Comment Wall
You need to be a member of Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community to add comments!
Comments are closed.
Soothing Aid To Ascension By Natalie Glasson & The Venus Beings
Soothing Aid To Ascension By Natalie Glasson & The Venus Beings It is a delight to be in your presence today. We are the collective energy of beings from Venus. We share with you our love, our peace and connection. We wish to be of service to you…
Read more…I'm Pansexual, and Here's What I Want You to Know
PANSEXUAL IS A NEW ONE TO ME-I FEEL BADLY FOR THESE KIDS-EVIL SPITITS RUINED THEM-THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS I'm Pansexual, and Here's What I Want You to Know© Provided by PopSugarThe first time I came out to my parents was in 2013. I was 15 at the…
Read more…World Economic Forum (WEF) member and lead adviser to Klaus Schwab by the name of Yuval Noah Harari is eager to see the world taken over by "non-organic entities"
Yuval Noah Harari says “non-organic entities” and “emotionless algorithms” will soon dominate Earth – in other words, AI TAKEOVER is coming soon06/13/2023 // Ethan Huff // 11.4K Views Tags: AI, artificial intelligence, Collapse, cyborg, demonic…
Read more…To repeat, knowledge of the Uranian Astrology planets and knowledge of use of the 90 Degree Dial are required for this lesson. Personal Points (As, Mc, Moon, Sun, North Node, and Aries Point) get primary…
Comments
Again. I do not live in your world. The work of 3d physics that you reference is primitive. Sorry."
It doesn't justify your belief that 'you create the world by merely looking at it', so again you resort to emperor's cloths!! If you don't see the cloths of the emperor, then 'you are primitive'. Hopefully , pple will claim that 'i too see the cloths' for fear that you will describe them as 'primitive'. But they will end up walking naked!! I am not one of them!!
Again. I do not live in your world. The work of 3d physics that you reference is primitive. Sorry.
Pure nonsense!! QM is a 3D theory! Must you hijack a physics theory, written with volumes of books to justify a simple, non-scientific, unfalsifiable claim about '5D'? Do you need a rubber stamp of a physicist to justify your beliefs?
"But is string theory any closer to describing reality? “People say that string theory doesn’t make predictions, but that’s simply not true. It predicts the dimensionality of space, which is the only theory so far to do so, and it also predicts, at tree level"
Prediction is not what counts. Testing it does. Is this 'dimensions' testable? No!! We are stuck in 3d and this surverely limits our ability to test any theory that talks of 'other dimensions'. To test 'other dimensions', we must see if kinetic energy is as described by:
E=mvx2+ mvy2+mvz2,
or we have to add more terms other than just the 3 for the 3 dimensions. If, for instance, there is a 'fourth dimension', then we expect even an object that looks stationary to, at times surreptitiously moves due to 'its motion in fourth dimension being bent towards the third dimension' in some way. As you can see, this method of testing is not practical!! It demands that we know everything!! How are we to be sure that the particle is not being simply hit by an unknown, invisible particle, hence its kinetic energy increases unexpectedly but without anything 'going to another dimension'.?
What we need when testing in science is never 'confirmation'. Rather, we do 'falsification'. A theory that can only be 'tested' by supposing that 'we know everything' is not falsifiable, hence not science.
This is humorous, I mean in the sense of hilarious. The topic of QM demands a lot of words if you are not to be simplistic like those guys who tell you that you are a god who creats the moon and the stars by a blink of an eye.
Quantum books are often 3 centimetres or so thick! Pple who think they know QM by reading a 9min read article are fooling themselves!!
Thus to understand what happens during observation, you must drop 'fundamental QM' done by the likes of Neumann and use more complete theories like QED. The 'fundamental QM' misleadingly removes a particle off its environment and considers an ideal, non-interacting particles, which we know they don't exists, therefore irrelevant! Its just like Newt considers an object moving in a perfect vacuum and then concludes that such object can move forever, or the way he 'removes' all evenly bodies and considers only the earth and the moon as though they are the only things in the universe.
These guys who say 'in QM, observation does it all' applies 'fundamental QM where it obviously doesn't apply: in interacting particles! It is like claiming that a billiard ball can never stop because Newts first law of motion does not mension 'friction'. It woefully misleading and stupid!!
If you truely want to understand QM, you will have no option but to go further than listening to physicists who are stuck with 1920's understanding if QM!! The guy in that vid talks of 'fundamental QM'. But he means 'Copenhagen interpratation' as formulated by the likes of Neumann and Dirac. These guys did not include some things in QM as part of 'fundamental understanding' simply because the model was a stop-gap measure to allow physicists to proceed anyway, without understanding the details of what goes on in a process termed 'collapse of wavefunction'. Thus they never mensioned 'interaction between micriscopic world and macroscopic world' simply because they were slopy, and like I said, physicist don't like admitting their errors or even shortcomings cause they want to look perfect!! In this case, their 'fundamental understanding if QM' is unscientificaly seen as 'perfect', like a closed canon of scriptures, lol!
However, much has gone on since Bohr et-al did the sloppy work, most notably, Quantum Decoherence, which shows that we can model the 'collapse' using interaction between the wavicles in the microscopic object and the ensemble of waves that forms the macroscopic object.
Such physicists like below neglects further research into QM because it doesn't confirm their world view! This is not a scientific attitude. There is no 'fundamental understanding' of anything in science as it is an ever on-going research. We can't fail to talk about quantum Decoherence just because bohr et-al had no clue about and thus failed to enshrine it in 'fundamental understanding of QM ). We must update our understanding based on new ideas and discoveries. In this instance, pple are stuck in 1920s and as such, don't understand anything!!