Graviphoton

If any unified theory is to come about, i think we will find that ultimately, quantum physics runs the show. We already know, if we track our calculations back, in theory, all we can deal with is subatomic phenomenon.

The rules of physics, mooey, dispite what you may say, runs the whole show. This means ''all things'' within the univese need to abide by quantum rules. This is one of the first rules you learn in physics, is that everything obeys its laws. If we are talking about macroscopic objects, then they themselves are built up of quantum rules that gives rise to what we see. Everything is run by quantum rules, or nothing would exist, not even macroscopic laws, which has been pointed out, it just made of smaller averages. But consciousness can have a metaphysical and scientific interpretation. Best to keep both sides away from conflict. But you say it mooey, as if it is strange if something can have a metaphysical and scientific interpretation simultaneously. Why should it be? Some things can be described many ways.

Consiousness can be metaphysical, depending on exactly how you are studying it. But science and physics has a place as well. For instance, physics job is to explain how things work in this universe, since anything contained within this universe needs to abide by quantum rules. This means, that quantum events are giving rise to consciousness, and it our job to figure out what exactly we are talking about. That's a quantum job, i argue.

Or less complex, you might want to consider just learning the basics of curved spacetime, and how curvature is totally equivalant to gravity and distortions, and even matter. Then learn about the Inverse Square Law for radiation, which must include gravitational radiation, then perhaps the gravitationally warped masses of planets. Here's something to start you off... a few words on Newtons theory... the best place to start... Newton developed his work from Kepler’s Law which describes the motions of planets. By working off Kepler’s work, he found that the planetary paths where nearly circular and they were used to describe the force causing the motion. Kepler’s three laws state: 1. All planets follow elliptical trajectories with the sun in central frame 2. A line between the sun and a planet sweep out equally 3. The ratio of the cube of the radius to the square of the period of revolution is the same for all planets. This gives us [math]k=R^{3}/T^{2}[/math] He found that the force of attraction of the sun for a planet is equal to the product of mass and centripetal acceleration. [math]F_{SP}=mPaP=mP(4π^{2}R/T^{2})[/math] Because of this, Newton started to postulate an inverse-square law of attraction. When he expressed the form of the famous inverse-law, he made it form Kepler’s third law and used [math]R[/math] and m only; [math]k=R^{3}/T^{2}[/math] and stated [math]T^{2}=R^{3}/k[/math] So the force is usually given as; [math]F_{SPOH}=mP(4π^{2}2R/R^{3}/k)=mP(4π^{2}k/R^{2})[/math] Newton introduced [math]G[/math] into his equations, and the value of the Gravitational Constant has been found to be something like [math]6.67 x 10^{-11}[/math] . Mathematically, the value of [math]G[/math] was stated as, [math]F=Gm1m2/R^{2}[/math] One interesting thing is that no one actually knows how Newton arrived at value of the Gravitational Constant. Newton also showed that force is related to mass and distance. If we consider for a moment the projectile motion of a thing, we use the equations: [math]x=v_{OH}t[/math] and [math]y=v_{OV}t-½gt^{²}[/math] They are called ‘’parametric equations,’’ and they have a parameter given as t. Solving the parameter in the first equation, we should get [math]tx/v_{OH}[/math]. Substituting t in the other equation and we get a parabolic equation; [math]y=v_{OV}(x/v_{OH})-½g(x/v_{OH})^{²}= v_{OH}/v_{OV} x-½g(x/v_{OH})^{²}=v_{OH}/v_{OV} x-g/2v_{OH}^{²} x^{²}[/math] The force of gravity is what is known as the net force on a projectile. The path of a projectile is then called the parabola. Gravity is then said to be acting on the thing along the path it takes. Even though Newton knew of the equations that described free fall, none of his equations ever required them, until Einstein’s theory of relativity came around. Suppose that M was the mass of the earth and m is the mass of a building, like the legendary Leaning Tower of Pisa, the motion given by the famous [math]F=Ma[/math] equation, must abide by the rules of gravitation, [math]F=GMm/r^{²}[/math] If m under the law of gravitation is the same value as the m under the motion of gravity, then we say, [math]ma=GMm/r^{²}[/math] Which allows for m to be cancelled out completely, leaving, [math]a=GM/r^{²}[/math] Where a is acceleration.

Well thar's because we need a quantum aether. This aether has planck scales as coordinates, and from the very small regions from which energy bubbles from, turns out to spontaneously appear. But one answer is that they ''pop'' into existence from a quantum aether. Recently, there was some speculation as to whether dark energy might have something to do with this stuff we call quantum aether.

Well you see, that's the point. It is found that zero-point energy in the vacuum should cause a cosmological value. But it doesn't. Physicists are still asking what exactly cancels this out. But either way, what i said was true.

