Time is the 4th dimension

[toobfreak]

I don’t know what you said as I have dementia

What would happen if a hypersphere would touch us? You would see a point coming from nowhere ...

I realize this is all just pure speculation, but interestingly enough, what you are describing goes a long way to explain some aspects of both the paranormal as well as mysteries like UFOs.

Sorry - I don't believe in any paranormal things or UFOs

Whether you believe them or not, people have these experiences, far too often to dismiss all of them as nonsense. I've seen UFOs at least once, REAL UFOs as you put it, I'm no idiot or fool and know what I saw and there is nothing on this Earth made by man that can do these things (especially since I saw them in the 1960s).

Whatever you saw ... you saw it. But what it means and what's the real background, who knows?

Sorry, no. Physics is not an arbitrary standard that the observer simply makes up. There are certain physical laws that ANY vehicle in our sky MUST follow. For instance, it is impossible for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant, dramatic speed changes, likewise for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant changes in direction, yet that is exactly what I saw, and I'm no fool, tricked by my eyes or by light; it was not some "atmospheric phenomena"---- I'm a skilled, trained observer, well versed in the details of light, atmosphere, body, mechanics and optics. I know what I saw. And there were at least one or two other times.

 

[Quasar44]

toobfreak
Why does the moon look crescent !!
Is it because of earth light being reflected on the moon ??

 

[Quasar44]

I am not very good at math !!
I can grasp concepts but I have dementia lol

 

[toobfreak]

toobfreak
Why does the moon look crescent !!
Is it because of earth light being reflected on the moon ??

The Moon always looks some fraction illuminated between totally dark (New Moon) and fully lit (full moon) except when the Moon is exactly opposite the Sun from Earth. The rest of the time, we only see a varying portion of the illuminated side facing the Sun.

 

[Quasar44]

toobfreak
So it’s crescent because that is the side facing the sun ??

 

[toobfreak]

toobfreak
So it’s crescent because that is the side facing the sun ??

 

[Quasar44]

toobfreak
We can only see the dark parts because of “earth shine “

 

[zaangalewa]

I don’t know what you said as I have dementia

What would happen if a hypersphere would touch us? You would see a point coming from nowhere ...

I realize this is all just pure speculation, but interestingly enough, what you are describing goes a long way to explain some aspects of both the paranormal as well as mysteries like UFOs.

Sorry - I don't believe in any paranormal things or UFOs

Whether you believe them or not, people have these experiences, far too often to dismiss all of them as nonsense. I've seen UFOs at least once, REAL UFOs as you put it, I'm no idiot or fool and know what I saw and there is nothing on this Earth made by man that can do these things (especially since I saw them in the 1960s).

Whatever you saw ... you saw it. But what it means and what's the real background, who knows?

Sorry, no.

No?

Physics is not an arbitrary standard that the observer simply makes up.

If you are not able to reproduce a measurable experiment or observation then this is interesting - that's all.

There are certain physical laws that ANY vehicle in our sky MUST follow.

I don't have any idea what you saw and how you interpret this. I saw for example someone saw up a young lady while she smiled.

For instance, it is impossible for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant, dramatic speed changes, likewise for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant changes in direction, yet that is exactly what I saw,

So you did not see what you interpreted to see. Did you ever play with a cat and a mirror with sunlight? What do you think interprets the cat?

and I'm no fool, tricked by my eyes or by light; it was not some "atmospheric phenomena"---- I'm a skilled, trained observer, well versed in the details of light, atmosphere, body, mechanics and optics. I know what I saw. And there were at least one or two other times.

You overestimate yourselve. It's easy to produce perception "errors", which have in very most (or even in all) cases nothing to do with errors, but with characteristica of the own perception and interpretation system.

Example:

 

[toobfreak]

I don’t know what you said as I have dementia

What would happen if a hypersphere would touch us? You would see a point coming from nowhere ...

I realize this is all just pure speculation, but interestingly enough, what you are describing goes a long way to explain some aspects of both the paranormal as well as mysteries like UFOs.

Sorry - I don't believe in any paranormal things or UFOs

Whether you believe them or not, people have these experiences, far too often to dismiss all of them as nonsense. I've seen UFOs at least once, REAL UFOs as you put it, I'm no idiot or fool and know what I saw and there is nothing on this Earth made by man that can do these things (especially since I saw them in the 1960s).

Whatever you saw ... you saw it. But what it means and what's the real background, who knows?

Sorry, no.

No?

Physics is not an arbitrary standard that the observer simply makes up.

If you are not able to reproduce a measurable experiment or observation then this is interesting - that's all.

There are certain physical laws that ANY vehicle in our sky MUST follow.

I don't have any idea what you saw and how you interpret this. I saw for example someone saw up a young lady while she smiled.

For instance, it is impossible for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant, dramatic speed changes, likewise for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant changes in direction, yet that is exactly what I saw,

So you did not see what you interpreted to see. Did you ever play with a cat and a mirror with sunlight? What do you think interprets the cat?

and I'm no fool, tricked by my eyes or by light; it was not some "atmospheric phenomena"---- I'm a skilled, trained observer, well versed in the details of light, atmosphere, body, mechanics and optics. I know what I saw. And there were at least one or two other times.

You overestimate yourselve. It's easy to produce perception "errors", which have in very most (or even in all) cases nothing to do with errors, but with characteristica of the own perception and interpretation system.

Example:

Save your theories, guesses and rationalizations. You have no common frame of reference with my experiences to know what you are talking about, so you just want to reduce it down to some mysterious optical phenomena of vision which played a "trick" on me, the very first thing I told you to rule out.

 

[zaangalewa]

I don’t know what you said as I have dementia

What would happen if a hypersphere would touch us? You would see a point coming from nowhere ...

I realize this is all just pure speculation, but interestingly enough, what you are describing goes a long way to explain some aspects of both the paranormal as well as mysteries like UFOs.

Sorry - I don't believe in any paranormal things or UFOs

Whether you believe them or not, people have these experiences, far too often to dismiss all of them as nonsense. I've seen UFOs at least once, REAL UFOs as you put it, I'm no idiot or fool and know what I saw and there is nothing on this Earth made by man that can do these things (especially since I saw them in the 1960s).

Whatever you saw ... you saw it. But what it means and what's the real background, who knows?

Sorry, no.

No?

Physics is not an arbitrary standard that the observer simply makes up.

If you are not able to reproduce a measurable experiment or observation then this is interesting - that's all.

There are certain physical laws that ANY vehicle in our sky MUST follow.

I don't have any idea what you saw and how you interpret this. I saw for example someone saw up a young lady while she smiled.

For instance, it is impossible for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant, dramatic speed changes, likewise for any vehicle as we understand it to make instant changes in direction, yet that is exactly what I saw,

So you did not see what you interpreted to see. Did you ever play with a cat and a mirror with sunlight? What do you think interprets the cat?

and I'm no fool, tricked by my eyes or by light; it was not some "atmospheric phenomena"---- I'm a skilled, trained observer, well versed in the details of light, atmosphere, body, mechanics and optics. I know what I saw. And there were at least one or two other times.

You overestimate yourselve. It's easy to produce perception "errors", which have in very most (or even in all) cases nothing to do with errors, but with characteristica of the own perception and interpretation system.

Example:

Save your theories, guesses and rationalizations.

Okay.

You have no common frame of reference with my experiences to know what you are talking about,

So your answer on Immanuel Kants question "Kann das Ding an sich erkennbar sein?" seems to be "yes". After six month I stopped to think about this question and my answer still is "I don't know!"

so you just want to reduce it down to some mysterious optical phenomena of vision which played a "trick" on me, the very first thing I told you to rule out.

I do not rule out what you rule out, because what you described was exactly a phenomenon like a light-projection.

 

[toobfreak]

I just love the people taking pictures of the light show with their flash cameras! Thanks for the laugh.

 

[zaangalewa]

I just love the people taking pictures of the light show with their flash cameras! Thanks for the laugh.

de rien

 

[james bond]

The theory of gravitation and electromagnetic fields would fail in a space of any dimension other than three. The inverse square laws depend on 3 spatial dimensions.

.

Yet, it's God and logic that define nature. We would not have it otherwise.

Your statement doesn't mean anything on a science forum.

Don't be atheist and stupid . Science backs up God, the Bible and creation. Evolution and atheist scientists are just wrong and believe in lies.

 

[Wuwei]

Some science does not always back up the "strict" interpretation of the Bible, for example, radiological dating.

The Scientific Method:

Start with the facts, and see what conclusions can be drawn from them.​

The Creationist Method.

Start with the conclusion, and see what facts are consistent with it. Ignore all facts that aren't.​

​

. ​

 

[zaangalewa]

The theory of gravitation and electromagnetic fields would fail in a space of any dimension other than three. The inverse square laws depend on 3 spatial dimensions.

.

Yet, it's God and logic that define nature. We would not have it otherwise.

Your statement doesn't mean anything on a science forum.

Don't be atheist and stupid . Science backs up God, the Bible and creation. Evolution and atheist scientists are just wrong and believe in lies.

All Christians "believe" in evolution - the only exception are some very few extreme US-American Christians. And science is as spiritually Atheistic or spiritually Christian as to bake bread. Sure depends the motivation to do a good job and not to be a liar also on education and ethic rules - but good bread is good bread. Stephen Hawking for example had many reasons to be angry on god. So why this excellent scientist should had to believe in him? Because you would feel better?

 

[zaangalewa]

Some science does not always back up the "strict" interpretation of the Bible, for example, radiological dating.

The Scientific Method:

Start with the facts, and see what conclusions can be drawn from them.​

I would say first Newton learned a lot, had many intuitions and ideas and found a good concept - and then felt an apple on his head.

 

[Faun]

We’re so used to the world being in 3 dimensions that we forget that the 4th exist and it’s called time

It's actually a tesseract.

 

[james bond]

All Christians "believe" in evolution

Most Christians believe in creation. You just do not get real science.

 

[james bond]

Some science does not always back up the "strict" interpretation of the Bible, for example, radiological dating.

Radiocarbon dating does. I've said this before.

The Scientific Method:
Start with the facts, and see what conclusions can be drawn from them.The Creationist Method.
Start with the conclusion, and see what facts are consistent with it. Ignore all facts that aren't.

You are so wrong. Sir Francis Bacon, a creation scientist, came up with the Scientific Method -- Sir Francis Bacon - creation.com. Next.

 

[zaangalewa]

All Christians "believe" in evolution

Most Christians believe in creation.

All Christians believe that god created the world(s) and the heaven(s) - all visible and invisible realities - all known and [still] unknown things.

You just do not get real science.

One of the most superidiotic abstrahotic nonsense discussion is the neverending English discussion "creation vs evolution".