Symmetry Of Shifts In Time - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum Message

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


Home \| Discussion Forums \| God and Science \| Post	Login

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

Symmetry Of Shifts In Time

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard Ruquist on April 18, 2001 12:07:40 UTC

It is interesting that the symmetry of shifts in time, and space, which is the basic assumption in doctordicks model, is labeled as opinion by him when you, Alex, express the same thing. In other words his model is based on symmetry. It is also inherently based on space and time. So we should all be in agreement. Our only differences are in interpretation.

In my opinion, general relativity establishes the reality of space and time, whereas quantum mechanics establishes the reality of invisible fields residing in space and time. So in that sense it all comes from mathematics.

But also in my opinion, quantum mechanics does not establish the reality of particles, and this is where I diverge from most scientists. Particles happen when fields (or quantum waves if you wish) collapse, but there is no theory to establish that reality. We can predict when it happens, but not what actually happens.

Keeping the spirit,

Richard

Follow Ups:

Completely agree. - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 13:51 UTC
- Thanks - yanniru - April 18, 2001 - 14:51 UTC
Both of you completely miss the point! - doctordick - April 18, 2001 - 14:06 UTC
- Dick, space, time, etc exist INDEPENDENT of humans. - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 14:39 UTC
  - Again and again - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 15:14 UTC
    - WOW! This is a cool superstition. - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 16:23 UTC
      - Alex - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 16:56 UTC
        
        So, you claim that when you close eye, light disappears? - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 18:37 UTC
        
        We can test that... - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 19:35 UTC
        
        So, Sun did not shine. Harvey, what education do you have? - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 21:32 UTC
        
        Tsk.. tsk.. Alex - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 21:38 UTC
        
        No, I just want you to honestly answer - alexander - April 18, 2001 - 22:14 UTC
        
        First answer my question - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 22:20 UTC
        
        That is the point. - alexander - April 19, 2001 - 01:07 UTC
        
        No, that misses the point - harvey1 - April 19, 2001 - 14:02 UTC
        
        No, human experiments or observations are needed. - alexander - April 19, 2001 - 20:26 UTC
        
        Typo in the title. Humans NOT needed. See copy below. - alexander - April 19, 2001 - 20:28 UTC
        
        No, human experiments or observations are NOT needed. - alexander - April 19, 2001 - 20:27 UTC
        
        Alex, if you don't mind I moved this to the top (nt) - harvey1 - April 19, 2001 - 21:00 UTC
        
        And who checks the plants? - doctordick - April 19, 2001 - 17:38 UTC
        
        Unlike God (Ghostd) evolution, plants evolution is documented - alexander - April 19, 2001 - 20:22 UTC
- Dick you're not alone - harvey1 - April 18, 2001 - 15:11 UTC
  - I don't think so! - doctordick - April 19, 2001 - 17:41 UTC

Additional Information

About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy

Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2025 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