It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DomCheetham
1 dimension is nothing so that we agree on (wipes sweat from head)
2 dimensions is flat like playing cards. I think we are in that 2d plane.
Originally posted by DomCheetham
how do you get a universe from nothing
Originally posted by kalisdad
Originally posted by DomCheetham
how do you get a universe from nothing
now that is the question that has believers in a higher power/God...
this is why I felt your 2nd dimension was an energy that exists both outside and inside our universe, and was the catalyst for our universe coming into existance.
something caused our universe to be created, and it had to have been an infinite energy source to accomplish what they say happend in the 1st second after the BB
Originally posted by DomCheetham
I think you need 5 dimensions for the big bang.
Originally posted by kalisdad
Originally posted by DomCheetham
I think you need 5 dimensions for the big bang.
the problem to me is that people think 3D(height/width/depth) and assume those are the first 3 dimensions and everything else is after that...
but what if they are actually dimensions 6, 7, & 8?
with 5 dimensions before and after those 3, that we just cannot detect.
Because of the one-pointed Time awareness in which the conventional mind remains immersed, humans tend to think of everything in a sequential, word-oriented framework. This mental trap produces very short-term concepts of effectiveness and consequences, a condition of constant, unplanned response to crises.
Liet-Kynes The Arrakis Workbook
The thing the ecologically illiterate don’t realize about an ecosystem is that it’s a system. A system! A system maintains a certain fluid stability that can be destroyed by a misstep in just one niche. A system has order, a flowing from point to point. If something dams the flow, order collapses. The untrained might miss that collapse until it was too late. That’s why the highest function of ecology is the understanding of consequences.
Pardot Kynes in "Appendix I: The Ecology of Dune"
Either we abandon the long-honored Theory of Relativity, or we cease to believe that we can engage in continued accurate prediction of the future. Indeed, knowing the future raises a host of questions which cannot be answered under conventional assumptions unless one first projects an Observer outside of Time and, second, nullifies all movement. If you accept the Theory of Relativity, it can be shown that Time and the Observer must stand still in relationship to each or inaccuracies will intervene. This would seem to say that it is impossible to engage in accurate prediction of the future. How, then, do we explain the continued seeking after this visionary goal by respected scientists? How, then, do we explain Muad'Dib?
Lectures on Prescience by Harq al-Ada
Originally posted by MasterGemini
Love your idea about this! I disagree with the premise of this thread but this type of thinking is needed none the less!
Originally posted by DomCheetham
3 dimensions could not come before 1 dimension.
Originally posted by DomCheetham
Time exists because somthing came from nothing. we have clocks that tell us the time it means that there is a start and an end to everything. How does everything start.edit on 23-9-2011 by DomCheetham because: (no reason given)