# The first experimental measurement of God; to a 2-decimal point accuracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
In George's explanation reply George is able to leap Grand Canyon chasms of connections

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Yeah, and I don't need a Harley-74 to do it !
George

Michael345 would make a suggestion here
Can SciForum increase the collective IQ of the internet by closing this thread?
Thank you

Takes a bow and exits stage left to thunderous applause and cat calls

Let me tell you something, the word "quadrature" is a 17th century mathematical term however it has instant "theological meaning"
But you added the word "cube", which is what I objected to. You're trying to mix theological voodoo with science, which doesn't work, even if Newton did it.

But you added the word "cube", which is what I objected to. You're trying to mix theological voodoo with science, which doesn't work, even if Newton did it.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
A "cube" is just a quadrature in 3 dimensions, while a square is a quadrature in 2 dimensions, I don't see the problem? By the way, Newton use the word quadrature in a private conversation in his apartment at Trinity College when he was talking to Edmund Haley who discovered Haley's Comet,
... Sorry, I have to prefer Isaac Newton's authoritative usage over yours !

George

A "cube" is just a quadrature in 3 dimensions, while a square is a quadrature in 2 dimensions, I don't see the problem?
Every cube may be a quadrature but every quadrature is not a cube. A cube is very specifically a three-dimensional solid with six square faces.
Sorry, I have to prefer Isaac Newton's authoritative usage over yours !
If he had used the word "cube", he would have been just as wrong as you.

Michael345 would make a suggestion here
Can SciForum increase the collective IQ of the internet by closing this thread?
Thank you

Takes a bow and exits stage left to thunderous applause and cat calls

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Buzz off "SPAMMER and HECKLER". You've been spamming and heckling this thread since the beginning, and you're the only one who does! First you recommended it be put in the "cesspool" now you're recommending that the thread be "removed".
... There are serious productive conversations in science going on here, and you're certainly not part of it. You have no scientific credentials or any peer published scientific record, and the conversation is entirely over your head
... I recommend that you push the "ignore button", is that too much to ask?
... And one more thing, I do have an advanced degree in physics, and do have a peer published scientific record. And furthermore, putting this "scientifically decent" thread in "pseudoscience" was enough of a slap in the face, but your suggesting to put it in "the cesspool" is a monumental insult to both religion and science. If anyone does that, I'll legally sue both you and Sciforums for the misappropriation and profitable use of copyrighted materials for commercial purposes!!

Hit that ignore button now !

George

Every cube may be a quadrature but every quadrature is not a cube. A cube is very specifically a three-dimensional solid with six square faces.

If he had used the word "cube", he would have been just as wrong as you.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
...
No he wouldn't ! By "quadrature" he was referring to the use of "rectangular, or cubic mathematical integration". If you are integrating a two-dimensional curve you have to use "infinitesimal rectangles" but if you are integrating a three-dimensional surface, you have to use 3-dimensional rectangular "cubes". I suggest that you don't have any expertise in mathematics, and Isaac Newton certainly did !

George

By "quadrature" he was referring to the use of "rectangular, or cubic mathematical integration".
Pay attention. I said he (Newton) didn't use the word "cube".

... The reason you are incorrect is because God is a "physical fact" of the human brain, and NOT an "invention" of the human mind.
No, that is a Tulpa and Tulpas only have a subjective existence to the "mental creator".

Tulpa
What is a tulpa?
A tulpa is an entity created in the mind, acting independently of, and parallel to your own consciousness. They are able to think, and have their own free will, emotions, and memories. In short, a tulpa is like a sentient person living in your head, separate from you. It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient, but in this community, we treat them as such. It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality; as they grow older, your attention and their life experiences will shape them into a person with their own hopes, dreams and beliefs.
What Is a Tulpa? • Tulpa.info

This definition exactly meets all the properties you have scientifically described, including perhaps an afterlife.
Unfortunately it only exists in the mind of the mental creator, including the "personalities" assigned to the Tulpa.

Test the concept of Tulpa against your hypothesis. I think you will find it fits very nicely........

Have you spoken with any Tulpa adherents? They may be of assistance in refining (or falsifying) your hypothesis. Tulpa creation and cognition is an old practice with a long philosophical history.
Might be worth it!

Last edited:
Pay attention. I said he (Newton) didn't use the word "cube".
Nearly 500 post

When is the thread going to address the issue of the other 4,299 waiting to be discovered?

Also the small inconvenient Lucifer waiting (stage right) to make an appearance

No, that is a Tulpa and Tulpas only have a subjective existence to the "mental creator".

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Hey, Write4u, I know you've done a lot of "grant writing" for the Indian tribes in the Northwest US, and learned all about "Tulpas" (e.g. "personality disorder") from them, but you're not talking to an amateur here.
... My scientific proof of God (SPOG) is based on the well-known difference between the genotype and phenotype in the human body. The fact is that the human brain is aware of the existence of the genotype, even though we are walking around in the phenotypic body. This awareness is known historically as the "phenomenon of God", in other words that there is a "all-powerful guiding man" directing our behavior.
... This is universal to all of humanity, causes billions of religious people worshiping God, causes churches to be built on every street corner in Christendom! And it is certainly a far far cry from any manifestations of "personality disorder" experienced by the Northwest Indian tribes in the United States.

How about sticking to our conversation about you completing the "mathematical universe" by including a mathematical description of God which has been recently discovered and is on the cutting edge of human knowledge!

George

Hey, Write4u, I know you've done a lot of "grant writing" for the Indian tribes in the Northwest US, and learned all about "Tulpas" (e.g. "personality disorder") from them, but you're not talking to an amateur here.
For the record. Tulpas are part of Buddhism, especially practiced by Tibetan Lamas and observed by Alaxandra David-Neel in her book "Magic and Mystery" in Tibet.

Tulpa
Theosophy and thoughtforms

Thoughtform of the Music of Gounod, according to Annie Besant and C. W. Leadbeater in Thought-Forms (1901)
20th-century Theosophists adapted the Vajrayana concept of the emanation body into the concepts of 'tulpa' and 'thoughtform'.[6] The Theosophist Annie Besant, in the 1901 book Thought-Forms, divides them into three classes: forms in the shape of the person who creates them, forms that resemble objects or people and may become ensouled by nature spirits or by the dead, and forms that represent inherent qualities from the astral or mental planes, such as emotions.[7] The term 'thoughtform' is also used in Evans-Wentz's 1927 translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead.[8] The concept is also used in the Western practice of magic.[9]
Spiritualist Alexandra David-Néel stated that she had observed these[which?] mystical practices in 20th-century Tibet.[1] She described tulpas as "magic formations generated by a powerful concentration of thought."[12]: 331  David-Néel believed that a tulpa could develop a mind of its own: "Once the tulpa is endowed with enough vitality to be capable of playing the part of a real being, it tends to free itself from its maker's control. According to David-Néel, this happens nearly mechanically, just as the child, when her body is completed and able to live apart, leaves its mother's womb."[12]: 283  She said she had created such a tulpa in the image of a jolly Friar Tuck-like monk, which later developed a life of its own and had to be destroyed.[13] David-Néel raised the possibility that her experience was illusory: "I may have created my own hallucination", though she said others could see the thoughtforms that she created.[12]: 176
Tulpa - Wikipedia
This awareness is known historically as the "phenomenon of God", in other words that there is a "all-powerful guiding man" directing our behavior.

But God was not discovered by man at all. God was discovered by a hominid ancestor of modern man.
The concept derived from the fundamental "fight or flight" instinct in the face of an unseen enemy. The gods were born in the mind of early hominid who perceived unseen but powerful entities in the sky who made war and conjured thunderous sounds and fire (lightning), while blowing air and water down to threaten their troup.

This aggressive defensive behavior is still observable and has been recorded in chimpanzees (our closest genetic cousins) during thunder storms. The Alpha male will run around in a clearing a beat the bushes with a stick and throw it into the air to scare away those gods who make him and his family scared, wet, and miserable.

What do chimp ‘temples’ tell us about the evolution of religion?
All hail the sacred tree. I’ve often wondered aloud in the newsroom about the possibility of finding evidence of a chimp shrine, the discovery of a place where chimps pray to their deity.
This week, my half-whimsical dream almost came true. Biologists working in the Republic of Guinea found evidence for what seemed to be a “sacred tree” used by chimps, perhaps for some sort of ritual.

Sign or symbol
The behaviour could be a means of communication, since rocks make a loud bang when they hit hollow trees. Or it could be more symbolic.
“Maybe we found the first evidence of chimpanzees creating a kind of shrine that could indicate sacred trees,” Kehoe wrote on her blog.
Of course it’s not proof that chimps believe in any kind of god, as the Daily Mail would have it, but it is the latest evidence of their extraordinarily rich behaviour.
But most pertinent to the discovery of the “shrine trees”, we’ve seen evidence of chimps displaying strange ritual-like behaviour in the last few years. First, a “ritual” dance performed during rainfall. Then a peculiar slow-motion display in the face of a bush fire in Senegal.
Jill Pruetz of Iowa State University, who observed the “fire dance” in 2006, said that the behaviour seems to suggest that chimps have a conceptual understanding of fire. Perhaps they are paying respect to it, in some way. I’ve also heard stories of chimps performing dances in front of waterfalls.
Maybe chimps have some understanding of impressive natural phenomena such as rain storms, wild fires and waterfalls and are paying “respect” to them. So I always hoped that we’d find evidence of a “temple” in the forest.
I don’t see it quite like that anymore. It’s hard to argue that we’re not unique when asked if chimps could build their own LHC, as one primatologist once asked me.
But I do see these stories as vital for the way they spectacularly illuminate our own roots. The evolutionary origin of religion is profoundly important to understanding human culture, for example. So it’s essential to examine any possible roots of this in other animals. And for their own sake, with all the conservation pressures chimps face, a deeper understanding of our closest relatives can only be a good thing.
What do chimp ‘temples’ tell us about the evolution of religion? | New Scientist

Last edited:
And one more thing, I do have an advanced degree in physics, and do have a peer published scientific record. And furthermore, putting this "scientifically decent" thread in "pseudoscience" was enough of a slap in the face, but your suggesting to put it in "the cesspool" is a monumental insult to both religion and science. If anyone does that, I'll legally sue both you and Sciforums for the misappropriation and profitable use of copyrighted materials for commercial purposes!!

But this thread clearly deserve to be flushed to the cesspool.

Oh no!! Now I might get sued too!!?

But this thread clearly deserve to be flushed to the cesspool.

Oh no!! Now I might get sued too!!?
At least you'd be sued legally . Heaven forbid you should be sued illegally.

For the record. Tulpas are part of Buddhism, especially practiced by Tibetan Lamas and observed by Alaxandra David-Neel in her book "Magic and Mystery" in Tibet.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
LookWrite4u
, I've had on my bedside table the 2 volume work "Personality and it's Survival Of Bodily Death" by WHF Myers for the last 40 years, and I've read the whole thing cover to cover. And it includes long passages by Prof. William James world famous founder and chairman of the Harvard psychology department Therefore I know all about Theosophy, Annie Besant, CW Leadbeater, Lenora Piper and Psi phenomena, clairvoyance, mental telepathy, communications with the dead, and every other crackpot psychological theory ever to surface !
... I'm a physicist, and I've discovered the world's first "hard science – rigorous scientific proof of the existence of God!... And that is the only thing that I'm here to talk about.

George

Seems appropriate

But you added the word "cube", which is what I objected to. You're trying to mix theological voodoo with science, which doesn't work, even if Newton did it.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Dear slideshowbob,

… I may be mistaken about the conversation between Isaac Newton and astronomer Edmund Haley (Haley’s Comet) which took place in Newton’s apartments at Oxford University around the year 1680. It was subsequently reported by Edmund Haley himself either in print or told to someone else who subsequently published it.
… Anyway, Haley asked Newton “have you made any headway on the theory of gravity?” And Newton replied “I have reduced the problem to quadrature”.
… I presumed that Newton meant that he had reduced the problem to a mathematical integration problem, because at about that time he was developing the theory of calculus (contemporaneously with Leibnitz in Germany) involving the mathematical integration of functions using the series summation of infinitesimal squares and cubes.
But it occurs to me now that I may be wrong about that. That in fact he may have been referring to the fact that he had reduced the problem of gravity to an “inverse square law”, and this inverse square function might have been the “quadrature” that he was referring to, since the area of a square of size X is in fact x2 . Anyway Newton’s law of gravity is an inverse square law:

F = G(mm'/x2)

So you may be right, Newton may not have been actually referring to a “cube”. Nevertheless, the function x2 IS the area of a “square” so again Newton was referring to a “quadratic equation” or a “quadrature”.
… But all of the is a conversation for the benefit of the unaware person, unaware that the word “quadrature” is clearly a “theologically loaded “expression. Just as the common street expression “the guy is a square” is a theologically (or psychologically) loaded, expression.
…. And to be noted, is that in the archives of Oxford University there remain to this day over 5 volumes of Newton’s “theological writings”, he was highly concerned and aware of psychological and theological theories.

George

At least you'd be sued legally . Heaven forbid you should be sued illegally.
This forum seems to be dominated by nutcases at the moment. George here is obviously barking, Arfa, who is apparently going senile in a slightly unpleasant way, is back, having been suspended from the .net site for rudeness, and Write4U is crazily claiming that the electron has -ve energy because it has a -ve electric charge......and is now trying to back up this ridiculous position with internet references about other things entirely.

I suppose one good thing about George is he is a proper crank, with a crank idea to promote, daft though it may be. I suspect that's what keeps the thread out of the cesspool.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Dear slideshowbob,

… I may be mistaken about the conversation between Isaac Newton and astronomer Edmund Haley (Haley’s Comet) which took place in Newton’s apartments at Oxford University around the year 1680. It was subsequently reported by Edmund Haley himself either in print or told to someone else who subsequently published it.
… Anyway, Haley asked Newton “have you made any headway on the theory of gravity?” And Newton replied “I have reduced the problem to quadrature”.
… I presumed that Newton meant that he had reduced the problem to a mathematical integration problem, because at about that time he was developing the theory of calculus (contemporaneously with Leibnitz in Germany) involving the mathematical integration of functions using the series summation of infinitesimal squares and cubes.
But it occurs to me now that I may be wrong about that. That in fact he may have been referring to the fact that he had reduced the problem of gravity to an “inverse square law”, and this inverse square function might have been the “quadrature” that he was referring to, since the area of a square of size X is in fact x2 . Anyway Newton’s law of gravity is an inverse square law:

F = G(mm'/x2)

So you may be right, Newton may not have been actually referring to a “cube”. Nevertheless, the function x2 IS the area of a “square” so again Newton was referring to a “quadratic equation” or a “quadrature”.
… But all of the is a conversation for the benefit of the unaware person, unaware that the word “quadrature” is clearly a “theologically loaded “expression. Just as the common street expression “the guy is a square” is a theologically (or psychologically) loaded, expression.
…. And to be noted, is that in the archives of Oxford University there remain to this day over 5 volumes of Newton’s “theological writings”, he was highly concerned and aware of psychological and theological theories.

George

[GE Hammond MS physics]
postscript:

The Question Is, whether or not Newton was using the word "quadrature" is a noun or a verb ? The report I read said that Newton said "I have reduced the problem to curvature", which means he was using the word curvature is a verb (an action), whereas if he had said "I have reduced the problem to a quadrature" I would presume that he was using the word quadrature is a noun.
And by the way most dictionaries define the word quadrature is a noun?
... If he was using the word quadrature as a verb, it would more likely refer to a mathematical integration process, but if you are using the word quadrature is a noun, it would more likely refer to the inverse square law.
... To my best recollection, the report I read, Newton used the word quadrature as a VERB and not a NOUN ?

George

This forum seems to be dominated by nutcases at the moment.
And you managed to exclude yourself from that category?
Arfa, who is apparently going senile in a slightly unpleasant way, is back, having been suspended from the .net site for rudeness
Oh fuck.
When did you appoint yourself the guardian of sanity? What the fuck are you doing here?
Why do you think anyone else cares?

Are you nuts?

Status
Not open for further replies.