QWC document comments and criticisms

[prometheus]

Then you mention some nameless and perhaps imaginary guru who has come to you in a private message or was it a vision or something and has set you straight.

The person is very real, and he is welcome to post here if he wants. It's not my place to reveal private conversations.

And you say the guru said you were wrong but I wasn’t right.

Wow you are dull. I said I was wrong and you were right, but you still don't understand why you are right.

And the accusation that I don’t understand hinges on the use of the word proof. Perhaps you got that from your guru? Proof can always be refuted. Proof for one is never irrefutable by or transferable to another. Do you want to dispute that next?

Proof in this context (maths) is not open for debate. If you prove something then it can only be dis-proven if your system is sick. You're getting confused between mathematical logic and falsifiability, I'll warrant.

But my proof is the challenge to you to “try it”. Apparently you tried it, discovered I was right, and can’t man up.

I believe I've acted quite honourably in this discussion. The readers of this thread will ultimately be the judges of that.

I was hoping you would man up about the fact that I was right and you were wrong. But instead, someone you respect says you are wrong and you thank them for getting you to understand, and then you turn around and prove that you don’t yet understand.

You still haven't been able to explain to me why time can be infinite and yet there can only be finite intervals. You quite clearly have no idea what you're talking about at all.

Do you stick by this?

Sure - You are basically saying that the distance between two events is |x - y|. If time is infinite then why can't I choose $$x = \infty \, ; y = - \infty$$ so the separation is $$\infty$$? There is a reason that I now understand, but perhaps you would like to explain it from your point of view?

I do understand it. You don’t.

Go on then - explain it.

Please tell me if you see the oxymoron in your phrase, “infinite intervals”. Do I need to start a thread so you can get your gurus and respected friends to support this new concept of initinite intervals or will you just admit you still don't understand that you cannot have an infinite amount of time between two events. Or maybe you can difine an interval that doesn't start and stop?

What is an interval? - it's nothing more than a gap of some specified size between two points on a line (that's not the rigorous definition BTW). Essentially the size of the interval can be any size I want. There is, as I've said already, a point that means the interval cannot be infinite for time but I can have an infinite interval if I chose the right circumstances. You don't understand what an oxymoron is.

 

[quantum_wave]

Wow you are dull.

LOL, them I must be dull because you made a point of saying this:

Firstly, I should point out that I have been having I conversation about this with someone via PM (thanks - you know who you are) who has convinced me that I was wrong to say that you can have events separated by an infinite period of time. You haven't convinced me and what you provide is no proof at all - please explain why it is not possible to have events separated by an infinite period of time. At the moment what you have done is define a system of finite intervals. Doing that does not rule out infinite intervals.

So like the proverbial horde of monkeys you've managed you type out a sentence - congratulations. Remember though, that you are still a monkey - you don't understand it.

Is that where you said I was right? I didn’t pick up on that part but maybe I was confused by the obfuscation.

You have not acted honorably but I suspect you have friends who would be willing to accept that characterization to make Zeno go away.

And as for me being able to explain why time can be infinite and yet there can only be finite intervals, this is something that you have to be able to figure out yourself. First of all there is nothing I could say to you that you would accept since you continue to characterize me as “dull” and “a monkey”. You must think you are grasping the concepts of finite and infinite. You don’t seem to be quite there yet.

And as for you being able to choose an infinite expression for x and Y to express an infinite interval, I have always said that numbers can be made to say anything . You say you are aware of a reason that you now understand, but ask if I would like to explain it from my point of view? No, but I explained my position to you, you came back antagonistically and defensively and brought up some vague request for me to prove something else? And then make believe that you said I was right all along.

Please state exactly what you don’t think I understand about the following:

What is an interval? - it's nothing more than a gap of some specified size between two points on a line (that's not the rigorous definition BTW). Essentially the size of the interval can be any size I want. There is, as I've said already, a point that means the interval cannot be infinite for time but I can have an infinite interval if I chose the right circumstances. You don't understand what an oxymoron is.

Oh PLEASE.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

You have not acted honorably

Tell me, do you think falsely accusing someone of wishing you dead, on two separate occasions, is 'honourable', 'ethical' or 'professional'? Those are 3 words you've used, in their negation, to describe other people while oblivious to the fact you're being a hypocrite by doing so.

You've repeatedly linked me to this thread whenever I've asked you such a question elsewhere so now you have no excuse not to give a direct answer.

 

[prometheus]

Is that where you said I was right? I didn’t pick up on that part but maybe I was confused by the obfuscation.

Yeah right.

You have not acted honorably but I suspect you have friends who would be willing to accept that characterization to make Zeno go away.

I have done exactly what I said I would and if that's not behaving honourably I don't know what is. You on the other hand have been deceitful from the start.

And as for me being able to explain why time can be infinite and yet there can only be finite intervals, this is something that you have to be able to figure out yourself. First of all there is nothing I could say to you that you would accept since you continue to characterize me as “dull” and “a monkey”. You must think you are grasping the concepts of finite and infinite. You don’t seem to be quite there yet.

So lets see if I can characterise this correctly - you claim to understand why a time interval cannot be infinite, but are refusing to explain it to me and you also think that I don't understand it. I don't believe for a second that you understand it. You have nothing but an overinflated opinion of yourself, a good deal of time on your hands and a whole bunch of worthless waffle.

And as for you being able to choose an infinite expression for x and Y to express an infinite interval, I have always said that numbers can be made to say anything . You say you are aware of a reason that you now understand, but ask if I would like to explain it from my point of view? No, but I explained my position to you, you came back antagonistically and defensively and brought up some vague request for me to prove something else? And then make believe that you said I was right all along.

Please don't judge me by your standards. The thread is there for anyone to read. Numbers can't say anything that you chose. You first define the system and your axioms and then see what comes out. How do you expect to accomplish anything without using any maths? Just talking about time having no beginning and no end is invoking maths. You're being extremely naive if you try and ignore that. Just on a minor point, an expression is not the same as a number. x and y are numbers, not expressions.

You don't understand why a time interval cannot be infinite. Please prove me wrong if you can.

 

[quantum_wave]

Tell me, do you think falsely accusing someone of wishing you dead, on two separate occasions, is 'honourable', 'ethical' or 'professional'? Those are 3 words you've used, in their negation, to describe other people while oblivious to the fact you're being a hypocrite by doing so.

You've repeatedly linked me to this thread whenever I've asked you such a question elsewhere so now you have no excuse not to give a direct answer.

I take it that you are saying that Prometheus has not acted honorably but it is OK because I didn't?

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2426359&highlight=dropped+dead#post2426359

You just throw insults at me, calling me fixated or lacking credibility but that's all you can do. You can't address my criticisms or name a single phenomenon you can model. I'm the opposite of fixated, I really couldn't give a shit if you dropped dead tomorrow. Of course I don't wish that upon you but I wouldn't lose any sleep either way. Science won't lose anything either.

You be honorable now and tell us all what kind of response you would make if I said that about you? Be honorable now, lol.

Besides, I have addressed your criticisms. And I have said to you and to prometheus that I didn't start the flaming, you did. I did say that I return the flames because I don't want to be a wimp.

You pretend to be making a point when someone offers ideas for discussion and you say they haven't modeled anything or proved anything quantitatively. It is about the art of discussion. Try responding to post #32 above:

If as a professional you can answer these questions I will stop discussing QWC and will spend my time appreciating you and those professionals who answered the questions.

The questions:

What caused the initial expansion of our observable universe?
What causes the presence of mass?
What causes gravity?

If you as a professional continue to show unusual interest in me posting and discussing QWC, but yet will not answer those questions, then I will suspect that you intend to be antagonistic. For a professional being antagonistic is not reasonable or responsible behavior. A professional who repeatedly demonstrates unprofessional behavior should not be enabled. I would be guilty of enabling your unbecoming unprofessional behavior by responding to your antagonism. A link to this thread would seem to me to be the appropriate response to such an individual.

 

[quantum_wave]

Yeah right.

I have done exactly what I said I would and if that's not behaving honourably I don't know what is. You on the other hand have been deceitful from the start.

So lets see if I can characterise this correctly - you claim to understand why a time interval cannot be infinite, but are refusing to explain it to me and you also think that I don't understand it. I don't believe for a second that you understand it. You have nothing but an overinflated opinion of yourself, a good deal of time on your hands and a whole bunch of worthless waffle.

Please don't judge me by your standards. The thread is there for anyone to read. Numbers can't say anything that you chose. You first define the system and your axioms and then see what comes out. How do you expect to accomplish anything without using any maths? Just talking about time having no beginning and no end is invoking maths. You're being extremely naive if you try and ignore that. Just on a minor point, an expression is not the same as a number. x and y are numbers, not expressions.

You don't understand why a time interval cannot be infinite. Please prove me wrong if you can.

OK, I will, but first let's address how honorable you are and how deceitful I am.

Do you agree that I was right all along and you were wrong?

Do you mean I was deceitful or I was right?

Then let's be clear that you are the one that doesn't understand why a time interval cannot be infinite given that an interval is a period between two points in time. Admit that. How is that waffling?

You seem to be saying that math is not about characterizing reality. How do you respond to that? I admit I thought that x - y = Z was an expression; so you say it isn't?

Then you ask me to prove you wrong about me not understanding why a time interval cannot be infinite. First, you do agree that proof to you from me is never going to be acceptable to you? Regardless though, if an interval is considered to begin and end then it is a period of time between two points in time. Is that acceptable?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I take it that you are saying that Prometheus has not acted honorably but it is OK because I didn't?

I made no comment on Prometheus, I am asking you the question I asked you repeatedly in another thread and which you responded to with nothing but a link to this thread. Now we're in this thread I think it's about time you answered it.

You be honorable now and tell us all what kind of response you would make if I said that about you? Be honorable now, lol.

I'd wonder why you're asking me about models when I've never claimed to have any. I don't care if you don't care about me.

Now why don't you answer my question?

Besides, I have addressed your criticisms.

You haven't answered my question. You haven't given a single phenomenon you can model. You haven't justified your claim you resolve the problem between gravity and quantum phenomena. You haven't addressed anything.

Try responding to post #32 above:

Try answering my question, which I've asked you many many times and which needs a 'yes' or 'no', though if the answer is 'no' I'd like an explanation.

 

[quantum_wave]

I made no comment on Prometheus, I am asking you the question I asked you repeatedly in another thread and which you responded to with nothing but a link to this thread. Now we're in this thread I think it's about time you answered it.

I'd wonder why you're asking me about models when I've never claimed to have any. I don't care if you don't care about me.

Now why don't you answer my question?

You haven't answered my question. You haven't given a single phenomenon you can model. You haven't justified your claim you resolve the problem between gravity and quantum phenomena. You haven't addressed anything.

Try answering my question, which I've asked you many many times and which needs a 'yes' or 'no', though if the answer is 'no' I'd like an explanation.

You made no comment on Prometheus but accused me of being dishonorable. To be clear, would you support Prometheus in his statement that he has been honorable which is in the quote that you lead off with?

Are you asking me again what I have modeled? I thought that was what I was accusing you of asking. So you confirm that? OK, I was right. Your response to my efforts to discuss QWC is to say I haven't modeled anything. I didn't claim to be modeling anything, just offering ideas for discussion. I have provided you a link to "What is QWC". Have you read it yet?

And to complete that spat I have to ask, why would you think that I didn't care about you if I said I don't care if you drop dead ?

Now let me get this straight. You are asking me a question. The question is about what phenomenon I can model. Then you refer to a statement that I made in one of my discussion threads that you paraphrase as;

You haven't justified your claim you resolve the problem between gravity and quantum phenomena.

That statement was in the context of a thread discussion "Spacetime vs. QWC Gravity". I had concluded a series of posts that were distinguishing QWC gravity from spacetime in a discussion. It was a discussion of topics I discuss in the Google.doc linked above. Note the use of the word discussion.

So if you have something to point out about how I distinguish the two from the discussion, or if there is something I said that was wrong or that you would like to correct, that is what this thread is about. In fact, that is what the spacetime thread was about too. You demanded a model or quantification instead of practicing the art of discussion. If you are simply repeating the same antagonism here, I have to refer you to post #32 and the QWC document. Which is it?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I see answering a direct question with a straight answer is beyond you.

 

[quantum_wave]

I see answering a direct question with a straight answer is beyond you.

link and document. See post #32.

 

[prometheus]

OK, I will, but first let's address how honorable you are and how deceitful I am.

I look forward to it.

Do you agree that I was right all along and you were wrong?

As I've already said twice, yes.

Do you mean I was deceitful or I was right?

I still maintain that you don't understand the reason why you were right. Until you can explain why I'm highly inclined to disbelieve your assertion that you do understand. In that respect, you are deceitful.

Then let's be clear that you are the one that doesn't understand why a time interval cannot be infinite given that an interval is a period between two points in time. Admit that. How is that waffling?

Previously, I didn't understand. Now I do. You make stuff up - a lot of stuff. Most of it turns out to be rubbish but once in a while you say something that is correct, just like the monkeys and the typewriters. You don't understand the why.

You seem to be saying that math is not about characterizing reality. How do you respond to that?

