QWC revisited 2011

And among other things, I'm using it to develope the best view I can of the universe, infinity, life and God.

And let's face it, I get some excitement from that. I post in order to get opposing ideas. I weigh the input and revise my output to include what I like; my latest version is above on my thread.

I don't like standard theory because it doesn't address the three imponderable that I think a cosmology should address; what caused the initial expansion that we observe, what caused the presence of matter that we observe, and what causes gravity.

The mainstream can't address "before" the Big Bang or even the Bang itself, except to refer to an "event", a singularity that the math fails to describe, and I understand the reason for that.

I speculate about those causes and encourage intelligent, contemplative individuals to say what they think. If they say that standard theory is the best we can do under the scientific method, I agree. If they say they can't think of an explanation for the expansion, or for the presence of matter and gravity then they don't want to play.
 
It is time to conclude this 2011 QWC thread. Look for the QWC 2012 updates thread soon.
 
Thanks for the interesting reading on your 2011 thread QW . . . . .
Thanks for that. My expectations are low because my content is "altphys" but this forum is supposed to be for my type of guy. So we'll see if they want it here or they don't. And by "they", I mean the members because if they want to participate they will, and if they post off topic and flame me that isn't supposed to be allowed. And since we aren't supposed to flame people back, it should be a very orderly place :rolleyes:. I post my ideas (they are referred to by the so called smart guys as delusions sometimes so I can call them that if I want, lol), and if the good ole boys flame me, maybe call me a pea brain (then I can call myself that if I want), I don't mind. I won't be reporting anyone for posting anything but I won't be flaming back in kind, so have at it. Also, I am planning to ignore anyone posting off topic. I will either defend what I post or say I was wrong when shown wrong, but I won't get into the drama, straw-men, off-topic antagonism, egotistical rants, or any of the usual distractions. I'm here to learn, improve my views, and the way to do that is to share my views and make adjustments to them based of real scientific observations and data, and not on consensus theories because the consensus theories don't work together and so something is wrong with one or the other of them and probably both. Some of us like "altphys" (alternative cosmology and physics and related problems) because logic and observation are our tools. We actually have the facts on our side, so it will be fun. For those who like to post off topic and attack personally, well they will show themselves and get ignored. It will be fun to update the forum on the new 2012 ideas. Watch or join in and we will judge for ourselves if this forum is here for us or for the members to feed on us without any rules, lol. I bet it will be like a graveyard at first but if history can be our guide, it won't take long for some healthy arguing of positions to begin. Let the chips fall where they will.
 
Last edited:
If I may say so, you do an admirable job of treating all posters with respect and ignoring those who are not worthy of your time or the time of those reading your thread.

The Science of cosmology is still in it's infancy when it comes to our understanding of our universe and so I greatly enjoy your speculations and the interpretations you are able to provide of the many theories which abound.

You have greatly enriched my appreciation of cosmology. I do not speculate overmuch because I have great confidence that any and all breakthroughs will get reported, leaving me free to gallivant through life (and the forums) placing my time and energy toward those priorities which are my strengths. :)
 
Aw, shucks :eek:. You are always welcome, on topic or off topic and I will never ignore you, of course. And since you follow me around to all the forums (just kidding, I admit luring you along with me, lol), you know that I have some interesting new content. And I hope you will continue to assist me with the research, but do try not to use links to comic book sites :bugeye:.
 
Last edited:
Aw, shucks . You are always welcome, on topic or off topic and I will never ignore you, of course. And since you follow me around to all the forums (just kidding, I admit luring you along with me, lol), you know that I have some interesting new content. And I hope you will continue to assist me with the research, but do try not to use links to comic book sites

But Tree Lobsters are so relevant at times....:D

Besides, it was a fellow armchair cosmologist who turned me on to Tree Lobsters so I thought perhaps it was a shared interest. I figured you had a bit of a sulk on when you didn't thank me for it, and you most often the gracious sort. :eek:

Okay. No comics.

Besides, I have a few other hangouts where I can dance on the tables and shoot out the lights, lol.... :p

Also sites where they don't limit how many emoticons I can use in a post, lol....
 
But Tree Lobsters are so relevant at times....:D
Lol, it wasn't the tree lobsters. It was that io9 that had that "ask a physicist" that you posted over at FRDB. This is from the same site:
http://io9.com/daily-10/
Besides, it was a fellow armchair cosmologist who turned me on to Tree Lobsters so I thought perhaps it was a shared interest. I figured you had a bit of a sulk on when you didn't thank me for it, and you most often the gracious sort. :eek:
A sulk? Me? No, it was an oversight if I didn't thank you. What, now I have to worry about being appreciative? But of course I always am.
Okay. No comics.

Besides, I have a few other hangouts where I can dance on the tables and shoot out the lights, lol.... :p

Also sites where they don't limit how many emoticons I can use in a post, lol....
OK, I was just kidding about the comics. Post freely and often, lol. And have fun on the tables; send pics.
 
Originally posted by Quantum Wave

Originally Posted by scheherazade
But Tree Lobsters are so relevant at times....
Lol, it wasn't the tree lobsters. It was that io9 that had that "ask a physicist" that you posted over at FRDB. This is from the same site:
http://io9.com/daily-10/

Isn't that against the rules of engagement.....to carry one's complaints between forums? :confused:

256px-NovaFractal_relaxation.real-3.0.png


I think I shall contemplate relaxing fractals for a while and wait to see what QWC revisited 2012 conjectures....
 
Back
Top