Philosophy Now Forum

socrattus wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 11:43 am

Cerveny wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 7:44 am

socrattus wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2024 4:57 pm October 25, 2024. After Decades of Searching, Are Physicists Closing In on Dark Matter?
With no conclusive laboratory results, researchers are turning to other methods to find the elusive substance
/Dan Falk/
…

We don't need a lab, we need a brain. Matter is "implanted" into physical space (aether), it is actually a damaged, deformed physical space, elementary particles are basically defects in the regular structure of physical space, and the massive movement of stars in galaxies is actually the overall movement of physical space (aether), pulled by "ingrown" matter...

And, WHERE did so-called 'luminerous ether' come from, EXACTLY?

Also, WHAT is so-called 'luminerous ether', EXCTLY?

'Dark energy' is just the made up name that astronomers gave to the mysterious "something" that is claimed to be causing the False PRESUMPTION and BELIEF that Universe, Itself, is expanding at an accelerated rate.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:32 am 'Dark energy' is just the made up name that astronomers gave to the mysterious "something" that is claimed to be causing the False PRESUMPTION and BELIEF that Universe, Itself, is expanding at an accelerated rate.

The universe (as a whole) is flat and static.
The universe (as a whole) is neither expanding nor accelerating.
Only in some places there are different disturbances of galaxies.
The proof.
The critical density (cosmological constant) of the material universe (in the cosmic vacuum)
is about 5.96×10^−27 kg/m^3. Such small amount of mass cannot create a "big bang" and therefore
the universe (as a whole) is static, flat, cold, and isotropic.
Such state mathematician Minkowski called "an absolute 4D spacetime".
This mathematically "beautiful" trick made science "strange".
‘’Since the mathematical physicists have taken over, theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the overuse and misinterpretation of mathematics
would be funny if it were not for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection.’’ /Richard Feynman. Nobel Prize in Physics 1965/

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:32 am 'Dark energy' is just the made up name that astronomers gave to the mysterious "something" that is claimed to be causing the False PRESUMPTION and BELIEF that Universe, Itself, is expanding at an accelerated rate.

The universe (as a whole) is flat and static.

Although in ALL directions objects can be seen, and can be seen to be changing. But the Universe, as a whole, is static in that It is always changing.

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am The universe (as a whole) is neither expanding nor accelerating.

As an infinite in size thing could NOT expand, NOR accelerate.

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am Only in some places there are different disturbances of galaxies.

Which is just as expected, and normal.

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am The proof.
The critical density (cosmological constant) of the material universe (in the cosmic vacuum)
is about 5.96×10^−27 kg/m^3. Such small amount of mass cannot create a "big bang" and therefore
the universe (as a whole) is static, flat, cold, and isotropic.

In relation to 'what', exactly?

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am Such state mathematician Minkowski called "an absolute 4D spacetime".
This mathematically "beautiful" trick made science "strange".
‘’Since the mathematical physicists have taken over, theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the overuse and misinterpretation of mathematics
would be funny if it were not for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection.’’ /Richard Feynman. Nobel Prize in Physics 1965/

The Universe, Itself, is ABSOLUTE SIMPLE, in the way It works, and functions.

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am ‘’Since the mathematical physicists have taken over, theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the overuse and misinterpretation of mathematics
would be funny if it were not for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection.’’ /Richard Feynman. Nobel Prize in Physics 1965/

Feynman said no such thing, but that exact quote is perpetuated regularly in social media.
So do you have a non-social media reference that shows he actually said that?

Noax wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 12:30 pm

socrattus wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 7:07 am ‘’Since the mathematical physicists have taken over, theoretical physics has gone to pot.
The bizarre concepts generated out of the overuse and misinterpretation of mathematics
would be funny if it were not for the tragedy of the waste in time, manpower, money,
and the resulting misdirection.’’ /Richard Feynman. Nobel Prize in Physics 1965/

Feynman said no such thing, but that exact quote is perpetuated regularly in social media.
So do you have a non-social media reference that shows he actually said that?

Regardless of who wrote it, it's accurate

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:26 am

socrattus wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 11:43 am

Cerveny wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 7:44 am
We don't need a lab, we need a brain. Matter is "implanted" into physical space (aether), it is actually a damaged, deformed physical space, elementary particles are basically defects in the regular structure of physical space, and the massive movement of stars in galaxies is actually the overall movement of physical space (aether), pulled by "ingrown" matter...

And, WHERE did so-called 'luminerous ether' come from, EXACTLY?

