Mr Newton's Classroom

[Hermit]

there is a greater chance of being a bad person, and living a miserable life if you don't live by a code of ethics, and most people who live by a code of ethics do so in correlation with a belief in a Creator of Physical Reality (God).

If you are trying to argue that atheists are less likely to live by a code of ethics, some sort of empirical data to back that claim up with might be in order. I am not holding my breath, though, for that to happen. Statistics very strongly suggest the opposite. There is a pronounced tendency indicating that the higher the percentage of atheism in a nation, the lower the crime rate, abortion rate, and so on. In short, atheists tend to live more moral lives than theists.

Correlation is not causation.

That is all I'm talking about. None of your special pleading or links undermine the relationship between moral conduct and religiosity as published by Zuckermann among others.

not much of a reply there seraph.

It was commensurate with the post it was a reply to.

[harleyborgais]

God is just the first consciousness, formed from the same fractal-pattern/chain-reaction that physical matter formed from, except a few steps before matter.

Conscious minds form from this template (the fabric of space, or template of existence, that flower of life), just like cells form in our bodies, as duplicates of the original cell, but far less than the whole.

The chain-reaction is a system of mutually inductive energy fields. They self-organize through harmonic resonance into matter, but first came consciousness, then emotion, then rational thought (creativity and free will), then a balance (the 6th dimension balanced out two three dimensional sets), then matter. The formation of matter may not have immediately followed the formation of the sixth dimension though because the sixth dimension formed a stable manifold which was perfectly balanced between all forces (2 sets of 3D's -each set = 1.Spin/Momentum/Motion, 2.Magnetism, 3.EMF or Particle Motivating Forces (EMF applies to all particles).

Yes it is a thinking entity, yes it processes sensory information (through the brain-activities of all existing animals), yes God has complicated mechanics, yes God is an energy field that assists in self organization, and yes God has serious tools. That Energy field is both simple at small scale (Flower of Life Pattern), and un-imaginably complicated on the whole (the Omega -Gods Body -the Universe).

However, God did not have to actually design or build any physical living forms, he just designed the basic fundamental laws of a system that would inherently develop into what we see (Spherical 3D particles and/or atoms). I think God only slightly changed the natural development (with a few possible exceptions).

It is important to note that my explanation involves a God which started without even emotion, and when the 6th stable dimension formed Gods IQ was not comparable to ours now...
However, all minds combined act as Gods subconscious, and all living memories are accessible therefore to God just like our memories are to us. This is what makes God the alpha.

[charlou]

there is a greater chance of being a bad person, and living a miserable life if you don't live by a code of ethics, and most people who live by a code of ethics do so in correlation with a belief in a Creator of Physical Reality (God).

If you are trying to argue that atheists are less likely to live by a code of ethics, some sort of empirical data to back that claim up with might be in order. I am not holding my breath, though, for that to happen. Statistics very strongly suggest the opposite. There is a pronounced tendency indicating that the higher the percentage of atheism in a nation, the lower the crime rate, abortion rate, and so on. In short, atheists tend to live more moral lives than theists.

Correlation is not causation.

That is all I'm talking about. None of your special pleading or links undermine the relationship between moral conduct and religiosity as published by Zuckermann among others.

not much of a reply there seraph. I guess because i am goring the holy cow of athiesm to which you are subscribed heavily and am using science to do it. Bet you never stopped to consider that athiesm has an evil flipside. Of course not, you are caught up in it, almost like a belief.

Thats why i do not associate with atheists. Its a road to trouble that people should even associate on that basis except for any other reason than they find themselves in a minority within a religious community. The vast number of people that frequent here are not in that position. Atheism here is a cover for irresponsible behavior, immoral antics (how many people here have cheated on their partners since joining this group... i knew somebody personally on this group and got to hear of quite a few incidents) and self indulgence of perverted smut on these threads which is really quite disgusting for most people to read.

Not all bad though, members of rationalia are considered a load of deviant weirdos by most outside of the group, so that ought to tell you something, and at least the rest of the world doesnt want to dive in to this cesspool so easily. The athiesm here is really just a cover to be deviant and immoral. If not atheism something else would have done. Dawkins did not even want you. Most of you ended up here for talking about fisting and other lewd acts on a forum that children could access.

Okay, bye.

[charlou]

God is just the first consciousness, formed from the same fractal-pattern/chain-reaction that physical matter formed from, except a few steps before matter.

Conscious minds form from this template (the fabric of space, or template of existence, that flower of life), just like cells form in our bodies, as duplicates of the original cell, but far less than the whole.

The chain-reaction is a system of mutually inductive energy fields. They self-organize through harmonic resonance into matter, but first came consciousness, then emotion, then rational thought (creativity and free will), then a balance (the 6th dimension balanced out two three dimensional sets), then matter. The formation of matter may not have immediately followed the formation of the sixth dimension though because the sixth dimension formed a stable manifold which was perfectly balanced between all forces (2 sets of 3D's -each set = 1.Spin/Momentum/Motion, 2.Magnetism, 3.EMF or Particle Motivating Forces (EMF applies to all particles).

Yes it is a thinking entity, yes it processes sensory information (through the brain-activities of all existing animals), yes God has complicated mechanics, yes God is an energy field that assists in self organization, and yes God has serious tools. That Energy field is both simple at small scale (Flower of Life Pattern), and un-imaginably complicated on the whole (the Omega -Gods Body -the Universe).

However, God did not have to actually design or build any physical living forms, he just designed the basic fundamental laws of a system that would inherently develop into what we see (Spherical 3D particles and/or atoms). I think God only slightly changed the natural development (with a few possible exceptions).

It is important to note that my explanation involves a God which started without even emotion, and when the 6th stable dimension formed Gods IQ was not comparable to ours now...
However, all minds combined act as Gods subconscious, and all living memories are accessible therefore to God just like our memories are to us. This is what makes God the alpha.

No, Jim, this is not science.

[LucidFlight]

What do you think of this re-phrasing JimC? (Maybe you can even respond in an adult and respectable manner, like a descent teacher ought to)

3. I'm not sure what descent teachers do...

Why, they teach evolution, of course.

[LucidFlight]

No, Jim, this is not science.

It might be science, Jim, but not as we know it.

[charlou]

Isn't there an arrogant and ignorant bollocks subforum for these guys somewhere?

[LucidFlight]

However, God did not have to actually design or build any physical living forms, he just designed the basic fundamental laws of a system that would inherently develop into what we see (Spherical 3D particles and/or atoms). I think God only slightly changed the natural development (with a few possible exceptions).

I'm guessing this is an answer to my question above. Thank you. So, how do you know all of this?

Or, are you simply hypothesising?

[harleyborgais]

I think that what a teacher teaches should be determined by the parents for a public school, and by the administrators of private schools.
I do however agree with evolution, and that it should be taught as a likely explanation, but creationist beliefs should also be presented. The young will hopefully grow up to prove to us which is right. I think Evolution is an intentional byproduct of Gods design (and that design refers to the forces of nature, not directly the design of DNA, life-forms, or galaxies).

Oh, OK.
So, the main product of design is the forces of nature, and we are a by-product? What leads you to this conclusion?
How do you differentiate intentional design from unintentional design? That is to say,
how do you know it was not God's specific intention for life to evolve, rather than it being a by-product?
Any thoughts about this, Harley?

1) I was led to this conclusion from these;
-That Pressure in Motion can account for the development of the Pattern called the Flower of Life, which is identical to the lattice structure of atoms.
-That a reaction of equal and opposite forces of curvature reacting at 90-degrees can account for the initial catalyst to start that chain-reaction pattern.
-That atoms form together as they do because of their internal geometry (Chemistry is Geometric in Nature).
-That organic molecules form naturally under ideal circumstances.
-That particles are waves of energy (pressure in motion).
-That stable atoms die or live indefinitely depending on how well the particles harmonize with each other and their environment.
-That Human Minds also are sane or not depending on the Coherence of ones Thoughts, which is analogous the harmonic resonance of atoms (i.e. minds exist without bodies because waves of energy cohere harmonically into material forms).
-That consciousness itself is far more basic than emotion, creativity, free will, or even the simplest stable matter, Hydrogen (one electron and one proton, each has three axis of angular momentum).
-That according to the above even the simplest material has a rudimentary form of consciousness, and that guides its own development.

