Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[DazzaD]

Bjarne...

I think it is possibly deceitful of you to start the given thread in the given forum and then slowly try to change the topic of conversation to one purely of philosophy and completely ignore any and all requests for mathematical and scientific rigour.

Were this to be in the other forums I would not have bothered to read it, personally I am not interested in the discussion of "what is reality" unless we are talking on a sound scientific basis, it simply is not my cup of tea at the moment.

Can I suggest we either return to the topic at hand, and you answer the mathematical questions I have put to you (e.g. show me a Hamiltonian) or you ask for the thread to be moved somewhere more appropriate.

Let me explain something about that video from a scientists viewpoint. You have cuts of scientists talking about real science and real maths, interspersed with other people talking of 'dreams' and woo-woo and philosophy.

It is dishonest and misrepresents what those scientists are saying. Completely out of context.

It is like taking clips of a speech by, say, Hitler et al proposing to exterminate a whole race of people, interlinking them in a clever way with some conversations with my mum, thus presenting my mum as an almighty saint come here to save and rescue everyone with peace and love.

It completely distorts the original speech and context and whats more tries to add some gravitas to what essentially is an argument completely devoid of mathematical or scientific 'evidence'.

Fine if you want to talk about it, but not here, and not by using dark energy as an example.

 

[Bjarne]

• Higgs boson = a scientific theory about the cause of mass.
• "Parallel Universe" = science fiction or your ignorance about the scientific theory of the multi-world interpretation of QM.
• Dark Matter = scientific theory.
• Dark Energy = scientific theory
• Big Bang = scientific theory

Halleluja
Halleluja

 

[Paul]

There was a time you let me know
What's really going on below,
Ah but now you never show it to me, do you?

Yeah but I remember, yeah when I moved in you,
And the holy dove, she was moving too,
Yes every single breath that we drew was Hallelujah.

 

[Bjarne]

Double .

 

[Reality Check]

Halleluja
Halleluja

Ignorance
Ignorance

If you cannot tell the difference between science and religion then you are posting in the wrong forum, Bjarne.

But then you do not know about so many things !

• Bjarne, Have you just found out that 2*2 = 4?
• Bjarne does not understand what the distance between 2 points is (r = the distance bwteen 2 3D points)!
• Bjarne, Can you count up to 4 (width, depth, height, time)?
• Bjarne demonstrates that he cannot count to 3

Bjarne, Given an equation, how do you determine the n in nD for it?
First asked 16th January 2012 (18 days and counting!)

Bjarne: Cite your 'loads of contradictions' for the Big Bang
First asked 21st October 2011 (105 days and counting!)

The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)

833 days and the answer to Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units) is still no !

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne...

I think it is possibly deceitful of you to start the given thread in the given forum and then slowly try to change the topic of conversation to one purely of philosophy and completely ignore any and all requests for mathematical and scientific rigour.

Were this to be in the other forums I would not have bothered to read it, personally I am not interested in the discussion of "what is reality" unless we are talking on a sound scientific basis, it simply is not my cup of tea at the moment.

Can I suggest we either return to the topic at hand, and you answer the mathematical questions I have put to you (e.g. show me a Hamiltonian) or you ask for the thread to be moved somewhere more appropriate.

Let me explain something about that video from a scientists viewpoint. You have cuts of scientists talking about real science and real maths, interspersed with other people talking of 'dreams' and woo-woo and philosophy.

It is dishonest and misrepresents what those scientists are saying. Completely out of context.

It is like taking clips of a speech by, say, Hitler et al proposing to exterminate a whole race of people, interlinking them in a clever way with some conversations with my mum, thus presenting my mum as an almighty saint come here to save and rescue everyone with peace and love.

It completely distorts the original speech and context and whats more tries to add some gravitas to what essentially is an argument completely devoid of mathematical or scientific 'evidence'.

Fine if you want to talk about it, but not here, and not by using dark energy as an example.

The problem is that you want to separate reality from the process of perception (consciousness) – It is impossible.

Because WHO must then observe reality? – A photon ? – A muon? - Or a cow?.
In all 3 cases you would end up with different realities and not a certain one.

My mission it not the to convince you about a certain religion, but only to get you to understand that reality is far from a concrete solid object out there.

Science force us to understand that reality is much more complicated as you are used to think, - for example ask how would reality be if no human or cow consciousness where here, - how would reality then look like?

We are part of the game, - it would be idiotic to deny that..
Take a look at this for example, and speculate a little what this video really tells you.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEzRdZGYNvA&feature=player_embedded


Also relativity in fact force us to continuing to wonder and ask question, - what is this for a strange reality we in fact live in? , - and off course included, - what and how is the process in our own head., - what is consciousness etc...

It would be stupid to deny 1000 years science, but also to ignore how humans on the planet have understood reality in thousands of years.

The fact that "correct reality" now often is parts of religious systems should not be a problem, - only few centuries ago, the church was ruling science.
So what ?
You are free to separate sense, isn’t you ?

Only (about) 30-40 years ago the pope said that he like the Bigbang theory (speculation) –probably because then everyone could see god have pushed the red button.
But this doesn’t make the BB to taboo, does it ?

When millions of people through history have a completely different understanding of reality, - we can off course shake our heads and think, this is absolutely crazy religion.

Remember a completely different way of understanding reality is not just part of 1 single nuts religion, but rather something that is common for many religions.

Think about the aborigines in Australia, - They too had such a strange understanding of reality.
I would not call this religion, but rather that they may have understood something that we first are beginning to learn now.
This understanding can be ten thousands of years old.

It could be glimpse of a deeper understanding.

As a truth scientist you must keep all possibilities open, - except if you prefer narrow minded single tracked omniscient arrogant solid concrete mass brainwashed “science”, - off course..

 

[Bjarne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDzR0aG3eGQ&feature=related

 

[Reality Check]

Nothing to do with the thread. Should be merged with Puzzling results from CERN

 

[Daylightstar]

...
Because WHO must then observe reality? – A photon ? – A muon? - Or a cow?. ...

No, your grandmother. She observes your burning irrationality from the

... unknown dimension, ...

and she cries.

When it rains, it is because she cries about what has become of you.

 

[Daylightstar]

...
It would be stupid to deny 1000 years science,
...
narrow minded single tracked omniscient arrogant solid concrete mass brainwashed “science”, - off course..

Yes yes, sure Bjarne.

 

[Paulhoff]

Have you guys ever thought about jumping into an active volcano?

Paul

 

[DazzaD]

Think about the aborigines in Australia, - They too had such a strange understanding of reality.
QUOTE]

But they couldnt predict the precession of Mercury to a precision of 0.2 arcseconds per century could they now?

 

[Bjarne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz9_98SAruM

This is a very nice video
It is not necessary to accept the religious part (part 3) , only the scientific parts.
Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism all claim the same; as you can see here. This video is made by an Islam follower, but it really doesn’t matter.
As mention you find the exact same claim in several religions, and also in Judaism, - Australian aborigines and many other historically records.
So either about the half of the Earth's population are insane, (and has always been so) or there is something about it.

 

[Daylightstar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz9_98SAruM

This video is made by an Islam follower, but it really doesn’t matter.

It really does matter, but you wouldn't understand that with the way your mind operates.
According to this set of videos, nothing is real, only allah is real.

With allah, according to part 3, being glorious and all, apparently allah has accomplished nothing real, again according to part 3.
If I were allah, I would strike the video's author with 10.000 beatings with a heavy stick for insulting and disbelieving the supposed glorious being who apparently is allah.

 

[DazzaD]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz9_98SAruM

This is a very nice video
It is not necessary to accept the religious part (part 3) , only the scientific parts.
Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism all claim the same; as you can see here. This video is made by an Islam follower, but it really doesn’t matter.
As mention you find the exact same claim in several religions, and also in Judaism
, - Australian aborigines and many other historically records.
So either about the half of the Earth's population are insane, (and has always been so) or there is something about it.

summary: we have eyes

what does this have to do with dark energy or any of the maths questions you are STILL avoiding?

 

[Bjarne]

It really does matter, but you wouldn't understand that with the way your mind operates.
According to this set of videos, nothing is real, only allah is real.

Let us first define "real"
To do this, let's think about the point of view Hans revealed.
He fully believed there is a certain reality "out there" and that observers in different space-time all (just) percept it different.

