| String Theory Discussion Forum |
| [ String Theory Home ] [ Forum Index ] |
Re: Background and no background?Posted by sol on September 14, 2002 at 21:00:44: In Reply to: Re: Background and no background? posted by DickT on September 14, 2002 at 20:17:12: Dickt, If we set our perceptions from the inside of the universe, what makes people think they do not send the same vision into the very heart of the matters? Once you accept the movement of such matters, and you become, the movement and smoothness become understood when the matters form. We are talking about a dimensional perspective that has incorporated the standard model, as well as its branches in science. You told me this, by one of your posts? The abstractness through which we describe that movement, from one spot to another cannot be distinquished by discreteness, but it can be by the tendencies of the energy to matters form? There can be no separation from the observer here? It is a fact we create our reality and that the order is in the link we form in our causality of motion. All things follow suit. Probabilistic elements within chaos, recognize the links and connection such matter form and how could this have been decided? Think about the energy conserved within this system, our universe and the expressions such matters are, could have descended through, and where does it end? We cannot deny the link we have to reality? Dr Syed Ameen recognizes the movement I am talking about, and he is telling Mike2. Why it was important that it be understood to work in abtractness without understanding the nature of these matters was a futile exercise in understanding The curvature is a inherent principle within that line, and is defined by ? The nodal point of connection recognizes the energy contained and the gravitational forces present by Euclidean intersections? Sol Follow Ups: (Reload page to see most recent)
|