Adamantium or Nth Metal?

[The Question]

Because if you manipulate things such as photons and such, it will encase a mass chain reaction that usually dwelves in breaking down matter.



Like let's say I just decided to rip half the gluons out of your body. You'd explode (possibly), but at least you'd fall apart because your atoms could not stick together anymore. (But most likely, your gluons would collide, and you'd explode, since I just generated all sorts of antimatter explosions that would break down the atoms before you.)



Or photons. Let's say that I just directed all sorts of photons around. That yields a few things. Mainly total black spots you're looking at, because I just basically overrode the powerful forces of planetary gravity with little to no energy (which is a feat against science all it's own.) We can bend some light, but not most or all of it. Much less with little to no energy.



Vector bosons. I guess... I wouldn't really know how to explain it. You can't move other elementary particles with words, so this one you can't either maybe?



Gravitons. Generally considered pure theoretical, the idea behind the graviton would basically state that you can rip elementary particles from mass and just do with them what you please.



Nuclear weapons overriding the matter around them with tons of energy couldn't accomplish these tasks. I just somehow doubt saying, "By the Vishanti" could I accomplish the same thing through scientific means, since they would also have to obey the laws of science to operate within science.



"But what if it's a trans-dimensional thing?" Thought of that already.



Introducing THAT much energy to the universe has two flaws.



One, you'd have to open a hole from one universe to the next, and nobody knows what that would do, but many believe that it would cause one universe to pour into the next, or both, and that would probably cause all time and space to just rip itself apart.



Two, you'd STILL be introducing so much energy, that you'd probably ignite the atmosphere from all the heat being generated through chemical, and sub atomic reactions. It's why causing fission fusion fission reactions generates heat that can be HOTTER than the core of the sun.



Basically, just because it differs a little bit, doesn't mean it cannot follow any other laws it doesn't want to. That's why it's called magic, because it doesn't have to follow laws. Chemistry and Biology have to follow Physics, after all.

I disagree. One can have magic and have it be working as part of the natural laws of the universe. I think so, at least. Also, when Dr. Strange, for example, says "by the Vishanti," he isn't just saying words. He's calling upon incalculably powerful extra-dimensional beings from whome he draws all of the power necessairy to preform his very very impressive feats. I don't claim to be a master physicist, but I still think having magic and science be two completely seperate things is unnecessairy.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I disagree. One can have magic and have it be working as part of the natural laws of the universe. I think so, at least. Also, when Dr. Strange, for example, says "by the Vishanti," he isn't just saying words. He's calling upon incalculably powerful extra-dimensional beings from whome he draws all of the power necessairy to preform his very very impressive feats. I don't claim to be a master physicist, but I still think having magic and science be two completely seperate things is unnecessairy.

That's kind of why I added that transdimensional bit. You can't introduce THAT much energy into the universe, especially THAT close to a planet, without destroying lots of things around it by overloading it's atoms.

And Leaguer and I have already had the whole, "Can interact with science on somelevel" bit. If it has to move outside of science, even at one point, then it doesn't correlate with science. It still has to introduce energy from somewhere that didn't exist before.

So we have two possibilities here. One, it breaks the laws of conservation of energy and matter. Or two, it basically says you can throw a sun's worth of energy at something, and not even heat up a room.

It's why I liked magic, it's just the one thing I can't explain off as something else. It's wonderful.

Also, about the Leaguer and I thing, I said that magic can instigate scientific reactions, but it cannot be scientific in it's own right, since it must break the law somewhere to be what it is.

 

[The Question]

That's kind of why I added that transdimensional bit. You can't introduce THAT much energy into the universe, especially THAT close to a planet, without destroying lots of things around it by overloading it's atoms.

And Leaguer and I have already had the whole, "Can interact with science on somelevel" bit. If it has to move outside of science, even at one point, then it doesn't correlate with science. It still has to introduce energy from somewhere that didn't exist before.

So we have two possibilities here. One, it breaks the laws of conservation of energy and matter. Or two, it basically says you can throw a sun's worth of energy at something, and not even heat up a room.

It's why I liked magic, it's just the one thing I can't explain off as something else. It's wonderful.

Also, about the Leaguer and I thing, I said that magic can instigate scientific reactions, but it cannot be scientific in it's own right, since it must break the law somewhere to be what it is.

Again, I don't think it has to. Assume, for a moment, that the gods and extra dimensional beings that many sorcerers call upon while doing magic do exist. Thus, it is safe to assume that they would do most of the heavy lifting outside of our dimension, and we just get the end result.

Or, another possibility is that the sorcerers don't actually go through the complex porcesses necessairy to get the results they want. I know that sounds like it's outside of science, but go with me for a second. My (somewhat limited) knowledge of physics informs me of the theory that the universe is made up of billions of possible outcomes and scenarios, and reality is made up of the possibilities that we are aware of. I know it's just one theory, and one many, possibly including yourself for all I know, object to. But, if the theory stated above is correct, then if a person could somehow tune into the other possibilities that we are not aware if, then could he not, in theory, alter reality without actually physically effecting anything?

Of course, I could very easily be wrong, so just say so if I am.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Again, I don't think it has to. Assume, for a moment, that the gods and extra dimensional beings that many sorcerers call upon while doing magic do exist. Thus, it is safe to assume that they would do most of the heavy lifting outside of our dimension, and we just get the end result.

Or, another possibility is that the sorcerers don't actually go through the complex porcesses necessairy to get the results they want. I know that sounds like it's outside of science, but go with me for a second. My (somewhat limited) knowledge of physics informs me of the theory that the universe is made up of billions of possible outcomes and scenarios, and reality is made up of the possibilities that we are aware of. I know it's just one theory, and one many, possibly including yourself for all I know, object to. But, if the theory stated above is correct, then if a person could somehow tune into the other possibilities that we are not aware if, then could he not, in theory, alter reality without actually physically effecting anything?

Of course, I could very easily be wrong, so just say so if I am.

I'm totally with you. But the only way that would work is to move an entire universe over several spaces. And the way that dimensional theories go right now, it would take immense amounts of energy. The simple idea of even warping space would possibly take a couple million suns worth of energy to do.

I mean, the idea of magic would be transdimensional in nature, but opening up holes back and forth through dimensions would possibly cause them to erupt on each other.

Though I like the idea of them doing the heavy lifting and bringing it into our dimension. THAT would work for things like summoning monsters, or objects. But things like melting or destroying things with energy outside of our universe would take tons of it.

Though, you are on the right track, I want to hear more.

 

[The Question]

I'm totally with you. But the only way that would work is to move an entire universe over several spaces. And the way that dimensional theories go right now, it would take immense amounts of energy. The simple idea of even warping space would possibly take a couple million suns worth of energy to do.

I suppose. But, I'm not exactly talking about warping space. I'm talking about warping reality. There is a difference. When warping reality, which is theoretically possible (although this is disputed by some as it is only a theory), you can alter things without ever physically effecting them. In theory, many laws of physics, such as the law of conservation of mass and energy, would go out the window as you would not only be changing what is but, in essence, what always was. At least for a short period. If you agree with Strodenger's Cat theory, and we assume that someone is able to "tune into" the various other quantum possibilities, then it is feasible to turn 45. handguns into water pistoles without actually physically effecting them. That's not so much defying the laws of physics as exploiting loopholes within them. Again, of course, this is all just speculative.

