Message Forum


 
go to bottom 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  
Next Page      

03/04/21 01:29 AM #1310    

 

Bill Engelhardt

 

Thinking of color TV?

 

 

 


03/04/21 12:33 PM #1311    

 

Bob Beveridge

Along those lines:  I visited Japan in the late 60's and was amazed at the scale and age of their monuments:  my favorite was the Kamakura Dibutsu, a cast Bronze statue from the 1200's.  Interesting website (search for ."Kamakura Buddha"). The large sandals you see were placed there for Him to use while taking walks.  You could also enter the statue...kind of like the Statue of Liberty.
 

 


03/05/21 10:34 AM #1312    

 

Ronald Goodmansen

We too saw it in 1972, amazing 


03/07/21 03:56 PM #1313    

 

Bill Engelhardt


03/08/21 02:32 PM #1314    

Robert Bramel

Truman president in 1953? Maybe, for the first a few days in January, but Ike (Dwight Eisenhower) won by a landslide against Adlai Stevenson in the 1952 election.


03/08/21 06:32 PM #1315    

 

Gregg Wilson

                  TERM LIMITS


03/10/21 11:29 AM #1316    

Tom Chavez

You’ve heard of cow cud, but have you heard of cow cuddle?!

 

Yes, its a thing! Get your thing on!

 

Cow cuddling has become a thing for lonely hearts in the pandemic.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/03/08/cow-cuddle-sanctuary-covid/



03/11/21 12:45 PM #1317    

Tom Chavez

Ten years ago today, a tsunami in Japan swept away 18,000 lives, displaced 500,000 people, and destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

 

Today, more than 40,000 people are still unable to return, and the nuclear plant area is still off-limits radioactive.

 

Nothing we perceive with our senses is permanent. Be grateful for what we have and be mindful, everything physical is temporary.



03/11/21 05:37 PM #1318    

 

Gregg Wilson


03/12/21 12:11 PM #1319    

 

Linda Pompeo (Worden)

I still have a couple.... one still has notes from other classmates.  Lots lighter than packing around a laptop or tablet.....but not quite as efficient!


03/13/21 07:23 AM #1320    

 

Virginia Wolfe (Scheffer)

However, they were only a nickel apiece versus a laptop at $500 and more!


03/13/21 02:55 PM #1321    

 

Bill Engelhardt


03/13/21 05:09 PM #1322    

 

Gregg Wilson

                   It's Daylight Savings Time!!


03/22/21 08:28 PM #1323    

Tom Chavez

Introduction to Ignorance

 

    Throughout human history, philosophers and sages have sought to understand the cosmos. Western scientists have operated on the assumption that the universe can be understood mechanistically—in terms of numbers and mathematics.

 

    Many times scientists have felt that an ultimate mathematical description of nature was nearly within their grasp. In the mid-nineteenth century Hermann von Helmholtz declared that all phenomena of nature “could be reduced to to forces of attraction and repulsion, proportionate to the mutual distance of material bodies.” 

 

    By 1900 many new concepts and discoveries made Helmholtz’s idea obsolete. Albert Einstein began a more sophisticated program to explain all phenomena as oscillations in one fundamental “unified field.” But revolutionary developments in physics soon rendered his basic approach obsolete. 

 

    In 1979 three physicists (Glashow, Salem, and Weinberg) won the Nobel Prize in physics for partially tying together some of the various physical theories. Scientists still hope to find a “theory of everything” in terms of mathematical equations describing a single, primordial “unified force.”

 

   For homework, write equations to describe the following natural phenomena:

 


03/24/21 01:58 PM #1324    

Tom Chavez

The pin-ball universe or, how useful is mathematics, really?

 

The usefulness of mathematics in science is a miracle with no rational explanation. It is a gift for which we should be grateful. — Eugene Wigner  

 

Physicists give a higher degree of reality to mathematical models of the universe than they accord the ordinary world of sensation. — Steven Weinberg  

 

Some scientists believe that mathematical laws apply to all phenomena of nature, and the discovery of such laws will lead to a complete understanding of the universe. 

 

Richard Thompson’s thought experiment consists of an array of fixed 2-inch spheres, spaced four inches apart, extending in all directions. Consider the track of a moving sphere that rebounds elastically off the fixed spheres. 

 

 

A slight variation in the initial direction of the moving sphere will be greatly magnified as it bounces off others. We need to know the sphere’s initial direction with great accuracy to predict its path correctly. 

 

Thompson calculates that if the sphere moves at sixty miles per hour, to predict its path for one hour would require accuracy of roughly two million decimal places, which would take over 700 pages to write out.

 

To specify the sphere’s movements for one year, would require more than six million pages. 

 

Generalizing the experiment by allowing all the spheres to move and interact by force laws of various kinds gives a 2D classical Newtonian model of nature.

 

Thompson concludes that the prospects for a simple universal mathematical theory are dismal, as it must account for almost unlimited detailed information. 

 

Conclusion: the practical usefulness of mathematics is great, but limited.


03/24/21 02:28 PM #1325    

 

Gregg Wilson

Hi Tom,

There will never be a theory of everything in terms of mathematics, equations, etc.

The universe consists of three realms:

1) The gravitational flux - everywhere and in all directions. Gravitons consist of mass and velocity - nothing else.

2) The light carrying medium. Light is a wave, not a particle. This medium has light, heat, temperature. The medium can be moved by gravitons. It can be thin, dense, even liquid.

3) Protons. They have no inherent velocity, nor heat, nor temperature. They possess mass and GEOMETRY.

Existence does not obey mathematics, equations.

You have posted the fantastic picture of LIFE. The universe has existed forever. Life has existed forever.

Theories by physicists, astronomers, cosmologists, etc, do not account for life.


03/26/21 09:00 PM #1326    

Tom Chavez

Hey Gregg, salutations! Let’s have some fun!

 

I agree with you that mathematics cannot describe everything, and that theories by physicists, astronomers, cosmologists, etc, do not account for life. 

 

We are in good company. Some respectable scientists and mathematicians also agree.

 

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. — Albert Einstein 

 

Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little; it is only its mathematical properties that we can discover. — Bertrand Russell

 

The only one thing more unreasonable than the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in physics, is the unreasonable ineffectiveness of mathematics in biology. — Isreal Gelfand

 

Your alien realms, beyond my puny comprehension, remind me, “never underestimate your own ignorance." 

 

This is a Hubble pic of Galaxy NGC 236. Is your home planet out there somewhere?

 


03/27/21 09:27 PM #1327    

 

Gregg Wilson

Hi Tom,

Let's consider Charles Darwin. He did not have very much "current" information, so his theory of survival of the fittest probably has some validity. However, when this is extended to the idea that life began on Earth - this has no validity.

Assuming that one celled life began in mud, sandstone, clay with water is ridiculous. Single cell life has DNA. To say the DNA is complex and highly organized is an understatement. This is supposed to have occurred in conjunction with creation of a single cell? No way.

So life came from off planet. It is sensible that sentient beings brought life to Earth. This is where Christians are much closer to the truth than Darwinists, though I don't think that they understand why.

If one wants to call the being that brought life to Earth God, I don't care. But life has existed forever. So assuming that God created the Universe has no basis. The Universe was not created. So, we have to assume that God is a "local" God.

And don't anyone propose the Big Bang. Since gravity is NOT attractive (see Isaac Newton) the Big Bang is nonsense. Personally, I prefer Calvin's "horrendous space kablooie".

 


03/29/21 01:44 PM #1328    

Tom Chavez

Aloha Gregg,

 

I agree that evolution is not a viable explanation for biological complexity. DNA requires proteins to replicate, and proteins require DNA for their production. We have a “which came first, the chicken or the egg?” problem.

 

The fact is that no one has ever proposed even a possible detailed evolutionary sequence for developing biological complexity from simple precursors. 

 

Professor of Biochemistry Michael Behe in his book Darwin’s Black Box, refers to the Journal of Molecular Evolution, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and other scientific resources, to note:

 

“Molecular evolution is not based upon scientific authority. There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or books—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred.”

 

Pan-spermia is the theory that biological forms came to Earth from elsewhere, but that just moves the problem of life’s origin elsewhere. It is not an explanation for the origin of life.

 

Rational laws of cause and effect are the basis of science. Reality didn’t just pop into existence from nothing. Something has existed eternally, as a precursor cause of our existence. 

 

For most of human history civilized societies have attributed the existence of both biological life and the universe itself to an omniscient God that transcends both.

 

For us Earthlings who are ignorant of your infallible alien authority, what is the rationale for claiming that the universe and biological life have eternally existed? How do you rule out other possible causal scenarios?


03/29/21 06:28 PM #1329    

 

Gregg Wilson

Hi Tom,

I don't know where you are going with this. Existence does not need a thumbs up. There is no alternative. There is no prior to or outside of existence.


03/30/21 07:44 PM #1330    

Tom Chavez

Ah, Gregg, you describe existence as graviton flux, light-carrying medium, and geometric protons. Where are you going with that?

 

Human intelligence naturally inquires. What is this existence? What the hell am I doing here? Sober minds want to know.

 

There are many philosophies, sciences, religions, ideologies, etc., which offer various views and answers. It can be hard to sift relevant from irrelevant, or truth from illusion. Don’t give up!

 

Modern science offers us a periodic table of elements. We hear that sodium is a soft metal that explodes on contact with water. And chlorine is a deadly poisonous gas. 

 

Although true, this is irrelevant to most of us. What is relevant to me is that sodium and chlorine combine to form salt, which I need for my fries!

 

I find Vedic philosophy to be simple and relevant. The basic Vedic understanding is that there are two main energies: superior and inferior. One energy is matter, and the other is consciousness.

 

Quantum mechanics has led some some modern scientists to recognize this distinction.

 

Nobel physicist Eugene Wigner, “there are two kinds of existence: the existence of my consciousness and the existence of everything else. This latter reality is not absolute but only relative.”

 

Matter is inferior and relative. Consciousness is superior and absolute. That, Gregg, is where I am going.


04/01/21 09:27 AM #1331    

Tom Chavez

It is common sense that there are two basic energies: matter and consciousness. But materialists deny the existence of consciousness by labeling it an illusory ‘epiphenomenon’ created by interaction of material elements, without substantial independent existence.

 

Materialists focus their consciousness upon matter in material science. Transcendentalists focus upon consciousness itself, by methods of yoga and meditation, in a science of consciousness, or self-realization.

 

Some transcendentalists perceive consciousness as an all-pervading field of energy permeating everything, which upholds and sustains the laws of nature. They identify with that field and believe that our experience of individuality is illusion. They are called impersonalists.

 

Advanced transcendentalists understand that although all consciousness is one in quality, there is a difference in quantity. Our individual consciousness is tiny, but there is a higher divine consciousness much greater than our own. 

 

The ultimate meaning of “yoga” is related to the English word “yoke” which means to link up. Yoga means to link our tiny consciousness with the Supreme Divine consciousness. That connection is called God consciousness, Christ consciousness or Kṛṣṇa consciousness.


04/01/21 01:13 PM #1332    

 

Gregg Wilson

Hi Tom,

You have entered religion. I do not go there.


04/01/21 03:23 PM #1333    

 

Bill Engelhardt


04/02/21 07:34 AM #1334    

 

Virginia Wolfe (Scheffer)

Unless those shoes were sold at WigWam, we never got them!  Always was jealous.  OK, I have gotten over that now!


go to top 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  
Next Page      



agape