The Theory of Relative Motion and Natural Purpose

New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
Physics and Metaphysics

I have a theory which combines the Physical and Metaphysical, a theory of everything, but it has not been organized into a coherent doctrine. So I would like to discuss my theory with other philosophers so that I may formulate a coherent Theory of Physics and Metaphysics.

To summarize the theory of relative motion and natural purpose I will state this; all things in existence are energy, and all energy is space bending in on its self and creating relative motion (time). That is the physical. The metaphysical is the fact that everything is happening for a reason, e everything is fulfilling it's natural purpose.

Everything happens for a reason. By this I do not mean that there is a cause for every effect, I mean that there is a later purpose for everything that is happening now, just as there was a purpose for everything that has happened prior, the entire universe is relative motion guided by natural purpose.

Any questions and arguments are more than welcome.
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
Hugo Phurst said:
I believe somethings happen for a reason, but not everything. Elsewise there'd be no free will.
Click to expand...
Very good observation, no there wouldn't be free will and I do not believe in free will, e everything is just cause and effect taking place, this may cause many to reject this theory.
 
TBoneJack

TBoneJack

Well-Known Member
New Age United said:
Physics and Metaphysics

I have a theory which combines the Physical and Metaphysical, a theory of everything, but it has not been organized into a coherent doctrine. So I would like to discuss my theory with other philosophers so that I may formulate a coherent Theory of Physics and Metaphysics.

To summarize the theory of relative motion and natural purpose I will state this; all things in existence are energy, and all energy is space bending in on its self and creating relative motion (time). That is the physical. The metaphysical is the fact that everything is happening for a reason, e everything is fulfilling it's natural purpose.

Everything happens for a reason. By this I do not mean that there is a cause for every effect, I mean that there is a later purpose for everything that is happening now, just as there was a purpose for everything that has happened prior, the entire universe is relative motion guided by natural purpose.

Any questions and arguments are more than welcome.
Click to expand...
What was/is the purpose of racism? Child pornography? Pedophilia?

Plz forgive me if these questions don't make sense. I'm interested in understanding your theory.
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
New Age United said:
Physics and Metaphysics

I have a theory which combines the Physical and Metaphysical, a theory of everything, but it has not been organized into a coherent doctrine. So I would like to discuss my theory with other philosophers so that I may formulate a coherent Theory of Physics and Metaphysics.

To summarize the theory of relative motion and natural purpose I will state this; all things in existence are energy, and all energy is space bending in on its self and creating relative motion (time). That is the physical. The metaphysical is the fact that everything is happening for a reason, e everything is fulfilling it's natural purpose.

Everything happens for a reason. By this I do not mean that there is a cause for every effect, I mean that there is a later purpose for everything that is happening now, just as there was a purpose for everything that has happened prior, the entire universe is relative motion guided by natural purpose.

Any questions and arguments are more than welcome.
Click to expand...

This is not a theory, not even close. It is a hypothesis in this Webster definition of the word - a : an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument . Energy is not space bending in on itself, it is the potential to do work. Spacetime is independent from energy and matter, though energy and matter do affect spacetime.Time is a measure in which events can be ordered from the past through the present into the future, and also the measure of durations of events and the intervals between them. So, the physical section of your idea doesn't seem sound. As far as a purpose, if you are speaking of a conscious or intentional purpose, there is no empirical evidence for that notion. In fact, that notion just adds a layer of complexity that is not needed in discovering and describing our cosmos and objective reality. It seems that your knowledge of physics is poor, why not learn more about the subject before attempting to generate new theories? Seems like your ego is leading you astray...
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
No the questions are certainly credible. I once argued with a man, he said that God must support homosexuals because he created them, I said then by your Logic god must also support pedophiles and psychopaths. I often wonder why people think that the creator is good when every instinct in you tells you that God is evil, god very well could be a sick sadistic being that created humanity just to watch us suffer, that's if you believe in god, I am agnostic.

These questions baffle me as well, and I can neither find the purpose nor the cause of such things. This presents the possibility that not everything happens for a purpose, perhaps some things do happen strictly out of chaos.
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
Glad to see you mister Durden lol. Are you familiar with time dilation, simultaneity, time is relative motion, frames of reference. Physics is also one of my favorite fields of study. It is my personal belief (theory) that all 4 forces are caused by the bending of space time and that unaffected forces do not exist, Space and matter are not actually separate. It is all the relative motion of space - time bending. It creates the illusion of a solid massive universe.
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
I am offering my intuitive insights, trying to find the rational explanation, trying to find the truth, perhaps you can help me with that.
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
New Age United said:
Glad to see you mister Durden lol. Are you familiar with time dilation, simultaneity, time is relative motion, frames of reference. Physics is also one of my favorite fields of study. It is my personal belief (theory) that all 4 forces are caused by the bending of space time and that unaffected forces do not exist, Space and matter are not actually separate. It is all the relative motion of space - time bending. It creates the illusion of a solid massive universe.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am familiar with those Einsteinian discoveries. I still don't know how that fits into your idea that 'all energy is space bending in on its self and creating relative motion (time)'. You'll have to explain that and link to some credible data. Space and matter are not separate entities? Really? Please link to that. What do you think happens when we remove matter from space? It's easy to see for yourself, move all objects out of a cubic meter of space, and the space still exists. It is the strong nuclear force that holds matter together into the illusion of solidity, not the relative motion of space.

