Notices
Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: intelligent design and the probable "G.U.T".

  1. #1 intelligent design and the probable "G.U.T". 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    Who actually, or rather, what profession, does anyone think will get the gong..........astrophysics, nuclear physics, who?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    I'm not sure I understand the question....

    ....I know what a gong is but....


    Do you mean who will be the first to find the connection-correlation between astrophysics and nuclear physics? Or do you mean something else?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    I think streamsystems may be referring to the old television show "The Gong Show" where amateur acts were judged by a panel of celebrities, who each had a gong. If someone hit the gong, the contestant was eliminated. The idea of the gong show lives on in shows like American Idol, where they seem to seek out the worst acts possible. The audience can then groan at how terrible it is and watch Simon Cowell humiliate the contestant. People seem to like that.

    Relativity theory and quantum mechanics are incompatible in certain cases, so stream is saying one or both will eventually be proved wrong and will get "gonged."

    I don't know enough to make an intelligent guess hew it will turn out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    what branch of science will officially compile and present the probable G.U.T theory.........ya di ya di ya da.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    5,975
    Maybe some patent clerk...oh wait...that's been done. That leaves an opening for the grocery clerk bagging groceries at the local supermarket. Smart guy, black and only a poor immigrant just off the boat. Even his name looks like an equation.

    Realistically would the scientific community even listen to an ordinary schmuck?
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    .....is there a hint of superiority creeping in?

    What about someone who has been conditioned by a Government security agency, exposed to a decent amount of things that fall from the sky that leave most baffled.......though with a little help from secondary school physics is able to piece the big space-time puzzle of those archaic artefacts together?

    Mmmmm?

    Sounds like "Star Gate", but it's not: this is Star Gate applied to the G.U.T of space time.

    Possible?

    Believeable?

    Already happening?

    I am thinking if such a route is already in the works, why even alert the scientific community. I know by my experience in this cat forum, I wouldn't............there is more self-righteousness in this forum than there is at an annual Church of England Primate Convention.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: intelligent design and the probable "G.U.T". 
    Moderator Moderator AlexP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by streamSystems
    Who actually, or rather, what profession, does anyone think will get the gong..........astrophysics, nuclear physics, who?
    I'm thinking it may be particle physicists that may "get the gong." Though I believe that in any case, it'll be a long time before a GUT is developed, because the level at which a unification of forces would be found is far beyond what we've currently probed with accelerators/colliders.

    side note... I just noticed the phrase 'intelligent design' in the thread title, and I haven't the slightest idea what that has to do with a GUT.
    "There is a kind of lazy pleasure in useless and out-of-the-way erudition." -Jorge Luis Borges
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    G.U.T is a theory of space-time, presumably, that is intelligent. A G.U.T will most certainly open the doorway to the idea that reality is a type of "mind", if indeed the human mind can understand space-time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    the human mind will evolve to meet the future requirements,
    and our mind-enchancing capabilities grow stronger every year.
    the computer is already an enormously handy tool for science and information.
    similarly, science evolves, making what was before a complex mess, simpler, and easier to grasp, as well as the methods of learning this science.
    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    In going back to the initial theme of this thread, I was asking what stream/sect/branch of science would more likely than not be the one to represent the branch that pieces the G.U.T together.

    I guess I am asking as though which branch of science has the more intellect-power, more funding, more research infrastructure, and so on.

    Is there an expectation for instance which branch of science will make the discovery.

    The G.U.T is like a holy grail of sorts, and so it would be normal to consider a certain necessary theme of self-importance in each of those branches of science (and I apologize for criticizing that quality among the scientific community), but is it now possible, at the current level of scientific development, already, to make a decent prediction, and why?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    nobody knows what G.U.T ïs.

    speak clearly. you dont win smart-points by trying to appear smart by using words nobody else uses.
    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    There appears to be confusion on the part of more than one party as to the meaning of G.U.T.
    It is an acronym for Grand Unified Theory. It addresses the unification of the electomagnetic, strong and weak forces into a single force at very high energy levels. A extension of this is the so called theory of everything that includes unifcation of these forces with that of gravity.

    I am therefore at a loss to understand how any field of research other than physics can deliver the answer to this, since it is a problem defined by physics, dealing with physical phenomena, and as such can only be legitimately solved by physics.
    Since you raise the question streamSystems I can only imagine that you have some other, non-standard perception of what G.U.T. is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    927
    yeah, i've known it as "theory of everything" as well.

    i searched G U T in google, and got gibberish. searched T O E in google, and got "theory of everything.
    when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
    A.C Doyle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    It is unwise for me to introduce anything not taught at the University level, right.........especially in this forum, right?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by streamSystems
    It is unwise for me to introduce anything not taught at the University level, right.........especially in this forum, right?
    It is unwise for you to do either of these two things:
    a) Expound at length upon a concept of which you have an incomplete and inaccurate understanding.
    b) Use a radically different definition of an accepted term (in this case GUT) without explaining why or how your definition differs.

    It may be wise for you to introduce any subject wherever it is taught, or not taught. However, in this case you have in a very vague, wooly fashion, thrown out some comments with no clear focus, and no connection with the current use of the terms involved. The only explanations I can come up with are my items a) and b) above. These, as noted, do not seem to be wise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    M
    M is offline
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    282
    It is unwise for me to introduce anything not taught at the University level, right.........especially in this forum, right?
    No. But it's unwise to try to express your ideas with borrowed terms of which you have, at best, a vague understanding. It's not only unwise, but also completely unnecessary. I believe this thread can be saved if you take the time to reformulate your question.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    OK.

