CP violation or new physics?

July 25, 2016 by Lisa Zyga, Phys.org feature
This is the "South Pillar" region of the star-forming region called the Carina Nebula. Like cracking open a watermelon and finding its seeds, the infrared telescope "busted open" this murky cloud to reveal star embryos tucked inside finger-like pillars of thick dust. Credit: NASA

(Phys.org)—Over the past few years, multiple neutrino experiments have detected hints for leptonic charge parity (CP) violation—a finding that could help explain why the universe is made of matter and not antimatter. So far, matter-antimatter asymmetry cannot be explained by any physics theory and is one of the biggest unsolved problems in cosmology.

But now in a new study published in Physical Review Letters, physicists David V. Forero and Patrick Huber at Virginia Tech have proposed that the same hints could instead indicate CP-conserving "new ," and current experiments would have no way to tell the difference.

Both possibilities—CP violation or new physics—would have a major impact on the scientific understanding of some of the biggest questions in cosmology. Currently, one of the most pressing problems is the search for new physics, or physics beyond the Standard Model, which is a theory that scientists know is incomplete but aren't sure exactly how to improve. New physics could potentially explain several phenomena that the Standard Model cannot, including the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem, as well as dark matter, dark energy, and gravity.

As the scientists show in the new study, determining whether the recent hints indicate CP violation or new physics will be very challenging. The main goal of the study was to "quantify the level of confusion" between the two possibilities. The physicists' simulations and analysis revealed that both CP violation and new physics have distributions centered at the exact same value for what the measure—something called the Dirac CP phase. This identical preference makes it impossible for current neutrino experiments to distinguish between the two cases.

"Our results show that establishing leptonic CP violation will need exceptional care, and that new physics can in many ways lead to non-trivial confusion," Huber told Phys.org.

The good news is that new and future experiments may be capable of resolving the issue. One possible way to test the two proposals is to compare the measurements of the Dirac CP phase made by two slightly different experiments: DUNE (the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment) at Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois; and T2HK (the Tokai to Hyper-Kamiokande project) at J-PARC in Tokai, Japan.

"The trick is that the type of new physics we postulate in our paper manifests itself in the way in which neutrino oscillations are affected by the amount of earth matter through which the neutrino traverses," Huber said. "The more matter travelled through, the larger the effect of this type of ."

"Now, for DUNE, neutrinos would have to travel roughly 1300 km in the earth, whereas for T2HK they would travel only about 300 km. Thus one would find two different values for the Dirac CP phase in both cases, indicating a problem."

In order to be accurate, these experiments will require extremely high degrees of precision, which Huber emphasizes should not be overlooked.

"Of course, the same result could arise if for some reason either experiment was not properly calibrated and thus precisely calibrating these experiments will be extraordinarily important—a very difficult task, which I believe is not quite getting the attention it should."

Explore further: First evidence of 'ghost particles'

More information: David V. Forero and Patrick Huber. "Hints for Leptonic CP Violation or New Physics?" Physical Review Letters. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.031801
arXiv:1601.03736 [hep-ph]

Related Stories

First evidence of 'ghost particles'

November 3, 2015

An international team of scientists at the MicroBooNE physics experiment in the US, including researchers from the University of Cambridge, detected their first neutrino candidates, which are also known as 'ghost particles'. ...

Best precision yet for neutrino measurements at Daya Bay

September 11, 2015

In the Daya Bay region of China, about 55 kilometers northeast of Hong Kong, a research project is underway to study ghostlike, elusive particles called neutrinos. Today, the international Daya Bay Collaboration announces ...

LHCb experiment observes new matter-antimatter difference

April 24, 2013

(Phys.org) —The LHCb collaboration at CERN today submitted a paper to Physical Review Letters on the first observation of matter-antimatter asymmetry in the decays of the particle known as the B0s. It is only the fourth ...

Recommended for you

How can you tell if a quantum memory is really quantum?

May 23, 2018

Quantum memories are devices that can store quantum information for a later time, which are usually implemented by storing and re-emitting photons with certain quantum states. But often it's difficult to tell whether a memory ...

185 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

tblakely1357
1.8 / 5 (12) Jul 25, 2016
One of the things I've never seen explained are the mechanism(s) that control E = M x C(squared). How nuclear fusion releases energy is well known but is that the only means of turning mass into energy? Then the big question is how energy is turned into mass. I've seen shows about the big bang who state that at some point some (much?) of the incredibly hot energy of the infant universe changes into matter but they never explain how or why that occurs. It just somehow happens.
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (20) Jul 25, 2016
One of the things I've never seen explained are the mechanism(s) that control E = M x C(squared). How nuclear fusion releases energy is well known but is that the only means of turning mass into energy? Then the big question is how energy is turned into mass. I've seen shows about the big bang who state that at some point some (much?) of the incredibly hot energy of the infant universe changes into matter but they never explain how or why that occurs. It just somehow happens.

Start with a google of "matter creation from energy". It starts pretty simple but you will soon find yourself "google-crawling" through thousands of interesting articles - some relevant and some not...:-)
epoxy
Jul 25, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 25, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.7 / 5 (19) Jul 25, 2016
The oscillating, massive, neutrinos *are* new physics all by themselves. in relation to the Standard Model, which assigns no mass - usually taken as zero mass - to them. The paper suggests ways that other particle fields could couple to SM neutrinos. But the matter/antimatter dichotomy could be explained either way.