There is no doubt that Hans and many of you believe the universe is "out there"

THIS is an illusion, - but is only changing what is then reality.

The closest we can get is that the flow of EM waves, (+ sound waves etc) is ”real" .
But it is not what it seems to be.

A dream is also "real" until you wake, and discover it was not what you thought it was.

So when we discuss real and unreal, you must first define what you want to put into such expressions.
If you believe in a solid physical and certain reality is out there,- exactly this is the illusion.

There are several aspect of science that all leads to this conclution.

1. Brains science
2. Quantum physics.
3. Relativity.

Relativity mean (if you one day really should understand it) - that there are no certain reality “out there”.
Reality by your nose is completely different compared to you feed.

Time and all you see (the whole universe) is comparable different at nose level compared to feed level.

You cannot point anywhere and say - HERE is the true reality, except inside you head.
Try to follow this fact to its extreme, - and you will understand that space simply disappears.
The universe does not exist, seen from the perspective of a photon.
This is not fantasy, but a scientific fact. – So now you should understand how infinity can be nothing.

God have always been accused for being responsible for the creation.
Science is working in the same business, so off course religion and science must collide, this is inevitable.

Scientific you can (and must) follow creation / reality into your own head, - and at last ask what in hell is bombarding me with this flow of EM-waves…..so long all this is science.

First when you begins to wonder whether the beauty of a sunset, consciousness, intelligence, how smart a cow is created etc. etc. and whether all this is parts of a cosmic hidden intelligent, - first at this point good comes into the scene.. – So god most bombards you with waves according to many religions.
But you don't need to take any religious decision.
You can simply drop the last question, and still there are no certain realities “out there”.

From a scientific point of view you can easy justify that reality is a strange pulsating elastic something, - some places stretching and some places contracting, - and exactly these properties (and nothing else) is what reality is.

I have used the expression "space density" about gravity. - Maybe the expression; reality-density is more correct.

The inner cinema is either comparable "slow" and then the universal (inner) cinema screen comparable small, - or opposite.
This is what relativity is about.

There is no certain "universal inner cinema" - Only locals, and only inside you head.

This is science, - I fully understand that many open minded wonders how many different religions have come to the conclusion that the universe is inside of you.
This conclusion is in fact very similar to how we today scientific is force to understand what the naked properties of reality really are, and which certainly not mean that there is a certain reality out there.

 

[Bjarne]

summary: we have eyes
what does this have to do with dark energy or any of the maths questions you are STILL avoiding?

As I wrote in the last post
Maybe is "space-density" - "reality-density"
We are not speaking about a container you can measure the content of this or that, but maybe rather about the difference between different "reality-density".
We have already have the Lorentz equation, and relativity, - all it now is left is better to understand the strange universe we should know we are living in..
Dark Matter is a different cup of kinetic coffee. http://www.science27.com

 

[Paul]

Bjarne, you really do appear to be a special kind of idiot.

After spewing pseudo-philosophical balderdash about the imaginary nature of everything, you run turn around and start talking crap about science again.

Do you even have the faintest idea about what you are writing?

 

[Daylightstar]

Let us first define "real" ... which certainly not mean that there is a certain reality out there.

You clearly do not understand the relationship between the observation and the observed.

In this instance, you show that you "deny 1000 years science, but also to ignore how humans on the planet have understood reality in thousands of years":
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7988964&postcount=5506

... deny 1000 years science, but also to ignore how humans on the planet have understood reality in thousands of years. ...

According to your own words, this is "stupid":
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7988964&postcount=5506

... stupid ...

 

[Daylightstar]

summary: we have eyes

what does this have to do with dark energy or any of the maths questions you are STILL avoiding?

As I wrote in the last post
Maybe is "space-density" - "reality-density"
We are not speaking about a container you can measure the content of this or that, but maybe rather about the difference between different "reality-density".
We have already have the Lorentz equation, and relativity, - all it now is left is better to understand the strange universe we should know we are living in..
Dark Matter is a different cup of kinetic coffee. http://www.science27.com

^{Bolding by Daylightstar}
Oh look, a weasel running away from a math question, again.
Understanding the universe is clearly not for you, Bjarne.

An incoherent dream is all you can muster.