Also, WHAT is so-called 'luminerous ether', EXCTLY?

Aether = physical (real) space = (perfect) vacuum

Cerveny wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 8:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:26 am

socrattus wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 11:43 am

And, WHERE did so-called 'luminerous ether' come from, EXACTLY?

Also, WHAT is so-called 'luminerous ether', EXCTLY?

Aether = physical (real) space = (perfect) vacuum

Do the words 'vacuum' or 'perfect vacuum' imply 'physically free space'?

And, when you use the word 'physical (real) space' what is 'that', exactly? (Providing examples here would be very helpful.)

Also, what is the difference between '(real) space', and, '(not real), or (unreal) space', exactly?

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 11:17 pm

Cerveny wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 8:07 pm

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 2:26 am

And, WHERE did so-called 'luminerous ether' come from, EXACTLY?

Also, WHAT is so-called 'luminerous ether', EXCTLY?

Aether = physical (real) space = (perfect) vacuum

Do the words 'vacuum' or 'perfect vacuum' imply 'physically free space'?

And, when you use the word 'physical (real) space' what is 'that', exactly? (Providing examples here would be very helpful.)

Also, what is the difference between '(real) space', and, '(not real), or (unreal) space', exactly?

WHAT is so-called 'luminiferous ether', Aether, nothingness, emptiness, perfect vacuum,
dark energy, dark matter, black holes, wormholes, 5D, 10D, 11D, 27D, MD,
and some 1000 quantum particles + god particles + ..... , EXCTLY? .....
if the ordinary matter in the universe is only about 5%.

The whole weakness of mainstream physics lies in the idea that the aether is something in some kind of (ideal) space. But the aether is that (real) space, I think.

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 12:55 pm The whole weakness of mainstream physics lies in the idea that the aether is something in some kind of (ideal) space. But the aether is that (real) space, I think.

And elementary particles are defects in the structure of physical (real) space (of aether), I think.

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 1:02 pm

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 12:55 pm The whole weakness of mainstream physics lies in the idea that the aether is something in some kind of (ideal) space. But the aether is that (real) space, I think.

And elementary particles are defects in the structure of physical (real) space (of aether), I think.

The whole weakness of mainstream physics is that it ignores the vacuum
as the source of the material world. ... Maybe 20 years ago I was talking to a physicist
(he was about 35 years old). I was trying to explain how important the vacuum is. ...
He looked at me from his tall height and said "My grandfather was a physicist,
my father is a physicist, and I am a physicist and vacuum is nothing."
I wanted to object, to say that quantum physics is based on vacuum,
but looking at his proud face, I said nothing.

socrattus wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 6:28 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 11:17 pm

Cerveny wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2024 8:07 pm
Aether = physical (real) space = (perfect) vacuum

Do the words 'vacuum' or 'perfect vacuum' imply 'physically free space'?

And, when you use the word 'physical (real) space' what is 'that', exactly? (Providing examples here would be very helpful.)

Also, what is the difference between '(real) space', and, '(not real), or (unreal) space', exactly?

WHAT is so-called 'luminiferous ether', Aether, nothingness, emptiness, perfect vacuum,
dark energy, dark matter, black holes, wormholes, 5D, 10D, 11D, 27D, MD,
and some 1000 quantum particles + god particles + ..... , EXCTLY? .....

So, to you anyway, so-called 'luminiferous ether' is BOTH the 'no thing', and, the some thing', which together makes up the Universe, Itself.

socrattus wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 6:28 am if the ordinary matter in the universe is only about 5%.

The Universe at Its most fundamental level is composed of two things, being 'matter', and, 'space'. But you want to claim that there is some thing classed as, and so-called, 'ordinary matter'. Now, how do you differentiate between 'ordinary matter', and ,'abnormal matter', exactly? And, how much of the Universe is composed of 'abnormal matter', exactly?

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 12:55 pm The whole weakness of mainstream physics lies in the idea that the aether is something in some kind of (ideal) space. But the aether is that (real) space, I think.

And, what is '(real) space', exactly?

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 1:02 pm

Cerveny wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 12:55 pm The whole weakness of mainstream physics lies in the idea that the aether is something in some kind of (ideal) space. But the aether is that (real) space, I think.

And elementary particles are defects in the structure of physical (real) space (of aether), I think.

you human beings 'think' a lot of things, but really that does not help in just getting to and KNOWING what is actually True, and not.

Now, what are 'elementary particles' of, exactly? Find out 'this', then you will be getting somewhat closer to ALSO KNOWING what is actually True, here.