You didn't answer my question of LaTex code. Maybe you know of a better alternative? I really don't know how to present my ideas on information without it.

Use the menu and present it with jpegs of your information if you need to.  You can also do video presentations upload them to youtube and post them here.

I have not tried to use html on here, but I think you can.

metha wrote on Dec 16^th, 2009 at 4:04am:



When you are working at the level of electrons, you are not in the same level of things that can be tested for random. Just like pseudo random ping pong balls that will produce lottery numbers.  Those can be predicted if you have enough data to do it.

Just as when you destroy uranium in an atomic blast.  Once is is down below the level of the most basic element of hydrogen (one electron, one proton), you are in a different science that is outside of the elements.

This is on the level of beyond the physical.  Electrons are all the same, and are not diverse.

When talking about what is in the physical world and these electrons are part of the structure of the chemicals there is no random.

Once you destroy the structures, there is no structure in physics it is on a different level of subatomic.  It is like looking at a single brick and saying that is all there is to the building.

In the world that we live in with all of these structures random does not exist. Even in a computer program you have to seed the program to get a "pseudo random" number.

We don't even know for sure if electrons only pass in wire or if they have the ability to pass on the charges in a wave from one electron to the next.  If we can work on that principle, I propose it would change the speed at which computers can run.

You issue is that what you are doing is a pseudo random or apparent random, not an absolute random.  In all cases it is simply taking structures and shaking them around and let them bump into each other.

But if you slow it down and actually look at all the "bumping" going on it is completely following the law of cause and effect.

When you are dealing with complex cell structures and DNA, you cannot just simply scramble the box and not have the creatures die.  Random in DNA is death.

Having a bunch of ping pong balls with numbers on them in an air chamber has no relationship to genetics.  Trying to force false beliefs on DNA is a mental illness caused by improper scientific training.

metha wrote on Dec 16^th, 2009 at 1:43pm:


There is free will, but most people do not use it. They are controlled by fear. 

metha wrote on Dec 17^th, 2009 at 2:30am:


How would you go about proving that one?  I am not talking about abstract mathematics.  I am talking about in the real physical world of matter, interactions, and reactions.

metha wrote on Dec 17^th, 2009 at 2:30am:


True randomness could never be used in a mathematical equation. The term mathematics is a precise set of rules that are not random.

There exists no random in the universe.
The reason why random has disclaimers on it is because pure random is not existent.
It is only cause and effect so fast that you think it is random, because you feeble mind cannot comprehend even 100 events taking place, much less trillions of scientific events taking place in a split second.  Random is a damn excuse for human stupidity.

Quote:


Your thinking is twisted.  Because you do not have the capacity to understand something, does not give you the right to manipulate the meaning of what is real.

In the future predictability of all things in the physical world will be easily done, by computers capable of that many calculations at one instant.

If you were to do a chart on the computing power we have now and what was in the past, you can easily see the direction computer science is taking us.

It will eventually destroy all the bovine garbage in science, such as mystical magical evolutionary processes that only exist in the minds of the believers.

metha wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 4:15am:

[/quote]

You need to give up this idea of random. It only shows that you are not capable of understanding how the universe operates.

Just because you are not capable of understanding all the events taking place, because of your feeble mind, does not validate this false premise of random.

metha wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 12:22pm:


I thought you were talking about euler's totient?