Cosmic Thinker

In My Humble Opinion
61

I did not make a value judgement about it, I simply pointed out that it is how it works. Your post is just an affirmation of what I said, plus a questioning of an assumption that was not in the post you are responding to. Everyone defends their paradigms until it is no longer possible. In fact, a lot of people keep defending them way after it has become impossible (fundamentalist religious people for example).

I don’t really think there is much point to translating the OP since there are (IMO) much better systems freely available and that have the benefit of being backed up by plenty of research and subjected to the peer review process. He’s just trying to create a cosmological hierarchy by himself. I’m not quite as ambitious and am happy to just use those that others have created. As far as I can tell there is nothing original or especially unique about his.

62

Where do you live? What area’s culture are you a part of?

63

I’ll do some translating, then: You can’t do it, and this is just more of that woo “Mutual Admiration Society” stuff that goes on everywhere, where y’all pretend to understand each other to provide a united front.

64

I find it quite hard to find pre-Enlightenment thinkers and scientists who denied the existence of any and all hidden (i.e. “occult”) forces at work in the world. Who, if anyone, did you have in mind?

AFAIK, even among Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment thinkers, such thoughts were remarkably resilient.

BTW, like Stoneburg, I too live in a part of the world where science reigns supreme. It does so to such a degree that I have never personally met anyone who opposes science, or who believes that science should be stopped or held back in any way. Guess I’m lucky that way! :slight_smile:

65
  1. "U"niverse is my most inclusive( wholistic ) terminology ergo;
    …1a metaphysical-1( mind/intellect/concept )

…1b macro-infinite non-occupied space( embraces finite occupied space UniVerse,
…1c finite, occupied space UniVerse.

  1. metaphysical-1 mind/intellect/concept
    …ex concept of a God outside of finite Universe, holding Universe in its hands…
    …2a) absolutes truths–cosmic laws/principles, etc
    …2b) relative truths

3)** Uni**Verse = finite occupied space aka physical/energy
…3a) fermions, bosons and any collective aggregate thereof
…3b) gravity and dark energy odd-bird-out bosons
Only rational logical common sense replies that address my cosmic outline, specifically as stated are welcome.

Crooked glue-sniffing dopers with their cruel intentions, who are lacking in respect, moral integrity, intellectual integrity, are not welcome.

Thx, ebuc

66

Do you have a simpler explanation for us stupid folk?

67

Could you please post a chart explaining the meanings of the colors used in your missives?

68

Same OP as his previous thread. Reported.

69

Two things.

  1. Please don’t start multiple threads on the same topic, particularly since your original thread is only two days old and still going. I’ve merged the two threads.

  2. You don’t get to dictate who can and can’t respond to your posts. If someone is violating board rules, you can report them for the violation. But you can’t tell anyone else how to post.

70

You keep using these words but I don’t think they mean what you think they mean.

First, you must provide us with something “rational logical common sense” to which we can respond.

You reap what you sow.

The Emily Post School of Etiquette suggests that you not thank people in advance for things they have not yet done.

There, see? Now you can’t say you’ve not learned something new on SDMB.

71

I don’t understand what you’re saying. Can you put it into simpler concepts? When a bunch of people are telling you they don’t get it, even if some are doing so in a mocking way, isn’t it possible that you’re not communicating your point very well and ought to try a different way?

72

I reject your cosmic outline as complete gibberish.

That is my rational logical common sense reply.

I’m sorry, but as many others have stated (and only one has not stated, and he’s not helping), what you are saying makes no sense. Nobody understands what you are saying. At a certain point, it is not reasonable to say that your audience is stupid, it is on you to communicate your ideas reasonably.

What you does your cosmic framework mean? What does it imply? I have no idea. All you’ve done is define some terms; whether or not those definitions have any relation to reality depends entirely on the argument they are then applied to. What you’re doing is entirely meaningless, and incomprehensible to boot.

73

You’re missing a " ) "

74

It’s there. He colored it white.

75

Without energy/mass and matter, this hardly leaves much for spacetime to display (i.e. gravity, dark matter, dark energy, light, zero-point energy, quantum foam, etc), since spacetime is affected and warped by the presence of matter and energy.

Although it’s hard to imagine the meaning of a Universe without any property; therefore I can imagine a universe that is comprised of only spacetime, but that brings it practically to the point of absolute nothingness (except for the existence of a there and a then, for what that’s worth).

76

Now that he’s (theoretically) learned that he won’t be allowed to just create a string of these threads, I doubt he’ll be around much longer.

77

You mean I can’t just keep repeating my non-sense without real clarification, and expect different responses?

78

You mean I can’t just keep repeating my non-sense without real clarification, and expect different responses?

79

You mean I can’t just keep repeating my non-sense without real clarification, and expect different responses?.

80

Now cut that out!