I feel like sharing

What was that thing he said he needed six months or something to reflect on, and he'd get back to us about? Something about some bullshit, I think, if that rings any bells

 

So that the wise may know my motive: Matthew 10:27; Ephesians 5:13.

I was arriving home on a Friday about a month ago when a thought came into my head from outside myself. The thought? "Uncertainty Principal." So I skimmed the wiki I had downloaded from the net for its equations and found ΔEΔt = ħ/2. So I applied it to the equation E' = 0 - E, and changed the zero into Ø (which according to Character Map is "U+00D8 Latin Capital Letter O with Stroke") to create E' = Ø - E. I decided to use Ø to represent a "non-zero" zero because it is not a zero, but it looks like one. And defined Ø as ħ/(2Δt), which, even independent of "my" equation, answers "the question." On that following Monday, I submitted my update and was, of course, rejected.

Just as well, I have since come to the conclusion that science is "dead"... meaning that we have all the knowledge necessary to answer every mystery that science has to offer us. What we lack is understanding (and/or intelligence). I have come to that conclusion, in part, because I was 'told' (in the same manner as I was 'told' "Uncertainty Principle") that "the question" is an intelligence test. Also, that this knowledge is not classified. My soulmate and I was communing recently (which tends to happen when we are not in conflict with each other) and we realized that the movie Theory of Everything mentions "10 impossible questions" of which Hawking answered five. Perhaps the question at hand is one of them?

Now as to why it took me a month to share... I was waiting for "them" to arrive to inform me that the data I just shared shouldn't be shared. And I was feeling like I was under surveillance. "They" never showed up; the feeling went away; and I realized that the so-called "collective consciousness" I had been searching for answers had others searching as well, so it would make sense that I would feel spied upon by those looking for the answers I had. So I gave my paper to someone of the next generation to keep, and decided to share this one last bit of experience.

I believe that the only way to prevent others from going through that "difficulty" when transcending intellectually is raise as many people up to that level as possible. So I am contemplating finding the answers to all the questions and presenting them to the younger generations in such a manner that even a child could learn them. The next one I am considering is Entropy's Arrow of Time, and the answer to that one I think can be found in Maxwell's equations that govern thermodynamics's energy transfer, that is, as an atom (which is composed of charged particles) vibrates it generates electromagnetic waves in the infrared spectrum because, relative to other particles, it is a moving charge, but if two particles are moving as one because their temps are the same, then no energy would be changed between them, or the transfers of energy would be equal betwixt the two. Of course, further research would require more math, but then that's the difficulty I would have to deal with.

Proverbs 28:5 "Evil men understand not judgment: but they that seek the LORD understand all things." leads me to believe that those that choose the wicked path will not understand, and those that choose to seek the LORD will. So let all have the knowledge that may or may be true and allow their own judgment separate one group from the other (at least until false prophets like Balaam arrive speaking both truth and lies).

 

The idea that your own thoughts are arriving from an external source, delusions of grandeur (sure, "anyone" can solve these fundamental questions - I guess it's fortunate that you're one of the people who have the intelligence most people lack) and feelings of paranoia where you think you're being watched are not good and definitely symptomatic of something.

I strongly suggest you submit yourself for psychiatric evaluation, and I'd wager to say if your soulmate if co-opting in your fantasies without any awareness that something is up she does the same.

Beyond that, your points are idiotic at best. I know at least in my field, enzymatic chemistry, that there isn't enough "knowledge" currently to solve all the existing questions. If there were, people would be able to engineer enzymes to do pretty much any reaction (solving pretty much all the world's problems) as they are vastly superior catalysts compared to almost anything else out there and are easily produced if you use DNA to transform bacteria and ferment them on an industrial scale (far, far cheaper, greener and more efficient than chemical synthesis). The fact is, people fundamentally lack the knowledge required to predict how proteins fold and how to create an active site - so enzyme engineering is crude at best. To say "the knowledge is out there already" is just moronic - new scientific discovery is definitely required in this example for the field to further itself, which I'm willing to wager is the case for a whole lot of other science too.

I guess my studying for a PhD pales to your lofty armchair science and nonsensical ideas however, so by your measure I'm sure I'm wrong. You know, it's not like I'm making a career out of my knowledge or anything.

 

Perhaps this has something to do with it. I'm no science nerd but gosh darn it if those people don't seem like they'd want you to at least read a whole wiki article before coming to some conclusions. Some people are such perfectionists.

9 out of 10, I think I remember. And no it wasn't one of them, because of course it wasn't. Especially if that bit of bio was fictional, but especially if it wasn't.

 

You're obviously taking the wrong approach here, Jo. You're probably wasting your time doing "experiments" and looking for "corroborating evidence" and all that nonsense. The secret of good science is to take two unrelated equations that use the same letters, and then juggle them around with some Unicode character substitution, and voila - the secrets of the universe will be revealed.

Oh no wait, I got the order wrong. First the secrets of the universe are revealed, then you do the equation juggling. Then you pass on the wisdom to someone of the next generation, by hiding it in a set of cryptic clues for them to uncover one by one, presumably while being chased by the CIA and falling in love with a reluctant co-participant who unknowingly became involved in the conspiracy via an accidental briefcase substitution while they were just trying to get home in time for Thanksgiving, dammit!

 

So you found the basis of the uncertainty principle and used it to prove that the net energy of the universe is a "non-zero zero". Here's something I turned up; ΔE ≥ ħ/2Δt. This is an equation for the minimum level of uncertainty in a given measurement, which can be used to measure the mass of an indeterminate boson. You're co-opting equations and formulas with established meanings and values and telling people they mean something utterly different.

No field of study is dead. Knowing more about something increases the amount of questions we're able to ask about it, so it's going to be fairly difficult to declare that of science.

This is actually "explained" when using imaginary time to simplify quantum mechanics, which turns it into a study on thermodynamics. It radically simplifies things when you no longer have to consider the direction of time when talking about energy on the quantum scale. Aside from that, you're also describing quantum entanglement.

Are you saying anyone who doesn't agree with what you're saying is choosing the "wicked path"? I need some clarification on this before I whip out my conclusion mat and jump to it.

 

And there goes the armchair scientist who isn't so armchair, I'm sure Gross surpasses my knowledge of physics on quite a few levels. Honestly, I wish Xyle could.

Everyone's criticisms have been more valid and humorous than mine, but I guess I was annoyed on such an empirical level how flawed his philosophy was - how almost anyone with any field experience can counter it. I guess I hope he'll realise what's up with himself, but probably not.

 

Oh, thank you. But I must admit, my scientist credentials merely come from a very comfy armchair.

 

I would contribute to the conversation, but I'm sitting on a stool.

 

I only have an office chair.
Not very comfortable, but it helps keep me awake while I'm lurking.

 

No Rick and Morty reference yet?

 

I sit on a Swiss exercise ball. It helps engage my core. Also I'm a 'pig cunt yo dun no a damn thing bitch' according to generic drunk guy number 11 of the night.