3Pig
0
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2013
- Messages
- 242
- Points
- 0
I'm pretty sure there are conspiracy nut forums specifically for this. Not hating, everyone has different views, but you would get much better responses and discussion.
Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers
Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations
Links below open in new window
FrozenGate by Avery
“Something Is Monitoring The Planet, And They Are Monitoring it Very Cautiously”
- Thread starter Alaskan
- Start date
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
It is obvious to me you don't understand what I'm saying, have you read any books on the idea or are you just making judgment on the fly without really knowing much about it? Sorry you think its stupid, there is something to it, you will see if you look.
Yes, a holographic universe is only theory, but no reason to think it is stupid because you don't agree, no one knows as far as proven science yet, but I accept it as reality anyway, as you already know. However, to speak up for my own belief, just because something isn't proven yet, doesn't mean that isn't how it is. Please read the following to get some idea of what I'm talking about, some of the reasoning behind the theory:
Holographic principle
The holographic principle is a property of string theories and a supposed property of quantum gravity that states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a boundary to the region—preferably a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First proposed by Gerard 't Hooft, it was given a precise string-theory interpretation by Leonard Susskind[1] who combined his ideas with previous ones of 't Hooft and Charles Thorn.[1][2] As pointed out by Raphael Bousso,[3] Thorn observed in 1978 that string theory admits a lower-dimensional description in which gravity emerges from it in what would now be called a holographic way.
In a larger sense, the theory suggests that the entire universe can be seen as a two-dimensional information structure "painted" on the cosmological horizon, such that the three dimensions we observe are an effective description only at macroscopic scales and at low energies. Cosmological holography has not been made mathematically precise, partly because the cosmological horizon has a finite area and grows with time.[4][5]
The holographic principle was inspired by black hole thermodynamics, which conjectures that the maximal entropy in any region scales with the radius squared, and not cubed as might be expected. In the case of a black hole, the insight was that the informational content of all the objects that have fallen into the hole might be entirely contained in surface fluctuations of the event horizon. The holographic principle resolves the black hole information paradox within the framework of string theory.[6] However, there exist classical solutions to the Einstein equations that allow values of the entropy larger than those allowed by an area law, hence in principle larger than those of a black hole. These are the so-called "Wheeler's bags of gold". The existence of such solutions is in conflict with the holographic interpretation, and their effects in a quantum theory of gravity including the holographic principle are not yet fully understood.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Some postulate we are all living in a large black hole, our universe satisfies all of the mathematical requirements for it to be such: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140218-black-hole-blast-explains-big-bang/
More here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-holographic-universe (if you want to buy the article, I don't).
There is also contradicting information on the subject which will support your disbelief,but in time I think future discoveries will support it as a reality. Choose your side on the issue, I guess... Well, never mind, you have already done that, but try to open your mind up a bit, don't be afraid, your brain won't fall out, I guarantee it.
From some of your responses, I'm going to make a judgment call that you haven't been exposed to very much in regard to such things and because of that challenge them, which is fine, just don't challenge out of disbelief due to limited understanding, better just suspend belief or disbelief and study it more, that will allow you to understand more.
If you want to push the limits of your reality, try this rabbit hole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUyqfUut8lA&feature=related - this is really too short, but it will give you a taste of what I believe will be new to you. Unfortunately, nothing in this little video montage is presented well enough, far from it, but the video will give you some strings you can start pulling on to see where they lead through your own continued research, if you wish.
Or.... continue as you are, the universe doesn't care as far as the big picture goes, you have free will to make your reality as you wish. Having said all that I will add a disclaimer of what I really know: Nothing, but I find interest in these things and I realize such may have no interest to you and others here but perhaps we could have a common interest in some areas without fighting about what is correct or not?
