tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.comments2024-03-04T15:09:00.479-08:00The Scientific WorldviewGlenn Borchardthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comBlogger1341125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-33451407955948169512024-03-04T15:09:00.479-08:002024-03-04T15:09:00.479-08:00Good one Glenn.
Getting around to publishing.
You ...Good one Glenn.<br />Getting around to publishing.<br />You are featured. <br />I let the world know how it really works and its not collisions.<br />GeorgeBlighhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10160829900151513063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-7955815650944240722024-03-04T05:17:54.680-08:002024-03-04T05:17:54.680-08:00Thanks for this very important topic.
-----
The nu...Thanks for this very important topic.<br />-----<br />The numerous cultural several thousand year old Stories of Creation don´t concern a creation of the entire Universe, but “only” the preconditions of and the factual creation of the Milky Way galaxy, the ancient known and observable part of the local universe.<br />If taking the modern cosmological approach to the very mythical concept of “Light” as the prime creative force and interpret primordial deities in a modern language, the ancient creation myths contains more natural logics than the modern cosmological theories, just and alone by having a cyclical perception of everything in cosmos.<br /><br />Have a quick look at my take on Ancient verses Modern Cosmology here - https://www.academia.edu/45010132/Ancient_Verses_Modern_Cosmology<br /><br />Best Wishes<br />Ivar Nielsen<br />Comparative Mythologist & Natural Philosopher<br />Denmark<br />Personal Website - http://www.native-science.net/index.html<br />Ivar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-24724689488709572122024-03-02T12:55:29.188-08:002024-03-02T12:55:29.188-08:00You are mixing the physical with the metaphysical ...You are mixing the physical with the metaphysical and I’m pretty sure you are aware of this 😏- having been a student of Dr Borchardt’s works for a year or so has grounded me in the physical real as far as science goes. No denying the physical has created the human mind with all its metaphysical fantasies. Such fantasies then do come back to have great effect on the physical world through human action. For example: a physical brain has a metaphysical fantasy (Gods and demons) and that leads their physical mind to direct their physical body in good or evil works. However none of that changes physical reality as far as the rules of the game of matter and motion. Our minds can use our bodies to manipulate these but not break their laws. Motion must always exist, thus time will always march forward as we can’t put everything in the universe back where it was 5 minutes or 25 years ago. Therefore and concepts of looped time can only be metaphysical human fantasy - perhaps sadly. Tory Presterahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03724525784722193637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-58478789904035579142024-02-19T06:13:09.915-08:002024-02-19T06:13:09.915-08:00Proponents of the Standard Cosmology are having a ...Proponents of the Standard Cosmology are having a hard time explaining away its obvious contradictions, inconsistensies, and shortcomings.<br />--------<br />We need a complete new and consistent approach to everything, and I highly recommend the contents in this video:<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL2SGF79Zrg&ab_channel=ThunderboltsProject<br /><br />Best wishes<br />Ivar NielsenIvar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-68053388215582263692024-02-07T21:47:59.924-08:002024-02-07T21:47:59.924-08:00Really a great blog. I liked the topic which you e...Really a great blog. I liked the topic which you explained in this blog and hope you will continuously share your thoughts by posting blogs. <br />User please attentions if you are looking for Pharmacy Equipment Manufacturer in Ambala then h.l. Scientific industries is the right choice because they are affordable and top company in india.H.L. Scientific Industrieshttps://www.hlscientificind.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-75152414112125545672024-01-29T05:09:58.406-08:002024-01-29T05:09:58.406-08:00"A black hole too large for its age".
It..."A black hole too large for its age".<br />It rather is a young cosmological conventional theory being much too small for the UniverseIvar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-44027994188253551052024-01-10T10:17:21.013-08:002024-01-10T10:17:21.013-08:00Glenn, when evaluating any proposed scientific the...Glenn, when evaluating any proposed scientific theory with religious roots, such as the Big Bang theory proposed by the Roman Catholic priest and physicist Georges Lemaître to conform with the Bible, and Einstein’s relativity, as written about in your 2020 book "Religious Roots of Relativity," it is important to understand its connection to religious belief. When realizing that awful things are ordered to be done in the Bible, there is no basis for using it in devising science theories. Here is a brief list of some of the horrendous things instructions found in the Bible. It commands us to Kill witches, adulterers, blasphemers, prophets, fortune-tellers, non-Hebrews, sons of sinners, gays, non-believers, anyone who curses God, all males after winning battles, disobedient children, strangers close to a church, those who work on the Sabbath, any bride discovered to not be a virgin, those who curse father or mother, those who worship the wrong god, and anyone who kills anyone.<br /><br />When attending public elementary school I was required to listen to passages from the Bible, but fortunately I never thought it was worthy of being believed.George Coynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05437030688390128534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-23922495009102870682024-01-10T08:22:46.124-08:002024-01-10T08:22:46.124-08:00Thanks, Glenn for the excellent blog. Because your...Thanks, Glenn for the excellent blog. Because your significant statement: “Time is motion” is an idea that I held before ever encountering your work, it is not difficult for me to understand. It was the phrase that I searched on the internet in 2014 that led to the discovery of your scientific blog, papers and books. A modification to the statement that I made for clarity that you have agreed with is: “Time is the motion of matter.” This is to reinforce the understanding that motion never occurs without matter, unlike Einstein’s absurd view that motion and matter can be separate. In my book I found it useful to differentiate between time as the motion of matter and the measurement of that motion, so I coined the term “nadal” to refer to the measurement of it, which is what clocks do with varying degrees of accuracy.<br /><br />Because I feature your theories with citations in my 408-page scholarly book “Notfinity Process: Matter-In-Motion Second Edition”(2021, 2023), I am certain that your readers would find it useful and interesting. I am most grateful for the blog that you published about my book and your positive comment about it that appears on the back cover. <br />https://thescientificworldview.blogspot.com/2021/07/george-coynes-notfinity-process-is.html<br /><br />The newest version of the book with the revised back cover and additional content came out in September 2023. <br />https://www.amazon.com/Notfinity-Process-Matter-Motion-George/dp/1775158802/ref=sr_1_1?crid=34UKYABLMTCFV&keywords=notfinity+process&qid=1704731077&s=books&sprefix=notfinity+process%2Cstripbooks-intl-ship%2C163&sr=1-1George Coynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05437030688390128534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-32109431586267905502024-01-08T14:30:51.251-08:002024-01-08T14:30:51.251-08:00Glenn,
With regard to materialism, I'm a har...Glenn,<br /> <br />With regard to materialism, I'm a hard atheist because I'm a hard materialist.<br /> <br />I watch some of the atheist podcasts on YouTube, and those atheists are scared to say that they are materialists. They say, "I don't see evidence for a god, but I can't say for sure that there is no god". If they would only admit that they are assuming that there is nothing outside of our material universe, that's all they would need to say for certain that "there is no god".<br /> <br />These defenders of atheist logic also love to rattle on about the Big Bang and Virtual Particles, all as a counter to the religious claim of God the Creator.<br /> <br />Although I sometimes can't help but add a comment, I know that there isn't much I can do if these smart atheists enjoy using modern physics and cosmogony as a counter to belief in God. They are just trading one regressive indeterminist view for another equally regressive indeterminist view.<br /> <br />In the YouTube comments section, I recently got a reply to my simple explanation that "the only thing that exists is matter and the only thing that happens is the motion of matter". The reply said, "Prove it". That's funny, but I don't think the guy was trying to be funny.<br /> <br />Cheers,<br />Rick Doogie<br />Allegan, MichiganDoogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04998598313711196391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-61682169595794306262023-12-18T06:29:59.588-08:002023-12-18T06:29:59.588-08:00It all depends on ones conception of "time&qu...It all depends on ones conception of "time" and motion.<br /><br />If one has a linear conception of time as a linear motion, it doesn´t seem possible, but the "time-travelling concept" is perfectly logical if having a cyclical perception of motion in time.<br /><br />Lots of neardeath experiences speak of having a meeting with their ancestors = a spiritual travelling back in time, and when returning to this life again, they also often got a message of their future tasks in life = forward in time.<br /><br />Regards<br />Ivar Nielsen<br />Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist<br />Denmark<br />Ivar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-27121575556135426952023-12-08T17:35:10.549-08:002023-12-08T17:35:10.549-08:00Anon:
So sorry for the year+ delay. Been busy and ...Anon:<br />So sorry for the year+ delay. Been busy and missed your question. BTW: Einstein’s theory was what I call the Untired Light Theory. Einstein assumed light was a massless particle filled with perfectly empty space traveling perpetually through perfectly empty space. That was rank idealism and the regressive physicists ate it up. Hubble’s theory was the Tired Light Theory, which fits reality. Nothing travels from A to B without losing energy. As Hubble suggested, the cosmological redshift is merely a result of energy losses over distance. There was no universal expansion and thus no Big Bang.<br />Glenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-51719541085879720922023-10-27T14:08:25.045-07:002023-10-27T14:08:25.045-07:00From Bill Wesley:
"Its really really irritat...From Bill Wesley:<br /><br />"Its really really irritating that in the face of so much refuting evidence convolution gets a doubling down, more complexity, that's the answer! The simplest possible scenario is avoided like the whale in the room. You will hear an occasional hushed mention of the tired light scenario but never more than one or two sentences with the finish that tired light has been refuted.<br /><br />Since the cosmological model could have been rational all along, not needing the 100 years of ad hoc bells and whistles to substitute for functionality, imagine how embarrassing to find out that there is no baby in the bath water.<br />this would have to be the greatest intellectual embarrassment in human history, 100 years of useless flailing away by the greatest of human minds only to arrive at a model that goes down the drain, utter disaster. Collectivism is not actually an asset, no collective ever invented any major theory! We know for a fact that collectives tend to descend into abject conformity as witnessed by the insular nature of groups which is not conductive to cognizance or innovation, so its always individuals whom buck the status quo and never a collective.<br /><br />The problem is not one of insufficient intelligence, the problem is one of insufficient LIBERTY. A closed mind can be just as intelligent as an open one, the difference is not in processing power but in programing, most persons have submitted to being followers and not leaders, the intelligent are usually devoted to furthering the party line and not to defying it.<br /><br />Creativity depends much more crucially on an independent spirit and a love of content over social positioning, which is very very rare. almost no one puts cognizance ahead of prestige. Prestige prefers complex convoluted content to show off with, simple common sense solutions are not appreciated as unworthy of a fight, which is what the proceedings look like to me, wrestle mania where the more outrageous the stance the better the draw. the big bang is the ultimate in outrageous stance so there is a big audience for the matches, but a common sense practical wrestler has no draw.<br />As religion and art the big bang is ideal, it just does not stack up as science."Glenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-90092703338271617942023-10-18T05:59:31.462-07:002023-10-18T05:59:31.462-07:00AHHHH! We're still falling for the "Andy...AHHHH! We're still falling for the "Andy Wakefield was a fraud" narrative? Come on, now. That is so 20 years ago. Things have changed significantly. Folks gotta keep up. MMR, Polio, SmallPox etc vaxxes all have significant flaws. It's actually the pro-vax side that is "gullible". <br /><br />Josh Scandlenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03628949310808156653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-55482547984570390822023-10-18T05:48:27.481-07:002023-10-18T05:48:27.481-07:00"Will the Big Bang Theory be redacted"?
..."Will the Big Bang Theory be redacted"?<br /><br />Problably only by the speed of one departed cosmological scientist after another at the time. <br /><br />In the mean time, all kinds of "dark this and that" will be added, just like it happened when the "Newtonian universal celestial motion" was contradicted on galactic scales, and as with "black holes" which are simple galactic eyes in these swirling cosmic hurricanes. <br /><br />Even our most ancient ancestors had the Universe to be eternal and having an eternal embedded process of Formation, Dissolution, and Re-Formation of all basic atoms and molecules.Ivar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-35377324487353357242023-10-17T11:07:56.342-07:002023-10-17T11:07:56.342-07:00Jesse:
Nice to hear from you. I don't know mu...Jesse:<br /><br />Nice to hear from you. I don't know much about that. Aside from my attempts to publish progressive physics, I have had only one manuscript rejected, and that was via a review from competitors with opposing interpretations. Another was rejected by a competitor, but subsequently accepted by the Associate Editor and published in Science.<br /><br />About 2/3 of retractions are due to fraud. In science, fraud involves making up data. Often, such data "are too good to be true" and easily suspect. I imagine AI will be used more to check critical data. That is why we keep copies of our original notes for a long time. An accusation of fraud is devastating to a career--the resignation of the Stanford president is the most recent example. As an editor, I had to reject papers, but never for fraud. Usually, it was just sloppy work or a wrong interpretation.<br /><br />The rest of the retractions simply involve mistakes and errors in measurement, etc., which generally are discovered by the authors who then withdraw the paper, correct the mistakes, and resubmit.<br /><br />None of the retracted papers should be cited by anyone, especially in the medical field, as those could be dangerous to patients. You wouldn't want to take a drug that was lethal to 50% of the patients.<br /><br />You might be thinking about some of the faulty advice issued about the transmissibility of the Covid-19 virus. I realized early on that it mostly involved aerosol transmission (see PSI Blog 20200601 Coronavirus Hates the Outdoors). Washing hands and 6' of separation wasn't good enough. The struggle to change the anti-aerosol policy was just written up in: Marr, Linsey, 2023, Changing policies on Covid-19 transmission: American Scientist, v. 111, p. 266-269. It is a great illustration of how an erroneous theory has tremendous staying power even in the face of obvious evidence. Know any other theory like that? <br /><br />BTW: Our rejected paper was later confirmed via C-14 dating by others. <br /><br />Glenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-15097641921254332892023-10-17T11:06:28.631-07:002023-10-17T11:06:28.631-07:00Hi Glenn,
Are you confident all of those COVID-19...Hi Glenn,<br /><br />Are you confident all of those COVID-19 papers being retracted and censored by the journals is a good thing? I am aware of many world renowned scientists and virologists getting papers rejected due to not singing the proper tune. <br /><br />As far as I am concerned, the journals are captured.<br /><br />JesseGlenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-78581806938151540042023-10-03T13:33:51.146-07:002023-10-03T13:33:51.146-07:00Time is due to matter in motion but more precisely...Time is due to matter in motion but more precisely time is due to the changes in the medium, vacuum, or zero point energy field; whatever one wants to call it. Even more accurately it is the evolution of the fundamental field that produces the change we perceive such as motion. E.g.,<br />T = D / V.<br />Time is equal to Distance divided by Velocity.Blighhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10160829900151513063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-59170071121359439382023-10-02T08:20:19.344-07:002023-10-02T08:20:19.344-07:00Thanks for posting the video, Glenn. It has had ov...Thanks for posting the video, Glenn. It has had over 2.4 million views in the kast 4 months. It supports my assertion in my book "Notfinity Process: Matter-In-Motion" that the Universe is not expanding. As your readers know,the Big Bang theory was created because of the errroneous view idea that the Universe is expanding. Without expansion then there could not have been a Big Bang. Also,it is good to see that the video appears to share your idea that what we refer to as "time" is the motion of matter.George Coynehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05437030688390128534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-39343139697378496972023-09-23T05:20:27.486-07:002023-09-23T05:20:27.486-07:00Thank you for your historic contribution to the fi...Thank you for your historic contribution to the fight against idealism. I'd like to share with you a thought that might bring a little optimism and enthusiasm to a scientific conception of the world. It's inspired by Mao Zedong's contribution to dialectics. He established that the first principle is the relative identity of opposites (= the "motor" of matter in motion). <br /> <br />Let's now consider "life" in all its generality, i.e. as a relative differentiation of a portion of eternal matter in motion. The relative identity of opposites as a universal law implies that movement is not anarchic, but rather a spiral of development, with resolutions of contradictions leading to new contradictions, again and again. <br /><br />Consequently, if we want to establish a "meaning of life" in a universal sense (which would integrate the diversity of meanings that each person gives to his or her own life), the only way is to see life as a particular stage in the eternal development of the Infinite Universe. Isn't that a more beautiful perspective than all the bigotry in the world? Gozohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11706000148043506547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-87290383732705975942023-09-15T08:58:44.163-07:002023-09-15T08:58:44.163-07:00If time is motion what is velocity? Motion changin...If time is motion what is velocity? Motion changing of motion in motion? luce80https://www.blogger.com/profile/01563906135444043163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-71019071475429485232023-09-04T05:27:37.984-07:002023-09-04T05:27:37.984-07:00Dear, oh dear . . .
I hope they don´t get into tro...Dear, oh dear . . .<br />I hope they don´t get into trouble with the cathololic churc which like the interpreted Creation Story like model.Ivar Nielsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15229352811816119473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-31334592788796330952023-08-19T13:31:37.458-07:002023-08-19T13:31:37.458-07:00Doug:
Thanks for the comment and for your wonderfu...Doug:<br />Thanks for the comment and for your wonderful anti-expansionism essay that I referred to as the 20th falsification of the Big Bang Theory: https://medium.com/@glennborchardt/falsification-20-of-the-big-bang-theory-intergalactic-distance-unchanged-over-time-2dc07d025dd0<br /><br />I read your essay on scientism, and I get it. Many times, I have been accused of having beliefs no better than those of religion. This claim seems not to change even when I point out that religion is theistic and includes a belief in god or gods and science doesn’t.<br /><br />Is science a belief or a “faith?” You betcha. I totally agree with you on that. I suspect both of us are not happy with Coyne’s celebrated title: Coyne, J.A. 2015. Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible. Viking.<br /><br />Per Collingwood, in science we must use fundamental assumptions that always have opposing religious assumptions, both of which cannot be completely proven. The best we can do is to observe, experiment, and interpret the external world based on the correct fundamental assumptions. Kuhn admitted as much, although, as a historian, he didn’t say what they were. He hinted that paradigm change must begin with an evaluation of assumptions. That is what I did with: Borchardt, Glenn, 2004, The Ten Assumptions of Science: Toward a New Scientific Worldview: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p. [https://gborc.com/TTAOS; https://gborc.com/TTAOSpdf].<br /><br />By using those ten consupponible assumptions I can quickly analyze truth claims whether they are supposedly “scientific” or “religious.” As you mentioned, there is no such thing as “infallibility.” That is because the universe is infinite—every measurement has a plus or minus. Every analysis we do involves infinite detail that is the reason for uncertainty. Even so, it becomes clear that the “Last Creationist Theory” is false.<br /><br />I agree with you there are other ways of looking at the world. I see that every time I look out the window, look at art, or study ethics, about which science can say nothing because the words “good” and “bad” cannot be part of the scientific vocabulary.Glenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-69508644135221579112023-07-24T11:42:20.680-07:002023-07-24T11:42:20.680-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Glenn Borchardthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09394474754821945146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-48877105713257611632023-07-24T11:04:05.057-07:002023-07-24T11:04:05.057-07:00How does this information refute the Einstein Tire...How does this information refute the Einstein Tired Light Theory? 26.7 Billion Years is a long way from infinity? From my understanding is your theory proven correct if the age of the universe is older to the point of a number near infinity and/or if the age keeps increasing to the point that the Einstein Theory calculations do not compute? Please excuse my ignorance. <br /><br />Respectfully,Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10896633952454011451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2202092988208583550.post-37431775322910446682023-07-24T11:02:05.711-07:002023-07-24T11:02:05.711-07:00
How does this information refute the Einstein Tir...<br />How does this information refute the Einstein Tired Light Theory? 26.7 Billion Years is a long way from infinity? From my understanding is your theory proven correct if the age of the universe is older to the point of a number near infinity and/or if the age keeps increasing to the point that the Einstein Theory calculations do not compute? Please excuse my ignorance. I hope my questions are not too mediocre.<br /><br />Respectfully,<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10896633952454011451noreply@blogger.com