From Joseph Smith as scientist : a contribution to Mormon philosophy by Widtsoe, John Andreas, 1872-1952

 Referring to the above diagrams it will be observed that although each arrangement contains the same number of atoms, yet, because of the difference in arrangement, they are far from being identical. In fact, the difference in the properties of the sugars may be referred to the arrangement of the atoms in the molecules. This truth is one of the most splendid achievements of modern science. All the facts, here briefly outlined, are included in the atomic hypothesis, which is the foundation of the modem science of chemistry.

Science asks us to believe in the existence of particles, unknowable to our senses, the molecules; Science requires then to believe in still smaller particles, fn^"thrngs^not *^® atoms, which make up the molecules seen." but whose relative weights and general properties have been determined. Here, a faith is required in "things that can not be seen," and in the properties of these things. True, the scientist does not pretend to describe the atoms in detail, he does not need to do that to establish the certainty of their existence. He looks upon them as ultimate causes of effects that he may note with his physical senses. Does theology require more ? Does any sane man in asking us to believe in God, for iastance, attempt to describe him in detail ?

The scientist goes farther than this, however, for he asks us not only to have faith in the invisible, untasteable, unfeelable atoms, but also in the exact manner in which these atoms are arranged within the molecule. True, it is claimed, only, that the relative arrangement is known, yet the faith required still leads us far beyond the simple faith, in atoms. Has any man asked us to believe that he can describe the structure of God's dwelling? No principle taught by Joseph Smith requires a larger faith than this.

Not only in chemistry are such transcendant truths required. The fundamental conception of physics requires, if possible, a larger faith. The explanations of modern physics rest largely upon the doctrine Of the universal ether. This ether is everywhere present, between the molecules and atoms; in fact the things of the universe are, as it were, suspended in the ocean of ether. This ether is so attenuated that it fills the pores of the human body without impressing itself upon our consciousness, yet some of its properties indicate that its elasticity is equal to that of steel. As shown in chapter 5, the most eminent scientists of the day declare that the existence of this world-ether is one of the few things of which men may be absolutely sure. Yet the ether cannot be seen, heard, tasted, smelled or felt. To our senses it has neither weight nor substance. To believe the existence of this ether requires a faith which is certainly as great as the greatest faith required by Mormon theology..

Numerous other illustrations might be cited, without greatly emphasizing the truth that the great fundamental doctrines of science require a great faith in realities that are beyond the reach of our senses.

faith. physics rest largely upon the doctrine

of the universal ether. This ether is everywhere present, between the molecules and atoms; in fact the things of the universe are, as it were, suspended in the ocean of ether. This ether is so attenuated that it fills the pores of the human body without impressing itself upon our consciousness, yet some of its properties indicate that its elasticity is equal to that of steel. As shown in chapter 5, the most eminent scientists of the day declare that the existence of this world-ether is one of the few things of which men may be absolutely sure. Yet the ether cannot be seen, heard, tasted, smelled or felt. To our senses it has neither weight nor substance. To believe the existence of this ether requires a faith which is certainly as great as the greatest faith required by Mormon theology.

Universe code

 

Protons

 

We might have a God of the gaps, but...

 We might have a God of the gaps, A God who fills up whatever there is in our world that we can not understand! Exactly what this means to fill in gaps with God, does any one have the slightest idea what that might mean? Is God some kind of a variable that you just fill things in with? Is God some kind of secret formula? Some kind of magic spell of some sort or another? What does it even mean for there to be gaps? What does it even mean to fill in the gaps with God? At least it is better than making up a bunch of nonsense and calling that science! At least we don't have a theory of the gaps!

Nullo

 

!There was another time

There was another time When our hands met and the clocks st And we lived on the point of a needle

 

Things have consequences

 

Passover songs

 

From Physics by Aristotle

  

04:54 minutes left to register for free

when the objects of an inquiry, in any department, have principles, conditions, or elements, it is through acquaintance with these that knowledge, that is to say scientific knowledge, is attained. For we do not think that we know a thing until we are acquainted with its primary conditions or first principles, and have carried our analysis as far as its simplest elements. Plainly therefore in the science of Nature, as in other branches of study, our first task will be to try to determine what relates to its principles.

The natural way of doing this is to start from the things which are more knowable and obvious to us and proceed towards those which are clearer and more knowable by nature; for the same things are not 'knowable relatively to us' and 'knowable' without qualification. So in the present inquiry we must follow this method and advance from what is more obscure by nature, but clearer to us, towards what is more clear and more knowable by nature.

Now what is to us plain and obvious at first is rather confused masses, the elements and principles of which become known to us later by analysis. Thus we must advance from generalities to particulars; for it is a whole that is best known to sense-perception, and a generality is a kind of whole, comprehending many things within it, like parts. Much the same thing happens in the relation of the name to the formula. A name, e.g. 'round', means vaguely a sort of whole: its definition analyses this into its particular senses. Similarly a child begins by calling all men 'father', and all women 'mother', but later on distinguishes each of them.

Aristotle

 

Ernst mach

 

Copied from youtube

 An interesting point about the motion of the planets, stars, earth ect. is that in physics, there is no absolute reference frame. In other words, you must PICK one object or point in space as stationary to even define the location or motion of any other object or point. We can describe the motion of the whole universe in the reference frame of the Earth--it would be very complex mathematically, but no more or less correct than picking any other point as the center of the universe

Futuro

 

Nullo space

 

Home > Terms > English (EN) > nullo space

nullo space

An often overlooked area in the arena of relativistic physics is the matter of what would happen when one’s frame of reference has a disjointed directionality. In certain geometries, this is the case. We are used to objects always falling downwards. We have sensed such since our birth. This is only part of the universe. In outer space, in free fall, and to some extent underwater, one’s coordinate system is relative to one’s relative up-ness or down-ness. Up and down here are relative. One can just as easily view a person as walking on the floor as on the ceiling. In Nullo space, one can walk on the ceiling or on the ceiling. Also in Nullo space, we can have what I call the Bam-Bam effect. A small object can pick up a larger in Nullo space.

Nullo space also exists when ambiguities occur in ring theory. Ring theory is based upon the idea of transcribing a number from a dial like object. There is no unique zero in ring theory. Thus there is a redundancy.

People have used ring theory for ages. The Aztecs, the Babylonians, and the Hindus are some examples. Ezekiel’s wheel (Ezekiel 1:1, 4-5, 15-16) can be thought of as being a ring theory. binary numbers use ring theory. Y2k was due to the redundancy of 99 going over to 00 with a trailing 19. Then there is sphere theory, which Michael Crichton’s novel Sphere seems to say is a more complete version of ring theory.

Genetic drift appears to be a form of ring theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift

adam and eve

 

E=mc2

Relativity

The Top Ten Einstein Quotations: The Wit and Wisdom of Albert Einstein

The Top Ten Einstein Quotations: The Wit and Wisdom of Albert Einstein

You never truly understand something until you can explain it to your grandmother.
We all know that light travels faster than sound. That's why certain people appear bright until we hear them speak.
Only two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity (and I'm not sure about the former).
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.
An intellectual solves a problem. A genius avoids it.
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is at all comprehensible.
The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax.
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Gravitation is not responsible for people falling in love!

nabokov on time

“I confess I do not believe in time. I like to fold my magic carpet, after use, in such a way as to superimpose one part of the pattern upon another. Let visitors trip. And the highest enjoyment of timelessness―in a landscape selected at random―is when I stand among rare butterflies and their food plants. This is ecstasy, and behind the ecstasy is something else, which is hard to explain. It is like a momentary vacuum into which rushes all that I love. A sense of oneness with sun and stone. A thrill of gratitude to whom it may concern―to the contrapuntal genius of human fate or to tender ghosts humoring a lucky mortal.”

― Vladimir Nabokov

Metaethics