    When the G.U.T explanation is presented on terms agreed by the scientific community, I will be "on holiday"........."no comment".

    .......even though I am not one, but image trying to talk to someone who just walked out of a shimmering object aka "spaceship"...........could the G.U.T be and even bigger "what the" than Einstein at his prime?

    ........forget I said that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    As M said you can salvage this thread if you make an effort to communicate. You may think it very clever to adopt a style reminiscent of James Joyce at his worst.
    If amusement is your sole goal then, fine. If you truly have something you think is important to say, then try stringing toegther a few sentences that are likely to mean something to us mere mortals.
    As an example
    "When the G.U.T explanation is presented on terms agreed by the scientific community, I will be "on holiday"........."no comment". "
    is meaningless. If you disagree explain here what you mean. Or do you prefer to troll some more?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    What I mean about being on holiday, I think I have the G.U.T theory in the download: it achieves all the requirements. One would have to read it to understand how that is correct. Constructing equations known to be valid "is" proof. It's not pot-luck. Sorry, I got off track again. What I mean about being on holiday, my presentation of the theory, this is it, here in this forum, officially this is it, the presentation. When I am to be asked about it, the theory, I will direct people to what has already been posted in this chatroom. I will be on holiday. This forum has been hugely useful. I trust the professionalism and wisdom of you guys, and also appreciate that your replies are genuine and representative of the wider scientific audience. So, this forum will basically represent, ideally, a road map to the general obvious blocks modern science faces in approaching the idea that space-time can be better tackled using a new set of axioms.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    thanks for giving me a reminder of why i put you on my 'ignore' list
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    So what is your reply all about?

    Clearly I am not being treated fairly: your remark could seem a little "snide". I should caution you that forum moderators are out on people making snide remarks. I don't mind what a person says, but don't get yourself linched for the sake of me.

    I think there is room in this forum for new approaches to the explanation of space-time. Every post I have made where someone has replied in requesting proof, I have directed people to the download. Following that, I have received snide remarks. Believe me, it's not easy. I could easily present the case that it is "not" possible to present new approaches to space-time in this forum. If you choose to ignore me, show a little of something that suggests you are educated.

    As soon as I came into this forum, I was told that you were not allowed to promote your own ideas via your own website. So then I decided to interact with the major themes and concepts being played out. I offered posts relevant to conversations already happening in the forum, to then stimulate debate towards the theory I was trying to ultimately have reviewed. Every time someone requested proof, and the offer was made regarding the download, no reply. How I have incurred the wrath of users of this forum, it makes me wonder whether or not a little elitism has crept in, and yet I am the one branded with that title.

    I am not looking for sympathy or charity, that's why in forums people shouldn't be afraid of speaking their mind. But to make a statement that is irrelevant on the cause of better understanding space-time is nonsensical.........pointless to the forum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    streamSystems, you would be correct to a degree in thinking that the standards applied on this forum appear to vary depending upon who is being moderated. Thus, you are quite correct that Marnix has made a snide remark concerning your contributions. You are also correct in suspecting he is not going to be chastisted by me for this remark.

    Why? Is this just? I suggest it is. Marnix has demonstrated in many posts, on many threads, that he is a knowledgeable, supportive, contributor to the forum, who expresses himself cogently, and from time to time with humour. My recollection is that he offers explanations and comments that are solidly based within science and the scientific method. This is the kind of contribution that we welcome.

    In contrast I first became aware of your own contributions quite recently, when you began to promote some radical ideas on the forum. Now there is nothing at all wrong with radical ideas. They are the lifeblood of scientific progress. However there are established ways of putting such ideas forward.
    You may object that the established ways are not relevant to you, that radical ideas require a radical approach. You would be wrong if you were to argue that. If you wish your ideas to be given serious consideration you need to avoid the behavioural patterns associated with woo-woos, crazies, and the self deluded. So far you have not done a very good job of this.
    Your two largest errors in this regard are
    a) Waffling. Your last post was the first one of any of yours I have read that was intelligble from start to finish (and, in addition, included some nice touches of wry humour!)
    b) Crticising you audience for being too staid, too conservative, too whatever, to appreciate the value of your idea.
    Adopting these patterns of posting places you in the ranks of those who 'have a new answer to the Universe'. You must surely recognise the risk of this and I would have thought you would wish to avoid such a label being applied to you and therefore to your idea. That will require a change on your part, not on the part of your audience. Your last post demonstrates that you are capable of making the necessary change.

    My interpretation of Marnix's snide remark is that he is saying much the same thing as I have just said in the previous paragraphs, but saying it much more pithily. In contrast you appear, in most instances, to have just been nasty because we won't buy into your great idea.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    a reality you have all yet to properly explain
    Posts
    902
    I agree with you entirely.

    I have become more attuned to this forum.

    The conditioning upon me is just according to your standards of play.

    Let us look forward together therefore to more constructive and sensible debates and associated posts.

    I understand no scientist will "buy" into my idea........I am the one that ultimately must pay a scientist to review the work. I am expediting that path currently, and believe me, it is not cheap.

    Thank you though, it is always good talking to you.........at least you are being serious.

    As you can tell, I believe true science is all about going to the threshold.........the envelope.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    56
    It has to be the particle physicist. Though it will be a long time until we achieve the 10^14 GeV needed in the particle accelerators. Stephen Hawking claimed that it would need an accelerator the size of the solar system. Though that nowadays would be seen as untrue (technology does advance), it is still a long time till we can find out.
    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
  •