Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

What is wrong with this quote?

Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 5:42:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

There are two problems with it.

First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view. What you need to do is take a lot of acid, become a new age bliss bunny, and it will make perfect sense.

Second, I did not get my biobodysuit vehicle, did any of you get two?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 8:07:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 5:42:58 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

There are two problems with it.

First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view. What you need to do is take a lot of acid, become a new age bliss bunny, and it will make perfect sense.

Second, I did not get my biobodysuit vehicle, did any of you get two?

I got two but I ruined one of them taking acid so...... Solid quote by the way.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 6:59:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

You have to look at this from the POV of the vacuum.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 7:21:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 6:59:19 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

You have to look at this from the POV of the vacuum.

Thanks for trolling dude...
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2013 7:26:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 7:21:02 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:59:19 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

You have to look at this from the POV of the vacuum.

Thanks for trolling dude...

Ok, that's the last time I try and help you.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 5:15:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

Here is the correct point of view.

http://www.tiller.org...

Go to the white papers, read all thirty of them, then take acid....and the quote will make sense.

You will need to be wearing your biobodysuit vehicle of course.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 10:06:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

Uhm, you pretty much spelled it out. The energy "latent" in an atom is part of the total energy of the universe and, necessarily, cannot be greater than that.
TheAntidoter
Posts: 4,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 10:28:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 5:15:28 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

Here is the correct point of view.

http://www.tiller.org...

Go to the white papers, read all thirty of them, then take acid....and the quote will make sense.

You will need to be wearing your biobodysuit vehicle of course.

Thus, humans, with self
focused and directed intention, can
significantly change the magnitude and character of the unique
energies flowing
in these meridians (some call
it
"qi" or prana) which,
in turn, nourish the electrical energy flows in the rest of our physical
body.

Let me spell it out for you in simple terms.

1. Humans are conductors.
2. We have biobodysuits.
3. We make energy by using stuff like oil, coal, water, etc.
4. Energy is in electrons.
5. Through concentration, we can access the smallest parts of our beings
6. These parts are electrons, which we can conduct because we are conductors. The biobodysuits also help.
7. Thus, since we produce energy as sentient beings, the energy we get from electrons allows us to harvest our infinite potential to produce more energy then the universe.

Obviously nothing in the above proof is wrong.

Obviously.
Affinity: Fire
Class: Human
Abilities: ????

Nac.

WOAH, COLORED FONT!
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 6:22:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 10:06:04 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

Uhm, you pretty much spelled it out. The energy "latent" in an atom is part of the total energy of the universe and, necessarily, cannot be greater than that.

Thank you, now I could respond to the fb friend who posted this as a status.
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 6:28:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 10:28:43 AM, TheAntidoter wrote:
At 9/18/2013 5:15:28 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

Here is the correct point of view.

http://www.tiller.org...

Go to the white papers, read all thirty of them, then take acid....and the quote will make sense.

You will need to be wearing your biobodysuit vehicle of course.

Thus, humans, with self
focused and directed intention, can
significantly change the magnitude and character of the unique
energies flowing
in these meridians (some call
it
"qi" or prana) which,
in turn, nourish the electrical energy flows in the rest of our physical
body.


Let me spell it out for you in simple terms.

1. Humans are conductors.
2. We have biobodysuits.
3. We make energy by using stuff like oil, coal, water, etc.
4. Energy is in electrons.
5. Through concentration, we can access the smallest parts of our beings
6. These parts are electrons, which we can conduct because we are conductors. The biobodysuits also help.
7. Thus, since we produce energy as sentient beings, the energy we get from electrons allows us to harvest our infinite potential to produce more energy then the universe.

Obviously nothing in the above proof is wrong.

Obviously.

Lmao, I hope this is not what he actually says, I wouldn't be surprised though people like Creationists are worse.
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2013 8:49:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/18/2013 10:28:43 AM, TheAntidoter wrote:
At 9/18/2013 5:15:28 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:57:44 PM, Orangatang wrote:
At 9/17/2013 6:01:34 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 3:11:05 PM, Orangatang wrote:
...What? Can I have a serious answer or can someone link me to the "correct" pov?

The first part of the first answer was serious.

Ok... the first part of the first answer says: "First, you don"t understand because you are applying the wrong frame of reference, you will never understand the physics of the vacuum until you shift your point of view."

So again I ask, what is the correct POV? Any links that could help me better understand this quote? Anyone who could actually clear out the vagueness?

Here is the correct point of view.

http://www.tiller.org...

Go to the white papers, read all thirty of them, then take acid....and the quote will make sense.

You will need to be wearing your biobodysuit vehicle of course.

Thus, humans, with self
focused and directed intention, can
significantly change the magnitude and character of the unique
energies flowing
in these meridians (some call
it
"qi" or prana) which,
in turn, nourish the electrical energy flows in the rest of our physical
body.


Let me spell it out for you in simple terms.

1. Humans are conductors.
2. We have biobodysuits.
3. We make energy by using stuff like oil, coal, water, etc.
4. Energy is in electrons.
5. Through concentration, we can access the smallest parts of our beings
6. These parts are electrons, which we can conduct because we are conductors. The biobodysuits also help.
7. Thus, since we produce energy as sentient beings, the energy we get from electrons allows us to harvest our infinite potential to produce more energy then the universe.

Obviously nothing in the above proof is wrong.

Obviously.

Wolfgang Pauli would say, "It's not even wrong".
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
slo1
Posts: 4,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 1:40:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

E=mc^2

energy has a direct relationship to mass. One atom on helium does not have more mass than all the matter in the universe.

The vacuum this guy talks about is just empty space time. "Empty" space time does have fluctuating virtual particles that flicker in and out of existence. It has been shown that when one has a type of mirror that moves extremely fast it can knock into a particle that is in the act of coming to be, transfer kinetic energy to it, and send it in motion as a particle we could detect.

Most likely this guy is looking at the potential energy of these "virtual particles". The key issue with that though, is that the conservation of energy is temporary. These virtual particles net to zero energy over time. They flicker in and right out of existence and most never have any interaction with any other type of particle or matter.

The conservation of energy is maintained over time. Notice in the experiment that confirmed virtual particles they had to input energy into the system to get the particle to last longer than its normal brief existence. The potential energy of these "virtual particles" can be tremendous, but when netted together it is zero, however, it has been considered that the temporary potential is where the matter/energy for the big bang came from.

This guy is clearly taking liberty to speculate on virtual particles, but he goes way beyond what is scientifically prudent. In other words he is just guessing that there are more underlining hidden variables that would explain virtual particles and quantum mechanics, but make no question he is guessing at that and is using twisted logic to support his guess/speculation.
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2013 2:26:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/19/2013 1:40:19 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

E=mc^2

energy has a direct relationship to mass. One atom on helium does not have more mass than all the matter in the universe.

The vacuum this guy talks about is just empty space time. "Empty" space time does have fluctuating virtual particles that flicker in and out of existence. It has been shown that when one has a type of mirror that moves extremely fast it can knock into a particle that is in the act of coming to be, transfer kinetic energy to it, and send it in motion as a particle we could detect.

Most likely this guy is looking at the potential energy of these "virtual particles". The key issue with that though, is that the conservation of energy is temporary. These virtual particles net to zero energy over time. They flicker in and right out of existence and most never have any interaction with any other type of particle or matter.

The conservation of energy is maintained over time. Notice in the experiment that confirmed virtual particles they had to input energy into the system to get the particle to last longer than its normal brief existence. The potential energy of these "virtual particles" can be tremendous, but when netted together it is zero, however, it has been considered that the temporary potential is where the matter/energy for the big bang came from.

This guy is clearly taking liberty to speculate on virtual particles, but he goes way beyond what is scientifically prudent. In other words he is just guessing that there are more underlining hidden variables that would explain virtual particles and quantum mechanics, but make no question he is guessing at that and is using twisted logic to support his guess/speculation.

You deserve a medal, thank you for the wonderful explanation. I now understand where he is coming from and how far he has to stretch uncertain assumptions to get there.
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2013 4:22:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/17/2013 2:10:02 AM, Orangatang wrote:
"Spirit drives this biobodysuit vehicle! After all, 99.999% of all physical 'matter' consists of vacuum, with BIG spaces between electrons and nucleus. The energy potential, or latent energy, stored in one single Hydrogen atom is equivalent to one trillion times all the energy in our universe! If our consciousness could interact with the vacuum, we could have some very BIG effects. We'll be able to use the physics of the vacuum to get to the stars."

This honestly doesn't make sense, how could the latent energy in one hydrogen atom be greater than all the energy of the universe? The universe already contains illions of atoms that all have spaces between the electrons and the nucleus, and latent energies of their own. Are these other atoms considered in the calculation? Anyone know what exactly is wrong with this quote? It seems like complete nonsense. The quote is from this site: http://realityshifters.com...

I think you pretty much nailed it. The energy of one atom cannot logically exceed the energy of all atoms. While it's true that most of what we see as solid matter is on a sub-atomic scale mostly empty space, I think it's clear that the author's 99.999% is a completely fictitious number, as is the rest of the quote. There's no reason to chalk it up to anything more than the pseudo-spiritual ramblings of some aging hippy.