Simply, we don't know how to harvest the energy of zero point field. We can get a very very small amount of negative mass from the Casimir Effect, but even that is too small amount to obtain. Just remember what zero-point energy is. Its a giant lake of energy, embedded into all space and all time. It pressure is infinite to some regards, since as soon as you remove some of the energy, the space you removed it from is instantly filled again. Who knows if we will make zero point energy batteries, but it seems unlikely right now. We simply don't have the energy required to get any noticable amount of zero-point energy.

Consider i am not moving the goal post though. I am only highlighting the obvious: that the pillar of my codes: 37 x 7 39 x 7 Don'trely on any tranlastion of the Hebrew letters. They only depend on numerically placed values. There's quite a difference, moo.

Anyway, i'll continue now. Afterall, that's not all i had to say obviously. The Implications of Copenhagen and Consciousness The collapse of the wave function is not directly proportional to consciousness at all, but instead consciousness is one of another known method of collapsing a quantum system. The discovery of Decoherence in 1994 has shown that there is nothing particularily unique about the collapse and the observer. One thing Copenhagen states is that the Observer is somehow outside the laws of physics. The collapse of the wave function can be seen as an event where consciousness and the sudden reduction have no connection at all par the measurement taken. Somehow, the observer is outside the effects it evidently causes. In the parallel universe model, the observer upon measurement splits off with the universe into as many possibilities as there was probability. The observer turns out to be entangled within the frame of the universe. But here's the thing. I don't believe an infinite amount of universes could exist, and even if there was, there is no way to experimentally test this theory, now with the restriction of time travel. So, i tend to fall back to some alternative model, such as the Transactional Interpretation. I believe the mind is in fact a very good model next to the TI. The full extent of Dr. Cramers theory can suggest that quantum information can move through spacetime at superluminal speeds. An echo wave [math]<E(t,2)|[/math]moving back from the future, and an offer wave [math]|O(t,1)>[/math], and ''handshaking together'', as Cramer terms it, or more technically he calls it, the transaction, occurs. Because the transaction is the same as a collapse of the wave function, parallel universe is obsolete, since it cannot entertain a collapse theory. ... It has been said that consciousness, and the realms of emotions and thoughts do not exist in space. But there has been some suggestions that it does exist in time. In fact, some physicists have gone as far to say that perhaps the mind is time somehow. If mind is invariant with time, it could mean a few things. It may not necesserily mean that time and consciousness are interdependant, but may just mean that consciousness can only exist in a realm of time. Mystical? Maybe. But it does make predictions as protoscience, rather than a psuedoscience. They are more commonly known as spacetime theories, and they where first devised by Arthur Eddington. If this is true, then somehow, the fabric of consciousness rests neatly on the fabric of time. Somehow, things we may think of, and do, or say, emotions and lucidity was written or stored into the very fabric of spacetime. Afterall, relativity strongly predicts that any usage of time must indicate space as well. I have had some thought on this over the years, and have come to the conclusion that the mind is certainly a time dimension. It fits all the characteristics of a dimension, and that which is of time. Consciousness for us, can mean a sense of self, the notion of ''I'' and the value of being, but it is encapsulated by a psychological arrow of time. No surprise Arthur Eddington also coined that phrase. But it's not the same time, and there is good arguement for this. The Supracharasmatic Nucleus determines our sense of time. Whilst this is the medical sense of explaining time, and the experience of time, there is however the question to why consciousness and awareness in whole has a forward directionality, and why does this directionality effectively break down in unconscious states. It may seem rather obvious that the latter is a result of the fact a human is no longer conscious, so this effects the sense of what ''flow'' is. But suffice to say, we still don't know why there is any flow at all in any direction. Why doesn't it oscillate in a sinusoidal movement? Is it just a matter of consciousness tuning into existence, analogously like how we tune into a station on our radio? I'll leave it there for now. Next i'll talk about how i think the TI helps explain consciousness.

In fact, i'm arguing about the wrong thing entirely. I must have been stoned when i made that last post. We are dealing with the original Hebrew text. The translation of the text is irrelevant, because we don'r really make any convert from Hebrew to English, but in fact dealing with the actual Hebrew letters. Surely, whatever they mean, they are written the same in any old version of Genesis 1:1. If it wasn't, i am sure i would have heard about it, and even heard of it being used as an arguement. So really, whatever the words mean, isn't really the point, but rather the point is we are numerically reducing Hebrew letter to make total values... and this process cannot be flawed, since we don't need to translate anything.

