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

• 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