I mean, the idea of magic would be transdimensional in nature, but opening up holes back and forth through dimensions would possibly cause them to erupt on each other.

Though I like the idea of them doing the heavy lifting and bringing it into our dimension. THAT would work for things like summoning monsters, or objects. But things like melting or destroying things with energy outside of our universe would take tons of it.

Of course. However, most gods within the DCU seem to be able to bend time and space very easily. Also, you have to remember that in the DCU, at least, gods are not physical beings, but creatures of living thought that are capable of mimicing physical bodies when they need to. Thus, their relationship with energy and their ability to manipulate it would be very very different from our own.

Though, you are on the right track, I want to hear more.

I've been thinking about this for a while. Mostly about real world aplications, but I'm using a vraiant of my ideas for the DCU. Basically, my overall idea is that magic is basically science, although not academic science. Academic science and "magical" science are based on the same principals, but with different aproaches and, in some areas, different mind sets.

 

[Silicon Surfer]

Magic in the Marvel Universe is a discrete energy form of its own and according to the Cloud storyline in Defenders is radiated by the stars just as EM radiation is. Incantations calling upon entities such as the Vishanti are ritualized requests that ask those entities to send the sorceror energy that those entities have on hand. The nature of those entities is that when their power is called on the act increases the capacity of the entity to amass more energy. This has not been delved into in any depth AFAIK but does involve belief and the energy it contains. The entities draw sustenance from worship and general belief.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I suppose. But, I'm not exactly talking about warping space. I'm talking about warping reality. There is a difference. When warping reality, which is theoretically possible (although this is disputed by some as it is only a theory), you can alter things without ever physically effecting them. In theory, many laws of physics, such as the law of conservation of mass and energy, would go out the window as you would not only be changing what is but, in essence, what always was. At least for a short period. If you agree with Strodenger's Cat theory, and we assume that someone is able to "tune into" the various other quantum possibilities, then it is feasible to turn 45. handguns into water pistoles without actually physically effecting them. That's not so much defying the laws of physics as exploiting loopholes within them. Again, of course, this is all just speculative.

While I agree there is a difference, the method would most likely be the same. The only few things in the universe we believe can warp reality as we understand it (theoretically) would be a quasar, or black holes, as their distortion of time and space is rather extreme. The energy required would be immense. With Shroedinger (sp?), I do not agree with mostly on the frequency (which many refer to as String theory). Tuning into something would most likely be a fourth dimensional aspect, and thus, we wouldn't understand it. So "tuning" into something would be a really vague way of putting it.

However, changing mass to energy and backwards was originally thrown out the window, until more recent quantum physics thought otherwise, as Einstein himself dealt with it, and many other afterward, realizing what the constant state of matter is. Energy would be THE quanta of all matter itself, and so it's not so unfeasable, just extremely difficult. However, the precise "tuning" would be so difficult, you'd have to be able to account for every single gluon in the process, and it's simply impossible at our stage in time. We don't have any real supporting evidence for it's possibility. Many even regard string theory as being ludicrous, just some fad. Either way, scientifically speaking, the idea of it doesn't really pan out, as the energy exchange would be extreme for the process of billions upon billions particle sized blackholes and such.

Of course. However, most gods within the DCU seem to be able to bend time and space very easily. Also, you have to remember that in the DCU, at least, gods are not physical beings, but creatures of living thought that are capable of mimicing physical bodies when they need to. Thus, their relationship with energy and their ability to manipulate it would be very very different from our own.

Yes, they kind of instantly violate the laws of physics in the thought that the universe is second to will. As in their own minds basically will the universe as they want it to. However, being of energy, would mean they could not surpass the laws ordaining energy. They'd run out, require constant energy, require interaction with other energy, would actually want to avoid mass contact as they'd be feeding into atoms around them, and would all in all, require the energy of millions of suns to do what they do. And really, if you concentrated THAT much energy into a single space, you might as well detonate an H bomb right under yourself.

Humans don't really generate energy over will, and can't seem to affect much more than what their body does with their will. Humans don't seem to really be able to spread their will out past themselves and manipulate things they probably do not understand. I could see a god doing it. Gods tend to be high level magic beings that are just dynamos of power and such, with an ability to concieve things that would kill humans. But then, we're just talking about gods, not things we've come into contact with in our own universe.

I've been thinking about this for a while. Mostly about real world aplications, but I'm using a vraiant of my ideas for the DCU. Basically, my overall idea is that magic is basically science, although not academic science. Academic science and "magical" science are based on the same principals, but with different aproaches and, in some areas, different mind sets.

I could see where you're going. It's kind of like learning a language. You can't learn French from an English standpoint, and vica versa. You have to be THINKING in that mind set as well. However, the basic laws of the universe tend to not really lend much to interpretation, and usually rely more on limiting the universe to what it is. Granted, that doesn't mean people are locked where they are as it stands, it just means that there's really some things we just can not do. And using words as an energy fulcrum to span dimensions would be so faulty, that cataclysmic events would happen everyday from people just having conversations carelessly.

 

[The Question]

While I agree there is a difference, the method would most likely be the same. The only few things in the universe we believe can warp reality as we understand it (theoretically) would be a quasar, or black holes, as their distortion of time and space is rather extreme. The energy required would be immense. With Shroedinger (sp?), I do not agree with mostly on the frequency (which many refer to as String theory). Tuning into something would most likely be a fourth dimensional aspect, and thus, we wouldn't understand it. So "tuning" into something would be a really vague way of putting it.

I'm not even going to begin to speculate how one would be able to "see" the other quantum possibilities. My point is, assuming we've worked around that part and their brains are capable of it, then it is feasible.

However, changing mass to energy and backwards was originally thrown out the window, until more recent quantum physics thought otherwise, as Einstein himself dealt with it, and many other afterward, realizing what the constant state of matter is. Energy would be THE quanta of all matter itself, and so it's not so unfeasable, just extremely difficult. However, the precise "tuning" would be so difficult, you'd have to be able to account for every single gluon in the process, and it's simply impossible at our stage in time. We don't have any real supporting evidence for it's possibility. Many even regard string theory as being ludicrous, just some fad. Either way, scientifically speaking, the idea of it doesn't really pan out, as the energy exchange would be extreme for the process of billions upon billions particle sized blackholes and such.

I suppose. As I said, it would require a state of conscious awareness that I doubt either of us could even begin to comprehend. But assuming that someone has somehow reached that state, it is theoretically possible.

Yes, they kind of instantly violate the laws of physics in the thought that the universe is second to will. As in their own minds basically will the universe as they want it to.

That's not exactly how it works. At least, I don't think so. I'll explain down below:

However, being of energy, would mean they could not surpass the laws ordaining energy. They'd run out, require constant energy, require interaction with other energy, would actually want to avoid mass contact as they'd be feeding into atoms around them, and would all in all, require the energy of millions of suns to do what they do. And really, if you concentrated THAT much energy into a single space, you might as well detonate an H bomb right under yourself.

You misunderstand me. I never said they were beings of energy. I said that they were beings of living thought, or, to be more persice, sentient information. They're self aware data. And, as such, they can influence the workings of things by sending a messege to the universe, sort of like programing a computer. Of course, this doesn't sound like it makes much sense, but let's assume for the moment that it does work.

Humans don't really generate energy over will, and can't seem to affect much more than what their body does with their will. Humans don't seem to really be able to spread their will out past themselves and manipulate things they probably do not understand.

Some evidence suggests the contrairy, with some reported phemomina of people effecting the physical workd around them by force of will. But, of course, this has yet to be proven, and as such is merely evidence that may or may not be bull. Still, just puting it on the table.

I could see a god doing it. Gods tend to be high level magic beings that are just dynamos of power and such, with an ability to concieve things that would kill humans. But then, we're just talking about gods, not things we've come into contact with in our own universe.

Well, as far as we know, at least.

I could see where you're going. It's kind of like learning a language. You can't learn French from an English standpoint, and vica versa. You have to be THINKING in that mind set as well. However, the basic laws of the universe tend to not really lend much to interpretation, and usually rely more on limiting the universe to what it is. Granted, that doesn't mean people are locked where they are as it stands, it just means that there's really some things we just can not do. And using words as an energy fulcrum to span dimensions would be so faulty, that cataclysmic events would happen everyday from people just having conversations carelessly.

There's more to spells than the words, I think. Think of them more as a mantra to aid concentration or boost confidence than simply being words that do stuff besides make noise. Chants and songs in shamanic rituals follow the same principal. The noises they make don't to anythung but make noise. But the ritual itself helps the shaman focus his thoughts, and help the people respond to whatever the shaman is doing emotionally.

 

[droogiedroogie2]

Magic in the Marvel Universe is a discrete energy form of its own and according to the Cloud storyline in Defenders is radiated by the stars just as EM radiation is. Incantations calling upon entities such as the Vishanti are ritualized requests that ask those entities to send the sorceror energy that those entities have on hand. The nature of those entities is that when their power is called on the act increases the capacity of the entity to amass more energy. This has not been delved into in any depth AFAIK but does involve belief and the energy it contains. The entities draw sustenance from worship and general belief.

Yeah, I like that definition, insofar as I'd like to see magic incorporated into science. On the other hand, part of me would rather that it wasn't incorporated into science, so there you go, I guess.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I'm not even going to begin to speculate how one would be able to "see" the other quantum possibilities. My point is, assuming we've worked around that part and their brains are capable of it, then it is feasible.

I suppose. As I said, it would require a state of conscious awareness that I doubt either of us could even begin to comprehend. But assuming that someone has somehow reached that state, it is theoretically possible.

Well, seeing doesn't exactly correlate to controlling. I can SEE light, I can't control light without massive amounts of technology and measurements. And even then, I can't do much more with light than bend it.

That's not exactly how it works. At least, I don't think so. I'll explain down below:



You misunderstand me. I never said they were beings of energy. I said that they were beings of living thought, or, to be more persice, sentient information. They're self aware data. And, as such, they can influence the workings of things by sending a messege to the universe, sort of like programing a computer. Of course, this doesn't sound like it makes much sense, but let's assume for the moment that it does work.

Ah. That IS different. But we're going to have to assume the universe is really more or less a larger computer program waiting for a function, rather than a continuous function of numbers. Being self aware, and projecting to the universe wouldn't always really work out this way. No more than a computer controlling humans, even though computers could really outthink humans if they were sentient. If it DID work though, and the universe simply responded to thought, then yeah, anything within physical means is possible, even destroying it.

Some evidence suggests the contrairy, with some reported phemomina of people effecting the physical workd around them by force of will. But, of course, this has yet to be proven, and as such is merely evidence that may or may not be bull. Still, just puting it on the table.

I'll go with that. Reports around the world point to the idea that humans CAN will things around. But if it were a large scale thing, we'd have more events of it. It wouldn't be a simple task, and usually all the feats pointed out, are really not that major.

Well, as far as we know, at least.



There's more to spells than the words, I think. Think of them more as a mantra to aid concentration or boost confidence than simply being words that do stuff besides make noise. Chants and songs in shamanic rituals follow the same principal. The noises they make don't to anythung but make noise. But the ritual itself helps the shaman focus his thoughts, and help the people respond to whatever the shaman is doing emotionally.

If gods like that existed in our universe, and lets say the time expanse is the same, we would have seen massive fluctuations in the universe by now. Space-time not functioning correctly, things like that.

And while I agree, it's words and energy like energy and a machine, the actual words couldn't really...form the energy, as they are mere vibrations. Unless it were spiritual, and thus, against science. Then it would remain magical. It's like Billy, if it were merely focus, then he could think his spells in his head, or Strange, instead of having to vocalize them in perfect functions. Or necromancy. Things have to be done perfectly, without sense. But then again, who knows?


Either way, I think I'm logging off for the rest of your guys' "night." It's early morning here, and I have to prepare for a speech. Later.

 

[Ultra-Herald9]

This coversation is so FAR above my level of comprehenssion that it kinda makes me depressed. I still say Nth metal's better.

 

[The Question]

Well, seeing doesn't exactly correlate to controlling. I can SEE light, I can't control light without massive amounts of technology and measurements. And even then, I can't do much more with light than bend it.

Well, yes and no. The Cat in the Box theory suggests that the universe is made up of billions of quantum possibilities, and reality is simply the possibility we are aware of. Thus, it could be suggested that simply becoming aware of these other other possibilities is enough to later reality.

Ah. That IS different. But we're going to have to assume the universe is really more or less a larger computer program waiting for a function, rather than a continuous function of numbers. Being self aware, and projecting to the universe wouldn't always really work out this way. No more than a computer controlling humans, even though computers could really outthink humans if they were sentient. If it DID work though, and the universe simply responded to thought, then yeah, anything within physical means is possible, even destroying it.

True. Although, even if the universe is a continuous function of numbers, it could be suggested that the gods are capable of "hacking" it.

I'll go with that. Reports around the world point to the idea that humans CAN will things around. But if it were a large scale thing, we'd have more events of it. It wouldn't be a simple task, and usually all the feats pointed out, are really not that major.

Oh, very true. It would take a very special kind of person to be able to will huge things into happening.

If gods like that existed in our universe, and lets say the time expanse is the same, we would have seen massive fluctuations in the universe by now. Space-time not functioning correctly, things like that.

Well, there is a theory, and it is the theory used in the DCU to explain gods, that gods and other mythological beings are in fact poltergiest activity on a massice scale. The idea of poltergiest activity (and some other forms of paranormal happenings) is that the human consciousness is capable of, on some scale and under the proper conditions, effecting the physical world around it as we have discussed. The theory I speak of is that, because millions of people believed these entities existed, that theyr collective mental power willed them into being, if at least on some non physical level. Thus, envoking gods in magic spells makes some sense, as it would in essence be tapping into massive stores of human willpower that is self aware and your are able to strike a deal with.

As for us not noticing them. While there may be descrepencies in the functions of space/time, there's no real way that we'd be bale to detect such fluctuations unless we personally experienced them.

And while I agree, it's words and energy like energy and a machine, the actual words couldn't really...form the energy, as they are mere vibrations.

Like I said, the words don't do much but help you concentrait on doing it yourself.

Unless it were spiritual, and thus, against science.

Spirituality is not against science. It isn't supported by science, but it isn't contradicted by it either.

Then it would remain magical. It's like Billy, if it were merely focus, then he could think his spells in his head, or Strange, instead of having to vocalize them in perfect functions. Or necromancy. Things have to be done perfectly, without sense. But then again, who knows?

Again, like I said, it's like the shamanic rituals. The dances and songs and prayers and whatnot help the Shaman focus. They are a means to an end, but they're not doing what needs to be done. The Shaman is.

 

[thor87]

nth metal beats all of the marvel metals

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Well, yes and no. The Cat in the Box theory suggests that the universe is made up of billions of quantum possibilities, and reality is simply the possibility we are aware of. Thus, it could be suggested that simply becoming aware of these other other possibilities is enough to later reality.

Percieving something would actually move you outside of a dimension altogether most likely, since you, on some part, most likely massive part, would have to be PART of that reality. And really, running the buffers of reality that close together could cause what some believe to be a "quantum collapse cascade." That dimensional energies would just run together, and smash into each other at super high energies, destroying both. And ripping points in time and space from one to the next would cause fundamental destructive relapse. However, what we're talking about is a fourth dimensional idea. And truth be told, you and I wouldn't even BEGIN to know how to talk about a fourth dimension.

True. Although, even if the universe is a continuous function of numbers, it could be suggested that the gods are capable of "hacking" it.

Well, if it were a continuous function of numbers, that means it's in a flow. Energy-wise, matter-wise, stuff like that. If we were to simply stop it, we would require an energy as sufficient as the forces that drive it, and the reaction would cause an energy backlash just as powerful, and that could rip up time and space as well. So just stopping numbers mid equation usually turns out to be a bad thing.

Oh, very true. It would take a very special kind of person to be able to will huge things into happening.

A person of immense power. After all, the sun barely bends light around itself, and it has a much heavier gravity.

Well, there is a theory, and it is the theory used in the DCU to explain gods, that gods and other mythological beings are in fact poltergiest activity on a massice scale. The idea of poltergiest activity (and some other forms of paranormal happenings) is that the human consciousness is capable of, on some scale and under the proper conditions, effecting the physical world around it as we have discussed. The theory I speak of is that, because millions of people believed these entities existed, that theyr collective mental power willed them into being, if at least on some non physical level. Thus, envoking gods in magic spells makes some sense, as it would in essence be tapping into massive stores of human willpower that is self aware and your are able to strike a deal with.

While I've said in the past how I hate this theory, I'll meet you on it. If humans as a collective could somehow (and let's say that actual thought can form up to massive energy reactions) work perfectly in unison, then I could almost see how something could come into existance, since human mental energy would literally just be taking the form of something, and Einstein's great equation states that energy and matter are interchangable. However, we don't know what makes up a conciousness, and we wouldn't know how to make a being better than ourselves without understanding it first, or at least developing ways to do it. It's why we can not build robots. Human brains do not just fill in the blanks as we do not understand them, they just leave blanks instead. However, this would fundamentally violate the laws of physics. Since that mental power would have to have already been there, and humans are simply harnessing it, instead of developing it, which would be creating energy. And if that sort of energy was just floating around Earth at some point, it would HAVE to have reacted around us at some point, and we would have to have detected it several times with our machines by now, since it's fundamental energies would have to be photonic in nature, and/or generate tons of heat.

Think of it this way. I condense the sun to the size of a man, and put it on Earth. Now, the sun is relatively small in the universe, and there are stars FAR bigger than it, that barely do anything as well to the universe around it. But since we're dealing with the sun on earth (this is of course, using the four fundamental forces of the universe that we've been talking about), it would destroy Earth right there. If the gravity didn't crush it, the atmosphere would have exploded, our magnetic core gone neutral, and all life turned into plasma. It would not have been pretty for Earth. In fact, many scientists believe that the sun will kill Earth in a very similar fashion.

As for us not noticing them. While there may be descrepencies in the functions of space/time, there's no real way that we'd be bale to detect such fluctuations unless we personally experienced them.

Well, we'd notice that light is a LOT closer in one spot than in the next in relative means. Or that it's further away than it should be. Or that it should only be reaching our planet as a certain type of light. Or even sound, rather than certain pictures.

Like I said, the words don't do much but help you concentrait on doing it yourself.

But we're still talking about creating a machine out of energy not turned to mass. Unless of course that mental energy can manipulate several, if not all forms of energy for any purpose without direction for it, as an automatic function. And I don't believe that humans have automatic functions beyond their internal organs.

Spirituality is not against science. It isn't supported by science, but it isn't contradicted by it either.

Eh...yes and no. I can explain why I believe in God, but most won't agree. Likewise, science doesn't like something it can not tear down, because then it can not be analyzed, and thus, violates the rules that govern science. If it can not be taken down, analyzed, and tested, it's not science.

Again, like I said, it's like the shamanic rituals. The dances and songs and prayers and whatnot help the Shaman focus. They are a means to an end, but they're not doing what needs to be done. The Shaman is.

Unless they can project super complicated machines without understanding them, which humans haven't ever shown the ability to do (to my knowledge), then repeating words and focusing on an event would be like skipping from a seed to an apple without the tree.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

nth metal beats all of the marvel metals

Omit Uru metal.

 

[The Question]

Percieving something would actually move you outside of a dimension altogether most likely, since you, on some part, most likely massive part, would have to be PART of that reality. And really, running the buffers of reality that close together could cause what some believe to be a "quantum collapse cascade." That dimensional energies would just run together, and smash into each other at super high energies, destroying both. And ripping points in time and space from one to the next would cause fundamental destructive relapse. However, what we're talking about is a fourth dimensional idea. And truth be told, you and I wouldn't even BEGIN to know how to talk about a fourth dimension.

True. It's basically speculation at this point.

Well, if it were a continuous function of numbers, that means it's in a flow. Energy-wise, matter-wise, stuff like that. If we were to simply stop it, we would require an energy as sufficient as the forces that drive it, and the reaction would cause an energy backlash just as powerful, and that could rip up time and space as well. So just stopping numbers mid equation usually turns out to be a bad thing.

Never said anything about stopping it. Just altering it's direction a bit.

A person of immense power. After all, the sun barely bends light around itself, and it has a much heavier gravity.

Again, it has been suggested that merely being aware of these other possibilities can alter them. But still, it would require a level of consciousness that were are incapable of.

While I've said in the past how I hate this theory, I'll meet you on it. If humans as a collective could somehow (and let's say that actual thought can form up to massive energy reactions) work perfectly in unison, then I could almost see how something could come into existance, since human mental energy would literally just be taking the form of something, and Einstein's great equation states that energy and matter are interchangable. However, we don't know what makes up a conciousness, and we wouldn't know how to make a being better than ourselves without understanding it first, or at least developing ways to do it. It's why we can not build robots. Human brains do not just fill in the blanks as we do not understand them, they just leave blanks instead. However, this would fundamentally violate the laws of physics. Since that mental power would have to have already been there, and humans are simply harnessing it, instead of developing it, which would be creating energy. And if that sort of energy was just floating around Earth at some point, it would HAVE to have reacted around us at some point, and we would have to have detected it several times with our machines by now, since it's fundamental energies would have to be photonic in nature, and/or generate tons of heat.

I think you're over thinking it a bit. I don't think humans would have to know exactly how a consciousness works to make these gods real. Like I said, if human willpower can, to a limited degree, alter environment, and millions of people believe that something exists, then the environment might change as to make that thing exist. We don't need to know exactly how it works to do it. We don't know how to make a human consciousness, and yet people do by conceiving a child and giving birth. Same principal. To put it simply, millions of people say a god should exist, and the universe makes said god exist. Again, that's horribly over simplifying it, but it's the best way I can explain it.

