I tend to prefer the likes of dark matter to fixed belief in blue and white rabbit gods Craig - but you are right that much more is speculative than we credit and we are missing something.
On Mar 26, 4:01 pm, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 26, 9:59 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > A singularity of your 'everythingness' is electron. > > An electron is a part of the universe. The singularity can only be the > entire universe. > > > The richness of material world begun from fluctuation - > > - polarization of primordial vacuum . > > Fluctuation in what way? Emptiness regularly becoming emptiness? What > could it mean for a vacuum to have any properties whatsoever? > > > ==. > > Why electron is responsible for fluctuations in a vacuum? > > Because an electron has its own m mass and q charge. > > But (according to QED) by interaction with vacuum electron’s > > mass and charge becomes infinite ( electron is hidden in vacuum > > and we say he is virtual particle – antiparticle - antielectron – > > positron) > > To me it's much more likely to be a just-so story to plug the > equations. The equations don't take sense into account so they are > probably wrongly interpreted and we have to make up all kinds of > science fiction to save the model. > > If an electron is responsible for fluctuations in a vacuum then the > fluctuations are in the electron, not in the vacuum. The vacuum is > empty. There's nothing there to fluctuate. Virtual particle is just a > name for the fact that we don't understand what is going on and wish > for a deus ex particulus to save ourselves from the reality of having > to start over from scratch and reinterpret all of physics. It's just > stubborn sentimentality but now it it metastasizing into fanciful > delusions. > > > And when we see the 'fluctuations' of vacuum it means electron > > appears from vacuum, electron again acquire its usual mass and charge. > > Mass and charge are probably semantic conditions arising from sense > relationships within matter and across space. The electron itself may > not even be real. As far as I know electrons have only been studied > using instruments made of matter, so electrons, photons, the whole > Standard Model could be nothing more than shared atomic moods and > motives (which look like particles, waves, images, rays, twinkles, > signs and symbols, depending on what perceptual inertial frame the > observation is grounded in). > > I think that it is extremely likely that at present, our worldview is > in the last gasp of post Enlightenment modeling - a Dark Ages for > understanding awareness which has pathologized our science and > culture. As long as we look for emptiness and absence to find our > origins, we will only be able to find evidence of meaningless > mechanism and convince ourselves of our own non-existence. > > Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