Yes, a holographic universe is only theory, but no reason to think it is stupid because you don't agree, no one knows as far as proven science yet, but I accept it as reality anyway, as you already know. However, to speak up for my own belief, just because something isn't proven yet, doesn't mean that isn't how it is. Please read the following to get some idea of what I'm talking about, some of the reasoning behind the theory:
Holographic principle
The holographic principle is a property of string theories and a supposed property of quantum gravity that states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a boundary to the region—preferably a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First proposed by Gerard 't Hooft, it was given a precise string-theory interpretation by Leonard Susskind[1] who combined his ideas with previous ones of 't Hooft and Charles Thorn.[1][2] As pointed out by Raphael Bousso,[3] Thorn observed in 1978 that string theory admits a lower-dimensional description in which gravity emerges from it in what would now be called a holographic way.
In a larger sense, the theory suggests that the entire universe can be seen as a two-dimensional information structure "painted" on the cosmological horizon, such that the three dimensions we observe are an effective description only at macroscopic scales and at low energies. Cosmological holography has not been made mathematically precise, partly because the cosmological horizon has a finite area and grows with time.[4][5]
The holographic principle was inspired by black hole thermodynamics, which conjectures that the maximal entropy in any region scales with the radius squared, and not cubed as might be expected. In the case of a black hole, the insight was that the informational content of all the objects that have fallen into the hole might be entirely contained in surface fluctuations of the event horizon. The holographic principle resolves the black hole information paradox within the framework of string theory.[6] However, there exist classical solutions to the Einstein equations that allow values of the entropy larger than those allowed by an area law, hence in principle larger than those of a black hole. These are the so-called "Wheeler's bags of gold". The existence of such solutions is in conflict with the holographic interpretation, and their effects in a quantum theory of gravity including the holographic principle are not yet fully understood.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Some postulate we are all living in a large black hole, our universe satisfies all of the mathematical requirements for it to be such: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140218-black-hole-blast-explains-big-bang/
More here:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-we-live-in-a-holographic-universe (if you want to buy the article, I don't).
There is also contradicting information on the subject which will support your disbelief,but in time I think future discoveries will support it as a reality. Choose your side on the issue, I guess... Well, never mind, you have already done that, but try to open your mind up a bit, don't be afraid, your brain won't fall out, I guarantee it.
From some of your responses, I'm going to make a judgment call that you haven't been exposed to very much in regard to such things and because of that challenge them, which is fine, just don't challenge out of disbelief due to limited understanding, better just suspend belief or disbelief and study it more, that will allow you to understand more.
If you want to push the limits of your reality, try this rabbit hole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUyqfUut8lA&feature=related - this is really too short, but it will give you a taste of what I believe will be new to you. Unfortunately, nothing in this little video montage is presented well enough, far from it, but the video will give you some strings you can start pulling on to see where they lead through your own continued research, if you wish.
Or.... continue as you are, the universe doesn't care as far as the big picture goes, you have free will to make your reality as you wish. Having said all that I will add a disclaimer of what I really know: Nothing, but I find interest in these things and I realize such may have no interest to you and others here but perhaps we could have a common interest in some areas without fighting about what is correct or not?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 5,438
- Points
- 83
Oh boy... Rense.com ==> Credibility = 0
Anyway, I'm glad you finally started posting something that described what you're actually believing in all of this -- instead of just spamming the forum with some random link to some oddball website.
Yes. Even in an "off topic" forum, it's spam if you're not describing why the link should be posted.
Anyway, I'm glad you finally started posting something that described what you're actually believing in all of this -- instead of just spamming the forum with some random link to some oddball website.
Yes. Even in an "off topic" forum, it's spam if you're not describing why the link should be posted.
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
I have interest in some of their content, not their credibility. Really, I never saw them before tonight and just wanted to show some of the ideas presented in that one particular article. However, I will admit more than half of that web page is very questionable to me, but other parts I think might be right. I keep saying it, just because I post a link doesn't mean I agree with all of it, but find, at least, some of it interesting (I don't throw the baby out with the bath water just because some of it is dirt). That phrase "conspiracy nut" is loosing its sting these days as too many so called conspiracies are proven, specially where our government has been involved.
