Quantum vaccume fluctuations

[r6r6]

Gem---Well, R6 is basically saying that there is space

Non-occupied space is not an animal, It is rational, logical common sense conclusion. Rare find around here or other forums, in this regard

beyond the material universe

Occupied space. You would think were taling to 5 year olds since so many have difficulty saying the words 'occupied space' much less grasping such a simple concept. Go figure. Mental blockage is my best guess.

which the universe is expanding into (considering he accepts the material universe is expanding), but that's pure conjecture,

Most scientist observe our finite, occupied space Universe expanding. That is commonly accept belief since Hubble. You and Shivani need to get with program of last 100 years of cosmology.

which is fine in a purely mathematical sense.

Huh? Mathematical Sense? I never stated that even. I tend toward simple every day examples for over 20 years now. Ex say that a basket ball our finite,

occupied space

Universe and it is expanding. SO what is outside the basket ball Universe.


And I repeat for those so called adults who have mental blockages to rational, logical common sense, the basketball as finite occupied space Universe is embraced by macro-infinite noon-occupied space.


Not an animal as Shivani seems to think.

I like mucking about with pure conjecture as well (though my own musings are 100% consistent geometrically).

Mucking around is good label for what you have been doing with me.



"Mucking around" = irrational, illogical lack of common sense evasion/divergence/wiggle-out of

Apart from such mental fun and games, there is physics, which is about real measured things. We have theoretical physics to generate hypotheses, and create physical experiments to test them.

Yeah except you have no physics, or even rational logical common sense that adds too or invalidates even on statement in my cosmic outline.


You do have ego that blocks your ability to have rational, logical common sense disscussion, that arrives at rational, logical common sense conclusions, that, are based on observed physics.


Go figure and get back to me when others want to address the outline with rational, logical common sense. Not likely around here.




In topology there are only 3 possible curvatures, negative (bottom image), positive (this is enclosed but the image only shows half of a sphere), and flat (flat is defined as 0 curvature).


They basically tested the topology of the universe by measuring a triangle from a you-beaut telescope to two points on the cosmic background radiation (which is basically the edge of the observable universe). Then, applying the magic of trigonometry to the lengths of the triangle's sides, they found the internal angles add up to 180 deg. Therefore the topology is flat.


All of Gems flat, positive negative graphs --been around for 50 years or more--- are irrelevant to what is stated in my cosmic Outline.


Again, it it is just ways for Gem to avoid/evade/diverge from truths, facts and rational, logical common sense conclusions presented in my Cosmic Outline.


Sad waste of time talking to ego as it is a bit talkng to a drunk. Yo never get through the rational, logical common sense brain.


Then some of these drunks when not drunk perfectly logical, aplogectic and cant recall 90% of their actions.

[7luminaries]

Gem and Shivani, hello there!
Very interesting little thread here -- I had left off here when no one responded to my earlier post but that's fine, LOL -- the conversation here w/r6 was probably just getting started then.

Also quite interesting, from a conceptual level of cosmology in the broadest, metaphysical sense, I have come down to having a very similar discussion with r6 on this thread, but from a bit of a different starting point...

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...112104&page=24

My posts start around p19 and there is about 1 per page as we've conversed and I've been in process of determining where some of the broadest conceptual differences lay between us.

I'm still having the conversation...the last few posts are more around theoretical physics (high-level) from my part, and discussing many of these exact points. You may want to drop in or anyway have a peek.

Peace & blessings
7L

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Gem and Shivani, hello there!
Very interesting little thread here 7L

Ahh two of you both seem to like 5D so that conversation should go very well, maybe. I hope it does.


Will it be broadcast in the 3rd dimension? Joking

[Gem]

Originally Posted by r6r6r

Non-occupied space is not an animal, It is rational, logical common sense conclusion. Rare find around here or other forums, in this regard



Occupied space. You would think were taling to 5 year olds since so many have difficulty saying the words 'occupied space' much less grasping such a simple concept. Go figure. Mental blockage is my best guess.



Most scientist observe our finite, occupied space Universe expanding. That is commonly accept belief since Hubble. You and Shivani need to get with program of last 100 years of cosmology.

Well the recent cosmology predicts a flat universe, and when you asked for scientists who say so I posted the Degrasse Tyson video.

Huh? Mathematical Sense? I never stated that even. I tend toward simple every day examples for over 20 years now. Ex say that a basket ball our finite, Universe and it is expanding. SO what is outside the basket ball Universe.

