Does procreation offer proof;

[Bishadi]

Wouldn't it be a tragedy if Bishadi had made a genuine breakthrough in understanding entropy,

entropy does not make or break the day. (that is the drill-down to the founding cause as it applies to existing physics (benchmarks) of todays paradigm) (kind of stupid easy if you asked me as anyone can go read it all themselves in one publication by planck (1901) and from there is rolls thru most all knowledge (the benchmarks) of chemistry, physics (the existing paradigm))

nothing i am conveying is against the evolution of the knowledge that we all have used for over 150 yrs. (i can talk to you from here, because of it)

I am not against religions either except i am against people NOT giving themselves the confidence of being capable of understanding (all by themselves). I am against what people do with the ignorance blinding the overall scope of 'seeking truth.' ie.... religious leaders and even the people within educational foundations often styme the progression and innert capabilities of practitioners.

you have no idea how much i give up just to be here and share.

YOU are just as capable and the children will be far more capable as I could even imagine to be. (i have faith in 'we the people' (mankind, our species))

This thread is not for ME. (well i am kind of a sponge in that when i read something i had not observed, i do take it and dig a bit more (just to be fair) i learn every day)

but the idea was lost because he was incapable of explaining it to anyone,

all over the world some are exploring the comprehension but then right here, some are just having fun (Bad) with zero intent of doing anything for anyone unless they are gaining (were's the money( self interests)).


just be glad i am not like "them"..........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(if money was my quest with this kind of knowledge, i would have sharks with laser beems attached to their head, in a moat around my own continent)

The frame of math rendering how matter (atoms) and energy (em; light) are in constant process (of time) is what i have known for almost 3 decades and since then, most every branch of science i have dug into, just to see and make sure. (we have the internet in this generation)

but i have no intention of publishing the theorem (math) of the transition (just yet).

ie.. within todays material knowledge/information and technology there is plenty enough to cure most every ailment there is and within them fields many have already been contacted. What you see in this thread is a method of observing the evidence (the historical recordings of experimental evidence)

ie... energy is just em, upon mass (and all exposed to a point in time (the exchange) are associated/entangled) It is stupid easy!!!!!!!

i am here just to enable a few more to see for themselves and the real ones will do something with it.


YOU can think of this scope as a change in the observational point of view and that it is based on observing the energy of mass as em (all cases).

Think of the range of energy (spectrum) and how portions of it can be biased based on the mass (elements and molecular structures; mass). Just to comprehend the dna chains and notice with the four base energy states (colors (per se) of the lipids), then imagine that most every structure of difference within living organisms can be understood. (the color/wavelength vary by structure/environment)

Think of the range of elements, the molecular combinations and how each is maintaining a certain wavelength/frequency within its environment.

Think of waves combining to further existing (the opposite of entropy) (how an organism works)!


it's stupid easy!!!!


and everyone on this internet is capable of observing the NEW achievments and actually capable of making a difference.



now do something with it and forget about me



Procreation proves what? (you answer it yourself)

but the rules grounded to existence about 'choice' are already known;


ie.... good (actions, by choice 'we' all can perform); support life to continue

bad: loss to the common

Just ask yourself; are you of 'the garden' or do you actually believe you are separate?


everything you do is important! (to us all)

 

[RussDill]

Bishadi, if life somehow violates the 2nd law, then tell me, what happens when the sun winds down?

 

[aleCcowaN]

Just remember you are discussing -and keeping "alive" by it- a thread entitled "Does procreation offer proof; ". This thread is a spin-off from another thread and has itself its own spin-off. All these threads have required and will require a lot of people doing with their reasonings the intellectual equivalent to "throwing good money after bad" and I found it to be a pretty nice parallel of how entropy relates to life -including procreation-.

I also miss Yrreg, but either we raise the stakes and use a scientist to feed a bunch of lions on heat and speculate about entropy and reproduction, or simply we leave these threads without their input's high quality side and look what happens. The same about other threads because these kind of living things are known to parasite if threatened with extinction. I think this way the topic will reach its inescapable conclusion: it doesn't/it's gone.

And about missing deleterious chaps, a 12-step plan would be needed, because, as Dr. Yogi Berra said, "this is like déjà vu all over again".

 

[majamin]

Just remember you are discussing -and keeping "alive" by it- a thread entitled "Does procreation offer proof; ". This thread is a spin-off from another thread and has itself its own spin-off. All these threads have required and will require a lot of people doing with their reasonings the intellectual equivalent to "throwing good money after bad" and I found it to be a pretty nice parallel of how entropy relates to life -including procreation-.

Well, alright, but either the audience here is contributing to the conversation (who have so far sided way across the table from Bishadi), and/or they are listening to the scientific scrutiny dealt by many knowledgeable participants. This conversation is allowing me (perhaps others) to reiterate the knowledge that science has confirmed, so it is in the least a useful way of revisiting something old or learning something new. I personally don't feel that I'm "throwing good money at the bad", but "honing an old, dull blade" that I thought I'd never use again.