''Shows the utter arbitrary'ism of the entire method. Frankly, it's laughable. I can promise you I can pick a different number, twist it back-to-font and place it on its side and get the result I'm aiming for too.'' It may seem laughable, even perhaps simple geometrical child games, and i would have agreed, if it weren't for some additional information you are lacking in your conlusions of the subject, which isn't your fault. The number 2701, has a ''perfect triangle inset''. The outer triangles are in fact equal to 666, three of them. The inset triangle has a value of 666 + 37. Note again that 37 is a core number in both my investigations and Dr. Jenkins. But the value 66+37=703... the inset triangle is composed of 703 units, the same value as the expression found in Genesis 1:1 as ''and the Earth.'' Vernon has translated, (and in my opinion quite rightly) postulated a message within the construct of three 666 satelites surrounding ''and the earth,'' reflects the demonic domain of earth. It is already stated in the Bible that the center of the Earth was Hell. So, whilst in the end it may seem like a play with shapes, it really has a bit of structure about it contained within the details, an what makes it important, geometrically. Your hard worked analysis though, is indicating that the translation of Hebrew is more difficult than what was first concieved. I fear though you may have missed the point. Even though your work is interesting, most of it tacles the validity of numerically translating words, rather than the validity of Genesis 1:1. This wasn't what i really was asking. Since you have done it anyway, i'll just say it's a very good aguement, but is Genesis 1:1 translated correctly or not? This is really what was on question? ''Shemesh Jehova = 666 (They don't give a resource for that, I have to tell you this isn't very widely used in the bible.. too bad they didn't give resources for contextual check. Finding arbitrary made-up terms that fit the numerical target is really not a proof of anything but an imaginative writer)'' And what if so? In my years of understanding gematria, there are plenty of strange 666 connections with ''spiritual events'' and ''characters''. The very fact Shemech Jehovah gives 666, is a triad pattern. Jesus Christ in Greek gematria equals 888. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. There's simply not enough evidence to suggest either way. It's a ''make your own opinion on that'' situation. The very fact Genesis 1:1 is riddled with triad numbers and repitious combinations is just tantalizing facts. ''I'm sorry, but I am NOT going to count the number of letters and the division of letters. I'll grant you that one, though I'd expect the holy bible to be more accurate than 5 digits. The rest of the page also speaks of some very weird mathematical manipulations to get to whatever they aimed at. It all seems VERY arbitrary and quite imaginative. I have no will, time or desire to count words in those chapters or to calculate the entire chapter's Gimatriya value, so I'm going to stop here. This was a very preliminary analysis, but it should give you some food for thought. And it was all I could do between exams.'' I'm not sure about the results of e and pi. I'm a bit shakey on the error of 11%, and for whatever reason a writer would have to encode pi. So i have very little comment on it. The Video by the way, is talking about equi-distant letter counting, codes which i think are errenous and false. Plus, they have nothing to do with the codes i present.

huh?

No, wormholes are a subject of physics. Its not psuedoscience at all.

That life as we know it, takes on biological forms. And only.

String Theory gives me a headache, so i tend to stay away from it.

Well, let's not be ignorant of the facts, while we wait for a revelation shall we? Let's all agree at least that it seems highly unlikely an intelligent psyche can inhabit a computer.

Maybe i should have stated how electrolytes work, and how signals are actually sent about the body in under a second, or perhaps that only fleshy cells have been able to spark independant mobile matter. And that technology isn't biological. It can perform similar tasks but that is all. It doesn't have the necessery array of the building blocks of life, namely hydrogen, nigtrogen, oxygen and carbon. Its seems that life can only spark from these four elements under the right conditions, and using a catalysc, such as lightning. But otherwise, no, its more than speculation on my behalf. Artificial Intelligence is impossible.

Because whatever form of life we have ever dealt with, is of biological sense, not silicon-based. We know that a silicon-based life would be highly improbable, and no computer system as of yet has displayed sentient qualities. I think any form of life must stay within the bounds of cells and genetic make-up. Yes, there is a theory stating that consciousness is only built up on electrical signals, but consciosness in a wire? I really don't see how it is possible.

''Why can't "Boolean automatons" ever hope to, well, hope, dream, enjoy music'' Because its a computer? Cold hardware, and not a biological system?

So, you think its only a matter of time?

You know, i don't think we will ever discover a grand unfied theory of physics. I simply don't believe the universe will allow us to simplify all of its complexities so simply.

I think the nature of quantum theory points to possible CTC behaviour; but as ajb point out, Hawking can place a limit on the predictions of such time-travelling possibilities. I ask, even if we where to create a time machine... how do we know the human being can endure such a trip?

Just testing something [tex]x^{2}[/tex] Mmmm... the Latex system here is different to what i have been used to

Bascule The brain is the most powerful computer in the world. It may be slow in calculations, unlike a computer, but the brain is still extremely powerful, and can operate tasks unlike a computer. It has the property of self reflection, for instance. This ability to self-reflect allows us to broaden the ability to comute emotions, thoughts and mindless ponderings. A computer in no way shapes up to this. And i very much doubt a computer can. (and yeh... that was a typing mistake) ''The brain is therefore, the control system of the brain. '' It was meant to say 'the brain is therefore the control system of the mind'

That's ok. We have lives outside of here