Think of it this way. I condense the sun to the size of a man, and put it on Earth. Now, the sun is relatively small in the universe, and there are stars FAR bigger than it, that barely do anything as well to the universe around it. But since we're dealing with the sun on earth (this is of course, using the four fundamental forces of the universe that we've been talking about), it would destroy Earth right there. If the gravity didn't crush it, the atmosphere would have exploded, our magnetic core gone neutral, and all life turned into plasma. It would not have been pretty for Earth. In fact, many scientists believe that the sun will kill Earth in a very similar fashion.

And who says that these entities generate the heat and gravity of the sun?

Well, we'd notice that light is a LOT closer in one spot than in the next in relative means. Or that it's further away than it should be. Or that it should only be reaching our planet as a certain type of light. Or even sound, rather than certain pictures.

True. But then, If gods are just poltergeist activity on a massive scale, and there are documented cases of poltergeist activity, then how come said documented cases haven't yeilded the same descrepencies. I think it can be said that these entities may not be bending time and space in the way you're thinking, if at all.

But we're still talking about creating a machine out of energy not turned to mass. Unless of course that mental energy can manipulate several, if not all forms of energy for any purpose without direction for it, as an automatic function. And I don't believe that humans have automatic functions beyond their internal organs.

I never said anything about making a machine. I'm saying that the ability to do things like move objects and generate energy is in some way inherent within the sorcerer, and spells are simply a way to focus their minds on preforming the task.

E

h...yes and no. I can explain why I believe in God, but most won't agree. Likewise, science doesn't like something it can not tear down, because then it can not be analyzed, and thus, violates the rules that govern science. If it can not be taken down, analyzed, and tested, it's not science.

It's not scientific, no, but it doesn't violate any physical laws.

Unless they can project super complicated machines without understanding them, which humans haven't ever shown the ability to do (to my knowledge), then repeating words and focusing on an event would be like skipping from a seed to an apple without the tree.

No, it's not. Again, this is assuming that the shaman in particular is capable of doing whatever he's doing himself. They;re not building or using machenry by using the spells. They're focusing on doing what they are, for whatever reason, inherently capable of. And I wasn't even talking about turning a man into a rabbit or anything like that. Simply shamanic healing rituals.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

True. It's basically speculation at this point.

Agreed.

Never said anything about stopping it. Just altering it's direction a bit.

Even altering it would cause a massive chain reaction. One that would affect the entire universe IN that direction.

Again, it has been suggested that merely being aware of these other possibilities can alter them. But still, it would require a level of consciousness that were are incapable of.

That was a school of philosophy I believe. An empiricist who almost wasn't one. At least, this is a derivative of it. But being aware of something doesn't give you access to something. And being part of it would be one foot in one dimension, other foot in the other, and you'd be a link to both, causing a cascade.

I think you're over thinking it a bit. I don't think humans would have to know exactly how a consciousness works to make these gods real. Like I said, if human willpower can, to a limited degree, alter environment, and millions of people believe that something exists, then the environment might change as to make that thing exist. We don't need to know exactly how it works to do it. We don't know how to make a human consciousness, and yet people do by conceiving a child and giving birth. Same principal. To put it simply, millions of people say a god should exist, and the universe makes said god exist. Again, that's horribly over simplifying it, but it's the best way I can explain it.

Well, we can't really build things we don't understand. It's like making artificial intelligence. We can shove every super computer in the world to a single base, but it still won't generate an artificial intelligence. If we don't understand it, we can't do it. We literally have to discover it, and understand it, and capable of producing it. I can envision how a laser works, I KNOW how it works, and I know how to make it work. So I can literally do lasers. But I don't know how plants work, so I can't really make up plants.

And who says that these entities generate the heat and gravity of the sun?

If they affect the quantities, they have to be made up of the same quantities. You can't affect gravity without having gravity. You can't affect it on a large scale without having a large amount of gravity.

True. But then, If gods are just poltergeist activity on a massive scale, and there are documented cases of poltergeist activity, then how come said documented cases haven't yeilded the same descrepencies. I think it can be said that these entities may not be bending time and space in the way you're thinking, if at all.

Documented by chasers. And it sounds so wrong, but they're generally not scientifically accepted, since they can't go under repeatable scrutiny. There's no way to test it. Just usually faulty camera equiptment and witness testimony that could be staged. As bad as it sounds, I have to rule out every option before I'm left with a viable option. And the viable option is that it wouldn't work at the moment, without some better way of explaining how it would work. Such as, if a poltergiest had to interact with our earthly plane, then it would have to obey our earthly physics. If it were largely just a mass of energy, or lack there of, in the room, then it's effect on the environment would be proportional. So if we wanted big change, big energy is required.

I never said anything about making a machine. I'm saying that the ability to do things like move objects and generate energy is in some way inherent within the sorcerer, and spells are simply a way to focus their minds on preforming the task.

And science says a machine would preform it. I can't will a laser into existance, I can't just lump energy together and hope it forms a laser. I literally have to build a machine designed for the task of making a laser, and then measure and cut, and fabricate as needed. Otherwise, lasers don't happen. They do not occur in nature for that very reason.

E

It's not scientific, no, but it doesn't violate any physical laws.

Yes...and no. If you wanted to follow it perfectly, everything can be broken down. It has laws and states and changes equivalent to reactions. Everything in the universe can be torn down and analyzed by science. Anything that can't be torn down is in it's quantum state, which is elementary size stuff, particles. If it's large, solid, interactable, and cannot be reduced down, it's what is called "perfection". And "perfect" is an anti-science thing.

No, it's not. Again, this is assuming that the shaman in particular is capable of doing whatever he's doing himself. They;re not building or using machenry by using the spells. They're focusing on doing what they are, for whatever reason, inherently capable of. And I wasn't even talking about turning a man into a rabbit or anything like that. Simply shamanic healing rituals.

Spells would have to be machines to operate in science. Since science works in process, that means it has to follow a list of things. It can't just produce results without going through the process scientifically. Otherwise, it's not science.

 

[The Question]

Even altering it would cause a massive chain reaction. One that would affect the entire universe IN that direction.

That is, fo course, if you don't know what you're doing. If you know how to alter the flow prefectly, then everything would turn out fine. Still, I don't think the universe is a string of numbers or a computer waiting to be giving directions. Simply an ongoing program that can be manipulated if you know how.

That was a school of philosophy I believe. An empiricist who almost wasn't one. At least, this is a derivative of it. But being aware of something doesn't give you access to something. And being part of it would be one foot in one dimension, other foot in the other, and you'd be a link to both, causing a cascade.

Maybe. But all you would need is to be able to perceive these other quantum possibilities, not actually be apart of them.

Well, we can't really build things we don't understand. It's like making artificial intelligence. We can shove every super computer in the world to a single base, but it still won't generate an artificial intelligence. If we don't understand it, we can't do it. We literally have to discover it, and understand it, and capable of producing it. I can envision how a laser works, I KNOW how it works, and I know how to make it work. So I can literally do lasers. But I don't know how plants work, so I can't really make up plants.

But they're not building these entities. They're not putting them together themselves. You're comparing it to building a machine, which isn't an apt analogy. Millions of people over many centuries believe that, for example, Loki exists. If it is possible for human consciousness to effect environment on a limited scale, then so many humans should, in theory, be able to effect environment on a massive scale. Thus, they all will Loki into being. They're not building Loki themselves. They're uknowingly telling the universe that Loki should exist, and the universe then does make Loki exist. On some level, at least. Again, that's over simplifying it, but I can't explain it without simplifying it.

If they affect the quantities, they have to be made up of the same quantities. You can't affect gravity without having gravity. You can't affect it on a large scale without having a large amount of gravity.

You're thinking too basically. They don't literally effect gravity themselves. They would, I think, manipulate the universe into effecting gravity. Besides, I never once talked about them effecting gravity.

Documented by chasers. And it sounds so wrong, but they're generally not scientifically accepted, since they can't go under repeatable scrutiny. There's no way to test it. Just usually faulty camera equiptment and witness testimony that could be staged. As bad as it sounds, I have to rule out every option before I'm left with a viable option. And the viable option is that it wouldn't work at the moment, without some better way of explaining how it would work. Such as, if a poltergiest had to interact with our earthly plane, then it would have to obey our earthly physics. If it were largely just a mass of energy, or lack there of, in the room, then it's effect on the environment would be proportional. So if we wanted big change, big energy is required.

Poltergeist activity has not been disproven. It simply has not been proven. We can't say that it can't happen because we do not know. It's an if. I'm simply assuming, for the sake of the arguement, that it does work.

And science says a machine would preform it. I can't will a laser into existance, I can't just lump energy together and hope it forms a laser. I literally have to build a machine designed for the task of making a laser, and then measure and cut, and fabricate as needed. Otherwise, lasers don't happen. They do not occur in nature for that very reason.

I think you're not looking at this the right way. I've gone at this the whole time assuming that somehow, and I do not know how, the shamans or sorcerers or whatever are capable of doing this themselves. That being said, then the magic spells do not do anything besides serve as a ritual or mantra that help them focus. Now, as to how they do it, it may simply be an extrension of the idea that human consciousness can, to a limited degree, effect environment within physical laws. Maybe, somehow, a sorcerer's consciousness is, for lack of a better term, better at it than others,.

Yes...and no. If you wanted to follow it perfectly, everything can be broken down. It has laws and states and changes equivalent to reactions. Everything in the universe can be torn down and analyzed by science. Anything that can't be torn down is in it's quantum state, which is elementary size stuff, particles. If it's large, solid, interactable, and cannot be reduced down, it's what is called "perfection". And "perfect" is an anti-science thing.

There is a difference between being scientific and being physicall possible. We need to make that distinction in this discussion. Science is a method. A means to an end. You can do something that is not scientific but is physically possible. And, I think that to assume that everything can be broken down and analyzed in science is a very arrogant and flawed statement. Mainly because science has one huge flaw: It requires objectivity. The scientist is an objective observer outside of the workings of whatever he or she is observing who does not interfere. That is good for many things, but when dealing with ideas like reality being able to be manipulated by one's perceptions, then objectivity is useless and one cannot be objective when dealing with the idea of perception effecting things. One cannot be a non involved observer when dealing with the concepts that the very act of observing effects what's going on.

Spells would have to be machines to operate in science. Since science works in process, that means it has to follow a list of things. It can't just produce results without going through the process scientifically. Otherwise, it's not science.

Again, as I said, the spell isn;t doing the job. The magic man is. The spell is just something the magic man does to help himself do it.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

That is, fo course, if you don't know what you're doing. If you know how to alter the flow prefectly, then everything would turn out fine. Still, I don't think the universe is a string of numbers or a computer waiting to be giving directions. Simply an ongoing program that can be manipulated if you know how.

We are still talking about removing a section of one universe, taking stuff out of the middle that's required to function, and putting it in another seamlessly.

Think of it this way, since strings was brought up. You have two pieces of string. One white, one blue. You want to have the blue string have a white piece in the middle. The only way to do that is to cut up both, leaving one destroyed as a string, and the other in shambles as pieces tied together. They're no longer perfect strings. Merely cut up and temporarily put together as other strings, which will fray and eventually fall apart.

Maybe. But all you would need is to be able to perceive these other quantum possibilities, not actually be apart of them.

To percieve them, see in them, do anything with them, you'd have to be in contact with them. To see them with your eyes, its photons would have to be in your eyes. To touch it, you must be a part of their universe.

But they're not building these entities. They're not putting them together themselves. You're comparing it to building a machine, which isn't an apt analogy. Millions of people over many centuries believe that, for example, Loki exists. If it is possible for human consciousness to effect environment on a limited scale, then so many humans should, in theory, be able to effect environment on a massive scale. Thus, they all will Loki into being. They're not building Loki themselves. They're uknowingly telling the universe that Loki should exist, and the universe then does make Loki exist. On some level, at least. Again, that's over simplifying it, but I can't explain it without simplifying it.

Generating them is far less scientific. When using scientific methods, you do not generate. You can only generate energy, and that's usually fairly barbaric. Large chemical reactions and such. Building them would be far easier. And like I said, we couldn't do anything we couldn't understand. We can't warp space without understanding it better. We couldn't literally build a better human without knowing what a better human was.

Let's, for the moment, assume that we can little by little affect the environment with many human minds. You're talking about generating an entire universe, a multiverse, with a lump of human minds, when they barely affect the environment around them. Built up of extremely powerful, near conceptual people. Humans don't even understand concepts. Subconciously making near conceptual things wouldn't be something humans would be capable of.

But let's go back to how I was talking about the universe working like a tumbler of numbers. If humans just decided to make the universe somehow create a being like Loki, we have a few problems. One, fabrication, the universe can not break it's own laws, and just make up energy and mass. Two, sentience, the universe does not appear to be sentient. It has never really seemed to do anything that would proclaim sentience as you are kind of putting it. Three, if it WERE sentient, it wouldn't even acknowledge us. We make up less than .0000000001% of matter in the universe here on Earth. It would be like listening to your neutrons if they had lives. And four, the energy, let's say not created, would come from somewhere, feasable, but the energy would be so massive, that it couldn't really be contained in one place too long without destroying things around it.

You're thinking too basically. They don't literally effect gravity themselves. They would, I think, manipulate the universe into effecting gravity. Besides, I never once talked about them effecting gravity.

The universe would still work on a number basis. It works in reactions, long and short. Starting and stopping them would cause planets to just come apart. Gravity is a force, not just a malleable thing.

Poltergeist activity has not been disproven. It simply has not been proven. We can't say that it can't happen because we do not know. It's an if. I'm simply assuming, for the sake of the arguement, that it does work.

It doesn't have much evidence to support it. And I won't blatantly say it doesn't exist for that reason alone. But if it did work, then sure, why not? But if we're looking at this scientifically, there has to be a bigger explanation.

I think you're not looking at this the right way. I've gone at this the whole time assuming that somehow, and I do not know how, the shamans or sorcerers or whatever are capable of doing this themselves. That being said, then the magic spells do not do anything besides serve as a ritual or mantra that help them focus. Now, as to how they do it, it may simply be an extrension of the idea that human consciousness can, to a limited degree, effect environment within physical laws. Maybe, somehow, a sorcerer's consciousness is, for lack of a better term, better at it than others,.

While I can easily understand where you're coming from, there still is not enough energy. You're barred by the lack of it, and by the lack of control. Let's say for decay, and your idea. If humans wanted something to decay and die, like a tree, and most, or even a few, understood how decay works, the energy expelled would work at doing the process. But if you were just splashing energy at it, without understanding what you needed to do with it, then nothing would happen. The charge up and dispersal of energy creates problems without a machine, or understanding behind it. And double would go for the universe.

