Appolinaria

"The term "Hubble volume" is also frequently (but mistakenly) used as a synonym for the observable universe; the latter is larger than the Hubble volume." A galaxy beyond the threshold of our Hubble volume does not defy observation. Yeah, I'm using wikipedia... but I can also get the sources... "The word observable used in this sense does not depend on whether modern technology actually permits detection of radiation from an object in this region (or indeed on whether there is any radiation to detect). It simply indicates that it is possible in principle for light or other signals from the object to reach an observer on Earth." Anything in our observable universe, by principle, can be measured... regardless if we currently have the ability to do so. But supposedly there is an unobservable portion, right? As our universe expands, things get further from each other and increase in speed. Anything going faster than the speed of light in unobservable (because light/other signals could never reach an observer on earth) Anyway, if this is true, there are tons of unobservable things out there.... things we can never use science to explain. Wouldn't this classify as supernatural (Attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.) since it contradicts special relativity? (anything going faster than the speed of light) and also by the fact that we will NEVER be able to observe it? Therefore, our argument of anything unobservable being supernatural is correct.

well isnt the fact that our universe expands an observation? just because we dont have the technology to measure what it contains doesnt mean its unobservable in any way.

doesnt the inference of a galaxy further than what we can observe rely on prior knowledge? therefore the basis of an inference requires science. i can say unobservable deep space contains porcupines. but they exist in our reality. so do galaxies. try to predict something in deep space that isnt measurable here, you cant do it... thats what anything supernatural is.

the limited requires the unlimited in order to be observed. if it is observable, it has limits.. a boundary juxtaposed against the unlimited and unobservable. so what is this unobservable, supernatural force? is it god? i dont know... but it allows science to exist.

seems like the supernatural explains the possibility, science explains reality of course it should be taken seriously.. science makes anything supernatural obsolete. they involve each other

my mom had lyme's for so long, bells palsy, the whole thing... she had to send her blood to a lab in california (across the country) and then she finally tested positive... she struggled with a ton of health problems, and some doctors just thought she was crazy. only now do I know the extent of how sick she was. so don't give up. it could be something harder to identify. maybe there's a lab that will send you some kind of kit to do a scraping, and then they will look at it... remember that whatever's causing this might not show up on the tape.

try looking up demodex brevis, not sure if im right but i think they feed off of sebaceous glands and are itchy... especially at night. they usually occur on the face/eyebrows but can occur anywhere. once again im not educated in the medical field but i know youre desperate, so probably any suggestion is useful

science: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. not everything is explained by a system... like our universe in it's entirety. it just came into existence... there is no force acting upon it entirely, because that would imply something outside of it.... so is that where the supernatural comes in? if so, then the supernatural created, harbors, and allows all science. that means it even surpasses it in importance. if we cannot scientifically prove something, it is supernatural. mass attracts to mass because of gravity. it is a constant effect that is explained by the force of gravity. so if science is constant, what is the force behind it? you must use science to explain science for the supernatural to not exist. there must be a system behind something that is measurable. if our universe is measurable, what is the system behind it? if there is no system behind the constants of our universe, it breaks the definition of science. therefore the force behind it is supernatural. if science claims it exists, but there are no other universes, it contradicts itself.

or do they mutually explain each other?

first God created the possibility of light, then the sun to define it… the sun creates photons and all of their possible paths, but we define it.

Yes, but in my opinion, the "light" and photons from the sun are two different things. God first created light and darkness... then on the fourth day he created the sun and stars. So I think there is a difference between the word "light" in the Bible, and what we call light. The Bible says the sun and stars are given to Earth so we can identify the difference between the eternal light & darkness... so a photon would be a way of identifying this "light" god created on the first day.. I have been thinking about this so much lately. I really think there is a super particle that permeates everything and brings consciousness to it all... a super observer.... solidifying our existence as opposed to a state of infinite possibilities. It travels faster than the speed of light, allowing it to observe from the future, creating the present. What if the radiation from the sun created photons, emitting from it at the speed of light. but I think there is some kind of particle, traveling faster than the speed of light... also a product of radiation...

I was trying to speculate on whether sexual attraction is developed through environment & experience, not just predisposition.... if there was an experiment where a child was brought up in the most healthy environment possible while being unaware of an opposite sex, and sexual attraction is innate... where would it manifest ? just curious...

What about object sexuality?! Lol. They're physically normal but have an attraction solely to inanimate objects. If a perfectly healthy child was raised in an environment without the opposite sex, and no knowledge of an opposite sex existing, would they direct their sexuality toward objects? Or people of the same sex? Or just never develop any sexual orientation at all?

Sorry, didn't mean to frustrate you. When you make a new thread, it is not attached to this one. It's completely separate. The only way I found it was by going through the "Today's Posts" section at the top of this page. It's right at the top next to the little orange square. I would recommend putting a picture of the slide in this thread, so people can directly see it. You can do that by clicking "edit" underneath your original post at the top, and pasting the link to the slide like you did in the other thread. Hopefully I'm not just confusing you more. Anyway, good luck. Hope you figure out what it is

Skin problems are terrible. but don't worry, you will get it fixed. the fact that your blood work is normal is good. did any of those things slightly help more than the others? did any of them have an affect, even if it was extremely minute? yes, I see the slide, but I am not a doctor so it won't help me help you. sorry

candida overgrowth? your diet sounds good though... however i think once an overgrowth develops, a diet wont fix it. if there's a candida overgrowth in your intestines, and in your skin, it could be affecting your whole body... try seeing if acidophilus tablets in your diet will help. sugar is hidden in a lot of things which feeds candida. maybe try tea tree oil topically? you can dilute it and apply it to your skin. it supposedly is anti fungal and anti bacterial.... if you think it's parasitic, get some over the counter permethrin cream... it could also be viral, though. regardless, until you find out what it is, make sure you drink a lot of water, as it helps flush things out of your body and keep it from being stagnant. make sure your environment is clean, wear a lot of cotton so your skin can breath, and shower frequently... exfoliate.... use a cleanser with salicylic acid and maybe a benzoyl peroxide cream to see if it helps....

That's true. What if you are asexual, and have no attraction to anyone. Will your body still need sexual release based on hormones?

Pretty interesting to me personally. In christian esoteric books I have read, it states that there are numerous kingdoms. Mineral, plant, animal, human. The previous one is a level below in evolution. But as we are humans, we were animals before that, with humans who are now angels influencing us. There is an ongoing spiral, forever. It says the animal kingdom is one entity manifesting into all animals, which is why they all look similar (dog to dog) and why they don't really have independent, creative thought. Humans are their own entity manifesting into one body, and we have our own creative identity, which is why for example, two identical twins can appear to look different & act differently- this shows they're two different entities. Everything follows a specific pattern, like a spiral, each ring on the spiral is a little different than the previous one. Each time a new group graduates to the next level, so does the one before it... through mineral, plant, animal, human, etc... and with every revolution, the group is more advanced. The angels that were humans when we were animals guide us, but when we evolve to angels we will be more advanced than them in that stage. I've also read in these same books that when we purify our thoughts completely, our creative function will be perfected, and essentially we will be able to create our own universe... something along the lines with what you were saying. It also means that our current universe is just the thought & creative result of one superior entity.

Left-field question. If complete sexual gratification is received from oneself, without the opposite sex... can you lose all motivation to interact sexually with others, if you never identified sex as involving someone else? Can you view sexual release simply as another bodily function as opposed to an act that takes two to tango? Basically, if you don't rely on the opposite sex for gratification, does anything happen psychologically? Do you not equate sexual satisfaction with another person?

Well, I would say about 99% of the things that have been established or disproven in the world of science are absolutely groundbreaking news to me...

Haha yes, I was keyword searching based on a bizarre concoction of theories I've acquired and came across that.