GOD, RELATIVITY & THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
in [Relativity]
|
From: ZerkonXXXX on 6 Nov 2009 07:37 On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 04:22:30 -0800, George Hammond wrote: > 5. Historically Religion has evolved from Polytheism > (many demigods) to Monotheism (one supreme God). ... and after this? Religion has not been confined by a "supreme God" event. It has moved either passed this or has moved differently and away from it depending how you want to view it. From the Hindu (non)concept of Brahman, to the Buddhists, to the Tao, all defying this idea of 'one supreme god'. Let's get 'scientifically' exact here. Historically, religion has not evolved. It is humans that have evolved, modified or changed beliefs for one understandable reason or another which then is called religion. Religion as actor is metaphorical as is "Christianity predicts .." as is "Science believes..." an important point to keep in mind, as you may know. One can be 'set adrift' in metaphorical form. "Supreme" is a rather weak idea for god or anything else for that matter. Certainly any science is at it's worst whenever this type of thinking kicks in. It usually indicates being blinded by some fatal arrogance... > Meanwhile, the discovery of the world's first scientific > proof of God is my calling card to history. ... present poster, George Of the House Of Hammonds, excluded of course and as usual. Do you have a booking agent? Anyway, "God is a (only 'a'?) curvature to reality" is an excellent poetic image.
From: doug on 6 Nov 2009 08:28 George Hammond wrote: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:43:33 +1100, "Inertial" > <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >>"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.net> wrote in message >>news:gs48f5l3kartad4tq25ctdo30rqv9g3tre(a)4ax.com... >> >>>Copyright 2009 George Hammond M.S. Physics >> >>Gawd no .. Hammond again. Are you still doing your comedy act that you call >>science? >> > > You're not laughing, dork. If he reads the nonsense below, he will laugh his head off: > ======================================== > GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE > Primary site > http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond > Mirror sites > http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god > http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com > HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto > http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 > =======================================
From: raven1 on 6 Nov 2009 08:39 On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 04:22:30 -0800, George Hammond <Nowhere1(a)notspam.net> wrote: >Copyright 2009 George Hammond Look who the nurses are letting use their computer again...
From: John Stafford on 6 Nov 2009 09:01 In article <gs48f5l3kartad4tq25ctdo30rqv9g3tre(a)4ax.com>, George Hammond <Nowhere1(a)notspam.net> wrote: > [...] t modern psychology research > consists mainly of an activity called Factor Analysis. They > use the world's largest computers to extract the > eigenvectors from 100x100 correlation matrices. The > correlations are obtained from psychology tests given to > hundreds of thousands of people world wide. It that is true, then show the data - cite. > The upshot of all this is that they have known for > decades that every analysis results in exactly 4 > eigenvectors, Please show your work. > Being a physicist I > immediately recognized that the 4x4 matrix is what > physicists call, "curved". Eigenvectors do not curve, so you must be referring to some relationship between matrices. Show us.
From: Free Lunch on 6 Nov 2009 09:05
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:01:57 -0600, John Stafford <nhoj(a)droffats.ten> wrote in alt.atheism: >In article <gs48f5l3kartad4tq25ctdo30rqv9g3tre(a)4ax.com>, > George Hammond <Nowhere1(a)notspam.net> wrote: > >> [...] t modern psychology research >> consists mainly of an activity called Factor Analysis. They >> use the world's largest computers to extract the >> eigenvectors from 100x100 correlation matrices. The >> correlations are obtained from psychology tests given to >> hundreds of thousands of people world wide. > >It that is true, then show the data - cite. > >> The upshot of all this is that they have known for >> decades that every analysis results in exactly 4 >> eigenvectors, > >Please show your work. > >> Being a physicist I >> immediately recognized that the 4x4 matrix is what >> physicists call, "curved". > >Eigenvectors do not curve, so you must be referring to some relationship >between matrices. Show us. Didn't you know that George lives in a different universe than we do. He has been blessed with the opportunity to pass his wisdom along to us at times and does so without regard to our needs. |