Ask Me Anything

Author: DynamicSquid ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 33
  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    Ask me anything...
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,072
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Feynmans question to self, was, why does the mass of the electron repeat itself at approximately at 206.7572826?

    Pi { 3.133 approximation } * 66 = 206.778 and  is approximate to  mass of the muon-electron

    Pi = 3.141 - 3.133 = 0.008 differrence

    Why 66?

    66 lines-of-relationships between 12 vertexes of the 5-fold icosahedron and the 12 vertexes of Vector-Equlibrium

    Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 62 7 66..............

    Pi^4{ XYZ-t } - 31{ XYZ } = 66.4 0909 10 34 00 24
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Pi^3{ 3D }

    Pi^4{ 3D + t } this one is suspect as we consider the 4th-D as inherently time only value { more on that at bottom of page }

    Pi^4 { 4D } - 4 = ‭24.35 22 7 27.....
    ..this latter above is my process of renormalizing 4D{ as spatial only }  as a time value only.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Is it a valid process to consider time in the above Pi^4{ 3D + t } instead of considering it as a hyper-dimension?

    Considering the 4th-Dimension as Micho Kaku does, as the internal diagonal of XYZ cube, then that is INward.

    My numerical torus creates reality as sine-wave via INward inversions from peak of positive curvature and negative curvature of my 4 line/level numerical based torus.


  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @ebuc
    That's just a coincidence. Let me explain.

    Why are firetrucks red?

    Because they have eight wheels and four people on them, and four plus eight makes twelve, and there are twelve inches in a foot, and one foot is a ruler, and Queen Elizabeth was a ruler, and Queen Elizabeth was also a ship, and the ship sailed the seas, and there were fish in the seas, and fish have fins, and the Finns fought the Russians, and the Russians are red, and fire trucks are always “Russian" around.

    - Monty Python
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,072
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @DynamicSquid
    So you have no idea why the electrons mass repeats as the muon electron and thee tau electrons specific mass.

    That's fine, just asking.  We never know, what others might know, to aid us on our journey, unless we ask

  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Two questions since you asked...

    What is your passion?

    I noticed you are an Atheist, without claiming there is no evidence for God....including all you have thought of, what is it that has persuaded you to accept such an ideology? say...as opposed to agnosticism or a neutral position? 
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,072
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Pi^4 { 4D } - 4 = ‭24.35 22 7 27.......this is above is my original process of renormalizing 4D{ as spatial only }  as a time value only.

    Oops, a caught a misprint.  The above should read Pi^4 { 4D } / 4 = 24.35 22 7 27

    / = division



  • Alec
    Alec avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 2,474
    5
    7
    11
    Alec avatar
    Alec
    --> @DynamicSquid
    You do a lot of space debates.  You probably want more funding for NASA.  How much more money would you give them?
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @DynamicSquid
    ARE YOU A NASA AGENT!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @ebuc @EtrnlVw @PressF4Respect
    Ebuc

    Yeah I have no clue.

    Eternal

    1. Programming
    2. My parents were atheists, so I kinda just grew into it. I'm not really into religious topics, however I think that my current understanding of science and way of thinking prevents me from believing in any form of religion

    Alec

    Nice of you to notice! However I don't know an exact value for their budget increase. A couple more billion should be fine, probably a little more than 30 billion. I still need to do more research on how they spend their budget exactly.

    PressF4

    no
  • Singularity
    Singularity avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 1,019
    2
    3
    8
    Singularity avatar
    Singularity
    What do you think about transhumanism

  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid
    1. Programming
    Interesting, what about programming do you think attracts you so much?
    2. My parents were atheists, so I kinda just grew into it. I'm not really into religious topics, however I think that my current understanding of science and way of thinking prevents me from believing in any form of religion
    So, are you saying that science and religion/spirituality cannot be compatible? I for example, agree with science AND spirituality on most things (most things because neither are perfect). I think they can be in harmony with one another because they both study two different natures of our experience.
    Now when you say your way of thinking prevents you from religious propositions that worries me lol, because you don't want conditioned thinking to get in the way of potential possibilities. Did you know you don't have to accept any form of religion to accept there is a Creator? religion studies the nature of God but God exists independent of any religions, they are just there to relay knowledge and information.

  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,239
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Why?
  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @EtrnlVw @Mopac @Singularity
    Singularity

    Like brain implants and all that?

    Eternal

    1. I like the freedom of it, you can do whatever you want. It's also cool to see a bunch of lines on a computer create something. I'm also trying out game design with Unreal, and so far I love it!

    2. To me, I don't think they can be compatible. I think Science can prove everything, and it can disprove religion/creator. Now obviously science can't definitely prove everything yet, but I think it can and will in the future for sure. I also think being raised an atheist helped to cement my beliefs.

    Mopac

    Yes.
  • Alec
    Alec avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 2,474
    5
    7
    11
    Alec avatar
    Alec
    --> @DynamicSquid
    A couple more billion should be fine, probably a little more than 30 billion. I still need to do more research on how they spend their budget exactly.

    They currently get $19 billion per year.  I think they should get more funding, but it shouldn't exceed $200 billion per year.
  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @Alec
    $200 billion's too much. Way way too much. That's like a third of the military's budget! Instead of increasing NASA's budget a ton, we should focus on collaborating with private companies, and working with them. It's already happening, and has expanded the space sector a ton.

  • Alec
    Alec avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 2,474
    5
    7
    11
    Alec avatar
    Alec
    --> @DynamicSquid
    That's what I would want to spend in 2033.  Now, I'd keep it at around $85 billion.

  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @Alec
    Wow, you really want to see a lot of progress being done?

    If we spend this much money on space, what sectors are we going to be reducing?
  • Alec
    Alec avatar
    Debates: 42
    Forum posts: 2,474
    5
    7
    11
    Alec avatar
    Alec
    --> @DynamicSquid
    It's complicated, but here's my spending plan:


    Turns out NASA was getting less than what I thought.
  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid

    1. I like the freedom of it, you can do whatever you want. It's also cool to see a bunch of lines on a computer create something. I'm also trying out game design with Unreal, and so far I love it!

    Sweet.

    2. To me, I don't think they can be compatible.

    Why? I just said they work with two different natures lol?

    I think Science can prove everything, and it can disprove religion/creator.

    Science is a neutral study, it has no say whether or not God exists and that's not its purpose. As a matter of fact due to the very nature of God the scientific method can't reach that information. Science studies how things work in our natural universe that's it, if God exists science is still doing that same thing no more no less. It's just a method to examine what we observe in the natural world, you're putting too much emphasis where it don't belong, science contains no information on its own other than what we feed it. 

     Now obviously science can't definitely prove everything yet, but I think it can and will in the future for sure.

    Why are you waiting for science to prove something for you? doesn't that seem like a pipe dream when we have a study like spirituality that's been here all along that is capable and compatible with the nature of the Creator? Basically you are waiting around for it to do something it can never accomplish, even more it is a neutral study meaning the evidence can be interpreted as compatible to Theism as well.

     I also think being raised an atheist helped to cement my beliefs.

    Don't atheists condemn believers for that very thing? I wouldn't say that's a good thing because again we are back to conditioned thinking.

  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @EtrnlVw
    Well, what exactly do you define as a God or Creator?
  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Well, what exactly do you define as a God or Creator?

    God IS a Creator...The term Creator says a lot but God can be considered "the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality (Ultimate Observer) in the universe. God is the immaterial, efficient, formal and final cause of all that exists....the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes. As a metaphysical concept God is the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe."

    To make things more simplistic or easier to conceptualize, imagine your own conscious being but on a massive scale. Imagine if you had no bodily form but your awareness still existed, almost like as if you were just a mind or a pure conscious entity. Imagine that awareness to be comparable to energy as we know it in the universe. How it is omnipresent, without being created or destroyed....eternally existing. 
    Now imagine that everything that exists...exists within this formless mind or consciousness and that the Creator manipulates energy to create form that it may have endless experiences through all different channels of conscious activity.

    Let me know if you can get your head around that or if it makes any sense to you, if not I can elaborate more on it.

  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @EtrnlVw
    I think I know what you're saying, but that's where I disagree. I think Science doesn't support that belief of consciousness. No being can be like that.
  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid
    I think I know what you're saying, but that's where I disagree. I think Science doesn't support that belief of consciousness.

    Consciousness is an open question in science so anything they put forth is basically conjecture. Their conception of awareness will always be incomplete because they look at it azz backwards. Inanimate material does not create consciousness, consciousness exists as it is just like energy and it is this foundation of intelligence that creates form through energy, not the other way around.

    If you were to add awareness to energy you wouldn't be that far off from what you currently believe, only you would have a model that makes more sense. Have you ever asked yourself why energy exists at all? what is it? why is it there? how does it produce form and intelligence?
    Don't you think it is strange that any inanimate force could produce processes and sentient  beings? I mean you think this is possible so why is it so hard to consider that consciousness exists like energy exists?

    No being can be like that.

    Awareness is exactly like that and that is the nature of God, omnipresent. Omnipresent means there is nowhere something exists where God is not aware or present….Consciousness does not need a vehicle to exist, it needs form to have experiences though outside of itself.
    I understand it's not what you're used to accepting but awareness is the foundation behind all things...energy exists because conscious activity exists, conscious activity generates energy and so they co-exist. This is why energy operates as an intelligent force within the universe, why it produces what it does.

  • EtrnlVw
    EtrnlVw avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,211
    2
    3
    4
    EtrnlVw avatar
    EtrnlVw
    --> @DynamicSquid
    Science doesn't support that belief

    Science doesn't answer questions about God remember? this would be outside the realm of what science can reach. So when we are discussing the Creator and the nature of God we are leaving science out of the discussion. 
    If you want to learn anything new in regards to God, the soul or how creation is put together we move over to spirituality and the knowledge that correlates with the nature of God. 
    So it's not that science doesn't support it, it simply doesn't know it. 
  • DynamicSquid
    DynamicSquid avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 182
    0
    3
    11
    DynamicSquid avatar
    DynamicSquid
    --> @EtrnlVw
    So to answer your question about consciousness/awareness, I think that consciousness can only be derived from having a brain, and a brain can only be in a species, like us. So I don't think energy fields could have a consciousness. Also, energy fields in general can be simplified to atomic particles, and sometimes even smaller. Energy in a sense is measurable, and observable (well, not now, but in the future possibly). It's like air. We can't see it, but we can measure it, observe it in some ways, and therefore know what it is.

    And the thing about God. I think what you mean is that God isn't intelligent life (like us), but rather just energy with a consciousness. However, like I said before, energy is measurable, and observable. This means that we can track individual "energy units." This I believe contradicts the theory of God.