What is Dark Energy? FEB 05, 2024. By Chelsea Gohd.

[Age]

Every point in physical space is somehow physically fixed, connected, there are certainly no coordinates floating there Each such “point” has, let’s say, a Planck dimension. There is/are no such thing(s) as “nothing”

Yes, I agree with that within my theory on prev page. -- although you may disagree with this..

These people would just NOT STOP making up 'theories'.

Which is TOTALLY RIDICULOUS considering that the Truth is HERE, for ALL to just 'look at' AND 'see'.

Also, 'points' are just what you human beings DEFINE, or IMAGINE. So, ANY 'point' can be of ANY size, and at ANY place, one so likes.

Each point on/off events occur.

ONCE MORE, IN your IMAGINATION.

My belief is that something totally imperceptible to us, is operating from beneath the Planck scale, orchestrating the on/off events such that the fields behave the way they do - whether they interact with each other or not.

AGAIN, what this 'Thing' IS, EXACTLY, which this one, and "fairy", claim, is 'imperceptible' to these human beings, IS NOT 'imperceptible' AT ALL. And what this 'Thing' IS, EXACTLY, was, and is, VERY EASY and VERY SIMPLE TO 'see', 'perceive', COMPREHEND, UNDERSTAND, and KNOW.

We perceive in our reality 'particles' moving, but this is inaccurate. Nothing is moving, it's just the interaction points etc..

So, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IS 'moving' to "attofishpi" anyway, except for so-called 'interaction points', and some other things. (Whatever they may well be.)

[Noax]

But something is always occurring there or not (is my point).

You mean that for every event, something interesting happens there (on) or it doesn't (off). Did I get that right? If so, I don't see how those designations have anything to do with the fields. Presuming a counterfactual (cringe), say there's an electron present at one selected event. That's a disturbance there in the electron field. So you say this disturbance in that field "constitutes the various properties of the field", which seems a bit backwards. I'd have put it that the particular disturbance in the electron field is what constitutes the various properties that we know as an electron.

[attofishpi]

But something is always occurring there or not (is my point).

You mean that for every event, something interesting happens there (on) or it doesn't (off). Did I get that right?

Not really, both positions are interesting and important for the concept.

If so, I don't see how those designations have anything to do with the fields. Presuming a counterfactual (cringe), say there's an electron present at one selected event. That's a disturbance there in the electron field. So you say this disturbance in that field "constitutes the various properties of the field",

Constitutes the property of that point in spacetime of the field.

I prefer discussions to attempt to keep our dialogue intact where possible..

As I said, for me the particles are not passing...they are being 'invoked' at the dimensional point in 3D space. Like a beautiful musical composition, the fluctuations of the various standard fields and their any or none interactions with each other, are popping in an out of existence per those points, in an eloquently exquisite "timed" dance.

I take it, none of that makes any 'theoretical' plausible sense to you?

[Noax]

As I said, for me the particles are not passing...they are being 'invoked' at the dimensional point in 3D space. Like a beautiful musical composition, the fluctuations of the various standard fields and their any or none interactions with each other, are popping in an out of existence per those points, in an eloquently exquisite "timed" dance.

I take it, none of that makes any 'theoretical' plausible sense to you?

Pretty much no. I don't know what is meant by 'invoked' in this context, which makes it sound like a conjuring.
Popping in and out of existence presumes a non-spacetime interpretation, the language of which I'm not used to. To me, if it exists, it exists and cannot subsequently not exist since all events share the same ontology. OK, so you hold otherwise, but even those that use the 3D model don't suggest stuff popping in and out of existence, but rather enduring, changing in place so to speak, but existing for substantial time.

So again, not sure what you're trying to convey.

[attofishpi]

As I said, for me the particles are not passing...they are being 'invoked' at the dimensional point in 3D space. Like a beautiful musical composition, the fluctuations of the various standard fields and their any or none interactions with each other, are popping in an out of existence per those points, in an eloquently exquisite "timed" dance.

I take it, none of that makes any 'theoretical' plausible sense to you?

Pretty much no. I don't know what is meant by 'invoked' in this context, which makes it sound like a conjuring.
Popping in and out of existence presumes a non-spacetime interpretation, the language of which I'm not used to. To me, if it exists, it exists and cannot subsequently not exist since all events share the same ontology. OK, so you hold otherwise, but even those that use the 3D model don't suggest stuff popping in and out of existence, but rather enduring, changing in place so to speak, but existing for substantial time.

So again, not sure what you're trying to convey.

You are really starting to hit the nail on the head. I certainly am implying by 'invoked' that something is being LOGICALLY manipulated - each point in 3D spacetime is invoked within some logical frame of 'time' to be part of the field required at that point in time, does that make sense?

[Age]

As I said, for me the particles are not passing...they are being 'invoked' at the dimensional point in 3D space. Like a beautiful musical composition, the fluctuations of the various standard fields and their any or none interactions with each other, are popping in an out of existence per those points, in an eloquently exquisite "timed" dance.

I take it, none of that makes any 'theoretical' plausible sense to you?

Pretty much no. I don't know what is meant by 'invoked' in this context, which makes it sound like a conjuring.

"attofishpi" just introduced the word 'invoked' in the HOPE that doing so would somehow HELP "attofishpi" in getting others to BELIEVE what it does about SOME God, which it IMAGINES is REAL and TRUE.

Popping in and out of existence presumes a non-spacetime interpretation, the language of which I'm not used to.

I wonder if this one REALIZES that IF it EXPLAINED what this so-called 'spacetime' thing IS, EXACTLY, to it, then 'others' WILL have MORE OF AN IDEA of what it is ACTUALLY talking ABOUT, and MEANING.

To me, if it exists, it exists and cannot subsequently not exist since all events share the same ontology. OK, so you hold otherwise, but even those that use the 3D model don't suggest stuff popping in and out of existence, but rather enduring, changing in place so to speak, but existing for substantial time.

So again, not sure what you're trying to convey.

ALL "attofishpi" is, essentially, 'TRYING TO' convey, here, is that the God of its IMAGINATION is BEHIND EVERY thing, and is 'controlling', or 'invoking' absolutely EVERY thing that HAPPENS, and OCCURS.

[Age]

As I said, for me the particles are not passing...they are being 'invoked' at the dimensional point in 3D space. Like a beautiful musical composition, the fluctuations of the various standard fields and their any or none interactions with each other, are popping in an out of existence per those points, in an eloquently exquisite "timed" dance.

I take it, none of that makes any 'theoretical' plausible sense to you?

Pretty much no. I don't know what is meant by 'invoked' in this context, which makes it sound like a conjuring.
Popping in and out of existence presumes a non-spacetime interpretation, the language of which I'm not used to. To me, if it exists, it exists and cannot subsequently not exist since all events share the same ontology. OK, so you hold otherwise, but even those that use the 3D model don't suggest stuff popping in and out of existence, but rather enduring, changing in place so to speak, but existing for substantial time.

So again, not sure what you're trying to convey.

You are really starting to hit the nail on the head. I certainly am implying by 'invoked' that something is being LOGICALLY manipulated

I did NOT 'see' "noax" write absolutely ANY thing that was even CLOSE to saying what you appear to have BELIEVED "noax" did.

"noax" VERY CLEAR WROTE, and STATED, that "noax" does NOT KNOW what is meant by 'invoked', in the context that you are presenting that word.

But, AGAIN, you are ABSOLUTELY FREE TO 'see' AND 'believe' whatever you so WANT TO.

- each point in 3D spacetime

Like "noax" will NOT just EXPLAIN what so-called 'spacetime' IS, EXACTLY, to "noax", WHY do you NOT just EXPLAIN what so-called '3D spacetime' is, to you, EXACTLY?

is invoked within some logical frame of 'time' to be part of the field required at that point in time, does that make sense?

LOL To me, this makes LESS SENSE then what it was that you WERE 'trying to' CONVEY, before.

Just adding the words 'logical' and 'LOGICAL' did NOT help you AT ALL, here.

[attofishpi]

U R so annoyingly clueless.

..and if that upsets U then don't interact with my posts.

[Age]

U R so annoyingly clueless.

..and if that upsets U then don't interact with my posts.

ONCE MORE, ADDRESSED TO ABSOLUTELY NO one.

Now, the QUESTION of THIS THREAD IS:

What is 'dark energy'?

Would ANY one else like to PROVIDE an ANSWER?

[Cerveny]

U R so annoyingly clueless.

..and if that upsets U then don't interact with my posts.

ONCE MORE, ADDRESSED TO ABSOLUTELY NO one.

Now, the QUESTION of THIS THREAD IS:

What is 'dark energy'?

Would ANY one else like to PROVIDE an ANSWER?

What we see in galaxies is not "dark matter", but a vortex of viscous (imperfect) solution of matter in the aether -> towards the future:), I think... BTW, infinitely large or infinitely lasting things do not exist, that would be against, let's say..., nature :)), I think... @Age, please, sorry, you don't have to answer

[attofishpi]

There is an intelligence beyond our own that forms the entire reality we are perceiving. This intelligence manifests throughout all matter, including that which constructs our mind.

My belief is, that it operates from below the Planck scale, imperceptible to us and our instruments of detection. I also consider that what we infer as a cause of dark-energy/matter, the accelerated expansion between galaxies, is as a result of this intelligence, again, operating from beneath the scale we can detect.

[Age]

U R so annoyingly clueless.

..and if that upsets U then don't interact with my posts.

ONCE MORE, ADDRESSED TO ABSOLUTELY NO one.

Now, the QUESTION of THIS THREAD IS:

What is 'dark energy'?

Would ANY one else like to PROVIDE an ANSWER?

What we see in galaxies is not "dark matter", but a vortex of viscous (imperfect) solution of matter in the aether -> towards the future:), I think...

That may well be what 'you' think 'you' and 'some others' 'see', but what 'we' actually 'see' is different.

BTW, infinitely large or infinitely lasting things do not exist, that would be against, let's say..., nature ), I think...

Again, that may well be what you 'think', but what is 'known' is that nature, itself, did not just begin from absolutely no thing, and that the Universe, Itself, is infinite, and eternal. And, the Fact that NO one can refute this helps in the uncovering, and in the revealing of this Fact.

@Age, please, sorry, you don't have to answer

Okay.

By the way, your use of the 'sorry' word there does not work in the "english" language.

[Age]

There is an intelligence beyond our own that forms the entire reality we are perceiving. This intelligence manifests throughout all matter, including that which constructs our mind.

1. you human beings do NOT have 'your mind/s'.

2. Intelligence is WITHIN you human beings. And, WHEN you LEARN, and UNDERSTAND, HOW to USE 'it' properly, and Correctly, then this is WHEN what is Truly DESIRED, WANTED, and INTENDED, REALLY, STARTS TO BEGIN.

ALL living in peace and harmony together, as One, on earth, as it is in 'heaven', is some thing you human beings, in the days when this is being written, could ONLY IMAGINE. However, with and through INTELLIGENCE, ITSELF, 'this world' comes-to-BE, and so BE-COMES, 'Reality', Itself.

WITHIN the very 'make-up', fiber, heart, essence, 'programming', or in the very 'dna' of 'your being', you human beings, collectively, are being guided, or 'invoked' if you like, through evolution, to Create, and live in, 'the world' that you ALL WISH FOR, and DESIRE, and were INTENDED FOR.

My belief is, that it operates from below the Planck scale, imperceptible to us and our instruments of detection.

But, 'it' has ALREADY been PERCEIVED, and is ALREADY KNOWN and UNDERSTOOD, so 'it' is NOT imperceptible AT ALL.

AGAIN, I suggest you REMOVE ALL BELIEFS BEFORE you go MAKING CLAIMS.

I also consider that what we infer as a cause of dark-energy/matter, the accelerated expansion between galaxies, is as a result of this intelligence, again, operating from beneath the scale we can detect.

Or, just 'a bang' went off, which just expanded matter, and/or just some objects away from each other.

Also, did you mean what 'you', and some others, infer as a cause of the, supposed and alleged, 'accelerated expansion' between galaxies is 'dark energy/matter'?

I think you human beings are, still,just trying to figure out what 'dark energy/matter' is, exactly, which is only claimed to be the cause of the, alleged, 'accelerated expansion' between galaxies. So, until it is worked out what 'that' is, exactly, what you infer as a 'cause' of 'dark energy/matter' is, still, some ways off yet. Obviously you HAVE TO work out if some thing EXISTS, or NOT, before you could even begin to work out 'the cause' for 'that thing'.

[Age]

By the way, WHY it only APPEARS as though there is an 'accelerated expansion' between galaxies is ALREADY KNOWN, and UNDERSTOOD. Like WHY the blue and red shift, and what they ACTUAL MEAN, and are SHOWING is ALSO ALREADY KNOWN, and UNDERSTOOD.

So, AGAIN, if ANY one is Truly INTERESTED and would like to have A DISCUSSION regarding 'this' or just about ANY topic in this forum, then I am more than ready, willing, and wanting to.

[attofishpi]

1. you human beings do NOT have 'your mind/s'.

YOU'RE a human being you stupid fuckstain of a "brain", so fuck off with your batshit crazy condescension to others.