DevilSolution

Okay im looking for a word that represents a beginning in time, but not the creation of time itself just a pivotal point in time whereby everything after it is relative to it, such moments can be defined in terms of the big bang, the death of christ, the renaissance and many more. It could be defined as a moment in time whereby everything after it will be seen or judged by it, i think the word starts with a "C" but im not 100% sure. I dont think it necessarily has to be a HUGE part of time either, for example it could be used to describe the moment in time a good football player came to your club and your club became european champions because of it. So to me this isnt an important part of time because i dont watch football but to someone who follows football religiously it is the most important change in time to them. thanks in advance

how many idiots can we find on a science forum too argue that 0 = 1? /me looks around You dont have to disagree with an opinion for it to effect your thinking, infact its quite the opposite i think your trying to impose an opinion on someone who doesnt accept it by arguing, this is why arguing is bad. We as humans are curious by nature so no-one really needs anything forcing on them (this usually causes the opposed intention btw)..if there is some truth out there we will all unltimately find out our own form of it and we must accept that we do this everyday in our lives, we all accept some fundamental truth be it good or bad. also theres a difference between understanding something and agreeing.... XD

the opposite of love? that which is beyond good? ...

Skype works on alot of linux distro's, although there have been some issues recently it doesnt change the fact linux is the best base for educational purposes and thats for all science subjects not just computer science, the software center and tight community makes learning alot easier.....i would presume windows got picked due to the general knowledge levels of windows campared to linux. its just called manchester not united haha im not sure it matters what kernels good for 'hacking' if you dont know how to write your own code for networks you wont be able to exploit anything other than open ports if you do know how to write good networking code then anything with alot of networking features built in + alot of your specific programming lib's although these can be downloaded.

and UNITY comes up the rear

Cynical seems extreme, creativeness is not infinite of time but possibilities. Not even sure what that means but something cant come from nothing and something cant be nothing again it always exist's in some or form another, the rest probably lies in chemistry, maths and physics. Computers seem pretty limitless as far as creating thing's go but right now we seem to have physical constraints in one form another in (Z) being able to control our own existence thats to say 1) fate exist's and 2) you cant say your not going to die tomorrow or win the lottery(maybe i bought the ticket for you, its not an impossibility //ignore this if your get the bit before it) and 3) the boundaries havent been met yet, we are all still be part of some collective consciousness(unlucky) in which we can increase our own level of ability and overall knowledge of things that will expand the boundaries. Anyone know python? Rhetorical question btw does 0 = 1? (Z) {i changed it to in because on seemed contradictory to 1,2 and 3 //ive no idea what this means}

Really? we dont have to argue about anything, it simply establishes a religious base for which the implications can be endless ... Also im just insinuating you took the topic away from imagination and back to dogma, im rather interested with what humans would exist as without the imagination?, perhaps what we all imagine god to be (minus arguing with each other about our own beliefs) and then finally the only point im actually trying to make and that ive already made is that the imagination is the only way of reaching god, weather your hindu, christian, muslim or agnostic respectively all your gods are the same...and ive just proved it

my imagination > your DOGMA!

I think you might have just said it all? EDIT: haha i love the way people given you negative votes without any explanation's, theres atleast 2 of them too =D great scientists i see....? in other words dont vote negative unless your willing to explain yourself....

well obviously its a very philosophical concept which has 2 sides but i would certainly argue that subjectively if you couldnt imagine the ocean (which automatically means youve never seen it) then yes ovcourse it doesnt exist to you, how could it? it doesnt mean in reality it doesnt exist it just means in your comprehension and understanding of the world that the ocean is not present. someone can explain what the ocean is too you but then you dont understand what the ocean is you understand what someone told you what the ocean is. you pretty much just answered my question with a different version of my question, if you read my first post tho and understand the above statement then what implication does it have on the imagination? so for example if someone has never seen the ocean but has had a good briefing on what it is but obviously doesnt have any first hand experience of it then is their imagination not creating the ocean for them?

yeh exactly, like if we couldnt imagine wouldnt we all just be logical machines? Like this computer im using to communicate with you right now, it manipulates logic but only for our purpose it doesnt have a self built purpose therefore if we didnt have an imagination we would be the same as this machine but the fact we do means that imagination itself is like the cross over from logic to consciousness? hmmmm

The conspiracy game sounds fun, so skype and the .net framework = sky.net, be afraid be very afraid

Logic tells me that when we start with one we end with one, im not sure i have the intellectual capacity to understand everything you just told me so im not going to pretend i did however i did grasp some of the concepts you showed and would be greatly interested in taking it one step at a time to get a better understanding as what you just said seems to require some pre-requisites. Oh about the particles and planets moving faster than light , you sure about that?> "Your thinking can be splitted in three parts: your belief of a Big Crunch, your speculations of Dark Energy and your misunderstanding of escape velocity." - Agreed

england it is then? =D

your question in vague, on what level do you wish to program? ovcourse you can program computers

With respect, the point i was trying to make and the question i asked was; could god exist without the imagination. To everyone other than Athena; I was trying to show how two people with totally contradicting ideologies about god actually believe and use the same process of reaching god, the imagination, right~? Athena, i agree 100%, i think what your saying about love/hate is that perhaps they are one and the same relative to who you ask? and also we have places in our selves we can look into to feel love and hate, posts as you refer to them such as god for the love and maybe bad experiences or understanding's of shortcoming for the hate? things we struggle in our day to day lives to understand and change? EDIT: did anybody watch 6.00 to 7.50 of that video?

weight is it because we know what causes the acceleration of the car? in comparison to not knowing what accelerates the universe? hence the name

i have been reading over some religious idea's covered by most theologians and it became self evident i dont belong to any particular religion, however i do have spirituality and self awareness, im willing to overlook all the fallacy's of religion to see what is meant behind the metaphors and such but i dont believe in any particular being as god, this brings me to my conundrum, imagination, what is it?, where did it come from?, is it the force that made us evolve or is it just the force that helps us prosper once were alive? after all these questions are answered i think every believer in god needs to ask himself or herself a single question to fully overstand the existence of their personal god, WOULD GOD EXIST IF YOU COULDN'T IMAGINE IT? we all have biases of what we imagine god to be, for example i quite enjoy imaging god as all the laws we must abide, the laws of physics, laws of nature and laws we created ourself via politics, all these laws are very real and we live our lives by them (or most of us, those who aren't in prison) this is what i IMAGINE god to be, someone else however, perhaps a Christian may idealise god in his/her imagination as a HUGE white bearded male in which our universe makes up a small sub-atomic particle of HIS beard (or lungs or guts or heart) all that being said you are still only imagining god and if imagining god makes god real then what does that make our imagination? any idea's on the matter would be greatly appreciated as im trying to come to terms with the human imagination (or life on the whole) thanks for reading guys... worth watching if you understand what im saying from 6:00 to 7:50 is very interesting

Answer = Time. ill have a go, if the universe is still expanding at an increased rate due to dark energy (or the fact its burning up all its energy in gasses with heat transfer etc) then im fairly sure what goes up will come back down no matter how fast you throw it or what fuels it (unless perceptual inflation exist's) then gravity will keep slowly slowing the universe down, its all just relative to time. this is my thinking, escape velocity is relative to the time you calculate the equation so right now the escape velocity exists but is only accountable to that moment in time and isnt really an escape velocity at all, although it accounts for the force of gravity being 0 it doesnt account for the time that gravity will effect the forces of the original propulsion (and increased expansion) so gravity is always at play even if its shadowed by the illusion of escape velocity and accelerated expansion (the reason its speeding up can be explained in physics but it really cant just keep speeding up (unless you think planets will travel faster than light)) its also contradictory to things including multi-verses like string theory, if on the multi-verse level things dont cycle on the level below then they will just be frozen or they will inflate to nothingness like e=mc^2 without a counterbalancing equation to sum up it is my belief that theoretical physics is very contradictory(false) but very fun to comprehend & really the answer is simple and always has been. gravity is a very weak force relatively in the universe at the moment (well not on our scale of things) but for the whole picture its a rather feeble force compared with the speed of expansion however when you account for the universe as a whole it is the only counter balance force to the energy which increases propulsion and the original burst from the singularity, gravity and time will work together to cause the big crunch and the only possible way i see for it not too is via perceptual inflation or if gravity and dark energy work as poles on magnets also i have a few questions to verify my own understanding in the big freeze is all energy turned into mass and frozen? is all this mass just free falling in space so to speak? then is it physicists understanding that gravity is frozen too? in a vacuum if we have an object with the net value of 1 and an object with the value of 100, given the right propulsion the value of 1 hits the escape velocity, whats your opinion of the outcome? given only them 2 objects exist within the vacuum is dark energy just a weird name for acceleration? do we use dark energy to calculate the mass of the universe as a force? is there any other reasons that the big crunch doesnt exist, like my example of perceptual inflation or gravity and dark energy being poles of a magnet?

Yeh windows is generally more user friendly too, i use gnome on ubuntu and have used KDE on slackware but theres no definate winner in my books, its good that you can use different GUI's per-say on linux though, definitely has more features than windows GUI even if its not quite as user friendly as an OS

let the artist's paint the picture not the robots trying to put pixels in-formation if someone wants some of the bits of in-formation to help paint the picture then; yes end the conversation, half a picture always looks best?

why do you make me do this? OKAY so escape velocity is a variable and it depends on the current gravity and kinetic , i KNOW the universe is expanding i trust the scientists but if the escape velocity is a variable then relative to TIME the PROPULSION may be increasing now but given TIME the outcome is still inevitable, just becasue on our own scale of things we see it speeding up doesnt necessarily mean it wont ever slow down, it simply means that right now certain matter is going outward faster than gravity can pull it back but you seem to forget gravity will ALWAYS be in motion and therefore the original propulsion will come to its natural conclusion especially given the big freeze, i think i understand how your looking at it, like the current escape velocity states the gravity has no force on an object moving at an increased rate but as i will fail to persuade you it doesnt matter because its a variable and increased inflation will have its limit, dont trust me but think for yourselves. im not denying the facts im denying the theory, as i stated the picture isnt full so their conclusions arent right, mine might not be either im simply trying to increase my understanding of the subject from which i probably wont be moved from

im not denying the expansion of the universe just the inevitable outcome of it. so to clarify the general belief of most physicists is that dark energy will cause the big freeze and when the big freeze happens gravity no longer exists? or just heat transfer? Ill rephrase, no matter how hard you throw it EVEN IF IT FUELS ITSELF WITH DARK ENERGY, the fuel will run out and it will fall back..... to be honest i obviously have my own bias, i was just curious as to why scientists believe what they do, its almost ammo. i also believe in science as a means to an end, but were far from that end so its interesting to see what people believe without the full picture.