Anti-Matter :: Evidence men have NO idea what they're doing!

[Xenocrates]

[quote author=<<MiTcHiE>> link=board=1;threadid=2006;start=0#msg19905 date=1065590616]
Anyways back to what we were saying, I have noticed a change in the frequency scientists make announcements about some discovery or the other, right now its like there isnt anything left for them to do.
[/quote]

- A sign that Christ's coming is soon. In the book of Genesis, God confused the builders of the tower of Babel, because, in summary, he sez men will achieve anything they set their minds to. In that manner, men are almost godlike.

[quote author=<<MiTcHiE>> link=board=1;threadid=2006;start=0#msg19905 date=1065590616]
What i think these scientist should work on is a cure for the major virii that exist in the world, instead of focusing on freezing time or time travel.
[/quote]

- A very popular misconception. There are several types of scientist in the world.

There are:

Biochemists - They pioneer the drugs we use to prolong life and study life sciences which spawn the numerous fields of medicine. They are the ones working on cures for diseases (or making new ones) etc.

Physicists - They study particle mechanics and abstract mathematics in the hope of discovering new technology. It is physicists that are responsible for the tools we are now using to share information like this online.

Archeologists/Palaentologists/Zoologists etc. - They study the earth and it's contents to determine it's history, understand the environment, and protect vital ecosystems for future generations.

So you can't mix the two types. They are both very different. Physiscists do what physicists do. They pioneer technology that is used in just about every other field in science. In 1963, they developed TCP/IP. In the mid 1970's, they developed Integrated Circuits and microprocessors. In the early 1990's, they pioneered fibre optic technology and nanotechnology (which we use in our PDAs and laptops and micro-sized PCs)

We are realising the brilliance of those discoveries now. Who knows, when we're 40, we may be taking the Bus to Mars and not think about it.

[MiTcHiE]

i understand what u r saying now. I was looking at it without even thinking. Ahh well, i am at work and tired, so thats my excuse .

I never really thought about Einstein's theory before. Xeno did u study this info that u know at university level or on ur own, reading and researching??

[Xenocrates]

Both - but more the latter than the former. Uncle was heavy into particle mechanics. In fact, most of my peers are older folks who are deep into in this kinda stuff. Me? I just find all of this wickedly fascinating. I read a lot of Popular Mechanics and Popular Science. Amazing what you can learn in those. Usually it's stuff so new that it hasn't even hit textbooks yet.

In fact, I have a Popular Mechanics magazine that shows when they invented the Tunneling microsocope that can actually SEE atoms. I have another that shows how they use Nano technology to build processors from silicon molecules for devices such as pocket Pcs, Laptops, smart phones etc.

Did you know that there are over 3 trillion transistors on a Pentium 4 processor?!? If you know how small the chip is, it's mind boggling to even fathom how they put this stuff together on the ATOMIC level. That's something most people don't know. They just buy the chip, stick it into a motherboard and fire it up - but they have no idea how marvellous the technology behind building the chip was.

And now that I've studied chip design @ Utech, it makes it even more fascinating...

Physics is fun yute. (don't quote me on that...)

[willy]

here is a nice read:http://www.ldolphin.org/gspeed.html

[Xenocrates]

Excellent link Willy! ;D

I'd like to make a few quotes from this article. This writer has corroborated everything that I've mentioned so far. Check this out:

Newtonian mechanics imposes no maximum upper limit to attainable velocities in the universe, but Einstein's relativity theory does. As charged particles are pushed up near the present speed of light they grow heavier and more and more energy input is required to gain a smaller and smaller increment of increased velocity.

- As Mass approaches light speed, it gains more mass and it becomes heavier. Therefore, as it gets closer to light speed, the object becomes closer and closer to imploding on itself because of the massive amount of gravity it builds up. That instantaneously blows Star Wars and Star Trek out of the water.

At the Stanford Linear Accelerator (SLAC), near where I live, electrons injected in the accelerator reach 99.999% of the velocity of light in the first few feet of travel, and then they ride traveling radio waves for two miles down a long evacuated pipe, gaining virtually no additional speed, but mostly acquiring mass (and therefore energy). There is no reason to doubt the highly successful and well-verified theory of relativity in this regard.

- Just like I said before, it's practically impossible for an object to truly attain light speed, because the closer it gets to light speed, the amount of power required to push it faster increases exponentially! That means it is literally a waste of time and energy to get an object to attain light speed - it never actually gets there because of it's building mass. Therefore the speed of an object is directly proportional to its mass. As mass increases, the harder it will be for it to travel faster. When the object attains terminal velocity (the maximum speed its mass will allow it to travel) it won't be able to reach light speed, without becoming light energy itself.

That's why bullets are dangerous. Their speed gives them an incredible amount of mass. So essentially firing a bullet at someone in kevlar armour is almost the same as hitting them with a truck!

[Xenocrates]

Light from the sun requires 8.3 minutes to travel from the sun to the earth during which time the sun and the earth have moved as much as 20 arc seconds with respect to each other. Similarly light from the stars arrives at an angle which can be as much as 20 arc seconds because the earth is moving with respect to the stars.

- In other words, light, as fast as it is, takes an incredible amount of time to traverse the universe. The universe is HUGE, and to give you an idea of how big it is, it takes 200,000 years to traverse the entire Milky Way Galaxy (our galaxy) at light speed! That's pretty ineffecient isn't it?

Further proof: Did you know that when you look up into the night sky, the star light that you see had left those stars LONG before you were born, many of them when Jesus was still on earth!? This is known as light aberration - which was used to measure light speed. Do you know what that means?

Everytime you look up into the night sky, you are looking at the past!

Absolutely fascinating isn't it? ;D

Now, if light travels SO FAST and it took SO LONG to get around, can you see how inefficient it is to travel at light speed?

What's the point? Even if we were to somehow magically attain light speed in an object, the universe is FAR too large to travel at just light speed. And then, using up all that power to achieve light speed - that's just a waste of time and energy.

[Xenocrates]

As the universe aged, the free space permittivity and permeability increased and c decreased--but the velocity of gravity may not be tied to the permittivity and permeability of free space!

- In other words, like I had said before, it is GRAVITY that is the key to our being able to traverse the massive universe. It's simply too big to use light speeds to travel by anyway. Gravity remains constant with relation to all objects in space. It is Gravity that binds the universe together - but what causes gravity? That's where anti-matter comes in. Anti-matter is the key to manipulating gravity. Gravity is a magnetic force. In balancing matter as we know it, Anti-matter (in a parallel universe) created gravity. That implies that Anti-matter consists of an INCREDIBLE amount of energy (as was said before).

Therefore Anti-matter can be used to manipulate gravity at points in space, to bring two areas of space together which are thousands of light years apart.

If this is the case the velocity of gravity stayed at the original velocity of c. If we can produce a propulsion system based on gravitational principles rather than electromagnetic or chemical ones, we could travel at absolutely enormous speeds--we could hope to push a space craft anywhere in the universe, very literally at warp speeds beyond what even the Starship Enterprise could produce!

- The writer is thinking of propulsion, not folding. He is thinking in archaic terms. But this was before Anti-matter was discovered. Space is such that we don't need to GO there. With anti-matter, we can simply BRING there to us. Like I said before, if manipulate GRAVITY to fold space, there will be NO need to travel at light speed. It's simply FAR too expensive! Even if we built a starship that harnesses the power of positrons (anti-protons) to travel at or near lightspeed, the amount of power needed to do that would most definitely destroy the ship! And it would most certainly NEVER achieve light speed!

Furthermore, if we fold space, time remains constant between the two areas of space that are joined together (Gravity binds the entire universe together) and Relativity would become constant between here and there. That means, that it wouldn't take 8 years to travel to pluto and 8 years to come back. You would be able go to pluto (through a wormhole) and come back and when you get home, your baby boy will still be a baby! (Time remains constant across temporal vortices)

Personally, I can't wait to see what new technology comes out of anti-matter discovery. Prophecies are being fulfilled left right and center. These are truly exciting times we live in. ;D

[GodKid]

Ah Xeno.... nice reads.... Willy nice link...

there's one fundamental principle that has been overlooked in all this though.. and it is simply the definitions of matter and anti-matter.

The fact is.. MOST of science (esp. medical science) rests on the laurels of ALREADY DISPROVEN yet still accepted and implemented theories.
The reason many of these theories CANNOT be removed is exemplified by Xeno's first post.... too many other PROVEN theories rely on the BAD ones...

Xeno... I know a teacher (and there are many others like him) that can prove that 1 = 0 (as well as other "fallacies&quot, what does that say for -2 + 2 = 0 .... the fundamentals of math would say this... -2 + 2 = 1 = 0...

Science in and of itself has been disproving its very foundations for years... but what do you do when theory B which is based on theory A disproves theory A? Worse yet.. theory B can be PROVEN TRUE! .. simply... that is when the move from rival to dominant paradigm takes place...

what am I sayin? we can continue to spout and revel in scientific discovery.... but when will we realize that we are the ones dictating science, and that proof and scientific truth only lasts as long as the scientists behind them !

[CKnight]

[quote author=GodKid link=board=1;threadid=2006;start=15#msg19957 date=1065666536]
Xeno... I know a teacher (and there are many others like him) that can prove that 1 = 0 (as well as other "fallacies&quot, what does that say for -2 + 2 = 0 .... the fundamentals of math would say this... -2 + 2 = 1 = 0...
[/quote]

Let a and b = 1. Since a and be are equal,
b^2 = ab (eq. 1)

Since a=a,
a^2 = a^2 (eq. 2)

subtract equation 1 from equation 2, and we get
a^2-b^2 = a^2-ab (eq. 3)

Factor both sides of the equation.
(a-b)(a+b) = a(a-b) (eq. 4)

Divide both sides by (a-b)
a+b=a (eq. 5)

Subtract a from both sides
b = 0 (eq. 6)

Since b = 1
1 = 0 (eq. 7)

[Xenocrates]

Fascinating stuff CKnight... I've heard a brejin say to me that 1 = 0, but he never showed me how... I tell you. We learn something new everyday. ;D

GodKid - You're ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!

Remember the Quantum Paradox Theory?

Mass at light speed squared = Energy.
But...
Energy travels at light speed
Light is energy

THEREFORE,

If Mass travelling at light speed squared becomes energy, how is it that Energy only travels at light speed?

aaaaaaaaaaah! ;D (chi-chiing!)

The truth of the matter GodKid, is that science was only created with the intention of helping us to understand our universe. Science in and of itself is erroneous because:

1) Man says that something doesn't exist if Science cannot detect it
2) Science is based entirely on a physical realm of finiteness
3) The universe is NOT entirely a physical realm because
4) The Universe is infinite and contains links to realms of infinity

Therefore, Science is flawed... because man is flawed. That's why we would be foolish to say that there is no God. Because:

1. All things come from something else
2. That something else is the total embodiment of everything that comes from it (you look like your dad etc.)
3. Because of 2, all sources have a source that embodies them
4. Therefore, the further up the line of emation you travel, the fewer sources exist
5. Because of 4, You will eventually come to the realisation that there is one source for all things.
6. If there is one source for all things, then that source must be the embodiment of all the possibilities of everything that can be.
7. Since time is infinite, then that source must also embody infinity