• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Any one else here obsessed with physics?

I think that Stephen Hawking got a better idea that Penrose regarding the age of the universe. According to Hawking, before the universe came to be, there were no devices capable of measuring time, so the question about the age of the universe is meaningless.

Hawking was an atheist; although it seems that for him the universe was some kind of a “creature” capable of answering questions in non-verbal terms.

I have read Penrose’s book about AI, The Emperor’s New Clothes. He is a religious person., although he is a follower of the doctrine called Scientific Realism. I ‘m a Positivist, for me Scientific Realism makes no sense. Scientific Realism is used to justify the string theory, which is a nonstarter for me.
 
Steven and Roger were closely associated with each other, Never read Rogers books know about him for a long time but more as a mathematician. He bought spinors to life. I agree with you quit thinking something to string theory twenty years ago, could not visualize it. When it comes to religion just agnostic I need objective evidence from either side. Neither is convincing so far. Must admit out of body experience with knowledge of physics, moved me a bit towards religion, still neutral.
 
To me the theory of quantum fluctuation that led to creation of the universe makes no sense; so far, I haven’t seen alternative theories of Big Bang.

The idea of quantum fluctuation traces back to Dirac. In his view, the vacuum is not an empty space but a collection of unobservable negative electrons. Quantum fluctuations exhibit themselves n creation/annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs.

Some astrophysicists came to a silly belief that these fluctuations are responsible for Big Bang.

There are two inconsistencies in their assumption. First of all, creation of these pairs goes hand-in-hand with their annihilation, so the net product is zero. In other words, quantum fluctuations don’t lead to a prolonged existence of matter.

The second inconsistency is even more devastating for the proponents of Big Bang in its current form. Plenty of physicists were deeply unsatisfied with Dirac’s assumption of existence of unobservable negative electrons, so they were looking for the ways to bypass this idea. Pascuale Jordan used the second quantization method to remove unobservable electrons from the field theory. Dirac’s theory and the theory of second quantization have identical predictions except for one thing – second quantization puts the end to negative electrons.

As for religion, I believe in reincarnation because I know several cases of people who were able to recall their past lives.
 
The trick is being able to visualize how imaginary numbers work Roger is very good at this We share this ability however he has fifty IQ point on me. I see the big bang as the nexus of two universes one side matter the other side anti matter with a fourth dimension separating the two, along with time being emergent, via movement or as presently perceived action. Klein bottle is key in four dimensions the inside is the outside explains black holes all data that enters is stored on outside.
 
I don’t rely much on visualizations unless it is absolutely necessary for my work as a data analyst when I have to imagine large tables with row of data that I need to rearrange somehow to make them more manageable.

Regarding someone’s IQ – I don’t think IQ tests reveal anything of value about person’s ability to think logically.

This is my story. I took 2 cognitive logic tests that are deemed to be more difficult than IQ tests. On the test with time limit I got 193 points out of 200. On the test without time limit I got 200 points out of 200. That happened before I took an IQ test.

I got 100% on the math and reading comprehension sections. But after that I saw that I was steadily heading into the range of mild mental retardation and stopped taking the test.

What went wrong? For one thing, there was the section that required an extensive knowledge of biology which is something that I don’t have. Then there was the section that required to complete the idioms. The problem for me is that the person(s) who composed this section is from the Southern US, as far as I can tell. Their popular idioms are very different from the ones that I encountered in North East and California. The failure was inevitable. There were other, even more stupid sections, that I didn’t like.

There are also accusations that IQ tests are biased towards the white American culture, which puts minorities at a huge disadvantage. I’m a white American so I have different set of problems with IQ tests. But they are nasty problems nevertheless.
 
I really liked this a fellow Aspie getting pissed I like Eric Sabine and even Sean, watched all the videos previous to this.
Who knows what I see in my minds eye may be correct.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom