Notices
Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: "Einstein was wrong!! And Evil!!"

  1. #1 "Einstein was wrong!! And Evil!!" 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    EINSTEIN WAS WRONG!! AND EVIL!!


    "There are only two infinities.

    The universe, and, human stupidity.

    And,

    I'm not too sure about the universe."

    - Albert Einstein

    ______________________________

    Mr. Fred Hutchison:

    Nominated as Supreme PsuedoScientist & Einstein Basher of the New Millennium.

    Compliments of 'bascule', of Science Forums and Debate - SFN, who - along with Truly Yours - enjoys sharing unassailable, ingrate, light shedding counterstatements about Einstein's Semite ravings.
    Please click on the red URL for a memorable (if anomalous) tour of one of the many rooms in the Mickey Mouse bonkers house.

    http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/hutchison/050128

    Please click on that and read, before proceeding.

    Any suggestions as to how Mr. Hutchison might be reached for highly rewarded lecture tours and autograph sessions? The enigma about Mr. Hutchison is - in the opinion of this reviewer - the contrast between the relatively well written and realistic if not agreeable work he's done in other issues; whereas, physical science, especially Einstein's work, proves not to be, uuhhm, Mr. Hutchison's forte.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    he were right and was a good man


    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nebraska, the Heartland!
    Posts
    129
    Dr. Einstein was wrong about the universe being infinite. At the time, the prevailing theory was for an infinite universe - hence the 'Cosmological Constat'. He later found that was wrong; the universe is finite, but curved and expanding. The human stupidity part bears watching.

    By the way, stupidity is cumulative and geometric in progression. Two people are four times dumber than one. Groups of people are dumber than individuals.

    The heartening thing about Dr. Einstein was, when he was wrong and found out, he admitted it and moved on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    That Rascal Puff,
    I am a simple man, with simple tastes: smoked salmon with a mixed salad and Italian dressing, washed down with a Chardonnay, for example.

    This simplicity doubtless reflects a brain structure with relatively few neural connections, and an intellect that is in many ways below par.

    This is surely the explanation for the fact that I have no idea what the purpose of your opening thread is. Do you think you can explain, in very simple terms, short sentences and relevant points, what your aim was? And if you can do so, would you do so?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Einstein was wrong! And he's evil!' 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    Dear Ophiolite:
    Thank you for your response.
    ."...This is surely the explanation for the fact that I have no idea what the purpose of your opening thread is. Do you think you can explain, in very simple terms, short sentences and relevant points, what your aim was? And if you can do so, would you do so?"

    Mr. Hutchison is an unconvincing impersonator.
    His statements are based on false presuppositions.
    He cheats.
    (He cooks the books).
    The whole of his work consists of imaginative mind excercises in his office.
    He is a non pantheist who puts no stock in the work of Spinoza, is not Semite, and did not have to flee the Nazi juggernaut.

    ***************************
    And now, this:

    Many great scientists have been wrong, made mistakes, some of these men acknowledged their mistakes, some did not, and some were unaware of them. Einstein was among those who believed he made a mistake, and called it the biggest blunder of his life.
    Newton for example said 'I make no hypothesis'; yet most of his Classical Mechanics is based on 'particles', which have yet to be confirmed to exist. The production of the atomic bomb (commented on - as a reprimand, declaring Einstein to be 'evil', by one of Mr Hutchison's acolytes at another site) can be traced back to all of the giants of science who culminated in Einstein's work, which did in fact enable the invention of the atomic bomb. All of the contributors to the evolution of physics can be held resoponsible for every destructive culmination of the series of scientific contributions that precede it. As proven in the below series of excerpts from Fred Hutchison's work, an abbreviated, itemized response to your question is not tenable.

    May it suffice to say that many of Hutchison's equivocations are self revealing, whereas, a general response to Fred Hutchison and his misconceptions, prejudices and prevarications concering Einstein is accessible at http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie. Mr. Hutchison's essay resembles and proves itself to be more an evangelistically spirited bitter tirade than an objective critique.

    Einstein predicted an spatially expanding universe;; he did not predict any so called 'big bang'. The 'biggest blunder' he ever made in his life appears to be coming back around as being akin to the levity of Groucho Marx, proclaiming: "I made one mistake in my life. I believed I had made a mistake for years, but eventually discovered that I was right afer all."
    _________________________

    Mr. Hutchison's statements follow:(There is more than one mistake here, there's a hovel of them. I can provide a book length series of answers at this post, or refer the Reader to http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie and get back to this post after the Reader evaluates the referred material.)

    I have an idea what the purpose of Mr. Hutchison's 'Critique On Einstein', is. Does Mr. Hutchison think he can explain, in very simple terms, short sentences and relevant points, what his aim - in this critique - was? And if he can do so, will he do so?
    ___________________________

    Einstein's theories were based on false presuppositions.

    Einstein is comparable to an unconvincing impersonator.

    the whole of his work consisted of imaginative mind excercises in his office (*Much of this statement is true. So what? - TRP)

    Einstein uses plug figures to make the numbers balance, in short,
    Einsten cheats.

    The empirical proofs of Einstein's theories do not constitute a discovery of "laws of nature"

    They are useless for problems which are above or below the "radar range" of these applications.

    e) Einstein's ability to predict physical nature in a spotty way, does indeed demonstrate the existence of orderly laws of nature we can count on, but does not demonstrate that he knows what those laws are. He has only found a technique to impersonate those laws in order to calculate predictable outcomes. A convincing impersonator of a celebrity might not have any clue to the inner psychology behind the quavery voice, blinking eyes, and nervous tic which he mimics. Einstein's ability to mimic the measurable phenomenon of nature (the exterior of nature) gives us no reason to believe that he understood the realities which lie behind the phenomena (the interior of nature.).

    A False World View

    If reason and free will exist, then Einstein's cosmos is false. If a spiritual realm exists outside of a closed system of cause and effect, then Einstein's cosmos is false. If God is personal and transcendent then Einstein's cosmos is false. If God is the creator and differs in quality from the creation, then Einstein's cosmos is false. If there is a discrete separation between elements of the creation (heaven-earth, light-dark, land-sea, species after their own kind, man/creature, man as an individual) then Einstein's cosmos is false.

    Einstein claimed he was inspired by the beauty and harmony of the cosmos. But a picture of everything melting into every other thing is the epitome of ugliness and disorder, as we learn from surrealist artists such as Salvador Dali. A regimented closed system is the barrenness of a prison. Order, yes. Beauty, no.

    Did Einstein build all his theories on the presuppositions of Spinoza's pantheism? Yes. When he said, "God does not throw dice with the universe," he was referring to the seeming disorder of Quantum Mechanics which deals with the realm of atoms and molecules. If there are nooks and crannies in the cosmos where things can happen which are incongruent with other parts of the cosmos, then the cosmos cannot be an interlocking closed system. Einstein rejected this out of hand, not because of evidence or logic but because of his faith in Spinoza's pantheistic cosmos. The second half of Einstein's career was wasted with the futile search for a "Unified Field Theory," which would reconcile Quantum Mechanics with his Theory of Relativity. The motive of his quest was to vindicate his vision of the cosmos. He did not pause to consider whether that vision was wrong or whether the facts led away from the direction he was going.

    The Theory of Relativity and other theories of Einstein always have one thing melting into another thing. Matter and energy are the same thing. (Remember Spinoza's notion that everything is one.) Matter can melt into energy and energy can be precipitated as matter. Time and space are also relative. A mass of matter warps the space-time continuum which causes gravity. Time is relative to speed. Time slows down in a rocket as it approaches the speed of light. All of these ideas were conceived in Einstein's youth and all emerged out of Spinoza's pantheism — a fantasy of a young excommunicated Jewish heretic who dreamed up a pantheistic prison system and called it god. It is a monstrosity which we now call science, thanks to the mind experiments of the young Einstein, who is now a cult hero.

    Mistakes Concerning Gravity

    Einstein claims that gravity is not the attraction of two bodies containing mass as Newton said. Einstein claims that gravity is caused by a warp in the time — space continuum. For example, if a beam of light passes earth within the zone of warping, the beam will bend. During an total eclipse of the sun in 1919, Einstein predicted that when the sun peeked out from behind the moon, the first rays of light could be observed from a point on the globe which would lie beyond the horizon if the sun's rays are straight. Einstein predicted that the rays would bend when they passed near the earth so that they could be seen over the horizon. Not only did the light rays curve, but they curved nearly the amount Einstein predicted. This proof made Einstein famous.

    But wait a minute! Einstein said that light sometimes behaves as a wave and sometimes as a particle. If light behaves as a particle, why could not the sunlight bend when it passes through earth's atmosphere, like light refracting as it passes through water or through a lens?

    Both Einstein and Newton had a model for predicting the revolution of moons around a planet and planets around the sun. But Einstein's calculations are more accurate for calculating the orbits of space stations or the movement of spaceships through the solar system. For NASA, Einstein rules. However, Newton is more practical and makes more sense when it is applied to the human scale, to falling bodies and flying baseballs. Einstein's theory of gravity cannot explain why a falling bodies near to the earth fall straight downwards.

    Gravity on earth has nothing to do with vortexes, whirlpools, or warps in the space-time continuum. A dropped baseball falls straight down. If their were a deep enough hole in the ground, it would fall to the center of the earth. It would steadily accelerate (if there was a vacuum in the hole) until it reached the center. After it passed the center, it would lose velocity because it would be pulled back to the center. This is a simple straight line attraction between two objects. It has nothing to do with a warp in the space time continuum which works obliquely upon moving objects in space.

    Einstein's gravity has no effect on the atomic level, and a negligible, if any effect on a baseball because other nearby forces overwhelm it. A baseball on the ground or flying through air is bound up with the elements of earth and is not free to move in spirals like objects in space. A baseball is attracted straight down towards the earth with Newton's gravity, not with Einstein's gravity. Different principles are at work at the atomic level, the human scale, and in outer space. The creation is not an integrated system neatly packaged as the tidy minded Einstein supposed. His cosmological pantheism is false.

    Einstein Cheats!

    The "cosmological constant," is a term Einstein coined in his theory of general relativity. The constant represents the theoretical possibility of density associated with empty space. Einstein's numbers indicated that the force of gravity would cause the cosmos to collapse. Since the cosmos is not collapsing there must be a balancing force. Einstein introduced the "cosmological constant" to supply that countervailing force. As a CPA, I would say that this is the equivalent of supplying a plug figure to make the books balance. Einstein's mathematics did not work. He made up a number to make his equations balance and called it the cosmological cosmos. Einstein cheats! But he got away with it because of his great prestige. "Einstein's mathematics could not be wrong. There must be something we are missing in the cosmos to vindicate his numbers."

    Years later, when Edwin Hubble discovered that the cosmos is not in equilibrium but the galaxies are moving away from us, Einstein said that the cosmological constant was the biggest mistake of his career. Yes, cheating is a "mistake."

    Modern cosmologists are still cheating. They cannot understand why the universe is not flying apart. The mathematics does not work for big-bang theory, a theory built upon foundations laid by Einstein.

    Some scientists claim that they can infer the presence of dark matter by observing gravitational forces (Einstein's vortexes) in space. I do not know enough about their math and the data it is based upon to say if this is true. However, I do know that scientists never empirically verified the existence of "density" which Einstein assumed must be in space to support his cosmological constant. I also assume that the computations of the imaginary dark matter must be going poorly because scientists are talking about bringing back the cosmological constant. "Dark matter is not enough. There must be more stuff out there. We need another plug figure. Hey remember Einstein's quaint old idea of the cosmologic constant...." Sounds like the cosmologists are floundering.

