Back to Home

Blackholes2 Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes II | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Andrew Robbins/">Andrew Robbins on February 12, 2000 17:53:44 UTC

YES! Finally, a man after my own heart.

I completely agree with you that science needs to ask why, for if they don't understand WHY, they can't even hope to caclutate HOW accurately.

Calculations like E = mc2, and a lot of present theorys do seem to be correct, I don't disagree with most of them, but they do not pry deep enough be considered as a basis for the existance of this continuum. They try to calculate things that they don't understand, and it leads them to have a bunch of different choppy theories, for example relativity and quantum physics, that are not unified.

You're the man, I didn't know anybody thought like this. I thought that I was in a WHY world by myself.

I finished writing a theory just the other week (its title was "WHY.") and I think that it answers many of your questions to a low enough level that you may be rather satisfied, for once.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2021 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins