Instantaneous long-distance travel of LDS gods

[_Philo Sofee]

I see that you value science, but only so long as it supports your own understanding and hope of what God can do in order to bolster a particular LDS spin you want to be true. The only reason you appear to me to value science is so your confirmation bias can give you a burning in your bosom. So far, I have seen you violate every logic and truth and reality of Einsteinian science I have ever read. You aren't fooling those of us who know what Relativity does and does not do, and can and cannot do.

I seriously doubt you can cite a quote from me in any thread where I've stated a burning bosom is a good way to understand any topic. And I really find it hilarious when you pit Einstein against Quantum Mechanics. But since you pretend to be one of these "all-knowing" types that I was talking about, could you please simply explain the principles, equations and laws that govern the expansion of space-time? Someone of your caliber is up to the task I'm sure.

Are you here going on record that Einstein accepted Quantum Physics and all its ramifications? Did I once pretend to be an all knowing type, or are you so stereotypically pulling the apologist boner on me that by lumping everyone together, and mischaracterizing what I said you can beat that strawman to a bloody pulp and sleep calmly tonight assured that your testimony is intact, solid, and Godly approved?

[_Tobin]

I see that you value science, but only so long as it supports your own understanding and hope of what God can do in order to bolster a particular LDS spin you want to be true. The only reason you appear to me to value science is so your confirmation bias can give you a burning in your bosom. So far, I have seen you violate every logic and truth and reality of Einsteinian science I have ever read. You aren't fooling those of us who know what Relativity does and does not do, and can and cannot do.

I seriously doubt you can cite a quote from me in any thread where I've stated a burning bosom is a good way to understand any topic. And I really find it hilarious when you pit Einstein against Quantum Mechanics. But since you pretend to be one of these "all-knowing" types that I was talking about, could you please simply explain the principles, equations and laws that govern the expansion of space-time? Someone of your caliber is up to the task I'm sure.

Are you here going on record that Einstein accepted Quantum Physics and all its ramifications?

Ummm, this what I said actually. Please re-read it sloooowwwwly:

And I really find it hilarious when you pit Einstein against Quantum Mechanics.

Did I once pretend to be an all knowing type, or are you so stereotypically pulling the apologist boner on me that by lumping everyone together, and mischaracterizing what I said you can beat that strawman to a bloody pulp and sleep calmly tonight assured that your testimony is intact, solid, and Godly approved?

Yes, actually you did say that.

You aren't fooling those of us who know what Relativity does and does not do, and can and cannot do.

It sounds like you are pretty all-knowing right there (and rather full of yourself and full of it too).

[_Philo Sofee]

So are you then saying that Einstein and QM are singularly similar and the same, with the same kind of math and effects seen?! Good luck with that one arrogant little snot nosed arrogant ignorant Mormon. Can you find me just one single scientist who would agree that Relativity and QM are the same thing, have the same effects, work under the same laws? Just one viable astronomer or cosmologist or scientist at all?

Just because I have studied Relativity and say so does not mean I am full of myself and pretending to all knowledge. But I absolutely DO ***KNOW*** that you are ignorant if you pretend Einstein and QM are the same and work the same whether on the macro scale or micro scale. Spouting ignorance like that and then arrogantly accusing those of us who have learned the differences as the ones who are wrong is the surest way for you to kill credibility with anyone.

[_Tobin]

So are you then saying that Einstein and QM are singularly similar and the same, with the same kind of math and effects seen?! Good luck with that one arrogant little snot nosed arrogant ignorant Mormon. Can you find me just one single scientist who would agree that Relativity and QM are the same thing, have the same effects, work under the same laws? Just one viable astronomer or cosmologist or scientist at all?

Just because I have studied Relativity and say so does not mean I am full of myself and pretending to all knowledge. But I absolutely DO ***KNOW*** that you are ignorant if you pretend Einstein and QM are the same and work the same whether on the macro scale or micro scale. Spouting ignorance like that and then arrogantly accusing those of us who have learned the differences as the ones who are wrong is the surest way for you to kill credibility with anyone.

Philo, I see is no reason to discuss this topic with you. You have demonstrated that you are incapable of reading, comprehending, or responding in any reasonable way to a single thing I've said. I'm putting you on ignore. Congrats.

[_Philo Sofee]

I can't blame you, any ignoramus that claims QM and Relativity work on the same laws, factors and principles in our universe as we understand is so wrong that I won't waste my time either with you. Thank you for ignoring me, I appreciate the compliment.

[_Philo Sofee]

I have enjoyed, however, reading Dr. W's ideas on how our science today just does not jive with theological interpretation of Kolob physics or speculation about faster than light travel. Nothing so far as we are aware of violates Einstein's relativity in the Quantum. Speculation occurs, but that does not make it reality. Scientifically based on all evidence thus far ever discovered has proven without a doubt that nothing physically travels faster than light. It is the Luxon Wall in physics on the macro scale. QM deals with the micro which is a completely different situation, and works differently than classical large scale physics. That we do understand.

[_Chap]

Here's what I find ridiculous, Tobin.

Saying that there are things we don't know about the universe proves there is a God.

Stripping aside the huffing and puffing, that is what pretty well what Tobin's posts amount to.

[_Philo Sofee]

True. I have actually been reading in QM recently and finding it fascinating as usual. I just find anyone who thinks Einstein's Relativity is over rode or changed has always been wrong. No one that I am aware of who knows what they are talking about has ever said Relativity is ever violated for any reason. So when those come along who say so I am seriously suspect.

[_Gadianton]

Hardly, but I think it is the height of arrogance and stupidity to pretend we KNOW everything about the universe, how QM impacts the macro universe, and the laws and principles that apply to space-time. I think that is the front that DrW is pushing forward and I find it completely ridiculous at a very fundamental level. You seem to be repeating this argument and I really don't understand that. Do you really believe our current understanding of the macro universe Trump's quantum mechanics? I personally find such an approach to science and learning appalling. My view is that we don't have the full picture and it is still developing as we learn more about what is really going on and today's view is not necessarily 100% correct (nor do I think it is reasonable to assume that is the case).

tobin,

just for clarity here. If you check out that link I sent you from SEP, do you agree or disagree with its assessment that scientists are in general agreement that superluminal communication can't work? if you disagree, can you offer an example of a living scientist, employed at a real university who believes that it can work, with the right technology? I'm not saying there aren't any, I have no idea. But you mentioned something about scientists taking this idea seriously and I'm trying to understand who those scientists are, as my brief search efforts aren't turning up anything.

[_Tobin]

Hardly, but I think it is the height of arrogance and stupidity to pretend we KNOW everything about the universe, how QM impacts the macro universe, and the laws and principles that apply to space-time. I think that is the front that DrW is pushing forward and I find it completely ridiculous at a very fundamental level. You seem to be repeating this argument and I really don't understand that. Do you really believe our current understanding of the macro universe Trump's quantum mechanics? I personally find such an approach to science and learning appalling. My view is that we don't have the full picture and it is still developing as we learn more about what is really going on and today's view is not necessarily 100% correct (nor do I think it is reasonable to assume that is the case).

tobin,

just for clarity here. If you check out that link I sent you from SEP, do you agree or disagree with its assessment that scientists are in general agreement that superluminal communication can't work? if you disagree, can you offer an example of a living scientist, employed at a real university who believes that it can work, with the right technology? I'm not saying there aren't any, I have no idea. But you mentioned something about scientists taking this idea seriously and I'm trying to understand who those scientists are, as my brief search efforts aren't turning up anything.

Gadianton, you aren't asking the right question. I don't think anyone is really trying to show that superluminal communication or traveling FTL is actually possible. That isn't what people are seriously looking at and I don't believe in that either. What I am talking about are proposals that there may be shortcuts through distortions in space-time at the quantum level that people think may exist and could use as a means of communication (or maybe travel). It is much as you fold a piece of two-dimensional paper through another dimension and bring two points together and could use that as a shortcut instead. As an example in our universe, we know that space-time is expanding so things are getting further apart FTL. It isn't that they are moving FTL, but instead are being spread apart FTL. So if you were able to reverse this expansion and instantly contract the space-time between those objects, they would instantly come together. Or if space-time is spongey (has holes in it between particles) at the quantum level, you could utilize these distortions to shorten the distance between objects to allow this type of instantaneous communication.

Now, as you noted, distorting space-time (or finding these distortions and utilizing them at the quantum level) may mean causality is not necessarily true. I'm ok with that, and I think many physicists are too since physics equations work perfectly fine forward and BACKWARDS. I believe, as do others, that causality is an imposition and not a universal law and some results in QM seems to indicate this is true.

Anyway, if you are interested in this topic and want to discuss it with people interested in it and do this professionally, I'd recommend visiting forums like the Physics Forum and asking questions. I think you'll find that there are a number of views on this and differing views about whether or not causality is necessarily true.