    May I offer a suggestion? Maybe there is something wrong conceptually with Einstein's theory of gravity when you extend it to galaxies. It does not work at the atomic or the human scale. It does work with spacecraft and planets. It does not work with galaxies. It is a niche theory, not a unified theory.

    Final Comments

    I have shown that Einstein is a niche scientist whose math only works within a limited range. Therefore, we should use Einstein when he is useful, but not regard him as our teacher about the nature of the physical world. This satisfies point d) under the heading Who Am I to Question Einstein?

    Question e) concerns why Einstein's work should not be counted as "laws of nature" but as practical engineering techniques for the space program. Newton observed the patterns of gravity and could predict the trajectories of bodies moving through the air with mathematics. But he humbly confessed that he did not know what gravity is and why it works that way. He correctly insisted that he was in the dark about the laws of nature. He said that he was like a small boy sitting on the sea shore playing with a pretty shell but oblivious to the great ocean of truth all around him. The same is true of Einstein's knowledge, but he mistakenly thought that he understood the cosmos because of his faith in Spinoza's philosophy.

    Einstein reminds me of a science fiction story about a scientist who built an android which convincingly mimics human behavior. The scientist claimed that he had discovered the secrets of human biology by observing his android. A medical doctor came into the room, opened the chest cavity of the android to reveal wires, computer chips, gears, motors and gauges. The doctor said, "I see no blood vessels, digestive system, muscles, bones, nerves or lungs. You know nothing about human biology. Your android is merely a mimic, a programmed parrot." Einstein's mathematical models, developed entirely at the blackboard, are like the android. They can predict certain natural events as a mimic. But they cannot tell us about the laws of nature just as the android could not tell the scientist anything about the circulatory system.

    It is high time for physics to outgrow Einstein. He has served his short term purpose but has become an historical dead end. I suspect that when a critical mass of physicists get up the nerve to defy Einstein, science will make a great leap forward." - Fred Hutchison, A CRITIQUE OF EINSTEIN (Excerpts)

    - Rascal Puff
    (Reflecting an example of the growing recreation of 'Einstein bashing'.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Einstein was wrong and evil 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    Archie wrote:
    Dr. Einstein was wrong about the universe being infinite. At the time, the prevailing theory was for an infinite universe - hence the 'Cosmological Constat'. He later found that was wrong; the universe is finite, but curved and expanding. The human stupidity part bears watching.

    By the way, stupidity is cumulative and geometric in progression. Two people are four times dumber than one. Groups of people are dumber than individuals.

    The heartening thing about Dr. Einstein was, when he was wrong and found out, he admitted it and moved on.
    _______________________________

    Dear Archie: Until further notice you are half right about the universe being finite, as Einstein put it, 'The universe is finite in space, but unbounded in time'.

    The 'Cosmological Constant' appears to be coming back into vogue. Indeed, that, and human stupidity do indeed bear watching.

    By the way, I could not agree with you more regarding the geometric extrapolation of dumb people. The higher they stack themselves, the stupider they are...

    'Limitless are the numbers of apparently correct answers, that can be based on a false premise'. - Anon
    'Science is not a democracy'. - Anon

    Indeed, Dr. Einstein was wrong, did admit it and then did move on.

    He was back to working on his previously abandoned Unified Field at Princeton University, until the time of his perishment, May, 1955. I completed a lot of it at http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie
    There are no accomodations for guest commentary at that location; if you care to do so here would be my honor, Sir.

    Sincere thanks for your response.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    309
    human stupidity definitly applies to That (idiot) Rascal Puff. and wouldnt the universe be infinite, and at the end of the universes mass be vaccum?
    I don't suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it

    the road to succes is never paved or clearly marked
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    http://www.aethertheory.co.uk/
    just take a look at this page, it claims einstein were wrong, and guess what? all they say is wrong and havnet been solved have been solved, hahahahhaahahahahahahahaha hylarius. so stupid
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    Methinks that if the biggest objections to Einstein's theory are 'Free Will' or the presence of metaphysics, I don't think many contemporary philosophers will have a problem with that..

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    i dont see how they go against each other. the only thing that goes against einsteins theory is the normal perception of the world
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Speaking of Philosophy & Dr. Einstein... 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Login | Donate | Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It's A Shame To Hide Such Good Stuff
    Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics
    Posted by Clerk on June 10, 2004 16:39:33 UTC


    Ph.D Indeed Means Dr. Of Philosophy
    Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Hide savolain | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To Clerk's post of Alexander's self induced denouement.
    Re-Posted by K B Robertson on June 9, 2004 21:35:42 UTC

    (Review of the previous post with my response)

    "CAN YOU PLEASE USE MATH
    TO SUPPORT YOUR PHILOSOPHY
    By Alexander, 6/8/2001
    "Because this is physics/astronomy place, not a philosophical magazine. Physics has nothing to to with opinions (blah-blah-blah...) - that is area of phylosophy. Physics is about verifiable by observation numbers/phenomena. It does not make sense to say that space is 3-dimensional (or 20-dimensional) and time is 5-dimensional unless you can support it by observation and math.

    "So, any observed facts or math to support your foggy opinions?"

    ___________________________________________

    Response to Alexander, by *K. B. Robertson - *That Rascal Puff:


    I was told of this series of replies to my posting of 'Xeno's (alleged) paradox'.

    The first response by Alexander surprised what few correspondents I am blessed with, who told me of it. The word 'please' is actually employed; though awkwardly followed by the fly swatting proclamation - 'Physics having nothing to do with opinions' - as though the explanation for the flaw in Xeno's (allegory) paradox at issue here, as an intro to related discussions (the exclusion of time from the motion of A to B, where A never arrives at B as long as the element of time is excluded from the issue).

    Several forums and BBS messages on the net accurately point out that mathematics can be ambiguous and even self contradictory. This is hardly a newly observed or understood fact, about 'mathematics'.

    Whereas: with regard to the employment of math as applied and responding to and describing the physical universe: this is called *'metric mathematics'. It's objective - and obligation - is to describe existential conditions; events 'what's happening' (independent of any anthropomorphic observation or description of it).
    (E=MC squared, for example, is not merely 'mathematics', it's an ongoing physical event - quite indifferent to whether people know about or properly describe it, or not...)

    The other kind of math is called *'non-metric' mathematics, which has an earned reputation for being able to prove or disprove anything at all, including the feature of two flawless formulas - side by side - that mutually contradict each other. The former type of (metric) math is obliged to adhere to describing events in space-time that occur, with or without human observation or mathematical application.

    We may properly - if quaintly - spell clue, 'clew' (old English); perhaps properly spell philosophy 'phylosophy'; whereas, such trivial minutiae - however mesmerizing to their newly indoctrinated practitioners, have no authority to exclude 'philosophy' from physics: is to forsake altogether the fact that all academic ranks of 'Dr.' - certainly including physicists and mathematicians - are Ph.D's - Doctors of Philosophy.
    Hopefully this will clear up you 'foggy opinions' on the meaning of your quaint spelling - and arrythmic doggerel; while offering an alternative spelling for what you ostensibly prove not to understand.

    "So, any observed facts or math to support your foggy opinions?" - Alexander Please

    It was not Einstein's 'opinion' that the recognized 3-dimensional universe is actually 4-dimensional, for example.
    You seem to think that the 4th, 5th and 6th dimensions (for example) of gravity, electricity and magnetism are a matter of philosophical opinion, rather than very substantially proven, previously unrecognized mathematically and geometrically established facts of 'hard science' (math, experiment and geometry, not necessarily in that sequence).

