@JamesJTraitz so are brain is not really three dimensional right? how do we know were not energy creating the brain? if you can see were im coming from. for example you take lcd and side you're wearing a hat when you aren't.
@ncawadias it isn't matter though everything is just infinite particles and energy the fact that we can even see particles our, energy is due to our brain. for all we know we are just ferrying 1s and 0s. our perceptions are compketely made by our brain without a conscious being analyzing everything there is nothing but endless possibilties with nothing,definite. that its basically nothing.
All he should have said is E=MC^2 but then he started yapping how electrons, protons and neutrons are gravitationally trapped light, at that point I just wanted to see him get slapped hard and ask him, is that physical enough for you.
@BK0125 Matter does not truly exist-NOT because it's convertable into energy-it is a 'projection' from an inner order of events BTW a "hard slap" would hurt the same in a dream ; the three dimensional 'program' is manufactured by the soul-by all souls , collectively- we co-create our reality, which is the true meaning of "...in the image and likeness"
This guy is a moron. Saying that matter does not exist because electrons, protons, and neutrons don't fit your definition of matter is using semantics to make a scientific claim. Matter is simply that which physically exists. So if the protons, electrons and neutrons exists -- they are matter. If matter did not exists, then this idiot would not be here to make this claim. My guess is that he is making annoying statements to get attention. Mission accomplished.
@ncawadias Well, he's not a moron. He knows what he's doing. He takes quackpot information from various sources and lumps it all together. His misinformation makes him money. If anything, he's an asshole.
@ncawadias How do you know what physically exists, know anything about Descartes? Cogito ergo sum? Everything is just perception, do you perceive everything how I do? I don't know.
@flip103333 Maybe we don't see things the same. For example, you some how took the statement "I think therefor I am" to mean that we don't exist physically(?) I took the statement to mean that since I am here to think, I must exist is some capacity. Are you disputing this?
@ncawadias I think therefore I am proves you exist. But it doesnt prove anything more than that. The one thing you can be certain of is that you exist.
Descartes basically said if someone was to fool you about everything you think you know, he can't fool you about your existence. But your senses can be giving you a completely warped view on reality making you understand it the best you can. Unfortunately its hard to know more about this philosophy... how can we discover the "real" reality
@flip103333 Well as long as I exist that is good enough for me. Though the senses are far from perfect, they do allow us to perceive a portion of reality. If you do not trust your senses then there is no point in having this conversation because you are using your senses in order to have it.
@ncawadias That is an idiotic way to argue. I can play along with the consistency of my reality, but am I not allowed to ponder how accurate it is? Everything makes sense, but we only imagine a physical world because of our senses. I make sense of things, but that does not make my sensations true or real.
@flip103333 Obviously it's fine to ponder about the accuracy of our senses, but are you really so skeptical that you don't think anything around you is real and this is all an elaborate hoax?
@ncawadias It is a possibility that I don't deny, but I play along with the consistency of my senses. I'm more of a materialist, but idealism is very interesting. What if you were only dreaming right now and tomorrow you wake up into "reality" and it is completely different. Different world, universe, laws of physics, and different senses... what if it was the same world but you sensed it differently. Lol sorry I got carried away but this is why I love philosophy.
@flip103333 It's about consistencies among several individuals using more than one sense. If there is an object giving off heat, I will feel it. My senses perceive the heat, but are not causing it. Bring more people into the scene, they will feel heat too. That is evidence enough that heat is being caused by an outside force not bound to one's perception. You don't need to rely on logical argument by Descartes to know this.
@Mick0722MX Ok but how do you know that those other people are conscious beings as well? What if you are a schizophrenic and just think they exist? What if your whole life has been a dream? Or maybe not a dream but some weird perception of a reality your imagination makes up.
@JamesJTraitz That is extremely stupid. From whose consciousness do they emanate? If I die, the world still exists independently of mine (and everyone's) consciousness.
@ncawadias "From whose consciousness do they emanate?" Everyone... Color is how we percieve light, but that doesn't mean everyone percieves it the same way. I we might both look at something that we have been taught is "red" but that doesn't mean we see "red" in the same way. Heck some people can't even see the difference between red and yellow...
@TheBloodyBlackJackal You didn't answer his question. But, as a rebuttal to your answer...I might and probably do perceive "red" differently than you do, but the light that reflects from the molecules that make up that object are still an 'objective' wavelength.
@Mick0722MX Yes and light exists, but how we percieve it is different; that was my point... Clearly water exists, but we percieve it as a physical object, when most of the atoms are void... You can't even touch it, it vanishes if you try...
@Mick0722MX Yes but no atoms of one object can touch the atoms of another. Atoms are mostly void, they can't be touched because of the electromagnetic force. Electrons are negitively charged; they repel each other...
@Mick0722MX "Your skin is made up of atoms. Every object in existence is made of atoms." Yes but atoms cannot touche atoms, because of an electromagnetic force. Electrons are negatively charged; they do not and cannot touch each other. Neither can the electrons on the outside of an atom, touch the protons on the inside (the nucleus); due to a nuclear force. When you lean against a wall, you are not touching the wall, your leaning against the electromagnetic field...
@TheBloodyBlackJackal You're claiming that the energy released from the particles are part of the particles. They are not. Their inability to touch each other has no bearing on the nature of the particle itself. It has mass, therefore it occupies space.
@Mick0722MX "There is no wrong here." No there is wrong, the wrong is you percieve that your physically touching the object when your not... "has mass, therefore it occupies space." How do you know it has mass??? If you can't actually touch it, and it deteriorates when you get too close, how do you know its actually there??? The whole point of me bringing this up, is that our senses can be wrong; your not touching the objects despite percieving that you are...
@Mick0722MX "I never made any such claim since I'm fully aware of the forces that keep particles separated." I didnt say you made the claim; I said that you and the rest of the world percieve, that we are touching things. However, we are not.
"I most certainly can since mass is well understood" Umm No its not...
@Mick0722MX "You're claiming that the energy released from the particles are part of the particles." No I am claiming that because you percieve the fact that your touching an object, when your not; it prooves that perception can be wrong... What classifies something as having mass?
@TheBloodyBlackJackal It's not about perception.. It's about what exists and what doesn't. You keep bringing up the point that particles don't touch each other. No shit. The forces separating particles have nothing to do with the nature of the particle! The forces do not have mass, the particles do! If you want to learn about mass, read up on it.
@TheBloodyBlackJackal Matter emanates from everyone's consciousness? Does this include animals? What about before humans existed? From where will matter emanate after we are gone? Consciousness comes from matter, not the other way around.
@JamesJTraitz So if they don't exist then why do we see the elements that they make up? And while we're at it, how is it that we are here if nothing exists? So yes, you actually are a moron. When you say that nothing exists, the burden of proof is on you. As it stands, it appears we both exists physically.
@ncawadias I am not saying I fully agree with him, however; your argument is flawed. Hes not saying nothing exists, simply that matter is how we are precieving a type of energy. Sense can fool you, if you take 2 magnets and press them togather; it feels like there is something there, doesn't it? Same with atoms, most of it is void, we can't even touche it...
@ncawadias "So if they don't exist then why do we see the elements that they make up?" P
P P
What do you see??? A triangle??? Nope, there is no triangle; triangles have 3 sides, and 3 angles... However, here there is only 3 points, and yet you still percieve a triangle...
