not subscribing to RT, perhaps? <<s’enfuit très vite en effet>>
1 Like
Meanwhile Israel and its network of worldwide oligarchs (sorry sorry, poor downtrodden refugees made good) meddles all day, everyday but as they control the media, nobody is allowed to say that.
Skiing in Hampstead tonight?
London lockdown tomorrow 
1 Like
Snowden gets it.
3 Likes
When one thinks of “the universe” at “the beginning”, there are two possibilities. Something exists, or Nothing exists.
Evidently something existed, as we are here. I think therefore I am.
Something cannot come from nothing, therefore something has always existed.
Something and Nothing cannot exist simultaneously. Or at least it would defy occam’s razor. To conceive of it, one must define also the border/boundary between something and nothing. what stops Something from permeating Nothing? What is Nothing?
Something can always be divided into a smaller Something. There is no largest or smallest Something. To argue otherwise, one must define the smallest unit of something and how it works. And how can it work without motion? And what does it move in? Is it not trapped by all its neighbors? Or is there Nothing in between? But how can Nothing exist? And what prevents it from being divided? and on an on. The simplest thing is that there is always something smaller.
So then, we come to the simplest cosmology:
- The universe is infinite (endless) in all directions.
- The universe has always been and always will be.
- The universe is fractal and self-similar at infinite scales, turtles all the way down and up. (Scale factor should be included in all equations).
- The entire universe is filled everywhere with “something” aka “ether”, which is the sum of matter (something) at all (infinite) smaller scales below our scale.
- “time” is simply matter in motion, and is thus relative to scale.
Most humans emotionally reject this notion because our brain boggles at understanding true infinities.
One useful thought exercise: If I were standing on an electron (whatever that is) how big would “the universe” look to me? What if my electron is in a drop of water? or in an atmosphere, or in a brain cell…? Probably I could not even see/detect to the edge of the water droplet.
And then imagine our Earth as an electron in some vast drop of water, or sky, or brain…
Or maybe the Milky Way galaxy itself is the atom equivalent, and the sun is the electron…
Understanding this, we should then study the very large to understand the very small, and vice-versa.
Anyway, yeah, cosmology has “had a problem” pretty much forever. Every time we think humanity is in any way at the center of things, we are wrong.
btw, the above logic applies even if we exist in a simulation, or if “God” created our universe, which is equivalent. Because then our universe is simply a microcosm of the larger “real” one, to which the same logic applies.
4 Likes
3 Likes
I don’t claim to know what hypothesis is correct - but I love it when conventionally accepted hypotheses are strongly challenged and sometimes even falsified, as it opens the door for alternative existing and sometimes even completely new hypotheses to take the stage.
JWST is likely going to break some conventional hypothesis. It’s data is already beginning to provide challenges for some of them - and it’s just started producing data. 
Exciting times.
3 Likes
2 Likes
The fun thing to think about when it comes to infinite space and infinite time is that there is a finite probability of 1 that we have already had this conversation before…
I’ll up the ante … given infinite time and space and …
If any given human neural net can be assumed to have a finite number of arrangements/connections/atoms that make an individual what they are.
And given that as we pass our days and take in mass and lose mass the specific atoms are replaced, yet we consider ourselves to be the same individual.
And given that when we enter a deep sleep we lose conscious awareness of existence for a period of time but when we regain consciousness we consider ourselves to be the same individual even though atoms have come and gone from our neural nets while sleeping.
And given that when unaware of existence, time is without a reference frame.
Then … we effectively are immortal beings.
Because when we either sleep or die and we lose conscious awareness with our neural net shut down with a specific configuration … at some point within infinite time and space, that very specific neural net configuration will occur again and again and again - likely within a nearly identical environment as that would be the most probable place for such a configuration to occur.
So death is only a loss for those who remain behind. For all I know, I’ve died many times, but life continues onward for me unaware of what happened.
Trillions of googleplexes of universal ages could go by and we would be none the wiser to our demise.
3 Likes
SBF indictment.
1 Like
Poor Sam, just like Bernie Madoff, he failed to ensure his victims were not of the untouchable tribe.
Baaaad mistake. The (self) chosen ones must not be allowed to lose out.
1 Like
If you are not the same as your (ever changing) neural configuration, then what might you be?
I don’t think it makes sense to say you may have lived and died many times until you define what is meant by you, or ‘I’.
I think evidence, or lack of (show me an ‘I’!) points to the ‘I’ being an illusion. As in deep sleep, in meditation it seems that the ‘I’ can be let go leaving only awareness. That’s very similar to feel sleep, only without being unconscious.
In which case ‘I’ was never dead or alive!
2 Likes
Would they allow a dedicated safenet appstore?
4 Likes