The only way to talk about reality in any meaningful way is to use maths. It's the closest thing we have to a universal language.

I admit I thought that x - y = Z was an expression; so you say it isn't?

That is an equation. x,y and Z are numbers (variables really). x - y is an expression.

you do agree that proof to you from me is never going to be acceptable to you?

If you prove it then of course that will be acceptable.

Regardless though, if an interval is considered to begin and end then it is a period of time between two points in time. Is that acceptable?

This is just a definition of what an interval is. It doesn't say anything about the possible duration of the interval. From that I could have a start time of 1 + 2i and finish time of 26 - 3i which makes no sense at all.

So no, that's not acceptable.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

It's always evasion with you q_w. A simple yes or no question is too much for you? I ask you in another thread and you link to this one. I ask you in this one and you refer to a post. You demand I respond to questions but you refuse to respond yourself. Always hypocritical.

Answer my question and I'll respond to post 32. Until then you simply illustrate you aren't willing to admit your hypocrisy.

 

[quantum_wave]

...

This is just a definition of what an interval is. ...

Good. We have an acceptable definition of an interval.

... an interval is considered to begin and end [so] then it is a period of time between two points in time.

Then you say:

It doesn't say anything about the possible duration of the interval.

And to that I say, yes it does. It says that the interval is not infinite since is is marked by two points in time.

Then you say:

From that I could have a start time of 1 + 2i and finish time of 26 - 3i which makes no sense at all.

We finally agree.

 

[quantum_wave]

It's always evasion with you q_w. A simple yes or no question is too much for you? I ask you in another thread and you link to this one. I ask you in this one and you refer to a post. You demand I respond to questions but you refuse to respond yourself. Always hypocritical.

Answer my question and I'll respond to post 32. Until then you simply illustrate you aren't willing to admit your hypocrisy.

OK, I will. Please state your question as precisely as you can, and if appropriate use the quote feature back to where I made the statement that raised the question. Try to avoid the personal characterizations like "always hypocritical" or I will just use the link and document response since I consider that antagonistic trolling.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Jesus, how many times do I have to bloody ask you? This is precisely why I asked you in the other thread because it was clear to anyone reading it you'd called me 'unethical' and 'unprofessional'. When I ask you if your behaviour is such you demand I ask you in this thread. Now we're here you demand I quote the thread I'm referring to!

All the time you just come up with another way to avoid answering simple questions. You know you called me unprofessional, you know you called me unethical. You know you've accused me twice of wishing you dead when I didn't say that. But in order to avoid answering the question you demand I jump through more hoops for you. You and I both know you've done the things I've just said so why can't you actually be a man for once and answer a direct question? Me spending 20 minutes going through threads getting quotes will only serve to make it even more obvious what an evasive hypocriticial hack you are because you and I both know the quotes are there. And they are there next to you demanding I post in this thread. You saying "I consider that antagonistic trolling" is just hypocrisy, since you use every single excuse you can to avoid admitting the insults you throw at us are hypocritical. You have insulted me loads of times and I still respond with actual posts, not your possum defence mechanism of mindllessly posting the same link.

If you can't accept you're a hypocrite then either stop saying hypocritical things or leave, because I'm not going to stop pointing out your hypocrisy.

 

[quantum_wave]

Jesus, how many times do I have to bloody ask you? This is precisely why I asked you in the other thread because it was clear to anyone reading it you'd called me 'unethical' and 'unprofessional'. When I ask you if your behaviour is such you demand I ask you in this thread. Now we're here you demand I quote the thread I'm referring to!

All the time you just come up with another way to avoid answering simple questions. You know you called me unprofessional, you know you called me unethical. You know you've accused me twice of wishing you dead when I didn't say that. But in order to avoid answering the question you demand I jump through more hoops for you. You and I both know you've done the things I've just said so why can't you actually be a man for once and answer a direct question? Me spending 20 minutes going through threads getting quotes will only serve to make it even more obvious what an evasive hypocriticial hack you are because you and I both know the quotes are there. And they are there next to you demanding I post in this thread. You saying "I consider that antagonistic trolling" is just hypocrisy, since you use every single excuse you can to avoid admitting the insults you throw at us are hypocritical. You have insulted me loads of times and I still respond with actual posts, not your possum defence mechanism of mindllessly posting the same link.

If you can't accept you're a hypocrite then either stop saying hypocritical things or leave, because I'm not going to stop pointing out your hypocrisy.