Thank you for a new understanding of spam, I always thought it was placed by people who benefited in some way by it (or hoped to), I get no benefit at all, in fact, negs from some
I'm glad you feel better now that I've given more for people who disagree with my view points to go after, that's why I don't like debates in forums. I share some things I'm interested in from time to time and welcome constructive feedback which I will respond to, but when it starts out "thats BS" or "you're stupid"... etc. without much more to their response is where I won't debate, especially when it degrades further from there and to give me a neg in retribution for not getting into a mud fight with someone who is obviously looking to disagree with you at every turn because their world view is so different from yours? No thank you, that isn't time well spent.
To those who are miffed over something in this thread or how I have acted, responded or what ever, please put me on ignore, I don't want you reading my posts, they aren't meant for those who become miffed by them. Have I once responded in a critical way towards anyone here, towards any post unless directed at me in a negative way? No, never. I will never jump into a thread I disagree with, especially one in the "other" section where we are less restricted but man, there sure are some members here who have no issue blasting others when they don't like what they see in another members thread or response to something. If someone gives bad advice regarding something technical or some scammer, bad product etc. and jumps in on that to correct someone, I only view that as helpful, but for this stuff, I find it less than helpful.
Now, I'm waiting for an agreement from those who negged me over this thread (or were orchestrated from behind the scenes, more likely... that's right I said it.) from loosing seven points on the popularity contest tally.
OK, I debated some points, was the time well spent? I don't think so. As much a waste of time for me as for those who think everything I give a damn about is BS.
Thank you for a new understanding of spam, I always thought it was placed by people who benefited in some way by it (or hoped to), I get no benefit at all, in fact, negs from some
I'm glad you feel better now that I've given more for people who disagree with my view points to go after, that's why I don't like debates in forums. I share some things I'm interested in from time to time and welcome constructive feedback which I will respond to, but when it starts out "thats BS" or "you're stupid"... etc. without much more to their response is where I won't debate, especially when it degrades further from there and to give me a neg in retribution for not getting into a mud fight with someone who is obviously looking to disagree with you at every turn because their world view is so different from yours? No thank you, that isn't time well spent.
To those who are miffed over something in this thread or how I have acted, responded or what ever, please put me on ignore, I don't want you reading my posts, they aren't meant for those who become miffed by them. Have I once responded in a critical way towards anyone here, towards any post unless directed at me in a negative way? No, never. I will never jump into a thread I disagree with, especially one in the "other" section where we are less restricted but man, there sure are some members here who have no issue blasting others when they don't like what they see in another members thread or response to something. If someone gives bad advice regarding something technical or some scammer, bad product etc. and jumps in on that to correct someone, I only view that as helpful, but for this stuff, I find it less than helpful.
Now, I'm waiting for an agreement from those who negged me over this thread (or were orchestrated from behind the scenes, more likely... that's right I said it.) from loosing seven points on the popularity contest tally.
OK, I debated some points, was the time well spent? I don't think so. As much a waste of time for me as for those who think everything I give a damn about is BS.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2012
- Messages
- 626
- Points
- 43
Did he really need multiple neg reps for posting this thread? It's all woo, to be sure, but I didn't see him posting any rude comments, and he did put it on the "other" forum, for what that's worth. Just my $0.02.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
You really don't see why people have a problem with his behavior? Do you really think being rude is the only justification for red bars? Making a wild claim and then running away and refusing to defend it or discus it certainly appears as a textbook example of trolling, for example.
- Joined
- May 14, 2013
- Messages
- 3,438
- Points
- 0
twitter is by far the best place for this sort of thing, not LPF, on twitter you can just share links to things other like minded people may find of interest and if someone comments you can discuss it or not.
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
What is the purpose of the Other section if it isn't for other things? I think it was made to share things people have an interest in other than lasers, wasn't it? If I am not to post interesting links which have nothing to do with lasers, please do away with the other section and stop getting so upset about my refusing to debate people who can do nothing but say the link is BS or that I am an idiot for having an interest in the subject I linked to. I have no problem with constructive debate, but when a member gets abusive or uses foul language, I'm not debating them or explaining my position, I won't be forced into it either through threat of loosing positive reps, as of today, over a period of 24 hours, loosing every single positive rep I had for having the balls to speak how I see things.
