Strange

Interesting question. A couple of thoughts... Although all paths lead to the singularity, they may not all have the same length - and therefore not the same gravitational force. Inside the singularity, space-time is so curved that the singularity is in your future rather than ahead of you. Which is why it can't be avoided. Maybe tidal forces are only present outside the event horizon. I don't know.

Coincidence? We all experience odd things. Some of us assume there must be some mysterious explanation and others assume it is probably just mundane coincidence. Coincidences are not as unlikely as most people think. For example, For example, how many people do you think you need to have in a room for it to be likely that two people share a birthday? 365? 200? 100? ... I have experienced lots of things like this you mentioned. I once bumped into someone I knew, completely unexpectedly, in a city on the other side of the world. What are the chances of that. It must be about 7 billion to 1, based on the number of people in the world. No! It must be even less likely based on the number of cities, or even streets in the world: trillions to one!! Well, maybe not. It was a street popular with tourists, in a city popular with tourists at the height of tourist season. So that reduces the odds enormously. And the person I met was just someone I knew from a shop I went to occasionally. So rather than being 1 in 7 billion; it could have been any one of maybe a thousand people that I know (or have known) in passing. So maybe the odds were only millions to one. But there were several million people in that city in the time. So it was probably reasonable odds that a coincidence like that would happen to one of them. It just happened to be me. And there are 7 billion people in the world. So it is almost certain that everyday someone would experience a coincidence like that. What is wrong with you? Why would it be frightening? It would be very exciting if some mysterious new thing were discovered. Why do some people assume that if anyone disagrees with them, they must be cared or angry. Bizarre. And, no. I don't have any "need to be right". I have been wrong so often, I am quite used to it by now. And being told you are wrong is a great way to learn. I'm sure you can find plenty of threads on this forum where I have been corrected. I will usually thank the person and/or give them an up-vote. I don't deny the experiences. But we may disagree about the likelihood of different possible explanations. You seem willing to jump to the conclusion that it is something for which there is no real evidence, whereas I am more likely to think it is down to ordinary well-understood probabilities and psychological processes (see also: apophenia, confirmation bias, selective memory, false memory, etc. etc.)

Yep. That's what contrails do. It is completely normal. Right. So you will believe me when I say the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary. That is always a possibility but, when dealing with accounts of ghosts, UFOs, psychic experiences, etc., it would be pretty much the last option on my list (just before "it is a real ghost/UFO/psychic experience").

In other words you are going to cherry-pick conclusions you like and reject ones you don't. And ignore the evidence. No surprises there then.

1. "The model's key success lay in explaining the Rydberg formula for the spectral emission lines of atomic hydrogen" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model 2. It wasn't unscientific. Why do you claim it was? Stop doing that.

There is no evidence that negative mass exists. There is no evidence that negative energy exists. I don't know much about Weber's theory, but it appears to be wrong and so not a good place to start from. Citation needed. This kind of paradox is one of the reasons to believe that negative mass (or energy) does not exist. You should find science to support your position, not science fiction. Energy has nothing to do with it. It still can't move faster than the speed of light.

All scientific theories are questioned, suspected, criticised, challenged and tested all the time. That is how science progresses. And when new evidence is found, then theories are updated or even abandoned.

Then why did you present it as evidence?

It didn't disagree with evidence at the time.

It depends. It isn't the subject that makes an idea scientific on non-scientific. It is the method. Of course they do. And then they test it, scientifically. https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/weighing-implications-negative-mass-antimatter

I thought it was a given (for the purposes of this thread). It seems a bit pointless to discuss "Universal Consciousness" if consciousness is thought not to exist. But, actually, I have seen some interesting arguments that consciousness is just an illusion. Because we have evidence for that and not the alternative. Why would there be a purpose? That seems to assume some sort of Plan. There may be a survival advantage. Or it may be something that arises when brains reach a certain level of complexity. We don't know which other animals are self-aware so it is hard to know when or why it arose. Nature doesn't work that way. There is no Plan. There does not have to be a reason.

If that were done, and the rules rigorously enforced, the "Scientific Speculations" forum would be empty and the "Wild" one would have all the crap that currently gets posted. Not at all. It may or may not be correct. But many scientific ideas contradict current theories. That is how science progresses.

1. How do you know the black hole is rotating? 2. How do you know this is unique? What power? Which part of the accretion disk? Why do you think that magnetic fields in plasmas are ignored by science? What do you think plasma physicists do? Why is the very next bit of your post a quotation about magnetic fields in plasmas if these are ignored by science? Can you give one reason why we should not consider this to be trolling? A plasma is a fluid. So, no. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)#Fluid_model (That page also has a section on the magnetic fields that are being "ignored by science".) Citation needed. Citation needed. Citation needed. As the paper is about plasma in the accretion disk of a supermassive black hole, then I would guess the answer is yes. But please feel free to show the errors in their mathematics. And stop posting random wild guesses about things you don't understand. As you have no interest/ability in learning science, why not go and annoy people on a gardening forum.

To answer that, we would have to see the nature of the speculation. Without mathematics, how is it scientific?

I'm afraid I disagree. Your wording was very unclear I really wasn't sure I had guessed correctly.

No. And no. The whole purpose of the scientific method is to get away from human errors like that. It has been proved. So, yes, people did feel the need to prove it. There is evidence of consciousness arising from brain function (from neurological studies). There is zero evidence for consciousness existing with the brain. I will go with the balance of evidence.

And all I got was repeated insults. It is the BIG BUTTON below a post that is labelled QUOTE. There seems to be a direct correlation, observed over many years, between the inability to use the quote function and the amount of nonsense someone posts.

I have read it. It is obviously myth. Copied from an earlier Babylonian story (the Epic of Gilgamesh). I will leave others to debunk those (they have all come here before). I will just ask: if these really were clear statements of fact (rather than interpretations added after the facts were discovered) then why did it take people so long to discover them, independently of the bible? And if your god wanted people to have this information, why didn't she state it more clearly? Why didn't she explicitly say that everything is made of atoms (and atoms of protons and electrons)? Where does she explain dark matter? This is not true.

Then produce some evidence.

That is one of the easiest to answer. Why do you think it is a problem? Did it say that on some Creationist website you saw? So you admit that there are multiple, plausible, possibilities for some of the steps required. That is not "zero". We have two models for gravity; that doesn't mean we have no theory of gravity. Stop it. Just repeating something doesn't make it true. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html You are the one that believes a mythical character did it all. I have already admitted that we don't have all the answers. As anyone with the slightest knowledge of science would know, that doesn't prove that your god did it.

I don't think your ignorance of nature is evidence for god. Why do you believe it is true, then? Bizarre. Your understanding, maybe.

You mean contrail. There is no such thing as a "chem trail". It is an invention of conspiracy theorists. Right. Which is why science never discovers anything new or overthrows old theories. And no one ever wins a Nobel Prize.

That is because it is a mathematical theory that makes precise and quantifiably testable predictions.

So what? "I don't know" does not prove that your god did it. Not true.

Speculations, in the context of this forum, is defined in the rules. Pseudo-speculations seems to be a word/concept that the OP has invented. By coincidence, I just came across this interesting article on outsiders and science: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whose-scientific-theories-are-permitted-into-the-mainstream/2017/03/17/a715293c-0725-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html (I guess this thread should really be in the Feedback section.) Stuff in the Trash Can seems to be mainly incoherent nonsense (either posted as a joke or perhaps by someone with some sort of problem) or way off-topic arguments/insults.