What Are the Limitations of LQG in Explaining Photon-Graviton Interactions?

[sol2]

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/javagif/gifs_thumb/20040428_1919_eit_304.gif

Kaku saids:" We Physicist's no longer believe inthe Universe. We physicists believe in multiverse that resemble's the boiling of water. Water boils when tiny particles, or bubbles form, which then begin to rapidly expand. If our Universe is a bubble in boiling water, then perhaps Big Bangs happen all the time."

Kaku goes on to say,"The Multiverse idea allows us to combine these two pictures into a coherent pleasing picture. It says, that in the beginning, there was nothing, nothing but hyperspace, perhaps ten- or eleven-dimensional hyperspace."

 

[sol2]

Universe is a Symphony

If strings are to be the harmony then what music do such laws of chemistry sing? What is the mind of God?


Kaku saids,"According to this picture, the mind of God is Music resonanting through ten- or eleven dimensional hyperspace which of course begs the question, If the Universe is a symphony, then is there a composer to the symphony."

 

[Tau_Muon_PlanetEater]

you are god

Any sentient creature is God. Look within, not without. Religion only seeks to control that God within, by convincing you that you must worship an outside God.

We are baby Gods in search of ourselves. When we reach our full potential, the Universe will be our playpen, will be putty in our hands. Is that not God-like? We merely need to grow up.

 

[sol2]

Any sentient creature is God. Look within, not without. Religion only seeks to control that God within, by convincing you that you must worship an outside God.

We are baby Gods in search of ourselves. When we reach our full potential, the Universe will be our playpen, will be putty in our hands. Is that not God-like? We merely need to grow up.

Inside/outside mean the same to God?

So if I look at this picture above what does this show me of the inside?

The laws of chemistry?

If we reach our full potential, do we not merge with God? So what would this look like in such colors?

 

[Tau_Muon_PlanetEater]

Well in my opinion, God is absolute consciousness. To be less vague, if a person knew all the laws of the Universe, and had the tools to manipulate all these laws, wouldn't he essentially be a God? Couldn't he create a new Universe? That is why I think God is within. Because once we understand all things, and can manipulate all things, what separates us from God?

In my mind this is more correct than thinking of God as 'out there' in space or time or wherever he may be. In fact, any conscious being is a manifestation of God, because we are simply a collection of physical forces that have self assembled (I believe) into an extremely complicated state, yet within that state there is great order. Just like the Universe.

Colors are irrelevant.

Think of the Universe as a continuous loop of Bigbangs and Bigcrunches. The first lifeforms, whether human or alien, to reach a critical technology mass after the Bigbang will be the same race that collapses the Universe (due to energy aggregation; and thus gravitational collapse around their energy density), and likewise, they will be the lifeforms responsible for the next Bigbang. In other words, all lifeforms race to become Gods, but only one makes it there first, and when they do, in the process they destroy our Universe, only to advertently or inadvertently create a new one.

What do you think? Am I a retard? Or is there some semblance of logic in my theory? Or both? lol.

 

[sol2]

Well in my opinion, God is absolute consciousness. To be less vague, if a person knew all the laws of the Universe, and had the tools to manipulate all these laws, wouldn't he essentially be a God? Couldn't he create a new Universe? That is why I think God is within. Because once we understand all things, and can manipulate all things, what separates us from God?

We are particpating currently in the way nature is evolving whether we like it or not? In God's view(?) why are you here? So regardless of the temptations, how could we not succumb to the forces of evil, and still retain some functianable use of the ability to become immersed again in that vast ocean of God's mind? Who is the composer of this grand symphony does not mean you cannot play music too?

In my mind this is more correct than thinking of God as 'out there' in space or time or wherever he may be. In fact, any conscious being is a manifestation of God, because we are simply a collection of physical forces that have self assembled (I believe) into an extremely complicated state, yet within that state there is great order. Just like the Universe.

One thing I learned to accept is the reality people can create for themselves

Colors are irrelevant.

From my persepctive and recognition of our differences, my reality saids that if you think, you are, and if you do, you are, so you would be hard pressed to separate from what your internal world is doing?

Think of the Universe as a continuous loop of Bigbangs and Bigcrunches. The first lifeforms, whether human or alien, to reach a critical technology mass after the Bigbang will be the same race that collapses the Universe (due to energy aggregation; and thus gravitational collapse around their energy density), and likewise, they will be the lifeforms responsible for the next Bigbang. In other words, all lifeforms race to become Gods, but only one makes it there first, and when they do, in the process they destroy our Universe, only to advertently or inadvertently create a new one.

Not so much as becoming Gods I think, as to wanting to return home. The fact is we have jobs to do, and a responsibility, even amidst the trappings of a material society. Is it our mission then, if we choose to accept, that amidst all this that there is, a perfect source, from which all souls sprung, to which all sols shall return?

What do you think? Am I a retard? Or is there some semblance of logic in my theory? Or both? lol.

On the contrary very normal, and you have not bottumed out yet

 

[Tau_Muon_PlanetEater]

What do you mean by bottomed out?

Also, do you believe in God? Your post seems to suggest that.

 

[sol2]

What do you mean by bottomed out?

A definition of a bot who has reach the lowest point My way of saying you are not retarded at all.

Also, do you believe in God? Your post seems to suggest that.

I do.

 

[Philocrat]

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/javagif/gifs_thumb/20040428_1919_eit_304.gif

Kaku saids:" We Physicist's no longer believe inthe Universe. We physicists believe in multiverse that resemble's the boiling of water. Water boils when tiny particles, or bubbles form, which then begin to rapidly expand. If our Universe is a bubble in boiling water, then perhaps Big Bangs happen all the time."

Kaku goes on to say,"The Multiverse idea allows us to combine these two pictures into a coherent pleasing picture. It says, that in the beginning, there was nothing, nothing but hyperspace, perhaps ten- or eleven-dimensional hyperspace."

God's Mind looks decisively chaotic...but He/She is not following a magical pathway to bring it to order...rather God is following a procedural pathway that, though quantitatively equivalent, but by scale of reference shorter than seven days to do so!

 

[sol2]

God's Mind looks decisively chaotic...but He/She is not following a magical pathway to bring it to order...rather God is following a procedural pathway that, though quantitatively equivalent, but by scale of reference shorter than seven days to do so!

Is there order at Plancklength? They have been using energy to reduce the matter considerations. Yet what value is in the gravitons, if we run out of room using photon interaction, with gamma ray indications.

As I see that you do not take it serious, maybe your questions on "first principles" would be more of value? What is emergent then? A unruly society? No democracies?

The days of Ole eh, where true discussions like Solvay actually produced some legitmate talk? Spookiness? Hopefully your next visit will be more kindly.

Where are the true orations these days? I have been reading your responses to self adjoint.

 

[Adam]

How/why do theological/mythological concepts keep getting dragged into physics? What's wrong with you monkeys?

 

[sol2]

...maybe a evolutionary setback?

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:VLCb6SHBmOUJ:www.nature.com/nsu/030623/images/monkey_180.jpg

If strings are to be the harmony then what music do such laws of chemistry sing? What is the mind of God? Kaku saids,"According to this picture, the mind of God is Music resonanting through ten- or eleven dimensional hyperspace which of course begs the question, If the Universe is a symphony, then is there a composer to the symphony."

 

[Adam]

Ooh, ooh, AHH!

 

[sol2]

ooh ooh ahh(a digeroo?)

As an innovative educator, Greene also occasionally defends the integrity of physics in filmography: he served as technical adviser and enjoyed a cameo role as himself in the film "Frequency," based on the novel premise of a solar storm providing a cross-time radio link connecting father and son across 30 years via the aurora borealis ("northern lights").

Not relying on time travel, but cross-time communication, the film, as Green explains, has an enigmatic twist that avoids many of the paradoxes of its Hollywood predecessors: "Time is far more subtle than our everyday experience would lead us to believe. In many ways, time may simply be a psychological construct for organizing the world. It is a device we scientists have found useful, but it may in fact be a dim approximation of something far more complex."

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-03x.html

 

[plum]

"The Mind of "God" is just a way of trying to draw an ultimate ring of understanding around all existence- a rather silly and misleading ambition. Is the multiverse just a dead cell in God's brain? And what is outside God's mind and body- doesn't He have a planet and a God too?

Redundant pseudo-scientific rubbish.

 

[sol2]

A Ring of Understanding?

Redundant pseudo-scientific rubbish.

How is it possible to have a opinion, and then say something is redundant?

Time is far more subtle than our everyday experience would lead us to believe. In many ways, time may simply be a psychological construct for organizing the world. It is a device we scientists have found useful, but it may in fact be a dim approximation of something far more complex."

 

[tabloid]

i think we have 3 states:

-passive mind:mind that doesn't know what its doing.
-active mind:mind that processes thoughts/thinks.
-intent driven:which is simply a mind that knows(or atleast 'thinks' it knows) what its doing.

we are mostly in passive state;the part of dreams adds more complexity-if we sleep without dreams we ought to be in passive state,right?i still don't know what being 'concious' means;ofcourse this is just the human mind,not other staff we have out there :blush:

 

[Grace]

I am now paraphrasing from a book titled Creative Visualization by Shakti Gawain.

Lie down comfortably and relax. Breathe deeply, in and out. Now relax deeper and deeper.

Now imagine yourself walking, running, etc. Picture it as clearly as possible in your mind. Now in your minds eye surround this desire in a pink bubble.

Now let go of the bubble and allow it to float off into the universe.

Let it go.

This is the end of this exercise. I did this in March 2004. Every once in a while I can see my bubble bouncing off of stars and planets in the universe. My bubble never bursts, it just keeps on floating and bouncing off stuff. I know this helps bring the solution to posivitive thinking. Maybe the more similar pink bubbles out there the more energy the desire (prayer) will gather.

I could not read God's mine, but it helps with positive thinking.

Give it a shot.

Do you think thought is the only thing we can say for a surety that lives after a person expires? Can this awesome energy continue long after death?

 

[Chronos]

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/javagif/gifs_thumb/20040428_1919_eit_304.gif

Kaku saids:" We Physicist's no longer believe inthe Universe. We physicists believe in multiverse that resemble's the boiling of water. Water boils when tiny particles, or bubbles form, which then begin to rapidly expand. If our Universe is a bubble in boiling water, then perhaps Big Bangs happen all the time."

Kaku goes on to say,"The Multiverse idea allows us to combine these two pictures into a coherent pleasing picture. It says, that in the beginning, there was nothing, nothing but hyperspace, perhaps ten- or eleven-dimensional hyperspace."

Stephen Hawking once said much the same thing. Discovering a true TOE would be the same as knowing the mind of God. I think that might be a bit conceited. God would be able to do the math, just like Einstein insisted. We will never be able to do more than approximate it.

 

[sol2]

Stephen Hawking once said much the same thing. Discovering a true TOE would be the same as knowing the mind of God. I think that might be a bit conceited. God would be able to do the math, just like Einstein insisted. We will never be able to do more than approximate it.

http://www.bun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~suchii/torus-sphere.jpg


As one looks at the continue reformation of our worldy view how can one not see that it is like a "circle within a circle," and that each successive stage, Kaluza and Klien, Klien of Einstein, Einstein of Reinman, Reimann of Gauss, Gauss of Maxwell, Maxwell of Faraday?

This view, has to be comparative to current existing cosmological views. And as these shells encase one another, we learn to encapsulate what this universe was doing, not only on a cosmological level, but on a quantum level as well. You learn to see the connection of Lifes cycles of energy and matter as events within the cosmo, yet these are never separate, and flow continiously, like topological scenarios from the early universe reformations.

http://universe.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/lifecycles/cycles.jpg

We have to draw another shell then

From this perspective, the gravitonic considerations allow us to understand what all phases are doing of the previous shells. So in order to do this, you need a way in which to recognzie the encapsulation of predecessors.

Limitation of Glast and LQG are very troublesome in my view if we are trying to identify the essence of all these shells? But this is only speculation?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Limitation of Glast and LQG are very troublesome in my view if we are trying to identify the essence of all these shells?

If the obsrvations (GLAST) are irksome to your theory, maybe you should revise it?

Sol we are treading close on the boundary of the no personal theory rule that was recently announced. Word to the wise.

 

[sol2]

If the obsrvations (GLAST) are irksome to your theory, maybe you should revise it?

Sol we are treading close on the boundary of the no personal theory rule that was recently announced. Word to the wise.

So everything before that statement is okay

Added another comment in subject post to satisfy theoretical statement of how Glast is looking at gamma ray detection.

http://www.airynothing.com/high_energy_tutorial/detection/images/compton_scatter.gif

I am also adding this http://wc0.worldcrossing.com/WebX?14@219.luvrc4ACB7f.20@.1ddf4a5f/96 for consideration.

Thanks self adjoint for being the anchor to reality.

 

[sol2]

Can Lqg go here? Of course not. It does not recognize the graviton.

So have we recognized LQG limitations? I would say so, and Lubos commment is very important if, one wanted to go that step further ask, what is possible with photon intersection with gravitons, beyond what Glast is demonstrating?

[Moderator's note: Yes, string theory guarantees the principle of
equivalence. All mass and energy in the Universe is subject to gravity.
Photons carry nonzero energy, and therefore they interact with
gravitons. LM]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=295787&postcount=1