While I was on vacation, I discussed your posts, and then ended up showing them to a group of people which included several physists. Their analysis based on a variety of reasons that I can post if you like, is that you are probably an undergraduate student who has been exposed to these concepts, but are certainly not doing what they would consider "research" in these fields.

I guess I will just conclude by saying, that if you have any questions regarding your areas of interest, let me know and I will pass them on.

I hope you do continue to pursue your interests. In addition, I think you would be better served if you took a scientifc approach regarding your religion. It might allow you to see some inconsistancies and troubling questions. But always keep in mind, this is true of ALL religions and by no means limited to LDS.

Ixtellor

P.S. If your chruch actually has the greatest artifact in the history of man-kind that would instantly and permantly save millions and millions of souls and save them from a life of hell, and you DONT show them... That makes you evil. IMHO

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

I would like you to tell me who believes I am an undergraduate student for I certainly am not. I would like to know what these people have said and why they think I am an undergraduate.

I have not run across these ideas in fact I study them and then research to find if similar things were found. I do take the scientific approach to my religion and I see nothing wrong with the belief that there is someone out there who knows all the laws of science and uses them. I have recieved the witness as a result of my faith in God and for your refusal to even try you find this incredible. Ether 12 : 6 "And now, I, Moroni would speak somewhat concerning these things I would show the world that faith is things hoped for which are not seen: wherefore dispute not because ye see not for ye shall recieve no witness until after the trial of your faith." People will find reasons to reject the truth no matter what it is and to show them an artifact would not save them no they would most likely say that it is a trick or if you showed them the gold plates that it was just a ruse set up by us to get converts in the end it would be no different.

Oh and by the way since gold takes a while to form anyway how would carbon dating on these plates prove anything.

1. They laughed when you wrote "Energy Shadow Matter". They went on to talk about other things before explaining why, but I assumed they believed it was a made up concept/phrase. I can ask for clarification, or you can say what it is.

2. You Wrote They said it was incorrect because it should have been kinetic energy not potential.

3. They said your definition of Zero point energy was flawed. That there is only one energy state at absolute zero.

4. You haven't heard of the equivilence theory, yet you claim to study correlation of gravity to energy.

5. Lastly, something I don't understand AT ALL. They said your quote about viscocity was overly simply and covered when studying fluid dynamics at a base level. That a PhD or someone working on a PhD wouldn't mention it.

Since the plates are not on earth and their is ZERO empirical evidence to suggest they exist or ever existed the point is moot.


Ixtellor

P.S. They wondered if you had published anything. This won't solve anything, because anyone can google a published work and take credit. They seemed to believe if they could look at your published work that all would be revealed.

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

First no I have never published anything I work for the public sector with the forenamed physicist and all findings are public knowledge.

I am studying shadow matter and you would do well to inform them if they googled it they could find out about it very quickly but I will bring it down to a nutshell. Shadow matter is a very fine state of matter that scientists attribute the rapid construction of the universe after the "Big bang". these particles are so fine that regular matter is unable to see them or measure their bonds but they are able to see its affects. These fine particles will bond to the larger particles and then bond to themselves giving structure to the universe faster than if it was just a random combination of particles. Supposedly they in themselves cannot experience the behavior of typical matter without the help of the matter itself.

"In physics, the zero-point energy is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical physical system may possess and is the energy of the ground state of the system." There is nothing saying that it can't have only one principle energy level but there is nothing saying that it has to have only one principle energy level. This of course can only happen at absolute zero.

I do appologize for my mistake I did mean kinetic energy decreases while potential energy increases. Sorry about this I will try to catch it sooner next time.

To cast me aside because I used a simple explanation for viscosity is very unintelligent in their part. Many scientists use simple explanations for the very purpose of not confusing those whom they are trying to speak to. I know that I had always found it annoying when people talked fancy to me because it seemed that they were just trying to trod me under foot because I didn't know what it meant.

I have done recent research in the equivelance theory and I am glad to see that someone else has come with a similar idea thank heavens for Einstein. anyway yes this is very similar to what I am trying to prove yet I have included more variables than just mass because volume must be included and with Mass and Volume comes density and so on. I am mostly dealing with density though. I figure that one could think of all energy on a planar grid with x, y, and z axis. Energy of matter could travel from one point to another instantaneously and would be immediately attracted to areas of higher energy. This is just the cliff notes version in a nutshell of what I am doing anyway if you have more questions ask.

Before I discuss your latest post with the people in the know.

How is it that you are studying and doing research in/on fields in which you don't understand the math?

All the physists that I know discuss almost only the math and the forumlas. How do you even know what to look for or how to explain all of these theoretical concepts without math expertise?

You say things like "energy on a planar grid with x, y, and z axis" which is math terminology, yet when I asked you math problems, you said "you don't do the math".

I ask, because I already know what the smart people are going to do:

They are going to say "ask him ______, if he can't answer it, he is full of crap. "

________ is going to be WAY over my head, and you won't be able to answer it unless you are doing PhD level work.

Much like my first series of questions, which you claimed you could not answer.

How do you study quantom mechanics without knowing quantom mechanics?


Ixtellor

P.S. If you have a scientific thesis you would like to pass on to Physists, I would be happy to do that. Physists are obsessed with solving problems and refuse to let any question go by. I like asking bizarre questions, usually about black holes, time travel, and what if scenarios and watching them explain the answer.

P.P.S What happens if a women gives birth past the event horizon, and the baby is catapulted at the speed of C towards the event horizon. What does the women see? What would the baby see? OR if that doesn't work, what happens if she gives birth to a baby just before the event horizon, and the baby passes it, what would the baby see and what would the women see?

__________________
_______________________________________
George W. Bush "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building"

Blasphemy is a victimless crime.

Have you served a mission yet?

__________________
Catz Meow
Badly behaved.
Hedonistic Lemming.

************************************************** ***
JW Frogen, my new favorite noob poster:

If you are such a weak jellyfish you can be bullied on a forum where you can ignore any poster you do not want to read than I suggest you move to Tibet, convert to Buddhism, protest the Chinese occupation, be killed as you will by the Chinese and hope you come back with some form of backbone.

I do know the math of the fields I am studying but like I said I am mainly observation and hear this I do not have to defend my Job to you or any others who wish to challenge my integrity. I did know of the equivalence theorem but by a different name. I have always heard and referred to it as the theory of relativity.

I said that I do not work with the math I didn't say that I didn't know it I know what to look for through exstensive study of past research and correlating and finding ways to prove and disprove past findings within these fields. I did not claim I couldn't answer I claimed that this was a debate on religion and not my job which it still is but we seem to have taken the tangent I had foreseen earlier.

I would ask you to ask Einstein that same question. Hold on he is "the father of modern quantum physics" so I guess there wasn't too much to know before him. You should really research him he too used very simple termanology to describe his findings. Lets see as I recall he described quantum entanglement as "Spooky action at a distance"

PPS. considering the fact that not even light can pass the event horizon both the baby and the mother would see nothing and if the birth was given at the event horizon, depending on the side, the baby would probably be catapulted into regular space while the mother would see nothing as all light is being sucked in or the baby would be drawn into the gravitational pull and the mother would not see it nor the baby to the mother.

This is quite a funny little problem though I would ask you keep it in words easier to write.

You would like to know wouldn't you well as I said before I do not give any personal information over the internet. But lets just say that France is an absolutely beautiful country with wonderful people.

How would telling me whether or not you have served a mission allow me to stalk you online?

LMFAO.

__________________
Catz Meow
Badly behaved.
Hedonistic Lemming.

************************************************** ***
JW Frogen, my new favorite noob poster:

If you are such a weak jellyfish you can be bullied on a forum where you can ignore any poster you do not want to read than I suggest you move to Tibet, convert to Buddhism, protest the Chinese occupation, be killed as you will by the Chinese and hope you come back with some form of backbone.

I would hate to think that someone has enough time to waste trying to stalk me online. To say yes I served or no I didn't is immaterial and personal it is no concern of yours or anyone's how old I am, whether I served a mission, my priesthood calling or so on. When something is immaterial and personal that could give someone an insight to look for age or information I do not give it to them. I already gave the internet enough to chew on by saying that I work with a physicist named Gary Sr.