@ncawadias But see, the thing is; matter is our perception. Whether or not it exists is semantics; the real question is, whether or not it exists in the way we think of it. Our perception can be wrong, our perception tells us we are touching the floor, however electrons repel each other; so we are really floating... Our evolutionary process; has made it so that we see in a way that best helps us survive, not how things trully are... Yes that includes animals...
@TheBloodyBlackJackal No, whether or not matter exists is not semantic or up for debate. As for your obsession with the fact that electrons repel each other...So what? Things at the sub atomic level appear much different. To top it off you answer only a fragment of my questions. Matter emanates from animals? What if all the animals die, does matter cease to exist? Obviously not. Consciousness comes from the brain and the brain is made of matter. Now please fuck off.
@ncawadias So what? So what, is that you perception of things was wrong. I did not say matter emanates from animals; I said our perception of matter emanates from animals. We see things in a way we were evolved to see it; not in the way things actually are... Watch the "Origin of Mass" video in the related videos section. Thats what scientists believe mass actually looks like. What we see is our perception. The lights reach our eyes; and our brains project an image, that does not mean that is
@ncawadias exactly how things are. "Consciousness comes from the brain and the brain is made of matter" Does it? Is matter the exact way we view it? If it is, then is that trully all there is to the brain? If thats true, then why can I take the brain of a salamander and cut it to pieces, rearange it; then put it back to find a still functioning salamander. This has even been done with cats...
@ncawadias The fact is, we percieve matter as something that "takes up space" but does it really? Or is it simply force that makes it apear that way. From your argument, its quite clear you don't fully understand the subject at hand. Your thinking; matter has to exist, or nothing would be alive. The theory is that, our perception is wrong. The table still exists, but its not how it looks; its mostly empty space...
@ncawadias "Now please fuck off." Rofl... See, smart people actually like debating. The only people who go "fuck off" are those who are scared of being wrong...
@ncawadias "Things at the sub atomic level appear much different." Exactly... Whats this mean? That our perception is once again, wrong... As for how it could be "semantics" the definition of matter was written by humans before we had a full understanding of how things works. If things turn out to not equel our definition of matter, then matter does not exist; until the definition is changed... Thats what makes it semantics...
@TheBloodyBlackJackal It doesn't mean our perceptions are wrong, they are just incomplete. The definition of matter was made by humans, but what it actually describes, the actual matter, was not. So whether matter exists is only a semantic debate if you like being a douche bag like the guy in this video. You can just say "Oh none if this qualifies as matter under my definition" and call it a day. What a useless thing to do.
This video does speak the truth to an extent, but then again, to my knowledge there is no single uniform definition of matter. It is true that all matter is basically just energy, but an electron is just made out of quarks, an atom is just made out of protons, electrons and neutrons and molecules are just made out of atoms.
To my understanding, matter is merely the definition of energy bound to more energy, to make up what we perceive as matter.
@JamesJTraitz Well spotted sir, in hindsight, my previous post doesn't quite convey my point as well as I would like.
I suppose I should elaborate, my point was merely this, matter as you stated, does in fact not exist. Matter is merely the definition of the "physical" appearance, it is merely defining the clouds of energy that make up matter as (we think) we know it. In short, my point is, matter describes a phenomena, wherein energy binds and forms what we know as matter.
@JamesJTraitz I have a question, how can things be made of "energy"; when energy is defined as the "capacity" to do work... Wouldn't that be akin to saying something could be made up of height, or time, or volocity, or physical???
@TheBloodyBlackJackal Great question : energy is both the entity and the 'vehicle' ; but energy itself is the 'physical' appearance that consciousness produces !
@oopxe789 The reason everything appears to exist is because you have the ability to sense things. Imagine an atom at its simplest form. A Hydrogen atom is 1 electron, 1 proton, and no neutron. If you break those down more it gets into quarks and some stuff I don't understand, and its all energy
Everything in our universe boils down to energy. You only think that physical things exist because of the way your mind sees them. But everything is just energy. Inbox me if you have questions.
@Mick0722MX What is an atom? Electrons, protons and neutrons. What are those made up of? Quarks neutrinos and what not (I don't understand that stuff yet but I'm learning about them). We imagine them as little spheres because we have the ability to perceive things. Imagine if you didn't have to ability to sense things but you were still an atom... then you are just energy. We have evolved to make sense of the universe in our own unique way; but that doesn't mean that anything really does exist.
@flip103333 You were doing very well up to this point ---> "Imagine if you didn't have to ability to sense things but you were still an atom... then you are just energy."
It's not about sensing anything. It's about using precise instrumentation to make calculations. The "then you are just energy" part of your comment has nothing to do with the first part. You just decided to fill that in for some reason
@Mick0722MX On another note, energy is just a measurement. Different things are energy. Gravity, Heat, Chemical potential energy (MATTER), and other things can be measured in energy or work.
@flip103333 Energy is not just a measurement. In Quantum Mechanics, energy, since we're talking about sub-atomic particles, is a wave function. Gravity is not a form of energy, and neither is matter. Heat, chemical energy is work, and that work is measured in joules. You're on the right track, but you're confusing some details.
@Mick0722MX Work and energy are the same thing, both are measured in Joules.
The wave function just shows a sinusoidal graph of this energy doesn't it? The only reason this concept is hard to understand is because we are all biased by our senses. What if no one ever had the ability to sense? There would be no perception of the universe. Does the physical universe still exist? or is that just our perception? It sounds absurd but this is philosophy for you. All science once was philosophy.
@Mick0722MX I don't know where you got that definition, but Work is Force times Distance. When work is done energy is gained or lost. I know they are not the same thing, but they are both joules.
Anyways, this all comes down to your point of view. It's hard to imagine this concept because we all are conscious. The only reason anything physical exists to you is because you have the ability to sense. You have to assume your senses are 100% accurate to know the "physical world."
@Mick0722MX And gravity is a form of energy. GPE stands for gravitational potential energy. Work is done by gravity; therefore, energy is turned into kinetic energy.
If I am arguing an electron is energy and not matter, then a photon being released from an electron doesn't prove anything. For me it means energy (the electron) became energy (the photon).
@Mick0722MX And if Energy can be released from matter... do endothermic reactions turn energy into matter 0.o ?!? No they just decrease the entropy of the universe, which should happen in the opposite way.
@JamesJTraitz My position on what, that your an swindler, a fake, a charlatan? Your obviously a fake, you didn't tell us anything but promote your book. And there's no such thing as mainstream science, science is devoid of human opinion. Why 1940 btw, Y didn't U pick 1905,1915 when Einstein published his theories on relativity, that's still being taught. Newton's science is 300 years old. How can you be taught anything but the proven science of the past? Your a devil-may-care charlatan.
@xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx You take comfort in your limited knowledge and understanding, this is why I freighten you with my ideas. The fact that you respond insultingly rather than intelligently reflects that you have little to say. Your anger tells me much about you;frankly I pity you - but I especially pity your wife.
yes, why would someone reject the existence of matter......ok then, what is everything you interact with....you cant go on forever saying its nothing, you have to give it a name.....PSEUDOINTELECTUAL DEBATE.....not even mentioning quarks...outdated philosophical crap
@JamesJTraitz it is a sort of manifestation of energy......and what you said about learning 1940s science, i have to tell you, that in the med university im addenting, we are told what you said, and its not a scientific university, but im not sure about the situation in the United States :D
Protons and Neutrons are PARTICLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why would he say that they are not matter?!?!?! Einstein says that matter and energy are interchangeable. Example I can exchange my hard work for money, and I can exchange money for an apple, this doesn't mean that apples don't exist.
Please learn actual science before raping it with pseudoscience, also we're taught 1940s science? Actually most of the science that they teach in high schools is more like 1800s; some even goes back to the 1600s. That does NOT make it any less valid for the frame of reference it is being taught in. We actually had E=mc^2 in 1905 which is the equation that you are butchering. what's funny is that all the rest of the science you are misrepresenting actually IS from around the 1940s.
@tadeckert7 Around that same time ,1900 , Planck's constant established that reality is dis-continuous , energy radiates in 'chunks' or "quanta" rather then smoothly or continuously...then again , electrons 'move' or change shell levels without existing between the levels they simply manifest at the 'new' shell level physical reality phases or pulses (blinks ! ) off and on ...
@JamesJTraitz Right, quantum tunneling, your point? I was only saying we teach WAY more outdated physics than you say, and it's not untrue for the frame in which they are teaching it. Now, to your claim that matter does not exist. The energy of a particle in it's rest state is E=mc^2 meaning that it has to have mass, which is good because the definition of matter as something which has mass and takes up space. Therefore, since electrons and nucleons have mass and take up space they are matter.
indivisible, we have no physical substance at all at
the sub atomic level. We are indeed made from
nothing. Obviously our essence is neither physical nor mental. We must conclude that in reality we are merely objects of perception, we have therefore no inherent existence.
religion was created by man to make man feel special in a vast universe with no beginning or end. we are surrounded by water gases and rocks and we are not in the center of anything.
But Matter is just a name for the way atoms etc behave together and appear..
like when you compress some gasses it can turn solid, it's likely energy under pressure can become solid. like ourselves.. obviously we are energy, we radiate heat.
Like the sun we burn out one day.
I think it's just a logical, i thought everyone knew already :/
Because everything in this universe is made out of the same stuff
@JamesJTraitz BTW we do live in a reality that appears physical and material and we do so for a purpose i.e. to learn and understand that our energy , translated into feelings ,thoughts and emotions causes all experience
well, honestly this isn't too surprising. Just think of magnets, and how they could repel each other.
Now apply the concept of it, to how "Matter" can reject other matter from 'entering' it.
(aka a wall seems solid, can't move through it.)
(No, I'm not saying its the same thing, I'm merely suggesting, if we can see a phenomenon that we openly accept, it's not hard to think of something similar.)
@Fleshcucumber1 well many phsicists do recognize the reality of the implicate order , the holographic nature of reality , the pixel like nature of the physical universe's contruction and the fact that wave functions which govern all events can only be collapsed by consciousness
@Fleshcucumber1 well many phsicists do recognize the reality of the implicate order , the holographic nature of reality , the pixel like nature of the physical universe's contruction and the fact that wave functions which govern all events can only be collapsed by consciousness
@JamesJTraitz; See? what did I tell you,like,almost a year ago? We found the "Higgs Boson" not only that but we found a neutrino that goes 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light...Woot.!
@Fleshcucumber1 (the) pre-physical 'particles' traveling faster than light 'slow down' as they coalesce into 'matter' . 'units of consciousness' operating superluminally form a nucleus from which they 'spin out' a boundary or an event horizon which travels within the speed of light and produces what we experience as matter
Come on, you really can't draw a conclusion out of matter just being built up by random energy and matrixes. We still need more research before we can draw a conclusion. Scientists just explain what they have found and sometimes, with the "help" of politics, they draw a conclusion.
@Bidmartinlo Correct! The objective realists as well as most scientists would actually have us believe the fantastic notion that particles and waves assemble themselves into cooperative gestalts with the beneficial help of 'forces' i.e. the 5 energies: electrical ,magnetic,nuclear strong force,nuclear weak force and gravity...all mindlessly and without design or designer....talk about denial!
@JamesJTraitz "The objective realists as well as most scientists would actually have us believe..." The objective realists vs. whom, the subjective believers? It makes me laugh how guys like you preach that subjectives are independent, therefore, objectives being dependent upon subjectives. I gotta hand it to you, Traitz. You must make one hell of an income spouting this nonsense to people if you insist on defending such absurd notions.
@Mick0722MX Don't be simple minded! I didn't invent subjective idealism it is a fundamental part of classical philosophy. You , nor any scientist can prove that a single atom exists outside of consciousness. When poorly educated individuals such as yourself resort to ad hominum attacks you don't help yourself
@JamesJTraitz Of course you didn't invent subjective realism, but you most certainly are twisting it around. You say no one can prove that a single atom can exist outside of consciousness. Of course a negative cannot be proven, therefore, you can't prove or even suggest with any credibility that it does! I'm actually highly educated, and knowledgeable enough to know nonsense when I see it. There is no ad hominem attack here, buddy boy.
This man is a lawyer right? which are his credentials on physics? is it that easy to sell books about physics without having competence to do so? ok then,
- There is no such thing as light! Light is just electromagnetic radiation and without electromagnetic interaction (both particle and wave like) we wouldn't have photons.
Which are my credentials on physics? i'm a graphic designer. buy my book!
@ZZzzzzzWhat Your comment makes no sense. What is "electromagnetic radiation"do you know what electromagnetic energy truly is - I suspect not. BTW ;I am not nor claim to be a physicist..I have studied over 35 years on the science of Einstein ,Heisenberg and Planck ; the ancient knowledge of Eastern mysticiisim psychic research as well as over 20 years of martial arts , especially the internal 'soft' styles of Southern China Fujian Yongchun White Crane
@JamesJTraitz First of all let me start by saying that I am a Radiographic technologist with plenty of knowledge in physics. ZZZZzzzzz your an idiot and should just shut up, this conversation is for big boys. James, I want to say that I do believe that matter doesn't exist, just not how you say it doesn't. Matter is anything with inertia, mass, and occupies space. Neutrons, protons, and even electrons have both those qualities. This can be measured and quite and accurately.
@tlehman0001 Would you be able to elaborate on why you think matter doesn't exist? The rest of your post doesn't match that statement. I'm curious as to what you're thinking. Thank you.
@JamesJTraitz Light is not matter and has no mass. So if atoms are "a form of gravitationally trapped light" they would also not have mass. Also atoms are held together by the weak and strong nuclear forces, not by gravity. So to say that matter is just a word to discribe what we dont understand should be revised to say what you dont understand. I will say that quantum mechanics is little understood but on none of the grounds that you stated. You need rewind your mind, you've missed somethings
@tlehman0001 Atoms are not trapped. The appearance of matter is produced by gravitationally trapped light.Light is affected by gravity because it has realitivistic mass
@JamesJTraitz Give it a rest, Traitz. You still insist on spouting your bullshit to the naive? Light is produced from electrons, not the other way around. Electrons are the only elementary particles that produce light. Protons and neutrons do not. FACT!
@JamesJTraitz Yes, but as with atoms, the strong nuclear force binds nucleons and electrons, with measurable mass. Light has no measurable mass and is not effected by the strong nuclear force, nothing about an atom is light. Atoms scatter and absorb light, thereby producing an image. Relativistic mass only refers to the total energy of a system and has nothing to do with the invariant mass that matter produces. The gravity required to effect light is that of a blackhole & no grav is in atoms
@JamesJTraitz Matter produces gravity, and for reasons that are not fully understood. Matter is made of atoms which are made of neutrons protons electrons, which are made of quarks that are held by gluons. No light!!!!!! the subatomic particle list goes on and if light was in the equation they would not be producing particles with mass in the LHC. You could interchange the word light with ENERGY and be correct, but not in any way shape or form light!
@ZZzzzzzWhat Just because you haven't opened your mind (which is the only difference between you and him, not the supposition that he is a lawyer) that doesn't trash his (not just right) duty to give his opinion. Whether I understand or agree with him or not, he does have very strong points. By the way, 'credentials' is (as you already know for sure) is nothing more than an over-rated word. I am sure some of us would buy your book.
this is like looking at programs written in high level programming languages like Objective C and say well all the functions are created of variables and all variables are just assemblies of bits and bytes together, so the program (matter) does not exist just because its fundamental parts such as functions (cells atoms) are not made up of functions (matter)? if those quarks and strings were made up of "matter" would u then rather reckon matter exists? breaking down had to stop somewhere right?
@expendable1969 it should be "I Am, therefore I think" if you meditate and be aware of the thoughts arising,at some point the thoughts slow down and eventually stop,leaving the "I", the" I am," the knower,all by itself,so thinking does not create "I" .Its very enjoyable too and time seems not to exist whilst in that state.like one hour seems like a few moments,so does time exist? one is not asleep either.
I like this video as it shows matter to be something non existant, like time.
@eaglerock999 Exactly right. Consciousness beyond thought. Time is 'smaller' than consciousness. Consciousness is the creator of time...and of course , of space
Hey James...look behind you, grab the "W" volume and read lots of Wittgenstein. You are playing semantic games. I love your style though...you are like the ron popiel of pothead physics.
When i saw about as many dislikes as likes, i had to press on out of morbid curiosity. It's all about perspectives on scale. For this I recommend Nassim Haramein.
Throw away all your teflon cookware,it robs you of your energy and creates fibromyalgia...there,now I've done my good deed for the day...oh,buy cast iron and stainless...its all about the molecules...food cooked in cast iron tastes better anyway...
Who buys encyclopedias anymore? Everyone knows they're just for show. that's a lot of non-existent matter to create a non-relevant appearance of an un-existing reality.
@yihate Written material is important. The words in a book can't be manipulated or changed in an instant by some partisan fool who may want to for his own purpose. A book is concrete. Also consider some catastrophe that could happen. Say solar flares or radioactive war that destroys computers and other integrated circuit devices. No more information hwy. Books will become very important.
Just because matter is made of energy doesn't mean it does not exist. Would you say a chair is not a chair or does not exist because it's not made of chairs?
@JamesJTraitz so are brain is not really three dimensional right? how do we know were not energy creating the brain? if you can see were im coming from. for example you take lcd and side you're wearing a hat when you aren't.
TheTheKRIT 3 weeks ago
@ncawadias it isn't matter though everything is just infinite particles and energy the fact that we can even see particles our, energy is due to our brain. for all we know we are just ferrying 1s and 0s. our perceptions are compketely made by our brain without a conscious being analyzing everything there is nothing but endless possibilties with nothing,definite. that its basically nothing.
TheTheKRIT 1 month ago
@TheTheKRIT our brain acts as a bio-transducer 'translating' an available field of 'activity' into the three dimensional living program we experience
JamesJTraitz 3 weeks ago
All he should have said is E=MC^2 but then he started yapping how electrons, protons and neutrons are gravitationally trapped light, at that point I just wanted to see him get slapped hard and ask him, is that physical enough for you.
BK0125 1 month ago
@BK0125 Matter does not truly exist-NOT because it's convertable into energy-it is a 'projection' from an inner order of events BTW a "hard slap" would hurt the same in a dream ; the three dimensional 'program' is manufactured by the soul-by all souls , collectively- we co-create our reality, which is the true meaning of "...in the image and likeness"
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
So if matter does not exist and everything is energy... what does that imply?
kikikikia 1 month ago
@ Nothing changes except one's approach to life. Everything we do creates results which affects who and what we are as well as our spiritual growth
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz Makes sense, thank you for the information.
kikikikia 1 month ago
@kikikikia your welcome
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz
if u analyse deeply u will conclude ur not doing the actions which ur doing
iamthatiamall 1 month ago
i want my time back...
ArenThomasian 1 month ago
This guy is a moron. Saying that matter does not exist because electrons, protons, and neutrons don't fit your definition of matter is using semantics to make a scientific claim. Matter is simply that which physically exists. So if the protons, electrons and neutrons exists -- they are matter. If matter did not exists, then this idiot would not be here to make this claim. My guess is that he is making annoying statements to get attention. Mission accomplished.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias Well, he's not a moron. He knows what he's doing. He takes quackpot information from various sources and lumps it all together. His misinformation makes him money. If anything, he's an asshole.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX It depends whether he actually believes this horseshit. He could be a moron, an asshole, or a combination of both.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias How do you know what physically exists, know anything about Descartes? Cogito ergo sum? Everything is just perception, do you perceive everything how I do? I don't know.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Maybe we don't see things the same. For example, you some how took the statement "I think therefor I am" to mean that we don't exist physically(?) I took the statement to mean that since I am here to think, I must exist is some capacity. Are you disputing this?
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias I think therefore I am proves you exist. But it doesnt prove anything more than that. The one thing you can be certain of is that you exist.
Descartes basically said if someone was to fool you about everything you think you know, he can't fool you about your existence. But your senses can be giving you a completely warped view on reality making you understand it the best you can. Unfortunately its hard to know more about this philosophy... how can we discover the "real" reality
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Well as long as I exist that is good enough for me. Though the senses are far from perfect, they do allow us to perceive a portion of reality. If you do not trust your senses then there is no point in having this conversation because you are using your senses in order to have it.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias That is an idiotic way to argue. I can play along with the consistency of my reality, but am I not allowed to ponder how accurate it is? Everything makes sense, but we only imagine a physical world because of our senses. I make sense of things, but that does not make my sensations true or real.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Obviously it's fine to ponder about the accuracy of our senses, but are you really so skeptical that you don't think anything around you is real and this is all an elaborate hoax?
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias It is a possibility that I don't deny, but I play along with the consistency of my senses. I'm more of a materialist, but idealism is very interesting. What if you were only dreaming right now and tomorrow you wake up into "reality" and it is completely different. Different world, universe, laws of physics, and different senses... what if it was the same world but you sensed it differently. Lol sorry I got carried away but this is why I love philosophy.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 It's about consistencies among several individuals using more than one sense. If there is an object giving off heat, I will feel it. My senses perceive the heat, but are not causing it. Bring more people into the scene, they will feel heat too. That is evidence enough that heat is being caused by an outside force not bound to one's perception. You don't need to rely on logical argument by Descartes to know this.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX Ok but how do you know that those other people are conscious beings as well? What if you are a schizophrenic and just think they exist? What if your whole life has been a dream? Or maybe not a dream but some weird perception of a reality your imagination makes up.
flip103333 1 month ago
@ncawadias your definition of matter is wrong the particles that you reference emminate from consciousness
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz That is extremely stupid. From whose consciousness do they emanate? If I die, the world still exists independently of mine (and everyone's) consciousness.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias "From whose consciousness do they emanate?" Everyone... Color is how we percieve light, but that doesn't mean everyone percieves it the same way. I we might both look at something that we have been taught is "red" but that doesn't mean we see "red" in the same way. Heck some people can't even see the difference between red and yellow...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal You didn't answer his question. But, as a rebuttal to your answer...I might and probably do perceive "red" differently than you do, but the light that reflects from the molecules that make up that object are still an 'objective' wavelength.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX Yes and light exists, but how we percieve it is different; that was my point... Clearly water exists, but we percieve it as a physical object, when most of the atoms are void... You can't even touch it, it vanishes if you try...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal You are seriously confusing concepts here. Water is a physical object, as are atoms. We know this because they have mass.
What do you mean you can't touch it? Your skin is made up of atoms. Every object in existence is made of atoms. None of it is vanishing.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX Yes but no atoms of one object can touch the atoms of another. Atoms are mostly void, they can't be touched because of the electromagnetic force. Electrons are negitively charged; they repel each other...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX "Your skin is made up of atoms. Every object in existence is made of atoms." Yes but atoms cannot touche atoms, because of an electromagnetic force. Electrons are negatively charged; they do not and cannot touch each other. Neither can the electrons on the outside of an atom, touch the protons on the inside (the nucleus); due to a nuclear force. When you lean against a wall, you are not touching the wall, your leaning against the electromagnetic field...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal You're claiming that the energy released from the particles are part of the particles. They are not. Their inability to touch each other has no bearing on the nature of the particle itself. It has mass, therefore it occupies space.
There is no wrong here.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX "There is no wrong here." No there is wrong, the wrong is you percieve that your physically touching the object when your not... "has mass, therefore it occupies space." How do you know it has mass??? If you can't actually touch it, and it deteriorates when you get too close, how do you know its actually there??? The whole point of me bringing this up, is that our senses can be wrong; your not touching the objects despite percieving that you are...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal "the wrong is you percieve that your physically touching the object when your not."
I never made any such claim since I'm fully aware of the forces that keep particles separated.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mick0722MX "I never made any such claim since I'm fully aware of the forces that keep particles separated." I didnt say you made the claim; I said that you and the rest of the world percieve, that we are touching things. However, we are not.
"I most certainly can since mass is well understood" Umm No its not...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX "You're claiming that the energy released from the particles are part of the particles." No I am claiming that because you percieve the fact that your touching an object, when your not; it prooves that perception can be wrong... What classifies something as having mass?
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal It's not about perception.. It's about what exists and what doesn't. You keep bringing up the point that particles don't touch each other. No shit. The forces separating particles have nothing to do with the nature of the particle! The forces do not have mass, the particles do! If you want to learn about mass, read up on it.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX Yet another example of how our perception of things; can be WRONG...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX "You are seriously confusing concepts here" Perhaps I am, but your going to have to be more specific if your trying to make a point...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal If you can't see that I'm making a point, then there's something wrong with you.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX You can't say 100% that it has mass if you can't touch it...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal I most certainly can since mass is well understood
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal Matter emanates from everyone's consciousness? Does this include animals? What about before humans existed? From where will matter emanate after we are gone? Consciousness comes from matter, not the other way around.
ncawadias 1 month ago
Comment removed
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias the particles you mention don't physically exist. It's not that I'm a moron it's that I sometimes attract comments from morons
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz So if they don't exist then why do we see the elements that they make up? And while we're at it, how is it that we are here if nothing exists? So yes, you actually are a moron. When you say that nothing exists, the burden of proof is on you. As it stands, it appears we both exists physically.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias I am not saying I fully agree with him, however; your argument is flawed. Hes not saying nothing exists, simply that matter is how we are precieving a type of energy. Sense can fool you, if you take 2 magnets and press them togather; it feels like there is something there, doesn't it? Same with atoms, most of it is void, we can't even touche it...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheBloodyBlackJackal "Same with atoms, most of it is void, we can't even touche it... "
Yes, "most" of it is void, not all of it.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal None of what you said addresses the point of matter not existing. If you don't agree with it, then don't argue for it.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias "So if they don't exist then why do we see the elements that they make up?" P
P P
What do you see??? A triangle??? Nope, there is no triangle; triangles have 3 sides, and 3 angles... However, here there is only 3 points, and yet you still percieve a triangle...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias Shit that skrewed it up lol.... Look at this instead... P
P P
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal Well if I am viewing three points in the shape of a triangle, then those points still exist -- just like matter.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias But see, the thing is; matter is our perception. Whether or not it exists is semantics; the real question is, whether or not it exists in the way we think of it. Our perception can be wrong, our perception tells us we are touching the floor, however electrons repel each other; so we are really floating... Our evolutionary process; has made it so that we see in a way that best helps us survive, not how things trully are... Yes that includes animals...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal No, whether or not matter exists is not semantic or up for debate. As for your obsession with the fact that electrons repel each other...So what? Things at the sub atomic level appear much different. To top it off you answer only a fragment of my questions. Matter emanates from animals? What if all the animals die, does matter cease to exist? Obviously not. Consciousness comes from the brain and the brain is made of matter. Now please fuck off.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias So what? So what, is that you perception of things was wrong. I did not say matter emanates from animals; I said our perception of matter emanates from animals. We see things in a way we were evolved to see it; not in the way things actually are... Watch the "Origin of Mass" video in the related videos section. Thats what scientists believe mass actually looks like. What we see is our perception. The lights reach our eyes; and our brains project an image, that does not mean that is
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias exactly how things are. "Consciousness comes from the brain and the brain is made of matter" Does it? Is matter the exact way we view it? If it is, then is that trully all there is to the brain? If thats true, then why can I take the brain of a salamander and cut it to pieces, rearange it; then put it back to find a still functioning salamander. This has even been done with cats...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias The fact is, we percieve matter as something that "takes up space" but does it really? Or is it simply force that makes it apear that way. From your argument, its quite clear you don't fully understand the subject at hand. Your thinking; matter has to exist, or nothing would be alive. The theory is that, our perception is wrong. The table still exists, but its not how it looks; its mostly empty space...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias "Now please fuck off." Rofl... See, smart people actually like debating. The only people who go "fuck off" are those who are scared of being wrong...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias "Things at the sub atomic level appear much different." Exactly... Whats this mean? That our perception is once again, wrong... As for how it could be "semantics" the definition of matter was written by humans before we had a full understanding of how things works. If things turn out to not equel our definition of matter, then matter does not exist; until the definition is changed... Thats what makes it semantics...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal It doesn't mean our perceptions are wrong, they are just incomplete. The definition of matter was made by humans, but what it actually describes, the actual matter, was not. So whether matter exists is only a semantic debate if you like being a douche bag like the guy in this video. You can just say "Oh none if this qualifies as matter under my definition" and call it a day. What a useless thing to do.
ncawadias 1 month ago
@ncawadias Bah screw youtube lol... You got the point didn't you???
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@ncawadias Don't expect an intelligent reply from him. Any time he's put into a corner, he disappears.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz Particles do physically exist, and he's right. You are a moron.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz I guess that's the price knowledge comes with.
kikikikia 1 month ago
This video does speak the truth to an extent, but then again, to my knowledge there is no single uniform definition of matter. It is true that all matter is basically just energy, but an electron is just made out of quarks, an atom is just made out of protons, electrons and neutrons and molecules are just made out of atoms.
To my understanding, matter is merely the definition of energy bound to more energy, to make up what we perceive as matter.
FoValentine 2 months ago
@FoValentine what you have described is simply the 'physical' appearance
JamesJTraitz 2 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Well spotted sir, in hindsight, my previous post doesn't quite convey my point as well as I would like.
I suppose I should elaborate, my point was merely this, matter as you stated, does in fact not exist. Matter is merely the definition of the "physical" appearance, it is merely defining the clouds of energy that make up matter as (we think) we know it. In short, my point is, matter describes a phenomena, wherein energy binds and forms what we know as matter.
FoValentine 2 months ago
@FoValentine Well said !
JamesJTraitz 2 months ago
@JamesJTraitz I have a question, how can things be made of "energy"; when energy is defined as the "capacity" to do work... Wouldn't that be akin to saying something could be made up of height, or time, or volocity, or physical???
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@TheBloodyBlackJackal Great question : energy is both the entity and the 'vehicle' ; but energy itself is the 'physical' appearance that consciousness produces !
JamesJTraitz 1 month ago
@JamesJTraitz "energy is both the entity and the 'vehicle' ; but energy itself is the 'physical' appearance that consciousness produces !"
That doesn't make much sense, energy doesn't have a physical apearance. You mean matter, is the "physical" apearance???
That still doesn't explain how matter can be made up of that which is described as the ability to do work...
TheBloodyBlackJackal 1 month ago
@FoValentine Electrons are not made of quarks. Electrons are a fundamental particle.
ksimmonsASU1 1 month ago
i dont exist, im just here annoying u with my post
hippyhappymigro001 2 months ago
can someone like dumb it down for me? what is this man talking about?
oopxe789 2 months ago
@oopxe789 The reason everything appears to exist is because you have the ability to sense things. Imagine an atom at its simplest form. A Hydrogen atom is 1 electron, 1 proton, and no neutron. If you break those down more it gets into quarks and some stuff I don't understand, and its all energy
Everything in our universe boils down to energy. You only think that physical things exist because of the way your mind sees them. But everything is just energy. Inbox me if you have questions.
flip103333 2 months ago in playlist PHILOSOPHY
@flip103333 You're wrong. Matter is not energy. It releases it. I find it appalling how so many people are being drawn to this new age nonsense..
Mick0722MX 1 month ago in playlist matter
@Mick0722MX What is an atom? Electrons, protons and neutrons. What are those made up of? Quarks neutrinos and what not (I don't understand that stuff yet but I'm learning about them). We imagine them as little spheres because we have the ability to perceive things. Imagine if you didn't have to ability to sense things but you were still an atom... then you are just energy. We have evolved to make sense of the universe in our own unique way; but that doesn't mean that anything really does exist.
flip103333 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@flip103333 You were doing very well up to this point ---> "Imagine if you didn't have to ability to sense things but you were still an atom... then you are just energy."
It's not about sensing anything. It's about using precise instrumentation to make calculations. The "then you are just energy" part of your comment has nothing to do with the first part. You just decided to fill that in for some reason
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX On another note, energy is just a measurement. Different things are energy. Gravity, Heat, Chemical potential energy (MATTER), and other things can be measured in energy or work.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Energy is not just a measurement. In Quantum Mechanics, energy, since we're talking about sub-atomic particles, is a wave function. Gravity is not a form of energy, and neither is matter. Heat, chemical energy is work, and that work is measured in joules. You're on the right track, but you're confusing some details.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX Work and energy are the same thing, both are measured in Joules.
The wave function just shows a sinusoidal graph of this energy doesn't it? The only reason this concept is hard to understand is because we are all biased by our senses. What if no one ever had the ability to sense? There would be no perception of the universe. Does the physical universe still exist? or is that just our perception? It sounds absurd but this is philosophy for you. All science once was philosophy.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 WORK: the AMOUNT of energy transferred by a force.
Take a Physics class and learn something.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX I don't know where you got that definition, but Work is Force times Distance. When work is done energy is gained or lost. I know they are not the same thing, but they are both joules.
Anyways, this all comes down to your point of view. It's hard to imagine this concept because we all are conscious. The only reason anything physical exists to you is because you have the ability to sense. You have to assume your senses are 100% accurate to know the "physical world."
flip103333 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX PS ya don't have to be so rude! I'm currently learning physics thank you very much!
flip103333 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX And gravity is a form of energy. GPE stands for gravitational potential energy. Work is done by gravity; therefore, energy is turned into kinetic energy.
If I am arguing an electron is energy and not matter, then a photon being released from an electron doesn't prove anything. For me it means energy (the electron) became energy (the photon).
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Gravitational energy is the potential energy associated with gravitational force. That does not mean gravity is a form of energy.
"For me it means energy (the electron) became energy (the photon)."
Well, you're flat out wrong. The particle (the electron) releases the energy (the photon).
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@Mick0722MX And if Energy can be released from matter... do endothermic reactions turn energy into matter 0.o ?!? No they just decrease the entropy of the universe, which should happen in the opposite way.
flip103333 1 month ago
@flip103333 Well, energy is released from matter. A classic example of this occurrence is a photon being released from an electron.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
@oopxe789 He's talking plain nonsense.
Mick0722MX 1 month ago
James: Please list your academic credentials. You may recall Dr. Samuel Johnson's quip that the self-educated man had a fool for a teacher.
grubelsucht 2 months ago
This is bullshit people, don't believe this idiot.
xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx 2 months ago
@xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx Since you are so smart lay out your position logically and scientifically if you can...or do you lack the courage?!
JamesJTraitz 2 months ago
@JamesJTraitz My position on what, that your an swindler, a fake, a charlatan? Your obviously a fake, you didn't tell us anything but promote your book. And there's no such thing as mainstream science, science is devoid of human opinion. Why 1940 btw, Y didn't U pick 1905,1915 when Einstein published his theories on relativity, that's still being taught. Newton's science is 300 years old. How can you be taught anything but the proven science of the past? Your a devil-may-care charlatan.
xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx 2 months ago
@xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx You take comfort in your limited knowledge and understanding, this is why I freighten you with my ideas. The fact that you respond insultingly rather than intelligently reflects that you have little to say. Your anger tells me much about you;frankly I pity you - but I especially pity your wife.
JamesJTraitz 2 months ago
@JamesJTraitz I pity the people who's gonna read ur stupid book
abohnad 2 months ago
Comment removed
xXGoDxiSxdEaDx666Xx 2 months ago
yes, why would someone reject the existence of matter......ok then, what is everything you interact with....you cant go on forever saying its nothing, you have to give it a name.....PSEUDOINTELECTUAL DEBATE.....not even mentioning quarks...outdated philosophical crap
swordfish1946 2 months ago
@swordfish1946 define matter
JamesJTraitz 2 months ago
@JamesJTraitz it is a sort of manifestation of energy......and what you said about learning 1940s science, i have to tell you, that in the med university im addenting, we are told what you said, and its not a scientific university, but im not sure about the situation in the United States :D
swordfish1946 2 months ago
Protons and Neutrons are PARTICLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why would he say that they are not matter?!?!?! Einstein says that matter and energy are interchangeable. Example I can exchange my hard work for money, and I can exchange money for an apple, this doesn't mean that apples don't exist.
morbidblade 3 months ago
matter does exist, matter is a form of energy that we can see.
Falador321 3 months ago
Duh! Every massacred shaman could've tell you that -everything- is spirit. Our misunderstanding of that is the source of all evil.
BeyondDogmaTV 3 months ago
@BeyondDogmaTV exactly right
JamesJTraitz 3 months ago
Please learn actual science before raping it with pseudoscience, also we're taught 1940s science? Actually most of the science that they teach in high schools is more like 1800s; some even goes back to the 1600s. That does NOT make it any less valid for the frame of reference it is being taught in. We actually had E=mc^2 in 1905 which is the equation that you are butchering. what's funny is that all the rest of the science you are misrepresenting actually IS from around the 1940s.
tadeckert7 3 months ago
@tadeckert7 Around that same time ,1900 , Planck's constant established that reality is dis-continuous , energy radiates in 'chunks' or "quanta" rather then smoothly or continuously...then again , electrons 'move' or change shell levels without existing between the levels they simply manifest at the 'new' shell level physical reality phases or pulses (blinks ! ) off and on ...
JamesJTraitz 3 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Right, quantum tunneling, your point? I was only saying we teach WAY more outdated physics than you say, and it's not untrue for the frame in which they are teaching it. Now, to your claim that matter does not exist. The energy of a particle in it's rest state is E=mc^2 meaning that it has to have mass, which is good because the definition of matter as something which has mass and takes up space. Therefore, since electrons and nucleons have mass and take up space they are matter.
tadeckert7 3 months ago
@tadeckert7 exactly, people like this do not know anything about science, just like deepak chopra
wearestarstuffsagan 3 months ago
We are not here. If you break our ingredients
down our substance is beyond invisible or
indivisible, we have no physical substance at all at
the sub atomic level. We are indeed made from
nothing. Obviously our essence is neither physical nor mental. We must conclude that in reality we are merely objects of perception, we have therefore no inherent existence.
MrNytn2001 3 months ago
@MrNytn2001 We are objects of our soul's perception
JamesJTraitz 3 months ago
religion was created by man to make man feel special in a vast universe with no beginning or end. we are surrounded by water gases and rocks and we are not in the center of anything.
wake the fuc,k up!
MrNytn2001 3 months ago
Do you know Orly Taitz?
malkooth 3 months ago
@malkooth no
JamesJTraitz 3 months ago
@JamesJTraitz That was a joke, you are a good sport I hope. Look this up : Derek Parfit - Brainspotting (part 1)
malkooth 3 months ago
What is the matter, realizeation can not be told, it must be understood
SpikeZeek 3 months ago
Post should of said just buy my book
13sam31 3 months ago
@13sam31 Q tips would solve your problem.
rovingdesertfox 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it's just a logical, i thought everyone knew already :/
Because everything in this universe is made out of the same stuff
only with a different combination and density
So energy can turn to matter when intentionally collaborating.
Bryantozero 3 months ago
Comment removed
Bryantozero 3 months ago
But Matter is just a name for the way atoms etc behave together and appear..
like when you compress some gasses it can turn solid, it's likely energy under pressure can become solid. like ourselves.. obviously we are energy, we radiate heat.
Like the sun we burn out one day.
I think it's just a logical, i thought everyone knew already :/
Because everything in this universe is made out of the same stuff
only with a different combination and density
So energy can turn to matter when collaborating
Bryantozero 3 months ago
If we do not live in a physical, material world, why did you spend so much money on nice suits, haircuts, and the Encyclopedia set in the background?
joematty5639 4 months ago
@joematty5639 For the same reason that don Juan appeared one day in a suit to Carlos Castenada...for the tonal
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz BTW we do live in a reality that appears physical and material and we do so for a purpose i.e. to learn and understand that our energy , translated into feelings ,thoughts and emotions causes all experience
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
well, honestly this isn't too surprising. Just think of magnets, and how they could repel each other.
Now apply the concept of it, to how "Matter" can reject other matter from 'entering' it.
(aka a wall seems solid, can't move through it.)
(No, I'm not saying its the same thing, I'm merely suggesting, if we can see a phenomenon that we openly accept, it's not hard to think of something similar.)
eivarden 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz; the first two points I'll concede(on a purely personal level) however the last part is perceived by the individual in my opinion...
Fleshcucumber1 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz; Lol...you obviously forgot I'm a physicist...I don't fall for tthat mystiphysical blather...heh
Fleshcucumber1 4 months ago
@Fleshcucumber1 well many phsicists do recognize the reality of the implicate order , the holographic nature of reality , the pixel like nature of the physical universe's contruction and the fact that wave functions which govern all events can only be collapsed by consciousness
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@Fleshcucumber1 well many phsicists do recognize the reality of the implicate order , the holographic nature of reality , the pixel like nature of the physical universe's contruction and the fact that wave functions which govern all events can only be collapsed by consciousness
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz; See? what did I tell you,like,almost a year ago? We found the "Higgs Boson" not only that but we found a neutrino that goes 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light...Woot.!
Fleshcucumber1 4 months ago
@Fleshcucumber1 (the) pre-physical 'particles' traveling faster than light 'slow down' as they coalesce into 'matter' . 'units of consciousness' operating superluminally form a nucleus from which they 'spin out' a boundary or an event horizon which travels within the speed of light and produces what we experience as matter
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@James
Fleshcucumber1 4 months ago
not light, but hydrogen and helium. deal with it.
quantum flim flam
kelbykross1 4 months ago
Come on, you really can't draw a conclusion out of matter just being built up by random energy and matrixes. We still need more research before we can draw a conclusion. Scientists just explain what they have found and sometimes, with the "help" of politics, they draw a conclusion.
Bidmartinlo 4 months ago
@Bidmartinlo Correct! The objective realists as well as most scientists would actually have us believe the fantastic notion that particles and waves assemble themselves into cooperative gestalts with the beneficial help of 'forces' i.e. the 5 energies: electrical ,magnetic,nuclear strong force,nuclear weak force and gravity...all mindlessly and without design or designer....talk about denial!
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz "The objective realists as well as most scientists would actually have us believe..." The objective realists vs. whom, the subjective believers? It makes me laugh how guys like you preach that subjectives are independent, therefore, objectives being dependent upon subjectives. I gotta hand it to you, Traitz. You must make one hell of an income spouting this nonsense to people if you insist on defending such absurd notions.
Mick0722MX 4 months ago
@Mick0722MX Don't be simple minded! I didn't invent subjective idealism it is a fundamental part of classical philosophy. You , nor any scientist can prove that a single atom exists outside of consciousness. When poorly educated individuals such as yourself resort to ad hominum attacks you don't help yourself
JamesJTraitz 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Of course you didn't invent subjective realism, but you most certainly are twisting it around. You say no one can prove that a single atom can exist outside of consciousness. Of course a negative cannot be proven, therefore, you can't prove or even suggest with any credibility that it does! I'm actually highly educated, and knowledgeable enough to know nonsense when I see it. There is no ad hominem attack here, buddy boy.
Mick0722MX 4 months ago
what really MATTER is that this guy's brain does not exist !!!!!!
MrSersant 5 months ago
This man is a lawyer right? which are his credentials on physics? is it that easy to sell books about physics without having competence to do so? ok then,
- There is no such thing as light! Light is just electromagnetic radiation and without electromagnetic interaction (both particle and wave like) we wouldn't have photons.
Which are my credentials on physics? i'm a graphic designer. buy my book!
ZZzzzzzWhat 5 months ago
@ZZzzzzzWhat Your comment makes no sense. What is "electromagnetic radiation"do you know what electromagnetic energy truly is - I suspect not. BTW ;I am not nor claim to be a physicist..I have studied over 35 years on the science of Einstein ,Heisenberg and Planck ; the ancient knowledge of Eastern mysticiisim psychic research as well as over 20 years of martial arts , especially the internal 'soft' styles of Southern China Fujian Yongchun White Crane
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Fair enough. Be sure your claims are peer reviewed by the scientific community. A Nobel Prize could be coming up.
ZZzzzzzWhat 5 months ago
@ZZzzzzzWhat Just trying to challenge the 'matrix' imposed on us by 'official' reality
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
@JamesJTraitz First of all let me start by saying that I am a Radiographic technologist with plenty of knowledge in physics. ZZZZzzzzz your an idiot and should just shut up, this conversation is for big boys. James, I want to say that I do believe that matter doesn't exist, just not how you say it doesn't. Matter is anything with inertia, mass, and occupies space. Neutrons, protons, and even electrons have both those qualities. This can be measured and quite and accurately.
tlehman0001 5 months ago
@tlehman0001 Would you be able to elaborate on why you think matter doesn't exist? The rest of your post doesn't match that statement. I'm curious as to what you're thinking. Thank you.
Mick0722MX 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Light is not matter and has no mass. So if atoms are "a form of gravitationally trapped light" they would also not have mass. Also atoms are held together by the weak and strong nuclear forces, not by gravity. So to say that matter is just a word to discribe what we dont understand should be revised to say what you dont understand. I will say that quantum mechanics is little understood but on none of the grounds that you stated. You need rewind your mind, you've missed somethings
tlehman0001 5 months ago
@tlehman0001 Atoms are not trapped. The appearance of matter is produced by gravitationally trapped light.Light is affected by gravity because it has realitivistic mass
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Give it a rest, Traitz. You still insist on spouting your bullshit to the naive? Light is produced from electrons, not the other way around. Electrons are the only elementary particles that produce light. Protons and neutrons do not. FACT!
Mick0722MX 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Yes, but as with atoms, the strong nuclear force binds nucleons and electrons, with measurable mass. Light has no measurable mass and is not effected by the strong nuclear force, nothing about an atom is light. Atoms scatter and absorb light, thereby producing an image. Relativistic mass only refers to the total energy of a system and has nothing to do with the invariant mass that matter produces. The gravity required to effect light is that of a blackhole & no grav is in atoms
tlehman0001 4 months ago
@JamesJTraitz Matter produces gravity, and for reasons that are not fully understood. Matter is made of atoms which are made of neutrons protons electrons, which are made of quarks that are held by gluons. No light!!!!!! the subatomic particle list goes on and if light was in the equation they would not be producing particles with mass in the LHC. You could interchange the word light with ENERGY and be correct, but not in any way shape or form light!
tlehman0001 4 months ago
@ZZzzzzzWhat Just because you haven't opened your mind (which is the only difference between you and him, not the supposition that he is a lawyer) that doesn't trash his (not just right) duty to give his opinion. Whether I understand or agree with him or not, he does have very strong points. By the way, 'credentials' is (as you already know for sure) is nothing more than an over-rated word. I am sure some of us would buy your book.
maycolBlueMagic 5 months ago
this is like looking at programs written in high level programming languages like Objective C and say well all the functions are created of variables and all variables are just assemblies of bits and bytes together, so the program (matter) does not exist just because its fundamental parts such as functions (cells atoms) are not made up of functions (matter)? if those quarks and strings were made up of "matter" would u then rather reckon matter exists? breaking down had to stop somewhere right?
Ams11121 5 months ago
I quite like this video. Never before have I thought about how the definition of matter should attempt to be updated.
Then again, the sum of forces from quarks and so on, would be a direct short-range repulsive force, which would be our current definition of matter.
Fascinating...
Solensherre 5 months ago
Descartes said.... " I think therfore i am!... BUT its thinking that creates "I"
expendable1969 5 months ago
@expendable1969 Descartes doubted his existence. But he could not doubt himself doubting(as would be a logical paradox) therefore Descartes exists.
Solensherre 5 months ago
Comment removed
eaglerock999 5 months ago
@expendable1969 it should be "I Am, therefore I think" if you meditate and be aware of the thoughts arising,at some point the thoughts slow down and eventually stop,leaving the "I", the" I am," the knower,all by itself,so thinking does not create "I" .Its very enjoyable too and time seems not to exist whilst in that state.like one hour seems like a few moments,so does time exist? one is not asleep either.
I like this video as it shows matter to be something non existant, like time.
eaglerock999 5 months ago
@eaglerock999 Exactly right. Consciousness beyond thought. Time is 'smaller' than consciousness. Consciousness is the creator of time...and of course , of space
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
Comment removed
Mick0722MX 4 months ago
the markets are taking a dump because they know the asteroid is coming...
Fleshcucumber1 5 months ago
Hey James...look behind you, grab the "W" volume and read lots of Wittgenstein. You are playing semantic games. I love your style though...you are like the ron popiel of pothead physics.
bmbenblog 5 months ago
@bmbenblog Thanks...I think : )
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
The set of Encyclopedias behind this guy have never been opened...
Phaleel 5 months ago
The horrors of Berkleyan metaphysics everybody!
niriop 5 months ago
Dude is nuts.
stratocaster1986able 5 months ago
@stratocaster1986able Thanks...like the Sage said: " lose your mind and come to your senses "
JamesJTraitz 5 months ago
When i saw about as many dislikes as likes, i had to press on out of morbid curiosity. It's all about perspectives on scale. For this I recommend Nassim Haramein.
AltairZielite 6 months ago
Throw away all your teflon cookware,it robs you of your energy and creates fibromyalgia...there,now I've done my good deed for the day...oh,buy cast iron and stainless...its all about the molecules...food cooked in cast iron tastes better anyway...
Fleshcucumber1 6 months ago
Who buys encyclopedias anymore? Everyone knows they're just for show. that's a lot of non-existent matter to create a non-relevant appearance of an un-existing reality.
yihate 6 months ago 3
@yihate Written material is important. The words in a book can't be manipulated or changed in an instant by some partisan fool who may want to for his own purpose. A book is concrete. Also consider some catastrophe that could happen. Say solar flares or radioactive war that destroys computers and other integrated circuit devices. No more information hwy. Books will become very important.
wolfgange63 3 months ago
Just because matter is made of energy doesn't mean it does not exist. Would you say a chair is not a chair or does not exist because it's not made of chairs?
Tygerman006 6 months ago
I have a hunch that matter exists...I dunno why,*I can just feel it in my bones*
Fleshcucumber1 7 months ago 2
"The fact of the matter is..."
But I thought you were arguing that matter doesn't exist? Chump
MelkorNoir 7 months ago
f*ckin athiest!!!!
legoclockfreak710