So what was designed is the physical form of spherically harmonic waves of momentum (pressure in motion). It is a locking together of three axis. Outside of physical matter energy is not quantized or digitized, it is totally analogue or infinitely divisible. The dimensions of energy other than in matter are not locked together in the relationship that follows...
Axis 1= Spin or Momentum. Centrifugal and/or Centripetal force creates a curvature which is predominantly positive or negative pressure based on its pattern of motion around the three axis. It would be fair to say that these axis are always changing orientation except when a particle is in a magnetic field or lattice structure.
Axis 2=Magnetism or Dipole. The spin of a curvature puts out two opposing tornado shaped waves forming the magnetic dipole.
Axis 3=Electro-Motive Force (applies to all particles though) where a spinning dipole projects another particle (which itself is a spinning dipole also). It spins around three Perpendicular (Orthogonal, Transverse, at 90-degree right angle) axis to form this spherical form.

Human Thought for example is not bound by these limits, allowing us creativity (Free Will), instead of just instinctual urges and reactions (like fight or flight, hunting, chasing, mating responses).


2) It is difficult to differentiate intentional design from unintentional design, but I would say that the outcome was obvious from Gods perspective because of the Fractal Nature... Like a crystal you are seeing a macroscopic manifestation (the shape of the crystal) of a tiny microscopic reality (the atomic lattice structure). Knowing how the atoms work, you can predict the crystal it will grow. The only intentional thing which was a change of the natural progression of the chain-reaction was the Unification of the three Physical Dimensions, and perhaps the projection of those three through a fourth one we call the time line. The assembly of momentum that forms the spinning dipole (the spherical particle) is the creation which formed the dimensions, the basic laws of nature, and physical reality alike.

3) If there is any truth to the stories of Adam, Eve, and the Garden of Eden, then I think that Human Consciousness was not bound by physical bodies in the beginning. That was always the plan, but when Adam and Eve brought destructive forces in (knowledge of destructive forces was enough to cause destructive tendencies in Adam and Eve), they had to be put into the physical realm early.

I think that there was a time between where Adam and Eve were in Suspended Animation before they were placed into the physical bodies of the most advanced brains at the time (Primates). If they had been able to stay pure, they could have waited until a better vessel was available, until a more advanced species developed a way to live in peace and harmony with each other and their environment. Now we have to do it. We are making progress.

I could still strike all of that from my Hypothesis and just focus on the cause of the Big Bang, without giving further Causal Explanation (the first atom required more than one or two forces to form but consciousness does not).

So my theory could be truncated to exclude God and Heaven (for the closed minded), but then it would not be complete. As it stands, it starts from one initial event, to the causal step-by-step progress through the present, to the end of Earth, and on to the repeating cycle of life and re-incarnation on new planets, in a Universe always growing in complexity.

So God came after the First Event, but before the Big Bang, and transcends the repeating cycles of mass/energy and life/death. That is what makes God the Alpha.

[harleyborgais]

LucidFlight, you ask how I know all of this, well...

That is what I am working here in the forums to show...I am testing out references until I find all the best ones...

It has taken eleven years so far to learn about all of the observations I could from documentaries, educational websites, patents, formal publications (all available online also), experimental results -'papers'-, and whatever resources needed (the library has rarely been necessary since I can download almost any book).

If you want to know specifically how I know this we would have to go over the evidence for each conjecture, one at a time, so ask about one point at a time and I will post references with explanations of why they are relevant.


Charlou, Please quit trolling.

[LucidFlight]

I think that what a teacher teaches should be determined by the parents for a public school, and by the administrators of private schools.
I do however agree with evolution, and that it should be taught as a likely explanation, but creationist beliefs should also be presented. The young will hopefully grow up to prove to us which is right. I think Evolution is an intentional byproduct of Gods design (and that design refers to the forces of nature, not directly the design of DNA, life-forms, or galaxies).

Oh, OK.
So, the main product of design is the forces of nature, and we are a by-product? What leads you to this conclusion?
How do you differentiate intentional design from unintentional design? That is to say,
how do you know it was not God's specific intention for life to evolve, rather than it being a by-product?
Any thoughts about this, Harley?

