Philosophy Now Forum

I'm certain about matter and energy and space. I think everybody would agree to that. How about dark matter and dark energy and quintessence (a type of dark energy)? Do you count them as part of the universe? What about the ether/aether? Is there something I'm missing?

PhilX

Plasma/Electricity - found among the large majority of the Universe and perhaps all of the Universe.

My two cents:

http://www.plasmacosmology.net/
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/

einstien searched for the unmoving thing.aether as that unmoving thing does not exist.dark matter is still matter of sorts so it moves.every thing moves.nothing= nonmoving.but the measurer of c finds himself stationary to c.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm certain about matter and energy and space. I think everybody would agree to that. How about dark matter and dark energy and quintessence (a type of dark energy)? Do you count them as part of the universe? What about the ether/aether? Is there something I'm missing?

PhilX

Yes, you most certainly have to factor in the proportions of dark energy and dark matter. Unless you do so about 90 percent of the universe is missing.

I think you are over complicating things. For the purposes of physics, all you really have to factor in is matter/energy. Since they are convertible, it's the same 'stuff' and there is no reason to assume it doesn't have, or cannot give rise to all the properties we experience, among them dark matter and energy, but also including experience itself. Spatial dimensions and time can be considered purely as relational, so that for all the mathematical convenience of x,y,z and t, they don't actually 'exist, consciousness is almost certainly an emergent property, there is no evidence of any god, so all you need to make the universe that we see is some 'stuff' that does exactly what we observe. (It also gets round the problem of how completely different substances interact.)

the universe is made of energy intareacting with nonlocality .its not just energy .energy is locality and locality came from nonlocality.so energy+timespace= nonlocality as in matter at the speed of light =consciousness.consciousness is stationary to the speed of light.the universe then can then be simple explain as a consciouse expression or a differential in consiousness which is a though.so its all realy thought .your thought

jackles wrote:the universe is made of energy intareacting with nonlocality .its not just energy .energy is locality and locality came from nonlocality.so energy+timespace= nonlocality as in matter at the speed of light =consciousness.

You could be right, jackles. I have to allow for that possibility, because despite my best efforts, I have no idea what you are on about.

jackles wrote:consciousness is stationary to the speed of light.the universe then can then be simple explain as a consciouse expression or a differential in consiousness which is a though.so its all realy thought .your thought

Very, very unlikely. I promise you: I could not make you up.

your thoughts couldnt start this universe uwot but your real identity could.its your real nonevent nonmoving id that singular nonlocal consciousness that started this old universe rockin and rolling.the exact same consciouness we all as animals are pluged into at the quantum level of things that started the universe .tell me please uwot as matter of interest.what do you think the status of an observers consciousness is as regs moving in relativity as regs c

Philosophy Explorer wrote:I'm certain about matter and energy and space. I think everybody would agree to that. How about dark matter and dark energy and quintessence (a type of dark energy)? Do you count them as part of the universe? What about the ether/aether? Is there something I'm missing?

PhilX

What is it about matter that you are certain of? Can you explain why inertial and gravitational mass are the same? Do you even know that they each represent different concepts?

I'm delighted to find someone who deeply understands energy. I've wondered why all physical expressions of energy are time-dependent, yet the principles of thermodynamics, the most fundamental descriptions of energy's behavior, are all time independent. I await your explanation, but won't be holding my breath until it appears.

Quintessence? Have you been drinking from the same pretentious intellectual toilet bowl that you've been shitting in?

My guess is that the only thing that you are missing is an I.Q.

GE,

First you say this: "I'm delighted to find someone who deeply understands energy."

Next you say this which is inconsistent with the other statement just above: "My guess is that the only thing that you are missing is an I.Q."

Now for your questions. You asked: "I've wondered why all physical expressions of energy are time-dependent..." If you look at the Einstein equation E = mc[sup]2[/sup], it's the speed of light portion that is time dependent as its speed is lowered when light passes through a gravity field and the law of conservation of energy guarantees that all energies are equivalent to one another.

PhilX

The second part of your question asserts: "...yet the principles of thermodynamics, the most fundamental descriptions of energy's behavior, are all time independent."

This is wrong. Entropy can only decrease over time so it is time dependent (I think you had this conversation before with someone else).

With respect to Quintessence, your statement clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:The second part of your question asserts: "...yet the principles of thermodynamics, the most fundamental descriptions of energy's behavior, are all time independent."

This is wrong. Entropy can only decrease over time so it is time dependent (I think you had this conversation before with someone else).

With respect to Quintessence, your statement clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about.

PhilX

..so ..if you already know the answers, then why ask them?

..attentionwhoring??

HexHammer wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:The second part of your question asserts: "...yet the principles of thermodynamics, the most fundamental descriptions of energy's behavior, are all time independent."

This is wrong. Entropy can only decrease over time so it is time dependent (I think you had this conversation before with someone else).

With respect to Quintessence, your statement clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about.

PhilX

..so ..if you already know the answers, then why ask them?

..attentionwhoring??

Maybe I do or maybe I don't know all the answers.

How about you? Do you have the answers or hold opinions about the universe (keep in mind that empty space is loaded with properties).

PhilX

.




Hydrogen.


The universe, EVERYTHING in the universe - including you, is nothing more than hydrogen...and derivatives and crossroads of such.






.

The universe is made up of certainty.and forms of it.