There is a difference between being scientific and being physicall possible. We need to make that distinction in this discussion. Science is a method. A means to an end. You can do something that is not scientific but is physically possible. And, I think that to assume that everything can be broken down and analyzed in science is a very arrogant and flawed statement. Mainly because science has one huge flaw: It requires objectivity. The scientist is an objective observer outside of the workings of whatever he or she is observing who does not interfere. That is good for many things, but when dealing with ideas like reality being able to be manipulated by one's perceptions, then objectivity is useless and one cannot be objective when dealing with the idea of perception effecting things. One cannot be a non involved observer when dealing with the concepts that the very act of observing effects what's going on.

Science and physics are one and the same. All science comes down from physics. If it's physically impossible, then it's scientifically impossible. If it's scientifically possible, then physics follows suit. The practice and application of science is kind of what you're talking about. Science is really nothing more than facts of the universe that can be tested and proved time and again. Or at least ideas of how the universe may work, that have supporting evidence.

That being said. Saying that all science can be broken down and analyzed isn't really all that arrogant. It always SOUNDS arrogant. Many scientists do sound arrogant. But it's the truth. We can study how a star explodes, how a moon orbits, how an ocean moves, how solar winds and cosmic rays move in our universe. We can talk about the formation of planets, stars, comets, and things of the like by breaking it down and analyzing it to better understand how they work. If we never strived to break something down and analyze the process and action, we'd be taking leaps of faith on things like the atomic bomb. "We know how nuclear fission works, but we just don't know how it works with heavy uranium." They didn't just decide to build it and see what happened, they had to break it down, test it, understand it.

Again, as I said, the spell isn;t doing the job. The magic man is. The spell is just something the magic man does to help himself do it.

I understand what you mean. And I used spell when i didn't want to, but my idea remains that he'd have to construct some form of energy machine with energy, probably not understanding much about energy, or the machine itself, if all he was taught was more or less the words and dance. Energy, especially large amounts of it, isn't really subject to manipulation by anything but machines we make if we wanted to direct it.

 

[The Question]

We are still talking about removing a section of one universe, taking stuff out of the middle that's required to function, and putting it in another seamlessly.

I'm not talking about anything that major. I'm talking about altering one tiny, seemingly insignifigant thing, but causing a chain reaction that ends with a huge result.

To percieve them, see in them, do anything with them, you'd have to be in contact with them. To see them with your eyes, its photons would have to be in your eyes. To touch it, you must be a part of their universe.

That is, of course, assuming that you are physically seeing them with your eyes, or that quantum possibilities even can be seen with the eye. Again, I'm not saying how it would work. I have no bloody clue, as I'm not an expert with biology, quantum physics, or any other feild related to this.

Generating them is far less scientific. When using scientific methods, you do not generate. You can only generate energy, and that's usually fairly barbaric. Large chemical reactions and such. Building them would be far easier. And like I said, we couldn't do anything we couldn't understand. We can't warp space without understanding it better. We couldn't literally build a better human without knowing what a better human was.

I never said that they "generated" them. Nor did I say that the aproach to doing this was at all scientific, or that it was even inentional.

Let's, for the moment, assume that we can little by little affect the environment with many human minds. You're talking about generating an entire universe, a multiverse, with a lump of human minds, when they barely affect the environment around them. Built up of extremely powerful, near conceptual people. Humans don't even understand concepts. Subconciously making near conceptual things wouldn't be something humans would be capable of.

We're not talking about creating multiverses or people in any physical sense. And you're assuming that for a conscious mind to directly effect the physical world, it has to know exactly how that works. Most reports of such phenomina have the person in question not entirely aware of what they're doing, so this may not be the case.

But let's go back to how I was talking about the universe working like a tumbler of numbers. If humans just decided to make the universe somehow create a being like Loki, we have a few problems. One, fabrication, the universe can not break it's own laws, and just make up energy and mass.

Never said that it was creaying energy from nothing (and I never talked about mass). It coul'd easily be energy moving around from somewhere else.

Two, sentience, the universe does not appear to be sentient. It has never really seemed to do anything that would proclaim sentience as you are kind of putting it.

I never suggested that the universe was sentient. It may have sounded that way, but that's not what I meant. I don't really know how to explain it if I'm not on some kind of mind altering substances, but the best way I can explain it is to think of the universe as a computer (which it is probably not like at all, but it fits the analogy), and the collective willpower of all of those people is sending it a messege as to how things should be on a very small scale (and if you think about it, Earthly pagan dieties would work on a very small scale compared to the rest of the universe), and the universe making the apropriate changes.

Three, if it WERE sentient, it wouldn't even acknowledge us. We make up less than .0000000001% of matter in the universe here on Earth. It would be like listening to your neutrons if they had lives. And four, the energy, let's say not created, would come from somewhere, feasable, but the energy would be so massive, that it couldn't really be contained in one place too long without destroying things around it.

Again, that's assuming that these beings would be made up of such a massive amount of energy. For all we know, they wouldn't be at all.

The universe would still work on a number basis. It works in reactions, long and short. Starting and stopping them would cause planets to just come apart. Gravity is a force, not just a malleable thing.

I never said anything about starting and stopping them.

It doesn't have much evidence to support it. And I won't blatantly say it doesn't exist for that reason alone. But if it did work, then sure, why not? But if we're looking at this scientifically, there has to be a bigger explanation.

There doesn't have to be. There might be. And it might be that poltergeist activity really is what people think it is. It's a maybe. I'm simply, for the sake of this arguement, assuming that it does work.

While I can easily understand where you're coming from, there still is not enough energy. You're barred by the lack of it, and by the lack of control. Let's say for decay, and your idea. If humans wanted something to decay and die, like a tree, and most, or even a few, understood how decay works, the energy expelled would work at doing the process. But if you were just splashing energy at it, without understanding what you needed to do with it, then nothing would happen. The charge up and dispersal of energy creates problems without a machine, or understanding behind it. And double would go for the universe.

I'm not sure that's true. They may not fully understand how it works, but they may have simply discovered that it did work through whatever means that they did and apply it to their practices.

Science and physics are one and the same. All science comes down from physics. If it's physically impossible, then it's scientifically impossible. If it's scientifically possible, then physics follows suit. The practice and application of science is kind of what you're talking about. Science is really nothing more than facts of the universe that can be tested and proved time and again. Or at least ideas of how the universe may work, that have supporting evidence.

No. Science is a methodology. Physics is a feild. The laws of physics are natural laws of the universe. Science, and the scientific mindset, are not the same thing as the laws of physics. Something can be physically possible without being scientific. I know this is just semantics, but clearing this out now will avoid confusion later on.

That being said. Saying that all science can be broken down and analyzed isn't really all that arrogant. It always SOUNDS arrogant. Many scientists do sound arrogant. But it's the truth. We can study how a star explodes, how a moon orbits, how an ocean moves, how solar winds and cosmic rays move in our universe. We can talk about the formation of planets, stars, comets, and things of the like by breaking it down and analyzing it to better understand how they work. If we never strived to break something down and analyze the process and action, we'd be taking leaps of faith on things like the atomic bomb. "We know how nuclear fission works, but we just don't know how it works with heavy uranium." They didn't just decide to build it and see what happened, they had to break it down, test it, understand it.

That is true. But, while you can study those things (hell, you can study anything), that doesn't mean you can understand everything through scientific methods. As I said, science is based on the idea that you can take the role of an objective observer sitting outside of what is going on and recording data. When dealing with ideas of the human consciousness, objectivity is impossible. And when dealing with the idea that simply observing something can effect and alter reality, then non interference is also impossible.