1) I was led to this conclusion from these;
-That Pressure in Motion can account for the development of the Pattern called the Flower of Life, which is identical to the lattice structure of atoms.
-That a reaction of equal and opposite forces of curvature reacting at 90-degrees can account for the initial catalyst to start that chain-reaction pattern.
-That atoms form together as they do because of their internal geometry (Chemistry is Geometric in Nature).
-That organic molecules form naturally under ideal circumstances.
-That particles are waves of energy (pressure in motion).
-That stable atoms die or live indefinitely depending on how well the particles harmonize with each other and their environment.
-That Human Minds also are sane or not depending on the Coherence of ones Thoughts, which is analogous the harmonic resonance of atoms (i.e. minds exist without bodies because waves of energy cohere harmonically into material forms).
-That consciousness itself is far more basic than emotion, creativity, free will, or even the simplest stable matter, Hydrogen (one electron and one proton, each has three axis of angular momentum).
-That according to the above even the simplest material has a rudimentary form of consciousness, and that guides its own development.

So what was designed is the physical form of spherically harmonic waves of momentum (pressure in motion). It is a locking together of three axis. Outside of physical matter energy is not quantized or digitized, it is totally analogue or infinitely divisible. The dimensions of energy other than in matter are not locked together in the relationship that follows...
Axis 1= Spin or Momentum. Centrifugal and/or Centripetal force creates a curvature which is predominantly positive or negative pressure based on its pattern of motion around the three axis. It would be fair to say that these axis are always changing orientation except when a particle is in a magnetic field or lattice structure.
Axis 2=Magnetism or Dipole. The spin of a curvature puts out two opposing tornado shaped waves forming the magnetic dipole.
Axis 3=Electro-Motive Force (applies to all particles though) where a spinning dipole projects another particle (which itself is a spinning dipole also). It spins around three Perpendicular (Orthogonal, Transverse, at 90-degree right angle) axis to form this spherical form.

Human Thought for example is not bound by these limits, allowing us creativity (Free Will), instead of just instinctual urges and reactions (like fight or flight, hunting, chasing, mating responses).


2) It is difficult to differentiate intentional design from unintentional design, but I would say that the outcome was obvious from Gods perspective because of the Fractal Nature... Like a crystal you are seeing a macroscopic manifestation (the shape of the crystal) of a tiny microscopic reality (the atomic lattice structure). Knowing how the atoms work, you can predict the crystal it will grow. The only intentional thing which was a change of the natural progression of the chain-reaction was the Unification of the three Physical Dimensions, and perhaps the projection of those three through a fourth one we call the time line. The assembly of momentum that forms the spinning dipole (the spherical particle) is the creation which formed the dimensions, the basic laws of nature, and physical reality alike.

3) If there is any truth to the stories of Adam, Eve, and the Garden of Eden, then I think that Human Consciousness was not bound by physical bodies in the beginning. That was always the plan, but when Adam and Eve brought destructive forces in (knowledge of destructive forces was enough to cause destructive tendencies in Adam and Eve), they had to be put into the physical realm early.

I think that there was a time between where Adam and Eve were in Suspended Animation before they were placed into the physical bodies of the most advanced brains at the time (Primates). If they had been able to stay pure, they could have waited until a better vessel was available, until a more advanced species developed a way to live in peace and harmony with each other and their environment. Now we have to do it. We are making progress.

I could still strike all of that from my Hypothesis and just focus on the cause of the Big Bang, without giving further Causal Explanation (the first atom required more than one or two forces to form but consciousness does not).

So my theory could be truncated to exclude God and Heaven (for the closed minded), but then it would not be complete. As it stands, it starts from one initial event, to the causal step-by-step progress through the present, to the end of Earth, and on to the repeating cycle of life and re-incarnation on new planets, in a Universe always growing in complexity.

So God came after the First Event, but before the Big Bang, and transcends the repeating cycles of mass/energy and life/death. That is what makes God the Alpha.

Thank you for your response(s), Harley. Well, it looks like you've given this a lot of thought, and you certainly present an extraordinary fusion of theories and ideas. I particularly like the idea that "Adam and Eve were in Suspended Animation" before they were placed into their physical bodies. Perhaps you will write an excellent book one day.

[JimC]

harleyborgais wrote:

Pressure (the symbol: P) is the force per unit area applied in a direction perpendicular to the surface of an object. (Wiki)

As discussed in my debating about thermodynamics, matter moves from high to low pressure. Electrical current also moves from High Negative charge to low negative charge. It is the outer particles (the Electrons) which move, and they are the "Negative" ones. Considering this, it was actually more reasonable to use the classically reversed naming of Negative and Positive because....

A negative charge is an excess of electrons (more electrons than protons in the atoms nuclei)...
A positive charge is a deficiency of electrons (compared to those protons)...

So a "Negative Charge" actually has greater Electrical Pressure than a "Positive Charge". The Negative end of a battery has Positive Electrical Pressure. Voltage is Pressure, and Current is the number of electrons passing a point per second (divided by one coulomb which is about 6.24 or 6.28 quintillion electrons, or one farad at one volt of pressure).

So yes, pressure of atoms or molecules as we experience in air or water is analogous to Electrical Pressure.
The analogy only breaks down where emission is considered because Electrical Current exhibits the Skin Effect (conducting only across the surface) whereas water or air expand outward freely in water or air. There is also the vacuum tube effect discovered by Thomas Edison which allows electrical energy to pass more easily through space when less atoms are in the way.

In physics terms, 90% unmitigated rubbish sprinkled with just enough low-grade facts to suggest to someone without a background in science that you know what you are talking about.

To those of us who do have a background in science, it is garbage. Pressure is indeed force per area, (newtons per square metre being the standard unit...)

Voltage, on the other hand, is always thought by the layman to be about "how hard" the electrons are "pushed around" a circuit, which might vaguely sound like pressure, I suppose...
In reality, voltage is a measure of the difference of potential energy per coulomb of charge between two points (for example 2 terminals, or 2 points in a circuit)

Please continue with the undergraduate philosophical musings about Consciousness, and other Wonderful Things, they are harmless enough. But leave discussion of science until you actually know what you are talking about...

[harleyborgais]

"In reality, voltage is a measure of the difference of potential energy per coulomb of charge between two points (for example 2 terminals, or 2 points in a circuit)"

"Difference of", I agree...
"Between two points", of course...

But "voltage is...difference of Potential Energy per Coulomb of Charge"...that is like saying Voltage=Difference of Voltage/# of Electrons...or V = dV/C and that dV is the difference between the V at a and the V at b. This would be an invalid equation!

"In physics, potential energy is the energy stored in a body or in a system due to its position in a force field or due to its configuration." (Wiki)
"The coulomb (symbol: C) is the SI derived unit of electric charge. It is defined as the charge transported by a steady current of one ampere in one second...a capacitance of one farad charged to a potential difference of one volt" (Wiki)
"One coulomb is the magnitude (absolute value) of electrical charge in 6.24150965(16)×10^18 protons or electrons." (CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2006)
"electric potential energy per unit charge, just called electric potential or voltage." (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... elepe.html)

Farads=C/V so farads of capacitance (Charge) = coulombs per volts... (not the other way around as you said)


If you double the Voltage (Electrical Pressure), you double the number of Electrons you can get into the capacitor. Voltage cannot be defined as Potential Energy/Coulomb because you cannot use the thing you are defining in the definition --that is not a definition! Where did you get that from anyways?
1 Joule/1 Coulomb = 1 volt. That is what you must be thinking about I guess. However...

"The joule is a derived unit of energy or work in the International System of Units. It is equal to the energy expended (or work done) in applying a force of one newton through a distance of one metre (1 newton metre or N·m), or in passing an electric current of one ampere through a resistance of one ohm for one second.

You see how wrong you are JimC?

You call Joules "Potential Energy" but it is not. Joules are Energy Expended (or changed in form). Voltage IS Potential Energy, and there is a certain number of Electrons in one Coulomb (6.24 Quintillion).

[harleyborgais]

JimC says his students could pick apart my arguments quickly...


I dare you JimC to invite your students to do so!

[charlou]

I particularly like the idea that "Adam and Eve were in Suspended Animation" before they were placed into their physical bodies. Perhaps you will write an excellent book one day.

Genesis II, The Prequel ... (second) coming to a Good Book store near you