Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Are General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics Bunk?

Page 1 of 2Next

Fair disclaimer I'm not a scientist, but I do drink more than is good for me and have a lot of opinions, which I think makes me uniquely qualified to opine on this subject.

I've long held the belief that the more science tries to explain creation without God, the deeper our understanding of creation increases, the more ridiculous the scientistic explications will become.

Furthermore I hold true that every bad philosophy will inevitably live out its logical conclusions, sometimes I wonder if this is not even the reason why God allows bad things, like nihilism or golf, to happen so that their evil conclusions and wicked spirit are unveiled to us.

It is with those two maxims in mind that I stumbled across the youtube channel of Theoria Apophasis. Now the guy is a fruitloop, and probably a gnostic too, but he is very intelligent and makes some very good points against relativity and quantum mechanics.

Basically he sumerizes scientific history, starting in ancient Greece and proceeding to our time as atomists vs aetherists. The atomists believe existence is nothing more than a chaotic cloud of tiny particles pinballing against each other predeterminately and without meaning (sound familiar?) Whereas the aetherists believe that there is a fundamental field superimposed upon creation which has many different modalities from which all phenomena originate.

Anyways the guy makes the point how the atomists are essentially mathematicians who are playing a confidence game. Because they can formulate the math to support their theories they (the atomists) reason that their theories are correct. Yet the secret is that you can write an equation to support anything. The trick is that the equation must not only be true for the phenomen it is explaining, but also be reconcillable with all other phenomenon. Because of course all phenomenon exists within the same universe and have to play by the same rules.

Now I digress back before copernicus when people thought the earth was the center of the universe astronomers observations increasingly did not match up with their predictions, planets and stars would not be in their predicted places at the predicted times. So in order to make sense of it all the astronomers came up with something called ellipses (can't really remember right name?) Which were basically mathematical corrections unique to each celestial body. As time went on the number of ellipses increased so much so that it began to be impossible to calculate it all.

So top are the atomists faced with a similar problem. because the atomists theories are bunk they are constantly inventing new particles, ie ellipses, whenever their predictions or theories run aground. However the irony is that both ellipses and imaginary particles, like virtual photons (no I'm not making that up) can perfectly mathematically explain their respective phenomena. Yet that is because math is only a description, not an explanation. For instance in Demarcus has been gibbed 1 apple, the "1" only describes what has be gibbed. The apple which has become gibberish is independent of the math used to describe it.

This leads us to relitivety which plays a con game and uses descriptions as properties for the things which they are describing. For instance "spacetime" as Theoria points out space has no properties. Space is just a unit of measurement. A meter cubed is a unit of space. Time is likewise just a unit of measurement, it's a sequence of events.

Saying things like spacetime is "curved" or "warped" is nonsense. How do you warp a unit of measurment? Going back to the cubed meter example how would you bend a meter? It's like saying warped temperature. If you were to take a cubic meter of space near a black hole and a cubic meter of space from earth's orbit and put them side by side they would be the exact same thing. I know I know we've all been taught that time dialates and space contracts and so on and so forth. But how do you contract a unit of measurement? It makes no sense. How do you act upon something which has no properites? Its like saying sadness dialation and anxiety contraction. Never mind that nobody has actually ever done any experimen which proves that. Sure the GPS satellite thing, but that's so minor that it could easily be something else.

Maybe this is why, to my knowledge, there has never, ever been anything tangible invented which as been based upon GR or QM. It's because these two things are a lot like communism, they dont work in the real world, and their even worse in theory. Anyways I'm tired and ill pick this up tomorrow.

 

Timothy Fitzpatrick, Bonzo and toddmv have reacted to this post.
Timothy FitzpatrickBonzotoddmv

I think you are on the right track.

Ryan Augustine has reacted to this post.
Ryan Augustine

Thanks Todd.

 

 

To wrap up what I started last night I see too many similarities with GR and QM and that of ellipses. The truth is that any mathematical framework can explain the universe. Even geocentrism can be a mathematically correct theory. However if if the underlying theory is wrong the math becomes more and more complicated and bizarre the more we discover as new math, and new strange explanations are constantly needed to patch up the holes and paradoxes in the theory. I think we see that in GR and QM where things that have not a shred of evidence for existing are conjured up to make the theories work. For instance dark matter was invented because the galactic models didn't work. Then we learned more about galaxies and now they had to invent dark energy because it turns out that the models still didn't work. Well guess what? The models still don't work which is why they're talking about multiverses now. Same thing goes for QM and all the particles they invent out of thin air, because their theories don't work eeither. I think they've even invented a time particle, as in time only exists because a particle carrying time interacts with an atom. Well how can it interact if everything it interacts with exists outside of time? It's a total fantasy invented to balance an equation. Speaking of the equation its so convoluted this is what it looks like:

 

Good luck forming a grand unified theory with that!

The irony is that these same people have essentially admitted defeated without admitting it. That's why they are trying to backdoor the aether by calling it field theory. However since they are mathematicians they still can't think of it outside of the quantum paradigm

"Stupid people aren't so bad, because at least they know they're stupid. The ones you gotta watch out for are the really dumb ones, who are so stupid they don't know they're dumb. These are called college professors" - something I might have read in a fortune cookie

 

 

Bonzo has reacted to this post.
Bonzo

"golf"

Haha! Hard to disagree with your conclusion on that one. 😉

I've always found the idea of wormholes and space travel absolutely absurd. As you say, how can you bend space and time, whatever they are?

Ryan Augustine and toddmv have reacted to this post.
Ryan Augustinetoddmv

Oh good I was terrified when I posted the article that this forum was full of golfers lol

Thanks Tim.

Timothy Fitzpatrick and toddmv have reacted to this post.
Timothy Fitzpatricktoddmv
Quote from Ryan on May 15, 2023, 00:27

Oh good I was terrified when I posted the article that this forum was full of golfers lol

Thanks Tim.

I was a golfer in a past life , and I think your description to be most apt !! All that being said, you can bend a golf shot right to left or vice a versa, lol !

Timothy Fitzpatrick and Ryan Augustine have reacted to this post.
Timothy FitzpatrickRyan Augustine

Bwahahaha

all my theories are in ashes Todd, your golf game has disproved everything lol

So I watched some more Theoria Apophis videos and the guy is a full of it. He's a self proclaimed expert on everything. So maybe I shouldn't have gotten so one sided on the issue of GR and QM. But I still think there's fundemental problems I those fields.

Presented without comment

 

Page 1 of 2Next