Also, it is fine to use the common vernacular of the word 'theory' if you are speaking of common subjects. When you enter the realm of science, you must use the word theory in its actual, scientific meaning. In Websters listing these include -

: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>

c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

New Agers, like Chopra, are consistently attempting to lend credibility to their specious ideas by using scientific language, like the type found in quantum mechanics. When pressed by people who know what the fuck they're talking about, he admits that he is simply using the language metaphorically. Don't be like his ilk, be honest. If you're going to play in the realm of science, you need to be precise and use precise terminology. One's personal beliefs are not theories...
 
Last edited:
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
TBoneJack said:
You physics guys really irk me. Yall got all the mental talent that the rest of us wish we had.

I'm not a stupid person. I earned a BS in math, a masters in computer science, and I make $140K per. So I can't be accurately described as "stupid". But as hard as I've tried, I can't visualize the things you advanced physicists can.

I'd like to ask a valid question, not to flatter or to degrade in any way. I've always wanted to ask this question of someone like you: what the fuck does it feel like to know you're smarter than 95% of the people in the world?
Click to expand...
I think it's mostly a matter of practice. When I first started down this path, my brain cramped all the time trying to understand what seemed so simple to these geniuses. I'm naturally a slow reader and retain 90+% of the material, but I had to reread physics paragraphs DOZENS and dozens of times to really understand and mentally picture what is actually happening. Having said that, yes I feel that I am much smarter than most people I've met. It often sucks, because it is a lonely place to be when you can easily understand what most others seem unable to. In a certain way, ignorance is bliss. If it's any consolation, you make more money than I do ;)
 
Last edited:
TBoneJack

TBoneJack

Well-Known Member
tyler.durden said:
I think it's mostly a matter of practice. When I first started down this path, my brain cramped all the time trying to understand what seemed so simple to these geniuses. I'm naturally a slow reader and retain 90+% of the material, but I had to reread physics paragraphs DOZENS and dozens of times to really understand and mentally picture what is actually happening. Having said that, yes I feel that I am much smarter than most people I've met. It often sucks, because it is a lonely place to be when you can easily understand what most other seem unable to. In a certain way, ignorance is bliss. If it's any consolation, you make more money than I do ;)
Click to expand...
Well, I deleted my post before you replied to it. I was afraid I sounded stupid and disrecpectful. But I appreciate the honest answer. I really do.
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
tyler.durden said:
Yes, I am familiar with those Einsteinian discoveries. I still don't know how that fits into your idea that 'all energy is space bending in on its self and creating relative motion (time)'. You'll have to explain that and link to some credible data. Space and matter are not separate entities? Really? Please link to that. What do you think happens when we remove matter from space? It's easy to see for yourself, move all objects out of a cubic meter of space, and the space still exists. It is the strong nuclear force that holds matter together into the illusion of solidity, not the relative motion of space.

Also, it is fine to use the common vernacular of the word 'theory' if you are speaking of common subjects. When you enter the realm of science, you must use the word theory in its actual, scientific meaning. In Websters listing these include -

: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>

c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

New Agers, like Chopra, are consistently attempting to lend credibility to their specious ideas by using scientific language, like the type found in quantum mechanics. When pressed by people who know what the fuck they're talking about, he admits that he is simply using the language metaphorically. Don't be like his ilk, be honest. If you're going to play in the realm of science, you need to be precise and use precise terminology. One's personal beliefs are not theories...
Click to expand...
OK. Point well taken, than this is my hypothesis, let us discuss my hypothesis.
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
New Age United said:
I can't link to data when this is all original
Click to expand...
What? You can link to data from established, credible physical theories that would support your ideas. For example, you stated that space and matter are not separate entities, so if you cannot link to any data that supports that statement you'll have to admit that you are incorrect...
 
New Age United

New Age United

Well-Known Member
tyler.durden said:
What? You can link to data from established, credible physical theories that would support your ideas. For example, you stated that space and matter are not separate entities, so if you cannot link to any data that supports that statement you'll have to admit that you are incorrect...
Click to expand...
What? So I can not come up with original insights lmfao, your starting to lose your credibility. "I never made one of my discoveries through the process of rational thinking" Einstein
 
mudballs

mudballs

Well-Known Member
the word 'insight' is not being used correctly. insight implies seeing a truth, a provable theorem. your non connective thoughts are little more than a madmans prose.and attacking Durdens scientific challenge to your thoughts has annihilated any chance you had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top