That's what I said to shivani about how you were explaining it, but the measurements don't support a positive curvature of of space time (which would be a basketball or other enclosed smooth surface. I could post other videos from other physicists such as Krauss on this as well.

And I repeat for those so called adults who have mental blockages to rational, logical common sense, the basketball as finite occupied space Universe is embraced by macro-infinite noon-occupied space.


Not an animal as Shivani seems to think.





Mucking around is good label for what you have been doing with me.



"Mucking around" = irrational, illogical lack of common sense evasion/divergence/wiggle-out of




Yeah except you have no physics, or even rational logical common sense that adds too or invalidates even on statement in my cosmic outline.

I'm actually explaining the astrophysics according to astrophysicists.

You do have ego that blocks your ability to have rational, logical common sense disscussion, that arrives at rational, logical common sense conclusions, that, are based on observed physics.


Go figure and get back to me when others want to address the outline with rational, logical common sense. Not likely around here.




In topology there are only 3 possible curvatures, negative (bottom image), positive (this is enclosed but the image only shows half of a sphere), and flat (flat is defined as 0 curvature).


They basically tested the topology of the universe by measuring a triangle from a you-beaut telescope to two points on the cosmic background radiation (which is basically the edge of the observable universe). Then, applying the magic of trigonometry to the lengths of the triangle's sides, they found the internal angles add up to 180 deg. Therefore the topology is flat.


All of Gems flat, positive negative graphs --been around for 50 years or more--- are irrelevant to what is stated in my cosmic Outline.

Basically, what the astrophysicists are telling us contradicts what you are saying.

Again, it it is just ways for Gem to avoid/evade/diverge from truths, facts and rational, logical common sense conclusions presented in my Cosmic Outline.

You can double check anything I say with the latest science.

Sad waste of time talking to ego as it is a bit talkng to a drunk. Yo never get through the rational, logical common sense brain.


Then some of these drunks when not drunk perfectly logical, aplogectic and cant recall 90% of their actions.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

I don't mean to sidetrack any existing conversation as it's quite interesting. This can just be another entry on the thread that fits into the greater whole.

Just wanted to mention that there's been some interesting theoretical work done in the past several years (which is probably in process of being tested further) regarding quantum equivalents of antimatter. Anti-quantum particles which determine the combination of positions and the variations in "history" that occur to bring a particle to any position.

Yes all the fundamental particles have an anti-particle pair.

Meaning, the quantum reality is probabilistic and also in superposition across (if not infinite then at least) a great many "paths".

Yes, but infinity doesn't mean 'anywhere'. I think this is well demonstrated in fractal geometry... in the following video simple rules are applied to a random paradigm and this leads to a highly ordered outcome because the introduced rules preclude some outcomes while allowing for others, and as you will see, some space can be occupied while other spaces simply cannot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=droTYSmSGHg


This is related to your three points A,B and C.


The particle wave function also works this way. In the double split experiment, for example, the detector screen shows a wave interference pattern, but there are regions of the screen which never 'light up'. Hence, while infinite paths are possible, the outcomes aren't. Just as in the triangle, any path is possible, but end locations are confined. However, the fractal zoom is still infinite... (mind blown).

And the thinking is that the reason quanta are at points A, B, and C at this point on the journey but at A and C only there and B and C only there (earlier points) is due to the tangled and non-linear path of superposition and outcomes at the point of measurement -- thought to perhaps result from the presence of anti-quanta particles at those points on the journey where the quanta are not present.

Why we cannot exist (at the quantum level) everywhere at once speaks to something regarding limits of emanation into materiality, I suppose (LOL). Meaning, some of those outcomes may have to collapse (via conscious choice and all other contributing or foundational factors) into others in order for any probabilities to manifest without challenge from anti-quanta. Or however they term or designate that force.

Peace & blessings
7L

Yes, that does capture the weird quantum world, and I think there are 3 main interpretations, and a couple of lesser interpretations, of the 'probability wave' nature of fundamental particles.


1) Copenhagen interpretation: The wave function collapses to become point-like on 'observation'.


2) Bohmian interpretation: The particle is 'always there' and is driven or moved by its wave.


3) Many worlds or mulitverse: All the possibilities exist but a single observation witnesses but one of these outcomes.



4) No interpretation. The math works. Period. (Shut up and calculate).



5) Transactional interpretation: Posits a wider view including the past and the future (I don't understand this one very well)


The commonality of the interpretations is, the mathematical constructs all allude to something immeasurable (called 'sub-empirical'), as implied by the 'measurement problem'. Founders of the the theory such as Planck, Bohr and Heisenberg thought that the very nature of the universe has a fundamental subjectivity... not simply an objective material which is observed, but also something inherently subjective.

[r6r6]

Gem---That's what I said to shivani about how you were explaining it, but the measurements don't support a positive curvature of of space time (which would be a basketball or other enclosed smooth surface. I could post other videos from other physicists such as Krauss on this as well.

Again you attempting to confuse appples with oranges and bannanas ergo you like to turn everthing I tell you into confusing muck. You like to much around and not play the game fairly.




Your flat, postive, negative has nothing to do with shape of Universe. You refuse to acknowledge and want to play muck games were you slop at least three differrent kinds of postive and negative as if there all the same.


There not. I have no time for misleading/mischaractorizing mind-games gem. You not interested in a truths beyond you very narrow mind-set of positive and negative. Sad

Basically, what the astrophysicists are telling us contradicts what you are saying.

Yeah and your playing misleading mind-games because of your ego.


That is not what is in question. What is your sincerity to grasp any other kinds of positive and negative that I have put to you.


You mistconstrue and mischaractorize them every time I do so. Unfair mind-games that I dont have time or desire to play with you.


When you want to place your ego to the side and actually address the other kinds of postive and negative Ive been talking about, then go back and start there.


You have not done so to date and have no intentions to do so in future. Sad lack of intellectual integrity.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by r6r6r

Again you attempting to confuse appples with oranges and bannanas ergo you like to turn everthing I tell you into confusing muck. You like to much around and not play the game fairly.




Your flat, postive, negative has nothing to do with shape of Universe. You refuse to acknowledge and want to play muck games were you slop at least three differrent kinds of postive and negative as if there all the same.


There not. I have no time for misleading/mischaractorizing mind-games gem. You not interested in a truths beyond you very narrow mind-set of positive and negative. Sad





Yeah and your playing misleading mind-games because of your ego.


That is not what is in question. What is your sincerity to grasp any other kinds of positive and negative that I have put to you.


You mistconstrue and mischaractorize them every time I do so. Unfair mind-games that I dont have time or desire to play with you.


When you want to place your ego to the side and actually address the other kinds of postive and negative Ive been talking about, then go back and start there.


You have not done so to date and have no intentions to do so in future. Sad lack of intellectual integrity.

I understand what you are saying even though that only really involves agreeing to definitions of terms (which you have changed now anyway), and there are problems such a torus not having negative curvature, the declaration of a finite occupied space, and other things which simply are not correct. I point out the holes in the theory in a reasonable way, and you start hurling insults which I simply overlook. I have assessed it isn't worth my while.

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Gem

I understand what you are saying even though that only really involves agreeing to definitions of terms (which you have changed now anyway), and there are problems such a torus not having negative curvature, the declaration of a finite occupied space, and other things which simply are not correct. I point out the holes in the theory in a reasonable way, and you start hurling insults which I simply overlook. I have assessed it isn't worth my while.

Sorry Gem, your lacking sincerity in having a rational, logical common sense disscussion, with me. I cannot continue to play your mind-games of skewing/twisting my comments as stated and their concepts as intended.



Good luck with 7L and your shared love of 5D.

[Imzadi]

Originally Posted by Gem

I understand what you are saying even though that only really involves agreeing to definitions of terms (which you have changed now anyway), and there are problems such a torus not having negative curvature, the declaration of a finite occupied space, and other things which simply are not correct. I point out the holes in the theory in a reasonable way, and you start hurling insults which I simply overlook. I have assessed it isn't worth my while.

Being as I am not well versed in quantum mechanics, I could not follow much of what you, 7L, Shivani, and R6 are discussing. However, what I do see is someone who is behaving belligerently while insulting and belittling others. I see this sort of bullying behavior in other threads as well and I think your final assessment is accurate. You time would be better spent elsewhere with people that are capable of having a respectful and productive dialogue. Cultivating patience is a wonderful practice, but time is too precious to waste.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Imzadi

Being as I am not well versed in quantum mechanics, I could not follow much of what you, 7L, Shivani, and R6 are discussing. However, what I do see is someone who is behaving belligerently while insulting and belittling others. I see this sort of bullying behavior in other threads as well and I think your final assessment is accurate. You time would be better spent elsewhere with people that are capable of having a respectful and productive dialogue. Cultivating patience is a wonderful practice, but time is too precious to waste.

Recently they're coming at me en masse from all angles wherever I go, but it's good practice for me to remain stable and balanced regardless of what I'm subjected to.