The reason for dealing with you this way is your unethical, unprofessional, fixated trolling posts like that one, full of lies, half truths, sick twisted rhetoric and a cry for help; and when I make a helpful offer you reject it with flames. Take my advice and respond to post #32 and read the document, or get some mental help, and don't let yourself sink any lower. link and document.

 

[quantum_wave]

The genuine offer I made to reply to your question was based on it being in context with the topic of QWC. Don’t dredge up a few of my post out of context unless you also dredge up and link us to your antagonistic posts to which I was merely responding in kind to your unethical, unprofessional, foul mouthed, fixated trolling posts, full of lies, half truths, and sick twisted rhetoric. link and document.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

The reason for dealing with you this way is your unethical, unprofessional, fixated trolling posts like that one, full of lies, half truths, sick twisted rhetoric and a cry for help; and when I make a helpful offer you reject it with flames.

You keep calling me things which make you hypocritical.

You have twice [1] [2] accused me of wishing people dead. The first time you admitted you lied [3].

You call me 'unethical' and 'unprofessional' [4] [5], [6].

You claim I'm repetitive [7] yet you post nothing but a link to your thread in more than a dozen occasions when people ask you questions you don't want to or won't answer.

You have asked me questions and complained I don't answer [8], yet direct yes/no questions to you are avoided. [[9]] [10]] [[11]] [[12]] [[13]] [[14]] [[15]]

You complain I am insulting but in the last 3 months you've called people, mostly myself Guest or Prom, 'dweeb' twenty times and fixated twenty three times.

However, in the last 3 months I have posted 435 times, 300 in Pseudoscience and only about 100 in replies to threads you have started. You've not received even the majority of my attention in pseudo! For comparison, you have posted 346 times everywhere. 224 times in Pseudo approximately 150 of which are in your own threads. You have 5 threads in Pseudo which have been active in the last 100 days. Together they have about 590 posts. I make up 100 of those. You make up more than 350. Unless your dictionary says 'fixation' is giving someone the minority of your time and attention its clear you have yet another lie to your name.

You admit [m] that you're pushing your personal view of the universe, not science.

You drop in buzzwords which you don't understand in the hopes of deceiving others into thinking you do understand them. Hamiltonian

You lie, you invent narrative, you try to deceive and you try to evade. It's all there for people to see. Now that I've given you a link to your posts where you said I wished you dead but didn't, and you admit you lied, would you care to answer my question :

Do you think that falsely accusing someone of wishing you dead is 'professional' or 'ethical'? If not, why not. If so, do you accept that makes you a hypocrite?

 

[quantum_wave]

You keep calling me things which make you hypocritical.

You have twice [1] [2] accused me of wishing people dead. The first time you admitted you lied [3].

You call me 'unethical' and 'unprofessional' [4] [5], [6].

You claim I'm repetitive [7] yet you post nothing but a link to your thread in more than a dozen occasions when people ask you questions you don't want to or won't answer.

You have asked me questions and complained I don't answer [8], yet direct yes/no questions to you are avoided. [[9]] [10]] [[11]] [[12]] [[13]] [[14]] [[15]]

You complain I am insulting but in the last 3 months you've called people, mostly myself Guest or Prom, 'dweeb' twenty times and fixated twenty three times.

However, in the last 3 months I have posted 435 times, 300 in Pseudoscience and only about 100 in replies to threads you have started. You've not received even the majority of my attention in pseudo! For comparison, you have posted 346 times everywhere. 224 times in Pseudo approximately 150 of which are in your own threads. You have 5 threads in Pseudo which have been active in the last 100 days. Together they have about 590 posts. I make up 100 of those. You make up more than 350. Unless your dictionary says 'fixation' is giving someone the minority of your time and attention its clear you have yet another lie to your name.

You admit [m] that you're pushing your personal view of the universe, not science.

You drop in buzzwords which you don't understand in the hopes of deceiving others into thinking you do understand them. Hamiltonian

You lie, you invent narrative, you try to deceive and you try to evade. It's all there for people to see. Now that I've given you a link to your posts where you said I wished you dead but didn't, and you admit you lied, would you care to answer my question :

Do you think that falsely accusing someone of wishing you dead is 'professional' or 'ethical'? If not, why not. If so, do you accept that makes you a hypocrite?

See post #57. And link and document.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Again, if you answer my question I'll respond to the actual topic of the thread. If you don't and you simply repeat your unjustified and hypocritical claims I'm 'fixated' etc then I'll simply continue to point to evidence you're a liar and a hypocrite.