There seems to be ways to distinguish between the two cases though, which is neat.
arom
Jul 25, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
swordsman
1.3 / 5 (14) Jul 25, 2016
atblakely137: I derived Einstein's energy equation, which was hidden in a proof, and I didn't recognize it immediately. It is shown in my book: "Secrets of the Atom" (Adaptive Enterprises, 1999, pp. 63, 64). I presented a proof of a new electromagnetic model of the hydrogen atom. I have had various contacts with those who obtained this book. ---- Open space has electromagnetic properties, which is an indication that dark matter exists everywhere, but is not easily detected by other medthods.
ursiny33
1.6 / 5 (14) Jul 25, 2016
Maybe neutrinos are the electrons of the quantum world, and they come in two flavors , one with a negatively dominant charge with a minority positive charge by its quantum mass, (unbalanced charged construction) and the other one a positively dominant charged neutrino with a minority negative charge by quantum mass,,and the positive dominant neutrino is slightly smaller in mass compared to the negative one, where they can magnetically couple and bond together to construct larger mass to become electrons in the hydrogen atom element world
Telekinetic
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 25, 2016
atblakely137: I derived Einstein's energy equation, which was hidden in a proof, and I didn't recognize it immediately. It is shown in my book: "Secrets of the Atom" (Adaptive Enterprises, 1999, pp. 63, 64). I presented a proof of a new electromagnetic model of the hydrogen atom. I have had various contacts with those who obtained this book. ---- Open space has electromagnetic properties, which is an indication that dark matter exists everywhere, but is not easily detected by other medthods.

I just ordered your book, "Secrets of the Atom" for $3.95 from Amazon. I look forward to reading it.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.5 / 5 (17) Jul 25, 2016
@tblakely: The equation you refer to points out that mass *is* a form of energy, invariant rest energy, and it is special relativity that tells us this.

So from relativity you have that changing rest energy (creating or destroying particles with different masses) means energy to energy conversion. In principle not different from when you convert gravitational potential energy to work or vice versa.

But you have to fulfill the energy conditions.

To take your example, fusion converts nuclei into other nuclei with lower rest energies, so the difference is released as energy, most often kinetic energy of the outgoing particles.

Another example is when you create electron-positron pairs from colliding photons (who have no rest energy, i.e. mass) they have to be energetic enough. The maximum pair production happens when the sum of photon energies are just at the sum of the pair rest energies, I think. (I haven't studied quantum field theory.)

[tbctd]
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (21) Jul 25, 2016
Worth mentioning also that we've seen CP violation in the hadron sector- K, B, and D mesons all show it. What's unique about neutrino oscillations is that this is the first sign of CP violation in the lepton sector. And @torbjorn's right: neutrino oscillations, not to mention neutrino masses, *are* new physics. At least as far as experimental evidence goes. They've been theorizing about it for quite a while.

As usual physorg fails to explain a vital point: what "new physics" these guys are talking about. I'll go read the papers and try to interpret it for them.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.3 / 5 (18) Jul 25, 2016
[ctd]

"the incredibly hot energy of the infant universe changes into matter".

The exact physics is arguable, but in the current cosmology a cold particle field with high potential energy, the inflation field, is the most likely physics that we can probe. If it existed for a long time it was very cold (0 K) and empty, as its particles were heavy, but it had this enormous vacuum (field) energy.

Then it stopped exist locally (due to a fluctuation taking it below sustainable field energy) it lost all that energy. The energy was liberated until it rested at a very low vacuum energy, the cosmological constant of today's dark energy vacuum.

[tbctd]
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.5 / 5 (17) Jul 25, 2016
[ctd] What happened then is speculative, but after putative phase changes in the vacuum the low rest energy (so low field energy) standard matter and dark matter fields remained. Since these particles were much lower in rest energy, photons have none (to take an end member), very many particles were released at the so called reheating of space.

"As the temperature cooled, we can calculate (now that we know the Higgs particle's mass, and if we assume there aren't any lightweight particles that we don't know about) that first the Higgs field would have turned "on", making the weak nuclear force henceforth weak; and then, a bit later, the strong nuclear force would have become very strong, so that quarks and gluons and anti-quarks would have been trapped henceforth and forever into protons, neutrons, anti-protons and anti-neutrons, as well as other very short-lived hadrons."

[ https://profmatts...eliable/ ]
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (18) Jul 25, 2016
OK, I had a look and by "New Physics" these guys mean undiscovered neutral current flavor-changing interactions, as modifications to the action of the weak nuclear force. They place these in two sectors, one above the electroweak unification energy, and one below.
ursiny33
1.3 / 5 (13) Jul 25, 2016
All atom constructions are unbalanced charge constructions, like an iron has a dominant negative charge compared to it positive charged mass, and hydrogen atoms have a dominant positive charge to its negative mass , the natural universe works in constructing unbalanced magnetic constructions, the only equal balanced magnetic charged constructions are in the light spectrum of photons there balanced, and probably from the osculating balanced frequencies between those charges in its construction do the become anti gravity particles on a scale,
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (16) Jul 25, 2016
@tblakely, the derivation of E = mc² requires both integration and differentiation. If you're up for some calculus, here it is: http://www.emc2-e...ving.htm

There is also a simplified explanation on the same site, here: http://www.emc2-e...rive.htm
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 25, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (20) Jul 25, 2016
So let's say you have that correct and the rest. You figured the equation 1 + 1 = 2, E=MC^2, etc.

What are you going to do with it?
Ummm, astrophysics.

You know, looking up in the sky and figuring out what goes on there.

Duh.
Whydening Gyre
4.6 / 5 (19) Jul 25, 2016
The oscillating, massive, neutrinos *are* new physics all by themselves.


So let's say you have that correct and the rest. You figured the equation 1 + 1 = 2, E=MC^2, etc.

What are you going to do with it?

Seriously!

Do you hope to learn more to help the life of this planet or is all just about you?

Is it just your life or all life?

Just a question...
If you had the cure for some deadly disease, would you license it to mfrs or just give it away?
thisisminesothere
4.8 / 5 (19) Jul 26, 2016
The oscillating, massive, neutrinos *are* new physics all by themselves.


So let's say you have that correct and the rest. You figured the equation 1 + 1 = 2, E=MC^2, etc.

What are you going to do with it?

Seriously!

Do you hope to learn more to help the life of this planet or is all just about you?

Is it just your life or all life?

Just a question...
If you had the cure for some deadly disease, would you license it to mfrs or just give it away?


I'd give it away... Health is one area in this world that needs less profit motive. Thats not to say Doctors shouldnt be paid well, just that if you are a doctor, Id hope you became one out of the desire to help as opposed to the desire to be wealthy. But thats simply my opinion.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (22) Jul 26, 2016
So let's say you have that correct and the rest. You figured the equation 1 + 1 = 2, E=MC^2, etc.

What are you going to do with it?

I'll give you a quote from a gaming strategy guide:
"Any rule you don't know can - and usually will - kill you."

It's in our best interest to know about stuff. Just for the tiny reason that we, as a species, don't want to go extinct.

And yes: preventing extinction on this planet is something I would definitely file under the header of "helping life".
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (15) Jul 26, 2016
@tblakely, the derivation of E = mc² requires both integration and differentiation. If you're up for some calculus, here it is: http://www.emc2-e...ving.htm

That derivation is circular.
Nawww, he just used relativistic mass. It's non-traditional. Check this out: http://www.pitt.e...oof.html

It's essentially the same proof.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (15) Jul 26, 2016
Here's another one: http://www.math.i...HP13.pdf

Again, essentially the same proof.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (18) Jul 26, 2016
Relativity is death? Or perhaps math is death?

Wow, wacky. Woo woo! Never eat anything with a face. (I'm still laughing over that one.)
EnricM
4.6 / 5 (16) Jul 26, 2016

Either truth is real and you have told lies, or we are not truthfully alive.


OMG! Can't believe it! A _real_ nutjob such as the ones in the good ol' times on Usenet! Ah, these days in alt.religion.kibology...
antialias_physorg
4.8 / 5 (18) Jul 26, 2016
That doesn't make sense coming from you. Nor was the question directed at you.You already publicly dismissed life as most important in life on many occasions here.

Believe it or not: I do value the survival of humanity above most everything else. I don't value the survival of ALL life above everything else (or I couldn't eat all the plants and meat I do - and neither could you).
And I could even construct a scenario in which it would be beneficial to let all life die (it would be a scenario like either "letting life survive at the expense of certain destruction of the universe" or "letting all life die with the chance that the universe survives and will eventually produce life again". A rather convoluted scenario, granted, but still a thinkable scenario)

So yes: the value of life is dependent on the scenario you find yourself in. That's nothing new. That goes for being hungry (i.e. eating biological stuff) to situations of extreme choice.
thingumbobesquire
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2016
Hmm. What happens when you add "non trivial confusion" to the "standard model?" Chaotic dark confusion?
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (12) Jul 26, 2016
@tblakely, the derivation of E = mc² requires both integration and differentiation. If you're up for some calculus, here it is: http://www.emc2-e...ving.htm

It's essentially the same proof.

Using relativistic mass makes the proof circular.
OK, show that. Because I've checked about eight or ten proofs and the basics are the same in all of them. I linked a second one above. I got more if I need 'em.
epoxy
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ChiefFartingDog
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (13) Jul 26, 2016
So you state you value life. Life isa truth. Do you value the truth?

I value life. I value truth. But I don't agree that 'life is truth' that's just a statement that doesn't have any meaning.

(And obviously YOU don't value truth...since you went on a childish rage-voting rampage again. Hypocrit, much?)

aking life that shows signs of compassion (intelligence)

Intelligence is a very fuzzy thing. Plants show signs of adaptive behavior. So do ameoba. Intelligence ia A characteristic of life. It certainly isn't THE characteristic of life. By any measure you care to name (that isn't circular) there are more successful species out there that show less intelligence than we do.

That's what life is most important in life is so important.

Erm ...whut?
It is self-defined as the most important truth in life

So you admit that your 'reasoning' is circular?

That's a logical fallacy.
https://en.wikipe...easoning
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (15) Jul 26, 2016
That was your choice. It was your ridiculous excuse.
...
The screams of those innocent are still being made.

After all this rambling your argument is exactly...what?

Life is always most important in life.

Circular. (i.e. nonsensical)

That's the Word.

How is this an argument?

I think you need to go and look up what an argument actually is (hint: just stringing labels like "truth" and "life" and "word" together isn't one)

Fight against it all you want,

That's the funny thing. Since you haven't yet actually made an argument for...well...anything: there's nothing to fight against.

what foundation do you have more solid than life is most important in life is true? But you've never proved or provided any.

That sentence doesn't make any sense (gramatically and semantically). Care to rephrase that? I can't really provide you with anything as long as you fail to actually SAY anything.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Zzzzzzzz
4.1 / 5 (17) Jul 26, 2016
LifeBasedLogic, you are a delusional arrogant narcissistic blowhard psycho who has zero value in any discussion on any subject. You have no clue what truth or honesty is. You are 100% worthless. I for one will not read any more of your stinking drivel.
Kron
1.5 / 5 (10) Jul 26, 2016
The most important things for life are the fundamental physical constants. If those values were to change for whatever weird ass reason the material world would change form and life as we know it would perish. If the fine structure constant were any different you would not be here today to put out dumb ass statements.

The most important thing for life is a place conducive to its existence.
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (15) Jul 26, 2016
That was your choice. It was your ridiculous excuse.
...
The screams of those innocent are still being made.

After all this rambling your argument is exactly...what?
I'm tellin' ya, @antialias, it's "never eat anything with a face."

Snicker.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
4.1 / 5 (14) Jul 26, 2016
So tell us, @LBL, do you eat "sea kittens?"

http://features.p...Kittens/

For everyone else, yet another brain dead PETA initiative.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (16) Jul 26, 2016
I'm tellin' ya, @antialias, it's "never eat anything with a face."

;-)

Sounds about as reasonable as the vegetarian mantra: "Don't eat any animals that you can see with the naked eye"

I for one will not read any more of your stinking drivel.

Yeh..should have never taken him off ignore. Just wortless waste of bandwith. Back on he goes.
TimLong2001
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2016
As equal but opposite charges comprise the binary photon structure, and given that the pair-formation mechanism creates matter and antimatter in equal quantities, supersymmetry can be explained by this mechanism. The fabrication of anti-atoms in the laboratory is a higher order manipulation, but the equality of matter and antimatter can be shown to be equal at the smaller scale of the photon.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
truthbasedlogic
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 26, 2016
Of course, he runs away, as usual, instead of facing the fact he can't prove me wrong proving he tells lies here and contributes to inciting hate, using nothing but a simple and basic truth.

He did not make a single valid point to defend his lies. Not a single one!
He sold out everyone everywhere that they have no valid reason to even have rights.
He believes equality is nonsense.
He has no foundation he is willing to state as to why people should have rights.
He won't tell you all what he really knows about them poisoning our children. Cowardice.
He hangs with people that also tell lies, incite hate, and use the cover of science to promote their personal evil agenda: Deny the truth and continue to needlessly kill.

He lost and ran. Cowardliness. That's what he reveals. He has nothing solid to stand on, so he ran away.


Yes, he did run away.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (14) Jul 26, 2016
he can't prove me wrong

Sorta hard proving you wrong when you never actually make a point. All you ever say is
"X is Y therefore Y is X" That's just nonsense.

Oh...and you got reported for making sockpuppets.
ElectricBoobVerses
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Random_Amateur
4.5 / 5 (4) Jul 26, 2016
Excuse my ignorance (not a physicist), but are there definite distances through the earth that neutrinos have to travel to reach each of the two programmes?!

Quote from article:
"Now, for DUNE, neutrinos would have to travel roughly 1300 km in the earth, whereas for T2HK they would travel only about 300 km".

Does this mean that the neutrinos are always entering the earth at a specific point?
antiantigoracle
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BiteMe
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Protoplasmix
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 26, 2016
ALL OF THESE PEOPLE THAT STAND WITH YOU HERE LIE, INCITE HATE, KILL FOR FUN, STALK, HARASS AND INSULT OTHERS.
LifeBasedLogic – I took the liberty of examining your mind and I discovered that it's wandering aimlessly out in the lunatic fringe. The discomfort you're experiencing arises from its absence. You should retrieve it at once, or you will continue seeing evil people doing evil things to you, and without it you will never be able to find relief. Act quickly LifeBasedLogic, before you're overcome by fear of all the evil, before your mind perishes completely from the atrophy of neglect. Your porch light is on, LifeBasedLogic, but nobody's home.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 26, 2016
The best thing to do about trolls like @LBL is just put them on ignore and move on. It's not like anything you say is going to have any discernible effect on the insane. DNFTT and it will starve and go find someplace else to trawl.

This course does, however, require discipline.
Protoplasmix
4.3 / 5 (6) Jul 26, 2016
This of course does, however, require discipline.
You ain't kiddin'. I'm no expert, but in this case I think one post is worth a thousand fMRIs. His train of thought is barreling down some dangerous tracks, and it's hard to tell what's up with the conductor.
antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2016
Excuse my ignorance (not a physicist), but are there definite distances through the earth that neutrinos have to travel to reach each of the two programmes?!

Yes. The the emitters and receivers are at fixed locations, so the distance is fixed.
Emissionen is done by controlled processes (smashing protons into a target substance) at the emission facilities. I.e. you know exactly how many neutrinos are produced and in which direction they are emitted.

Does this mean that the neutrinos are always entering the earth at a specific point?

Yes. At the emission facility.

There is some variability as the Earth rotates and orbits the sun, because the sun is also a neutrino emitter (and a non-uniform on eat that as the sun is not a perfect sphere and also not perfectly homogeneous at all times). So the distance between the sun and the receiver varies.
antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 27, 2016
antialias_physorg doesn't believe it's true that life is truly alive.

You know, for someone who uses the word 'truth' in every second sentence you surely lie a lot. Nowhere did I say that stuff that is alive was not alive (and I double dare you to find a quote by me stating such).

I think I'm also going to start calling you LieBasedLogic. That name is rather more fitting.

As for the sockpuppettry/ragevoting/shouty thing: What are you going to do next? Start sniveling? Don't you realize how much of a hole you're digging for yourself?

Here: have another shovel.

YOU FEEL PROUD antialias_physorg??????????

Oh my...multiple exclamation/question marks. The sure sign of an insane mind.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2016
I don't agree that 'life is truth'...


There you go everyone,

And not agreeing that "life is equal to truth" is the same as saying "alive is not alive" because...? Even you should see that those are tow entirely different statements.

I explained to him that it is life that is most important in life

No. That is not an explanation. That is merely a statement. Like "losing is the most important part in losing" or "winning is the most important part in winning". While both statements are intrsinically consistent neither tells you whether winning or losing is more (much lest 'most') important. That's why circular arguments like "life is the most important part in life" have no meaning. They do not convey information. (And I can prove that using information theory if you like)

antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2016
I then asked him to show me something more important than life

Well, you actually didn't. But since you do now here's one: Something for life to be viable in (e.g. the universe). Because without a universe life doesn't happen.

So yeah: a universe is certainly a hell of a lot more important to have than life (and that's why I'd go for "survival of the universe" over "survival of life at the expense of the universe" any day).

more hate.

Hate? Nah. More like pity. (and a bit of shame for the human species that it could produce something as insane as you. I'd thought we'd evolved past that.)
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2016
I have come to the website for many years. And no, I was never banned here.

Soooo..your account is from Feburary 2016...That isn't 'many years' by a long shot. so either you never poisted anything you're sockpuppeting, or you got banned.

I call 'lie' on your statement LieBasedLogic.

antialias_physorg has not stated why people should have rights.

Why should I have? No one asked me to. If you ask me to I certainly am willing to give you my opinion on why people should have rights.

ntialias_physorg uses the words true and truth in his posts

Do you even read my posts? All I say is that YOU use the words truth a lot and certainly don't know what it is. I don't use the word 'truth' because it is a nonsensical word from a philosophoical point of view.
It is like 'perfection'. Can something be perfect? Maybe. Can we know if something is perfect? No, because we have nothing to compare it to besides itself (which is circular and therefore not a valid argument)
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2016
Well, I can answer the 'banned' part for you. Your previous incarnation was DavidW. Before that it was WaterProphet. So...admit to a ban or admit to sockpuppetry. Your choice. Either way you don't belong here LieBasedLogic.

There is nothing insane about pointing out that the most important thing in life is life itself

But there's something totally insane about saying X is X and then thinking that this is a valid argument.
My comments are sane, whole, factually backed and proven

Ermm...nope, nope, nope and nope.

antialias_physorg's you bring nastiness to a world that needs love.

Nah. I try to bring sanity to a world that needs it (and that it needs it is amply proven by your posts)

You trivialize the needless deaths everywhere

Huh? Where did I do that? Making up lies again LieBasedLogic?
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (10) Jul 27, 2016
X is point. A truthful point.

Nope. X is just a statement. Without argument to why you think this statement is true it is still just a statement. Just declaring X true doesn't make it true (Just like declaring that "there is a god" doesn't automatically mean that there actually is). The thing that is missing is: Evidence. Provide evidence for your claim and all is well.

Low intelligence takes what was learned and accomplishes nothing practical with it. Such as, causing harm

There have been many intelligent people that caused harm...and HUGE amounts of dumb people that have never harmed anyone. Intelligence and compassion aren't closely related.

FOR YOU TO PROVIDE US THE FOUNDATION OF THE LOGIC YOU CLAIM TO HAVE.

Simple: I base my logical conclusions on that for which I can provide objective (!) evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. And I can find no objective evidence that would equate "life to truth".
epoxy
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (11) Jul 27, 2016
Whether it be trying to protect the life on this planet by getting to the stars, stopping children from suffering needlessly, to stopping war, to handling our consumption of products better, to protecting equal rights, to protecting liberty.

Totally agree. Those are all worthwhile causes. (Though I'm not quite sure how 'getting to the stars' will protect the life on this planet). But none of these causes depend on 'truth' of any kind. It's just stuff we want. Wanting something doesn't automatically make it true.

Think about a cause that really matters to you

All the causes you have enumerated do matter to me. I think we shouldn't go extinct. There's still so much interesting stuff to discover and present (and future) generations should have a chance to enjoy their lives as I do mine. That's just a basic sense of fairness I feel. But I wouldn't elevate my feelings to some 'universal truth'. Life is too ephemeral in this universe for that.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (10) Jul 27, 2016
Publicly agree that life is most important in life is true

It's a circular statement.
If you want me to agree that the statetement
"Red is most important in red"
is true, then: yes. But the statement doesn't MEAN anything.You cannot use it for any kind of deductive or inductive reasoning.

What conclusions am I supposed to draw from "Red is most important in red"? If you say "none" then you now see why "life is most important in life" doesn't tell you anything. It's just an as vapid statement as "red is most important in red"
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2016
You have already stated life is not true.

No. I have said that "life is true" is a nonsensical statement. That is not the same as saying "life is not true". You need to learn how to read (and how to apply elementary logic).

You use the words true and truth, so don't pretend that you have never heard the Word.

I wouldn't declare anything an absolute truth, because (as I pointed out in an earlier post) absolute truth - like absolute perfection - is a nonsensical idea.

All the causes you have enumerated do matter to me.

What evidence do you have?

I said they matter to me. That is subjective. Learn to read. That they are important *to me* doesn't mean they are important *per se*.

the measure of real intelligence is compassion.

Ah. "Real" intelligence. So now you're adding the 'No true Scotsman' fallacy to your circular reasoning fallacy. Wanna try for more? Here's a complete list:
https://en.wikipe...allacies
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (11) Jul 27, 2016
Truth is real.
saying,

That's just it: you're just saying. Not showing.

I don't agree that 'life is truth
is the same thing as saying
"I don't agree that life is real"

No. How do you come up with this?
If you want to know: life exists? I'd agree with this because you can test it
If you want to know: life is real? I'd agree with this because you can test it
If you want to know "life is truth" then that is nonsensical. Unless you redefine the meaning of the word 'truth' to be 'that which is real'. But that's not the what truth is. For example you'd be missing stuff like 5+5=10 ...which is a true statement. But neither '5' nor '10' are anything real. They are abstract notions.

If you wish to discuss things you need to keep to the definitions of what things are. Arbitrarily redefining words like 'truth' and 'intelligence' and 'life' leads nowhere. In that case you might just as well say "true is false" for a given definition of 'false'
Maggnus
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 27, 2016
Well, I can answer the 'banned' part for you. Your previous incarnation was DavidW. Before that it was WaterProphet.
An interjection: he was definitely NOT Water Pfffttth. He makes a whole different illogical argument. He was, however, previously banned as DavidW for conducted the same sort of witch hunting he is trying to do now.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Protoplasmix
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 27, 2016
Quit your lying and start your repentance from the evil you have created.
Well, well, well, banned DavidW is it. Back as a pathetic liar.

The only person here who burst in to a public forum passing judgments on everyone, shooting up the place with false accusations of lies and evil, flaunting the rules, harassing and bullying people by placing their names on a slanderous and defamatory list, is YOU.

Your hypocrisy is astounding. Your lack of respect for the forum and for the service Phys.org provides is appalling. Meaningful comments from you on the science topics are nonexistent.

Let's let some daylight in on your dark little evil-everywhere world, and on your LifeBasedLoonism, DavidW. If life's most important in life, then take heed of what the many living entities here have told you. Get your mind right.
antialias_physorg calls people names (lies) and incites hate.
The people who stop to give your nonsense the time of day are your very best friends in life.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 27, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
KBK
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 28, 2016
I know, I've got an idea.

Let's talk about CP violation!

Sorry I'm late to the party - odd one that it may be.

TransmissionDump
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 28, 2016
I always thought the most important thing in life was water.
Without that you can't that very important life in life thing you're banging on with.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
3 / 5 (3) Jul 28, 2016
Open space has electromagnetic properties, which is an indication that dark matter exists everywhere, but is not easily detected by other medthods.
To wit, the production of virtual particle pairs (by the Higgs field). The orientation of these pairs establishes e/m fields. Normally the orientation is random so the e/m properties cancel out. But this normalcy is changed in the presence of charged particles or relativistic moving particles (leading to gravitational waves). The vacuum pressure exerted by the production of these pairs leads to effects like gravity and dark matter.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2016
Anybody know how to edit formulas on PO?

I think your best bet is to create a public google docs document, put the formulas in there and then link it here.
epoxy
Jul 28, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2016
If you wish to discuss things you need to keep to the definitions of what things are. Arbitrarily redefining words like 'truth' and 'intelligence' and 'life' leads nowhere
@AA_P
a couple of things to remember when talking to davidW / LBL above:

1- you would be better off (and more successful) trying to teach your pet rock to sit up, play dead and speak

2- religious fanaticism doesn't care about reality; a delusional fundamentalist who's a philosopher that has written his own personal beliefs/religion like LBL, and is attempting to reach out for acolytes to fall at their feet, isn't concerned with reality, definitions, or anything anyone has to say, let alone logic, reality or facts

it is a fascinating conversation, however, and worthy of study as you can see where he attempts to retain some logical pattern but can't given the nature of the delusion and mental illnesses involved
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 28, 2016
a couple of things to remember when talking to davidW / LBL above:

well, you're right...

...but it was fun seeing to what kind of crazy claims I could drive him (note the "intelligence" vs "real intelligence" part? Hilarious),
And the devolvement from rage voting to sockpuppetry to lieing to shouting to sniveling to ? Priceless.
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2016
a couple of things to remember when talking to davidW / LBL above:

well, you're right...

...but it was fun seeing to what kind of crazy claims I could drive him (note the "intelligence" vs "real intelligence" part? Hilarious),
And the devolvement from rage voting to sockpuppetry to lieing to shouting to sniveling to ? Priceless.
@AA_P

well... can't argue with that

you've definitely brought out some real gems
LOL
Maggnus
4.5 / 5 (8) Jul 28, 2016
a couple of things to remember when talking to davidW / LBL above:

well, you're right...

...but it was fun seeing to what kind of crazy claims I could drive him (note the "intelligence" vs "real intelligence" part? Hilarious),
And the devolvement from rage voting to sockpuppetry to lieing to shouting to sniveling to ? Priceless.

haha, priceless and hilarious indeed!!
KBK
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 28, 2016
How about this one:

Unidirectional time explicitly states the reality of the concept of CP violation.
TransmissionDump
4.3 / 5 (6) Jul 29, 2016

Well, you needed life write that and say that.

In order to have a non-hypocritical response, you would have to respond without ever used life. So, what you always thought is wrong.

It sure is funny how people here think there is any sort of real conversation here when it always gets reduced to name calling and hate.


I needed water more

no water - no life - no writing on my keyboard

Water is the most important thing in life.
THAT is truth.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 29, 2016
Water is the most important thing in life.
THAT is truth.

No, It's air...no, wait: It's atoms...no, wait: It's quarks...no, wait: it's nuclear forces...no wait: It's spacetime, ..no, wait: It's ...
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 29, 2016
I needed water more

no water - no life - no writing on my keyboard

Water is the most important thing in life.
THAT is truth.
I'm going with air. You can last a few days or maybe a week with no water; but only 5 minutes without air.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 29, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
KBK
4 / 5 (4) Jul 29, 2016
How about this one:

Unidirectional time explicitly states the reality of the concept of CP violation.


Lets get back on track, and talk about CP violation.

Please, try to disprove the above postulation.

That, said another way...CP violation is fundamental in the face of our world and universe of unidirectional time.

You can describe the effects of time, you can quantify the effects, but you can't tear it down and manipulate it, for what is the very vast part. (little bits of clock changes, micro relativistic changes, etc)

But you can note it's permanence in being unidirectional, from our so-called observational viewpoint.

And that the strongly empowered (seeming fundamental permanence in all things) unidirectionality of time... explicitly indicates that CP violation is fundamental.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 29, 2016
But you can note it's permanence in being unidirectional

This might not be a universal law.
http://phys.org/n...les.html
or another article about how a particle close to a spinning black hole might be sent to its own past (using CTCs..closed timelike curves)
http://www.collec...ossible/
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 29, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 29, 2016
...the big question is how energy is turned into mass. I've seen shows about the big bang who state that at some point some (much?) of the incredibly hot energy of the infant universe changes into matter but they never explain how or why that occurs. It just somehow happens.
It still happens in nature but it takes lots of energy to produce even a low mass particle like a positron. It starts out with virtual particle pairs which are boosted into becoming real particles by high energy environments such as lightening bolts. But to produce a proton you would need 1836 times as much energy as for an electron or positron. That would take a lot of lightening, like what you would have at the big bang.
Seeker2
3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2016
[cont]
Some people say the big bang is still happening. The difference is in the energy density. At the big bang the dark energy was concentrated at one point (or maybe one Planck volume). Now it's distributed throughout spacetime as the temperature of the universe cools down, resulting in virtual particle pairs of much lower energy than real particle pairs. The lowest energy state of the universe as it continues to cool is when the virtual particle frequencies all come into phase. This would require less spacetime as the particles come into phase and merge raising the energy level of the merged virtual particles until they become real particles, resulting in another big bang.
Seeker2
3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2016
...the equality of matter and antimatter can be shown to be equal at the smaller scale of the photon.
I thought the photon was its own antiparticle. I don't get the point.
Seeker2
3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2016
New physics could potentially explain several phenomena that the Standard Model cannot, including the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem, as well as dark matter, dark energy, and gravity.
I don't think the Standard Model is meant to address these problems.
Maybe the new physics we are looking for- is just the Higgs field that we recently found (according to the Standard Model) via LHC and which was ignored so far …
http://www.vacuum...=9〈=en
I'd say the Higgs field addresses all the aforementioned problems.
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 29, 2016
Water is the most important thing in life.
THAT is truth.
I'm going with air. You can last a few days or maybe a week with no water; but only 5 minutes without air
@DaS
depends
if you're completely desiccated...
LMFAO

but then again, since we're speculating:
without death there can't be life... so i am sticking with the outlying defining parameters of life as being far more important

death is the reason we have instinct
that and hunger, sex, evolution and time

!!
maybe hunger is most important in life?
or sex?
there is surely a lot of compelling reasons for both, because without either life won't exist at all, considering the ability to survive and reproduce is one of the fundamental definitions of "life" that can be agreed upon...

problem is: defining "life" , eh?

.

Please give a link to peer reviewed published data to back that up!
@Phys2
ROTFLMFAO

Seeker2
3 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2016
incomplete comment
Seeker2
5 / 5 (3) Jul 29, 2016
"So far, matter-antimatter asymmetry cannot be explained by any physics theory and is one of the biggest unsolved problems in cosmology."
I think Feynman came close with his idea of antimatter travelling backwards in time. I can understand reversing the charge if this is the case but why shouldn't you also reverse the mass? In which case antimatter is antigravitational and all evidence I know of supports this thesis. Ever since matter began to collect antimatter has been going in the opposite direction. So it's out there. Way out there.
epoxy
Jul 29, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ElectricBoobVerses
Jul 29, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (7) Jul 29, 2016
Would you go to thunderbutts and try to argue with them? You do it here because you perceive that this is our site

Think of it as putting them in quarantine. As long as they're spending time here they're not out there getting in real scientists' (or other people's) way.
Removing obstacles is sometimes also a way forward..and we're pretty much keeping them tied up while having a bit of a sport at the same time.
LifeBasedLogic
Jul 30, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
2 / 5 (2) Jul 30, 2016
another article about how a particle close to a spinning black hole might be sent to its own past (using CTCs..closed timelike curves)
Another major misunderstanding? I think travelling in reverse time is completely independent of travelling in forward time. For example the positron as seen by Feynman. It can travel in reverse time forever but doesn't retrace its past back to the time it was created. Or so it seems. The whole grandfather paradox is probably a hoax.
epoxy
Jul 31, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 31, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 31, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 31, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
epoxy
Jul 31, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 01, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 01, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 01, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 01, 2016
It isn't hoax
@zephTROLL
is that why you posted 5 graphics, a youtube video and a wiki page you don't understand?

that's called opinion and conjecture, not science

where is the study that validates your claim?
more to the point: where is ANY evidence from any reputable source validating it?

oh... there is none?

yep: i *can* state it's a hoax if you can't actually provide anything other than your personal interpretations of what you believe and you can't actually prove anything

but then again, you have yet to produce anything proving your aether as well, whereas i've already falsified that with actual empirical evidence
so... you do the math

Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 01, 2016
If life is not truth, life is not real
@trolling religious nutcase idiot
define LIFE : you can't satisfactorily do that one... hell, biologists, scientists and everyone else can't do it, but here you are preaching it as some kind of truth

except that truth is also subjective to the individual
the way i see truth is: http://www.merria...ry/truth

considering the definition - you can't actually prove or submit evidence that validates your own claims as being "truthful" in any meaningful way, therefore you are attempting to post bullsh*t disguised as circular nonsensical arguments that aren't factual nor even valid

that isn't even philosophy, it's religious fanaticism and stupidity wrapped in delusion

life is defined by death and nonexistence, therefore it can only be as important as either of those two things, making your argument stupid, nonsense and invalid

so FOAD
TimLong2001
5 / 5 (1) Aug 01, 2016
With the bogus comment rating system, you will never be able to present anything but narrow, accepted (albeit, often incorrect) interpretations of scientific theory. Wake up -- obscurantism is no way to run science.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 01, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 02, 2016
...The line is drawn by the truth. None of us are above the truth, as we are truthfully life, and as such, none of us can move that line. That line never moves. It is eternal.
The only truth that is eternal is uncertainty.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 02, 2016
Um, no. Life is defined by a truth, life itself
@trolling religious nutcase idiot davidW
nonsensical argument and really f*cking stupid
are you illiterate?

you're simply repeating that something *is* itself

to make a point:

Science is most important in Science
So you state you value truth. Science is a truth. Do you value the truth?
nothing can be more true than Science is most important in Science

Do you relaize that the rest of your post you dismissed the truth that Science is most important in Science?
Which of course is true!

you can't refute the logic of truth that Science is most important in Science because the very definition of Science defines Science as being the Science we're talking truth about, therefore the truth of Science is most important in Science is absolute truth.

LifeBasedLogic
Aug 02, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 02, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 02, 2016
Uncertainty requires life.
Don't think so. Uncertainty and the laws of physics were around long before life.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 02, 2016
Seeker2,

I have never read a response from you, ever, where you have stated that what I have written makes sense, that I am just saying it as it is, and that those trolling should back off and their name calling (telling lies) and hate incitement is wrong.
You're right. Telling lies is wrong.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 03, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 03, 2016
I'm not right. I am me. The truth is right.
So you're not the truth. Why do you bother to post?
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 03, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2016
...life is most important in life.
Or maybe uncertainty. Without uncertainty there would be no life. We would be robots.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2016
The truth is not right or wrong.
So I guess why bother talking about it?
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2016
The truth is not right or wrong....Life is Most Important in Life is the Most Important Truth in Life.
So better to be important than right or wrong. I see now.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2016
So better to be important than right or wrong. I see now.
Best keep up your student's self-esteem than to try to teach them right from wrong, I guess.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 04, 2016
Best keep up your student's self-esteem than to try to teach them right from wrong, I guess.
So my tax dollar is going to make students feel good, not necessarily learn anything.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 04, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2016
With the issues the children and other life are facing, I wouldn't worry too much about those taxes.
And the issues will continue for all of us as long as we make them feel good without learning right from wrong.
slash
5 / 5 (2) Aug 05, 2016
The oscillating, massive, neutrinos *are* new physics all by themselves.


So let's say you have that correct and the rest. You figured the equation 1 + 1 = 2, E=MC^2, etc.

What are you going to do with it?


It is very rare that the use of a new technology is instantly apparent. For instance Tim Berners Lee never fathomed that by introducing the HTML protocol he would be founding the internet we know today!

There is a nice web page on LHC pointing out a number of similar examples (mostly related to particle accelarotrs, obviously): http://www.lhc-fa...transfer Unfortunately it's german only. You could use google to translate it though. One example they mention is https://en.wikipe...mography - a medical and research tool based on particle accelerator technology.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 05, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 05, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 05, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2016
And the issues will continue for all of us as long as we make them feel good without learning right from wrong.


No.
The only thing that will stop those issues is each and every person understanding and living by the most important truth in life.
Just wondering - can there be civilized human life without knowing the difference between right and wrong? What was Patrick Henry thinking when he said give me liberty or give me death?
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2016
We cannot change the fact that no one will ever be able to prove that life isn't most important in life and how any all arguments that something else is more important are easily dismissed as not having evidence.
Sell that to your slaves and they will love you forever.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 05, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 05, 2016
Better to transform the situation then have it explode. That's how I see it anyway.
I get it. surrender. Better red than dead.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 06, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
5 / 5 (1) Aug 07, 2016
If some action we can make doesn't agree with the most important truth in life, it must be a lie against ourselves, our existence, and the general welfare
If it's a lie you must be picking up on the difference between right and wrong. Hang in there.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 08, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 08, 2016
Do you agree life is most important in life is true, ...
Give me liberty or give me death.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 10, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
1 / 5 (1) Aug 10, 2016
How would you write liberty into law.
Start with the Declaration of Independence. Hang in there. You'll catch on before you know it.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 10, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 10, 2016
The first truth mentioned as self-evident, is life! Upon which equality is derived. Which is what I have been saying all along.
Equality is the first self-evident truth mentioned. Self-evident truths are not derived from anything. They don't need to be. You're getting closer though.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 10, 2016
The first truth mentioned as self-evident, is life! Upon which equality is derived. Which is what I have been saying all along.
Wishful thinking probably.

Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 10, 2016
We don't want you losing your brain PUBLICLY like antialias_physorg and the rest.
Critical thinkers can be pretty tough to deal with. Especially when they come up against wishful thinkers.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 11, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 11, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 11, 2016
Life is most important in life, always, even on the edge of a black hole...
Tell me more about that life on the edge of a black hole.
LifeBasedLogic
Aug 11, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 11, 2016
When all that is not possible is ruled out, only that which is possibly true remains.
For example Per http://www.nature...inct.htm 41 percent of all amphibians on the planet now face extinction, while 26 percent of mammal species and 13 percent of birds are similarly threatened.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 12, 2016
Maybe the new physics we are looking for- is just the Higgs field that we recently found (according to the Standard Model) via LHC and which was ignored so far …
http://www.vacuum...=9〈=en
In this reference there is a great idea of matter being made up of tiny black holes. Matter, like macroscopic black holes, displaces the vacuum pressure. So in regions of matter there is less vacuum back pressure resulting in a net positive pressure on bodies of matter. I see this net positive pressure as pushing down us keeping us from flying out in space somewhere and keeping the earth in orbit around the sun. In theories of gravity they would call it a negative gradient of the vacuum pressure.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 12, 2016
contd
Curved or warped spacetime describe relativistic effects, not Newtonian gravity.
Seeker2
not rated yet Aug 12, 2016
You already publicly dismissed life as most important in life on many occasions here.
I must have missed that. Where would here be?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.