Broken Circle

More
21 years 7 months ago #5543 by Mac
Replied by Mac on topic Reply from Dan McCoin
north,

I'm not in disagreement with you reagarding authority. I have several views that are in disagreement with authority but my point was directed at the fact that you were making statements as "Statements of Fact". When you do that you need authority.

If it isn't something generally accepted by science then you should indicate it is your opinion.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 7 months ago #5545 by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
mac

true;i agree i should have made it clear that these statements are my opinion.

but if i may put what i said before a different way.

since absolute "nothing" can not have substance absolutely and nor can it at any time have substance, then substance must exist absolutely since we exist and our universe,which follows that absolute substance must go on for infinitey,for it can never be absolutely destroyed.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 7 months ago #4648 by Mac
Replied by Mac on topic Reply from Dan McCoin
north,

since absolute "nothing" can not have substance absolutely and nor can it at any time have substance,[unquote]


ANS: We agree upto here.

then substance must exist absolutely since we exist and our universe,which follows that absolute substance must go on for infinitey,[unquote]

ANS: I do not see a coherent connection which indicates much less mandates infinity. Infinity is purely a mathjematical projection and cannot exist in physical reality.

for it can never be absolutely destroyed.[unquote]


ANS: That is an assumption based upon absence of complete knowledge about the universe. (+n)+(-n)


>0 which is what happens in a Black Hole in my view is just such destruction. Mass and energy being compressed into a sinularity becomes non-existant, hence destroyed.


Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 7 months ago #4652 by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
mac

first,although absolute nothingness can exist conceptually, it is not possible in reality because absolute substance exists.

now about the black hole singularity,now it is possible that a black hole does not exist,the mathematical model though it maybe true from a mathematical point of view does not mean this concept is true in reality.there are some, which i believe HALTON is one of them, figures this to be not true and also black holes as far as i know have not been proven as absolutely true.

now if so, i think that substance has only changed form.also the black hole must exist because of substance in the first place.there is also the possibility of a white hole which ejects matter back out,therefore of course substance is not annihilated.



Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 7 months ago #4472 by Mac
Replied by Mac on topic Reply from Dan McCoin
north,

first,although absolute nothingness can exist conceptually, it is not possible in reality because absolute substance exists.[unquote]

ANS: I don't buy this. There is no evidence or even logic to support the lack of "Nothing". Nothing is a physical reality.

There is no evidence that there is "Absolute substance" either.


now about the black hole singularity,now it is possible that a black hole does not exist,the mathematical model though it maybe true from a mathematical point of view does not mean this concept is true in reality.there are some, which i believe HALTON is one of them, figures this to be not true and also black holes as far as i know have not been proven as absolutely true.[unquote]

ANS: I agree only to a point. I believe Black Holes have been shown to exists but the mathematical discription; including the singularity is far from proven, just as Relativity is far from proven in its most extreme applications.

now if so, i think that substance has only changed form.also the black hole must exist because of substance in the first place.there is also the possibility of a white hole which ejects matter back out,therefore of course substance is not annihilated.[unquote]

ANS: I accept the premis that it could be either way. I also accept the possibility of the existance of White Holes. However, that does not mean mater and energy were not destroyed.

The fact seems to be that destruction and re-creation are normal functions in the Universe. The fact that there may be soncservation in the process does not eliminate the process. On example in my mind is the process of orbit jumping of electrons. I believe the electron is absorbed into the Chiral Condensate and recrated at the lower energy level orbit, leaving a photon of the differential energy behind. Vitural particles are popping into and out of existance all the time.



Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 7 months ago #5547 by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
mac

what i mean by "absolute substance" is the purveyance of ether everywhere.which i believe is the essence of all matter and/or energy.and because of this there can not be a "absolute nothingness",for there is nowhere where ether is not.

this is why i suggested that substance can not be completely annihilated,it just changes form.

perhaps the black hole (if it exists) just strips all entering matter and/or energy to its ultimate basic form (ether) concentrates it,thereby producing a white hole.

you talk about chirality i am not sure what you mean by this,could you explain?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.417 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum