Newtonian physics is for squares. Quantum is for haloes. I couldn't resist. At some point they are incompatible. Newton's laws break down, and are no longer accurate beyond this point. You cannot separate macroscopic from subatomic, unless macroscopic is all you want to see. It is a continuum that leads to a consciousness... ...a consciousness that does not even exist. Newton's laws might be called, the laws of man. These laws can be symbolized by an elephant holding up the world. Newton's laws "work" because a perciever wants it that way. Perception's laws are twisted - think wicked - forms of God's laws. Newton's laws enable man to make 'smart bombs' and other accurate oxymorons. Man is the ultimate smart bomb. His existence is for attack. His mind is used to defend against the truth. His laws 'bomb' when brought to the Light of truth. Time does funny things at the speed of light. The truth is you are Light. Time you made, and time you can command. You are no more a slave to time than the world you made. But when you hide your Light under a "bushel", you are masking your power. You are a non-spacial being having a spacial experience. You are also a timeless being having a time experience. Ultimately, space and time are merely beliefs. Both are meaningless. They provide a place for people to operate in. This helps cover up the fact that they are operating in a dream. When you wake up, you realize that time and space, and all of the things that appeared to happen there, were just a dream. Your mind merely seemed to go to sleep for a while. Time lasted an instant upon your mind, with no effect upon eternity. So, the fact is, all time is past. Everything is now exactly as it was before time imposed itself upon your peace. Time is a single instant, divided, subdivided and multiplied. So it looks different, from different points in time, but it is all the same thing. Each day, and every minute in each day, and every instant that each minute holds, you relive the single instant when the time of terror took the place of love. Time and eternity are both in your mind, and will conflict until you percieve time soley as a means to regain eternity. Till then, ghosts sit in a movie theater, reviewing what never really happened. The world was built on hypotheticals. Incoherent sentences, strung together, form a "story". It is the tragic story of dualism, and the "laws" that made it "possible". It is the comedy of a joke, taken way too seriously. Such is the world, and nothing more. Jesus
for you people that have no idea what your talking about - here is review that I think touches on the issues http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/23676 now if you spend some time reading susskind's other interviews - which I have cited in this thread - you begin to see that he if there are not trillions of universes you would have to conclude the universe looks spectacularly designed. "Leonard Susskind, a founder of the theory and one of its leading practitioners, brazenly lays out this no-boundaries attitude on the first page of his new book. His research, he declares, "touches not only on current paradigm shifts in physics and cosmology, but also on the profound cultural questions that are rocking our social and political landscape: can science explain the extraordinary fact that the universe appears to be uncannily, nay, spectacularly, well designed for our own existence?" (I think the author actually added the for our own existence part - as I have seen the quote without that clause as well) http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/20/news/booksat.php So far no one has attacked his science. All you do is call names and make crap up. Direct your energies to attack his science. All wait you are not qualified to do so because you are not top flight physicists (if you are say so). It is really quite simply. 1 If there is only one universe the fact we exist is evidence of design because the universe is freakishly tuned to support life - when it could have come out so many other ways. (trillions) Or - you could argue there are trillions of universes or more. Please explain why few if any top physicists in the world have not negatively critiqued the statements made by susskind. (the founder of string theory). Sure some have made critiques but The arguments given are that he does not understand how black holes work or something of that nature. These guys see the evidence of design. Finally I recently supplied a quote from the famously anti design website talk origins which seemingly concedes the need for trillions of universes to combat the design argument.
If we do not accept the landscape idea are we stuck with intelligent design? I doubt that physicists will see it that way. If, for some unforeseen reason, the landscape turns out to be inconsistent - maybe for mathematical reasons, or because it disagrees with observation - I am pretty sure that physicists will go on searching for natural explanations of the world. But I have to say that if that happens, as things stand now we will be in a very awkward position. Without any explanation of natureâs fine-tunings we will be hard pressed to answer the ID critics. One might argue that the hope that a mathematically unique solution will emerge is as faith-based as ID. Now this quote came from a design website - but it the quotes came from interviews with science publications. http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/interview-with-lenny-susskind/
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/L...Impact_Could_Survive_To_Reseed_Earth_999.html no reason "life" forms couldn't have existed pre-big bounce...
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/08/lifelike-dust-d.html Similarly then, no reason "life" forms couldn't derive from an autonomous non "life" form.