golf ball hanging in the tree. When I went to touch it to examine it, it was not there. When I returned to my chair it was there. The only way I could find it was to follow the image in my head to the tree small step by small step. It was amazing . At one unique angle , all the Olive leaves retreated into the body of the tree to offer no obstruction to the light. Serendipity a fortunate coincidence Coincidence of so many things , opened up a [Trivial] tube of opportunity. Just at that 'place' and 'time' .

Is this something you made up , or is it a great maths gem ? It sounds like the Frog jumping half way out of the center of a pond, over and over, and never getting out ever !

I don't think they had any choice in the matter before Darwin came along , or it would be like them saying they had no father ! They might not have liked the established hierarcy of the church , but I think most of them would still believe in God . As I said what alternative was there at that time ? Now , everybody has all sorts of choices ! Possibly many of them , not very good choices !

How do you see DARK MATTER and DARK ENERGY fitting in to all this ? What proportion of scientists do you think are currently Theistic Scientists worldwide ( even if secretly , not openly) ? 1 % 5 % 10 % 25 % 50 % ? .

Degenerate matter no more electrons . Just Neutrons

Do you believe they ( " some scientists, or science as a composite institution " ) are converging on or diverging from mike

Are you suggesting that every point (x,y,z) in three dimensional space is covered by a maths coordinate,? And every possible state of that point is covered by maths. ? And every point continuous (x,y,z) can 'do' anything in any time. ? Wow ! I find that hard to believe. ! Sort of wishful ( mathematical ) thinking. ! ? Is this what this Manifold is ? [ that appears in all of ajb's papers ] ? It sounds more freaky than anything I have ever mooted here !

To me what you have said, sounds a bit like mathematical gobble-de-goop. I appreciate it is most likely not to a real mathematical person. I presume it means all values of x,y, and z in a three dimensional space can be packed sufficiently densely as to be viewed solid. if necessary (maybe not ). Or all parts of 3 D space can be identified and described math wise. In what ever way maths is able to describe. However I might be hopelessly off beam. Perhaps you can put me right as to what it does mean ? Mike

Yes, but I am sure it was you that told me Neutron Stars were degraded matter. Namely the atoms had been pushed by gravity so flat that the electron shells were 'degraded' and pushed close to the nucleus. So any wiggling about they were doing in orbitals , would be concentrated near to the nucleus. [ Bit like, when you are catching a fly or bee behind a piece of paper on a window pane . The buzzing gets more intense. frequency goes up a bit ]

The above Quote to do with the inside of Neutron Stars : Clara Moskowitz June 27, 2013 This begs investigation , and thinking about . Mike ,Are there not hints at this in post #60 , or is this just ,whatever ? Post #60 Yes but we are not talking about one gyroscope , we are talking big numbers like your 'bizzillionth' ses . Anyway they are probably not gyroscopes [but acting in some respects like gyroscopes in partial arcs adding up to total mass], but clouds of buzzyness , all doing partial arcs in different directions . Nonetheless having angular momentum. Edited by Mike Smith Cosmos, 30 May 2013 - 07:21 PM. 0 Quote MultiQuote Does this not look like pasta, inside the Atom . ? - { Italian Job ! Bunny rabbits ! I am off for a coffee some where ! } -

I have thought long and hard about this 'dance' of Physics and Maths . maths is based on number , number infers discrete items, Physics IN PART ONLY ( Particle Physics Only ) How these numbers relate and dance is the outworking of Mathematics. It has been said that the physical ( hence Physics), World, is the outworking of Mathematics , which is, among others, Mike Tegmarks' ideas. However that might have some weight, if THAT is all, that makes up the Cosmos. Even then Maths is by no means yet a completely mapped discipline . ie there could be much more maths yet to be developed or discovered ) BUT, the Cosmos contains much more than Particles, and their interplay. Through discussion, argument , observation , experiment and otherwise , I have come to the conclusion that the Cosmos contains much more than Particles that dance the way of mathematics. As well as particles there are whole things [not divided into numbers or arrangements of particles ] , Fields, probabilities based phenomenon , non causal based events, biological development, emergent phenomenon , and the list can go on. And although maths can attempt a shadow of fields, probabilities ,etc it [maths] is by then, no longer absolute , proof giving, a predictive driving, shaping force. No . ! Mike

Helpers

Am I to take it that ONLY orbital velocity can increase the incoming space craft with kinetic energy increase . OR is the angular velocity of the body ( planet, sun, Galaxy ) able to give increase of velocity so as to increase kinetic energy ? How does the spacecraft know the [planet,sun, galaxy,cluster] is moving, rotating beneath it, [moving relative to what].? Is the Gravitational Field .sweeping along the space craft as the sling to give the space craft its added kinetic energy. Its existing velocity outside the dotted blue line is added to and lost ,on the way in and out, is that correct ? What is happening to the gravitational field as it SPINS , does it assist, neutral or subtract from velocity increase ? What effect does the Gravity of the spinning Milky way Galaxy, have on the space craft ? Does it give it an extra boost if it is spinning in the direction of the space craft as it goes behind [ the planet, sun , or body ] ?