    Please refer to the condensed book on Gravity Is The 4th Dimension at http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie (TOTAL FIELD THEORY), and if in fact you do that: please return to this forum and continue with your irreverent, non-mathematically or philosophically supported 'blah-blah'.

    As things stand here presently, it appears that your courtesy - the usage of the word 'please' - is the only appropriate communication in your (inadvertantly) memorable missive.
    On the other hand, the benevolent surfers who brought this forum to my attention were surprised to see that its replies aren't what has otherwise become a recently engaged and ongoing tradition of odious name calling and hazing of this author (KBR); often in redundant, Shakespearean (refer 'version7ein') over-speaking columns, 'all over the net'.

    That encumbent phenomena - along with its transparently identifiable, forumite familiar trespassers, having created and still apparently in the process of creating their own self condemnative WWW net legacy - will soon enough join the other documentary books, journals, novellas and essays on the menu http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie (THE CONQUEST OF REASON, MORALITY & LAW).


    (Not to be confused with the 'faction' (fiction based on fact) story at <obsolete> which all of the turbulent, name calling deluge of 'reverse confessions', vulgar self flagellation and galloping guilt, is disdainfully orbiting...)

    In the (timely-spatial) interim, Truly Yours can only be grateful for the - however wayward - sincereity of the entry 'Replies', so far...

    Untill further viable notice, I consider my entry and subjection of Xeno's Paradox, and it's (faulted) exclusion of time (the 4th dimension, including gravity) an appropriate and non-mathematically comprehensible introduction to related subjects (which also wrongly exclude the 4th dimension of time, such as the Big Bangological 'theory' <is a lame hypothesis>), as the issued, other more impingent subjects follow that discussion (Xeno's Paradox) in the starting missive (above).

    I remain, respectfully thanking the Astronomy Net staffers and all of the sincere contributors to its scientific and philosophical reason for being.
    Sincerely, Kent Benjamin Robertson.


    That Rascal Puff (etceteras)

    World's #1 Einstein Groupie

    Apprentice to Albert - 'The Axe' - Einstein

    The Last Man Standing
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 Re: Speaking of Philosophy & Dr. Einstein... 
    Forum Junior Cuete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    4722,28 miles away from home
    Posts
    218
    Quote Originally Posted by That Rascal Puff
    EINSTEIN WAS WRONG!! AND EVIL!!


    "There are only two infinities.

    The universe, and, human stupidity.

    And,

    I'm not too sure about the universe."

    - Albert Einstein

    ... blah blah blah ...
    Maybe he was wrong, but now we actually found something infinite... your posts man.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    "Blah blah blah." - Cuete
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    :? why should HUMANS be the only one with infinite stupidity. What are we... Special?
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    of course human isnt infinite, that wouldnt make any sense. we arejust some stupid living bieng on a pathetic blue planet. we are finite
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    still, are we really that stupid??

    a group of humans may do strange things (killing one another, walking over eachother in panic, be disorganised)

    but if you look at 1 single human, most are quite smart, and we all know different things..

    earth is NOT pathetic. It was one of the most perfect planets in the universe. Several scenario's were drawn in where there was life possible with less than we have now... i bet earth is defenately top 10% of all livable planets..
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    depend on what life we are talking about. remember earth were what we would call a hell when life came to live here, its life who have made it like how it is.
    id say its a good place for our life, but then again with other conditions we would call earth also a very good planet becuase life would adept to those conditions instant. so earth isnt that good for life, its just life that have adepted good to our conditions. But also made it like this from the condition it were before

    im ready to bet with the right chemicals life can turn any planet to any condition that is suitible for that life and adept to it. with other words, with right biochemistry all planets can be a heaven to life, with some restrictions of course

    a group of humans may do strange things (killing one another, walking over eachother in panic, be disorganised)