I understand what you mean. And I used spell when i didn't want to, but my idea remains that he'd have to construct some form of energy machine with energy, probably not understanding much about energy, or the machine itself, if all he was taught was more or less the words and dance. Energy, especially large amounts of it, isn't really subject to manipulation by anything but machines we make if we wanted to direct it.

Maybe. Except, as I have said many many times, there are documented cases where the human consciousness can effect environment. Now, again, assuming that these cases are true, then we can also assume that the human brain and the human consciousness can, to some degree, maniulate energy. Of course, this would take a very special kind of person. And, of course, all of this is basically speculation.

 

[The Question]

Also, Mistress, I just want to say this right now: Some of this back and forth is coming from me not explaining what I mean properly. And, for me to properly explain it, I'd need a few hours to sit down and talk about it, and probably a few diagrams to help illustrait it. Not exactly easy for me to put forth my idea on the internets like this.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I'm not talking about anything that major. I'm talking about altering one tiny, seemingly insignifigant thing, but causing a chain reaction that ends with a huge result.

Actually, any rip in time and space may cause a cascade. However small. You're still removing a part of one dimension, and forcing it into another.

I never said that they "generated" them. Nor did I say that the aproach to doing this was at all scientific, or that it was even inentional.

If it isn't scientific, then it wouldn't follow any laws of the universe, and hence, be against the laws of science.

And generate would be the word you're looking for. Manifestation and generation are similar. Though manifest would be totally against science.

We're not talking about creating multiverses or people in any physical sense. And you're assuming that for a conscious mind to directly effect the physical world, it has to know exactly how that works. Most reports of such phenomina have the person in question not entirely aware of what they're doing, so this may not be the case.

I'm assuming that, because the mind recorded has yet to show anything but that. While the mind is an extremely complicated instrument, it doesn't seem to do anything but simple little tasks like pumping a heart, or making sure your nervous system is fine.

While it might be possible that the brain does more than that, it doesn't seem to extend past the body.

Never said that it was creaying energy from nothing (and I never talked about mass). It coul'd easily be energy moving around from somewhere else.

I almost pushed on that point in my last post, but didn't, as that was talking about atomic energy reactions and such (not that I wasn't before.) Ambient energy around Earth would be a fine power source. However, the energy required to do these things would be so massive, that it would push everything around it to almost 0 Kelvin, and basically just destroy all matter around it, since the requirement of energy is great.

I never suggested that the universe was sentient. It may have sounded that way, but that's not what I meant. I don't really know how to explain it if I'm not on some kind of mind altering substances, but the best way I can explain it is to think of the universe as a computer (which it is probably not like at all, but it fits the analogy), and the collective willpower of all of those people is sending it a messege as to how things should be on a very small scale (and if you think about it, Earthly pagan dieties would work on a very small scale compared to the rest of the universe), and the universe making the apropriate changes.

Don't stress it about the mind altering substances thing. I know what you're talking about not explaining it that well. I usually don't understand half of what I'm talking about unless I'm in my conceptual state of mind.

Either way, the universe as a computer analogue fits the bill of what you're trying to say to the point you're trying to say it to. However, you're talking about altering trillions, possibly quadrillions of miles of space by something that you couldn't even see with an electron microscope with proportionate means. Think of it this way. If one atom of your body decays and "dies", does the rest of your body follow suit? The universe is huge. Infinitely huge just about, and growing more by the moment. Almost faster than the speed of light. The universe probably wouldn't even know how to respond to something as small as a simple human request.

And of course, I could easily (but I'm not, seeing how this is meant to be controlled) go into bombs, and how that destroys my argument. But then, using bombs isn't really bending anything. It's refracting of chemical reactions and such. But we can go into that if you want.

Again, that's assuming that these beings would be made up of such a massive amount of energy. For all we know, they wouldn't be at all.

Then they wouldn't really be science anything.

I never said anything about starting and stopping them.

That would be the only way to really change the environment around you. Numbers do not bend.

There doesn't have to be. There might be. And it might be that poltergeist activity really is what people think it is. It's a maybe. I'm simply, for the sake of this arguement, assuming that it does work.

For it to be considered science, yes, there does. If there is no reason, or proof of it ever happening, then it really wouldn't be considered science.

I'm not sure that's true. They may not fully understand how it works, but they may have simply discovered that it did work through whatever means that they did and apply it to their practices.

This I can agree with. But if they didn't understand how to really make it work in the first place, then they really wouldn't be able to do it again. (Notice how I love using lasers) Lasers were not an accidental discovery. That took years of research and understanding photonic values.

No. Science is a methodology. Physics is a feild. The laws of physics are natural laws of the universe. Science, and the scientific mindset, are not the same thing as the laws of physics. Something can be physically possible without being scientific. I know this is just semantics, but clearing this out now will avoid confusion later on.

This, I heavily disagree on. Science is science. It's not a human invention, it's our name for it. Like a tree is a labelled a tree. The application of science is a methodology. Science itself is nothing more than science.

However, I will not accept that something is physically possible, but not scientifically possible without some form of example.

That is true. But, while you can study those things (hell, you can study anything), that doesn't mean you can understand everything through scientific methods. As I said, science is based on the idea that you can take the role of an objective observer sitting outside of what is going on and recording data. When dealing with ideas of the human consciousness, objectivity is impossible. And when dealing with the idea that simply observing something can effect and alter reality, then non interference is also impossible.

Actually, objectivity is still possible even when dealing with humans, as long as a proper scientific method is being observed. A scientific method is really nothing more than a hypothesis, a test, corrections to the hypothesis, and retest. The method repeats itself until something is either found to be defunct, or a law.

What you're kind of explaining in the end, is the ever increasing popularity of the "Butterfly Effect." But that doesn't just go with observation, that also go with talking, or waving your hand.

Maybe. Except, as I have said many many times, there are documented cases where the human consciousness can effect environment. Now, again, assuming that these cases are true, then we can also assume that the human brain and the human consciousness can, to some degree, maniulate energy. Of course, this would take a very special kind of person. And, of course, all of this is basically speculation.

I guess this needs to be explained out. Since we're now trying to really dwelve into human effects, non outward physical, on the environment, we'll be requiring these documented cases. Or at least a website that can somewhat tell me what we're more or less dealing with here. And for the moment, I'll assume the possibility.

However, what we're still talking about is a massive manipulation of energy. Manipulate a little energy, and nothing much happens. The universe doesn't bend that much, nobody cares, it might even heat up a little around where you're trying to bend energy. Change something physically, and we're talking about a whole NEW set of rules. The energy requirement for burning things would be immense. The energy to grow things is massive. A little bit of nigh detectable energy would be nothing. And the energy to punch a whole in time and space, or bend things around would be counted in the mass amount of solar masses of chemicals needed.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Also, Mistress, I just want to say this right now: Some of this back and forth is coming from me not explaining what I mean properly. And, for me to properly explain it, I'd need a few hours to sit down and talk about it, and probably a few diagrams to help illustrait it. Not exactly easy for me to put forth my idea on the internets like this.

I have time. If you have MSN Messenger, let me know.

 

[Warhammer]

Nth Metal

 

[The Question]

I have time. If you have MSN Messenger, let me know.

No, I mean I really can't explain it very well over the internet. It's much easier for me to verbalize it. And besides me not explaining things properly, I think a good deal of this is also that we just happen to subscribe to different theories in different areas.