Philosophy Discussion Forums

Xris wrote:http://ccosmology.blogspot.co.uk/ Found this image of a hydrogen atom from Cern. Looks like ropes to me.Is some one in Cern realising something?

1. Sorry, there aren't enough ropes here to reach every atom in the universe. Note - Some of the ropes appear to be curved. Does this mean that some of the ropes aren't in tension?

2. It looks like someone has been watching the old Dr Who intro and copied it in a computer simulation.

3. By what means did they obtain this image? I hope they didn't smash one atom against another atom because that would cause an explosion, like the one in the picture!

4. Note - If you make one miniature galaxy smash into another miniature galaxy, you get a miniature supernova. Looks like you have given me more evidence that atoms are miniature galaxies. Thanks for your assistance in providing further evidence to prove my theories. Do you have any more!

It is from Cern so you will have to ask them.But if they are indicating ropes eminating from atoms, Gaedes hypothesis becomes even more credibly. Take it on the chin and admit the idea of EM radiation eminating from atoms as waves is a lost cause.

Xris wrote:It is from Cern so you will have to ask them.But if they are indicating ropes eminating from atoms, Gaedes hypothesis becomes even more credibly. Take it on the chin and admit the idea of EM radiation eminating from atoms as waves is a lost cause.

1. Well, your reply proves that you don't even know what the picture is of.

2. Not so fast! You have haven't explained why some of the lines in the picture are curved?

DarwinX wrote: (Nested quote removed.)



1. Well, your reply proves that you don't even know what the picture is of.

2. Not so fast! You have haven't explained why some of the lines in the picture are curved?

It is an image of a hydrogen atom produced by Cern. I have no idea why the imsge gives the impression of these ropes curving away from the core.Maybe it is simply an effect of perspective. What it most certainly indicates is that light does not leave the atom as a wave funcyion.

I get the feeling the OP needs a few lessons in non Euclidean geometry, no offence but if you don't understand Euclidean geometry, non-Ruclidean geometry is going to be a mystery to you too.

You can do anything in non-euclidean geometry even square the circle at an infinite limit, I find it hard to believe that reality operates according to our whims and sensibilities.

Xris wrote: It is an image of a hydrogen atom produced by Cern. I have no idea why the imsge gives the impression of these ropes curving away from the core.Maybe it is simply an effect of perspective. What it most certainly indicates is that light does not leave the atom as a wave funcyion.

1. Wrong!!!! - It is the image of a hydrogen proton which is smashed against another hydrogen proton at close to the speed of light. The picture shows an explosion and has nothing to do with ropes.

2. In Bill Geades diagram of a hydrogen atom, I could only count about 100, two dimensional ropes. I am sorry, but this is not enough ropes to cover every atom in the universe. In fact, the image is so pathetic, its a joke!!!

Essentially, imagine that space is like some substance, water, for example. When you immerse a metal ball into the water, you shift water's molecules , they move in a wavy pattern to give space to a ball. Say, this ball is also spinning, which creates spiral waves, and if there is tiny fish next to all this commotion, she'd appear swimming in circles around the ball from point of view of bacteria on a ball. Such space, if it is sort of substance, is not the same as system of coordinates.

Gulnara wrote:Essentially, imagine that space is like some substance, water, for example. When you immerse a metal ball into the water, you shift water's molecules , they move in a wavy pattern to give space to a ball. Say, this ball is also spinning, which creates spiral waves, and if there is tiny fish next to all this commotion, she'd appear swimming in circles around the ball from point of view of bacteria on a ball. Such space, if it is sort of substance, is not the same as system of coordinates.

Thanks, that's a good description of how the earth's spin effects aether flow.

DarwinX wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


1. Wrong!!!! - It is the image of a hydrogen proton which is smashed against another hydrogen proton at close to the speed of light. The picture shows an explosion and has nothing to do with ropes.

2. In Bill Geades diagram of a hydrogen atom, I could only count about 100, two dimensional ropes. I am sorry, but this is not enough ropes to cover every atom in the universe. In fact, the image is so pathetic, its a joke!!!

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/short ... le-he.html Found this for you.Plasma is another term for EM energetic expression. Obviously Cern can not produce the numbers of ropes required to represent the truth but sure have tried.

Christ no offence but some people need basic maths learning before they opine on stuff.

You can curve space you can curve anything even your mind.

Yeah, the article at this link says : surprisingly, "...the quark-gluon plasma, instead of being a gas, acts like a perfect liquid."

Gulnara wrote:Yeah, the article at this link says : surprisingly, "...the quark-gluon plasma, instead of being a gas, acts like a perfect liquid."

To be honest I think the article is nonsense. How they can say it represents the BB I have no idea. But the image certainly indicates a mirade of ropes eminating from a core. Not one particle nor wave .

Xris wrote: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/short ... le-he.html Found this for you.Plasma is another term for EM energetic expression.

Why don't they show the whole picture? I can see the edges of the explosion.

Obviously Cern can not produce the numbers of ropes required to represent the truth but sure have tried.

Does this mean that you are giving up on this silly rope theory idea?

When are you going to understand that this image was produced by Cern not me. It clearly shows what look like ropes eminating from an atom after impact. It does not prove or disprove ropes but it sure gives them a certain credence. I maintain my belief in them as they perform a logical alternative to the accepted concept of EM radiation.

Calrid wrote:Christ no offence but some people need basic maths learning before they opine on stuff.

You can curve space you can curve anything even your mind.

I have a pain, and no matter how hard I try, I cannot curve it. Moreover, a straight rod that is bent becomes curved in something. If it is curved in space, then space itself cannot be curved because space is that in which things are curved.

I think people often apply words mistakenly. Yours is the same mistake as when people say, "I wonder what causes free choice?" or "How can we improve free enterprise through government regulation?" Sometimes we put words together in ways that simply don't make sense. Here's another example, "What does a dog whistle, that I cannot hear, sound like?"

Okay, now I'm ready for your mathematical retort.