I have a suggestion, those who don't like what I post can put me on ignore, that feature is here for people just like me, apparently. It is no insult to me to be ignored, hell, I have two members on an ignore list myself who I am sure are otherwise good people, but after they have repeatedly responded with negative remarks I decided it was better not to see their posts. The cost is rather high though, I miss the good stuff they post that way too.
Me thinks the real reason some members are getting upset is they see some of the leading edge stuff I post as woo woo and undeserving of the seriousness and real science this forum is based upon, in their minds. Lighten up, I love science too, probably more so than you imagine, I work as an engineer, love electronics, that's why I'm here, having found lasers as something so cool it literally lights me up. I didn't really expect some of the leading edged so called woo woo links I've posted would get a few members that angry, but obviously it does as they insulted me and then wanted me to debate them so they could find more to attack me for, that's why I backed off on debates. What, see some sharks circling and then because I attracted them with blood in the water I must now jump in with them and be torn to bits as they enjoy their attack? Nope!
I have a suggestion, those who don't like what I post can put me on ignore, that feature is here for people just like me, apparently. It is no insult to me to be ignored, hell, I have two members on an ignore list myself who I am sure are otherwise good people, but after they have repeatedly responded with negative remarks I decided it was better not to see their posts. The cost is rather high though, I miss the good stuff they post that way too.
Me thinks the real reason some members are getting upset is they see some of the leading edge stuff I post as woo woo and undeserving of the seriousness and real science this forum is based upon, in their minds. Lighten up, I love science too, probably more so than you imagine, I work as an engineer, love electronics, that's why I'm here, having found lasers as something so cool it literally lights me up. I didn't really expect some of the leading edged so called woo woo links I've posted would get a few members that angry, but obviously it does as they insulted me and then wanted me to debate them so they could find more to attack me for, that's why I backed off on debates. What, see some sharks circling and then because I attracted them with blood in the water I must now jump in with them and be torn to bits as they enjoy their attack? Nope!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2012
- Messages
- 626
- Points
- 43
What is there to discuss? I haven't read his claims too closely but the ones I did read are wrong or not even wrong, thinking about them beyond that is just killing brain cells. Not worth it.
Last edited:
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
What's wrong with the holographic universe theory, or the fractal universe theory, that we might be living in a kind of black hole? Maybe it was the post about the fact we are being observed by aliens?
Are all of these taboo subjects or completely woo woo in most members minds? really?
Are all of these taboo subjects or completely woo woo in most members minds? really?
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2013
- Messages
- 8,549
- Points
- 113
I gave you some green rep Laser Project. It is called an "Other" section for a reason, and anyone has the right to post what they want to share(unless it's agaisnt the rules). Just be aware, if it's a controversial topic, be ready to back up your viewpoint 
-Alex
-Alex
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2012
- Messages
- 626
- Points
- 43
I like grilled cheese sandwiches. How about you?
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
Thanks green lander, I just don't like foul language, I can use it as well as the best of them, but these days, now that I am getting past middle age, I don't like to see it. Of course, I could just put those who keep doing that on ignore, but then I miss the good things too.
I like grilled cheese, ham and cheese, BLt's and lots of other food. But, I have a flaw, I'm woo woo through and through, have always been that way, will always be that way.... some of the woo woo is real though, IMHO. Guess what else makes me go woo? Lasers
I like grilled cheese, ham and cheese, BLt's and lots of other food. But, I have a flaw, I'm woo woo through and through, have always been that way, will always be that way.... some of the woo woo is real though, IMHO. Guess what else makes me go woo? Lasers
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2007
- Messages
- 9,399
- Points
- 113
Um... the wild claim, maybe? Someone makes a wild claim, and you ask "what is there to discuss"? Did you completely forget what the discussion is about, or are you suggesting if you ignore it that it will go away?
ARG
0
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,772
- Points
- 113
Alaskan
0
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2014
- Messages
- 12,025
- Points
- 113
My favorite; well done steaks, rib eye.