    but if you look at 1 single human, most are quite smart, and we all know different things..
    if we were that smart we wouldnt care if we are in a group or not
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    :? bleg, smartass
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    dont hate becuase im a genius <---- NOTICE
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    nah, i'm also smart (iQ based), but i didn't study physics or science.. just microbiology..
    this way i do have a more open mind than most... not yet stuck on the endless calculation (i hate calculators )
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman avoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    11
    Einstien was smart, but a lot of things he said, he was takeing chences on.
    -everyone
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    I study all science MOHAHAHA
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Freshman .:Elusive.Neutrino:.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Coronado, CA
    Posts
    54
    Einstein was a great man, hands down. However, I do think he was extremely ignorant in one way. My "proof" will be a sort of fusion of many different philosophies, so please don't flame me.

    First off, "the only good is knowledge, and the only evil is ignorance" (Socrates).

    We could also say that being good/moralistic/pure lies in one's ability to see God's message (or the secrets of the universe, or whatever else you may call it). See, Einstein's goal was to come up with a unified theory of everything after he completed his theory of relativity. He searched for many years until his death for this revelation of sorts, a moment of clarity if you will. He never came to saw it, even though most people could agree that he had the potential.

    Why was he unable to see God's message? Because he had made an assumption about God before he even began his search, that God does not play dice with the universe. It was for this reason that he couldn't apply quantum mechanics to his work, which we now know to be a crucial piece to the puzzle.

    I suppose one could say his vision of God's message was clouded by religion (ironic?).
    <i8b4uUnderground> d-_-b
    <BonyNoMore> how u make that inverted b?
    <BonyNoMore> wait
    <BonyNoMore> never mind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Sophomore NimaRahnemoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    156
    "Einstein was wrong and evil" <--- title of thread

    Well, you have to remember einstein was not finished working. His life's work was to find a master equation to the universe. It would seem like a lot of the things he has said are wrong because they don't fit well with other sciences, but if it was really going to be easy Einstein wouldn't have been the first to try to accomplish such a feat. He was the one who first started putting the puzzle together, but he didn't finish. So I guess if you really hate him, you could believe he's "evil" for not finishing his work. Since his work is really narrow-minded you might think he's "wrong". Let's be more considerate though. :wink:

    Have any of you tried to put together a puzzle (cardboard puzzle)? If you have, then you know that the puzzle doesn't make sense until it nears the end. I bet we've only started 10% of the puzzle of the universe, so we still don't see the big picture.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman .:Elusive.Neutrino:.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Coronado, CA
    Posts
    54
    10%? That's pretty presumptuous. :wink:
    <i8b4uUnderground> d-_-b
    <BonyNoMore> how u make that inverted b?
    <BonyNoMore> wait
    <BonyNoMore> never mind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman TheThinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7
    Nima Rahnemoon has something there, he was not finished with his work,
    because of this i think he should not be judged or deemed wrong
    When the wires are all down and your heart is coverd with the snows of pessimism and the ice of cynicism, then, and only then, are you grown old.
    From an address by General MacArthur
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    38
    einstien was not evil
    he hates war
    he could be worng be he is NOT evil
    no time for lots of things
    must save time
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    36
    Einstien was never an evil man. He was a pacifist his entire life and regretted crossing the line with nuclear advisement.

    Where's all of this hatred coming from? He was a great scientist with a great mind. Why is a value judgement necessary?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Good points Paranoia, and welcome to the forum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    never blame the scientist for the result of his work, its the politicians who decied what to do and therefor is to blame
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    actually.. a lot of todays scientists who are doing a great job are overshadowed by powerfull people in the media/goverment.

    Why don't they give the credit back to the REAL HEROES??

    Now the onlyone who get's the credit are the ones who start or end wars, who play in movies, sing, or who just have a lot of money.

    Not fair.. Because i am none of the above :x
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •