quote Originally posted by Tony Kania: I believe that the prior posting by Ronald is the most difficult read that I have encountered on this forum. Possibly in life. I can usually grasp things quite easily, but after attempting several reads, I failed to come up with any cemented thoughts? Am I the one slipping?

Rinselberg, composing his next post.

I had a high school chemistry teacher that looked like this (alleged) Dr (and Ms) Fang Fang
http://www.quantumgravityresearch.org/fang-fang

Belief systems. 'I believe' does not make anything fact and I've seen so many instances where someones beliefs are completely wrong that 'believing' obviously does not make anything factually correct on its own.

[This message has been edited by dratts (edited 04-19-2018).]

quote Originally posted by Tony Kania: I believe that the prior posting by Ronald is the most difficult read that I have encountered on this forum. Possibly in life. I can usually grasp things quite easily, but after attempting several reads, I failed to come up with any cemented thoughts? Am I the one slipping?

Interviews with 2 guys that talk just like Ronald posts:

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: ...just sane enough to live independently....

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 04-18-2018).]

quote Originally posted by Tony Kania: I believe that the prior posting by Ronald is the most difficult read that I have encountered on this forum. Possibly in life. I can usually grasp things quite easily, but after attempting several reads, I failed to come up with any cemented thoughts? Am I the one slipping?

Well, there is the possibility that someone could have a second look at that one.

I just submitted some edits. Not big edits. Just a couple or three sentences, where I saw that my original wording could be streamlined and made more directly on point.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Wow ! You explained that so well. If you can't [dazzle] with brilliance, baffle them with bullzhit.

I think I can help Cliff W or anyone else who might be following along here.

At the end of this message--a fairly brief message--I will comment on why I put any of this Quantum Gravity Research or QGR material into this "Belief systems" thread.

I have not tried to assess how seriously this QGR group is viewed by the larger scientific establishment. That's actually not relevant to my immediate purpose. It could well be that this QGR group is more "fringe" than "science".

In the YouTube video segments which I referenced on Page Two of this thread, the QGR group is promoting one of those so-called "Theory of Everything" theories, that reconciles all of the contradictions that separate General Relativity from Quantum Mechanics, and explains more or less everything that has not already been explained by scientists.

The QGR articulation (which may or may not be "jive", for the most part) offers 7 clues towards answering that most fundamental of questions: What Is Reality?

1. Information
   
2. Causality Loops
   
3. Non-Determinism
   
4. Consciousness
   
5. Pixelation
   
6. Eight-Dimensional Crystal Lattice
   
7. Golden Ratio

The only "clue" that I am focusing on here is (5), Pixelation. This is why I picked up on that Tetrahedron video segment. (It was not quite 3 minutes long.)

This is NO JOKE.

I picked up on it because it's an idea that has been taken seriously by some serious scientists, and I have seen it being "kicked around" before on the Science Channel. Or the Discovery Channel. Or maybe some other cable TV channel. Whatever.

Here's a serious scientist expounding in a serious way about the Tetrahedron. I cannot duplicate the text, but it is from a book that was published in 2000 by Oxford University Press (and you know they don't publish any junk) under the title of "Investigations". The author was Stuart A. Kauffman. The section within the book is "A Decoherence Spin Network Approach to Quantum Gravity". And the one paragraph that I want to have center stage here is this:

quote If we begin with an initial Tetrahedron of geometry, it can have four daughter Tetrahedra. In turn, each daughter Tetrahedra can have two or more daughter Tetrahedra; hence, the initial spin network can grow exponentially in the number of Tetrahedra before decoherence sets in. This is a clue that a purely quantum account might be given of an initial exponential expansion of a universe, starting with a single Tetrahedron. [And so] it might be possible to do without the "Inflationary hypothesis" of exponential expansion of a classical space in the early moments after the Big Bang.

There's quite a bit more in that section (obviously), but that is the link that connects this QGR group, with the YouTube videos, and Dr (and Ms) Fang Fang, back to Stuart A. Kauffman. And Stuart A. Kauffman (age 78, as of this messaging) is one hell of a guy; to wit:

quote Stuart Alan Kauffman (born September 28, 1939) is an American medical doctor, theoretical biologist, and complex systems researcher who studies the origin of life on Earth. He was a professor at the University of Chicago, University of Pennsylvania, and University of Calgary. He is currently emeritus professor of biochemistry at the University of Pennsylvania and affiliate faculty at the Institute for Systems Biology. He has a number of awards including a MacArthur Fellowship and a Wiener Medal.

That's from Wikipedia, and it's only the first paragraph. So how's that for starters? A rhetorical question, indeed.

It's a small step, indeed, from Kauffman's Tetrahedron model of Cosmic Inflation to the QGR group's Pixelation model of 3D Reality. One small step for man. One giant... OK. You can puzzle the rest of that one out for yourself.

Point well taken, if I do say so, myself.

So, why did I put this Quantum Gravity Research material into this "Belief systems" thread?

1. I felt like it.
   
2. No one was able to stop me.
   
3. I believe that the scientific community's pursuit of a viable Theory of Everything is like Winning. It isn't everything--it's the only thing.
   
4. I thought some here might find some amusement in it.
   
5. It is what it is.
   
6. A broken clock...

The reasons are almost endless.

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: So, why did I put this Quantum Gravity Research material into this "Belief systems" thread?

That's an easy answer.

Mental Illness

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: It's both my "mission" and also my pleasure to conduct myself here in any Batsh*t Crazy manner that takes my fancy.

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: ...just sane enough to live independently....

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 04-19-2018).]

Visualizing a Hypothetical Planck Scale Substructure of Reality
Quantum Gravity Research
THREE MINUTES AND THIRTY SECONDS
Starts with some "punchy" rock-style music. QGR scientist Dugan Hammock shows off some of his computer animations and talks about his project. No Marion Kerr. No Dr (and Ms) Fang Fang.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-20-2018).]

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: The QGR articulation offers 7 clues towards answering that most fundamental of questions: What Is Reality? 1 Information 2 Causality Loops 3 Non-Determinism 4 Consciousness 5 Pixelation 6 Eight-Dimensional Crystal Lattice 7 Golden Ratio

That is funny zhit right there. I don't care who you are.

Let me guess. A gooberment study. I knew what reality was/is.

8) Reality is happening to me.
I will go with your # 4. Consciousness.

Getting back to the subject of beliefs...



hehe

^^ One of my favorite '60s pop bands!