By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Belief in God 'childish,' Jews not chosen people: Einstein letter

That Guy on 14 May 2008

How the F did this turn in to an Israel/Middle East Thread?

This makes just about the same sense as my "FAT" thread turning into the rape thread.



Around the Network
tombi123 on 14 May 2008

Just to let everyone know, something can be created from nothing. The uncertainty principle allows this and it happens billions of times every second on the quantum level.

An imaginary photon that doesn't exist, creates a particle and anti-particle that follow different paths for a certain length of time, then they collide into each other and annihilate each other, emitting the photon that created them in the first place.

It is theoretically possible that the universe is a vacuum fluctuation. h=Et, where h is Planck's constant, E is energy and t is time. So a particles energy, multiplied by the amount of time it exists for, equals Planck's constant.

The universe has positive and negative energy. The positive energy is expanding the universe and the negative energy is slowing the expansion of the universe (gravity). If the positive and negative energies exactly cancel each other out (critical density universe), then the universe could have been created out of nothing and exist for an infinite amount of time, given by h=Et.

If the positive and negative energies don't quite cancel out, then the universe will exist for a less than infinite amount of time.

So basically, quantum mechanics allows the universe to be created from nothing, as long as it has no net energy or it has energy but only exists for a less then infinite time.



mesoteto on 14 May 2008




 

Kasz216 on 14 May 2008
hsrob said:
@Kasz216

The Big Bang is confusing, that's why people like Steven Hawking muse over it while us mere mortals play video games. Part of the problem is human beings natural tendency to separate time and space and see time as a constant. The typical question being, "Well what was there before the big bag?" The answer, well there was no time before the big bag or not in the sense that we understand it.

You are right about the cyclical nature of the Cosmos that it implies and that in itself is a pretty unrewarding conclusion. The Big Bag doesn't imply an absolute beginning of anything, just a beginning that we can start from as anything before the expansion of that singularity is unpredictable and in fact has no influence on our current universe, or so the theory goes.

It is this very fact that had lead many great minds in the field to conclude that there may in fact have been a higher being or power who put everything into motion in the infinite past but just because we as a species can't currently understand it doesn't make them right.

There is much that we didn't understand in the past that we now do. People still think being cold will give them a cold, but it is not so. Just people think or feel there must have been a beginning and therefore an end, does not make it so.

p.s. Was a pleasure reading your post

I try to mix in a bit of both physics and videogames... the thing though is I don't really mean "time"... i mean "real time".

I mean the time we perceive is so random that it changes based on the speed things move. Stephen Hawking didn't really have a word for it when I read the one book of his, so i'm not sure if he's come up with it yet... but he basically theorized that there is a "different" time that goes off at a different direction.

A time where basically everthing is standard, if that makes sense to you. Basically what we see as time isn't really time as we define it. Or as regular people would anyway... because "something" had to be happening before the big bang in some order. Just not something related to space time.

Personally I perfer the "all time is happening at the same time, even if it doesn't make sense to us." model, but that's more based on philosophical than research because of the Infinite amount of "real time" i'd expect to preceed us... it's the kind of thing that's impossible to prove however based on the way our brains work.

It would be like trying to prove something is orange to a person who is colorblind.  It's all gray to him and they pretty much have to take your word for it. (Well unless you can find a way to show the breakdown of the light wave... but to do that you'd have to know what causes time in the first place 



Kasz216 on 14 May 2008
tombi123 said:
Just to let everyone know, something can be created from nothing. The uncertainty principle allows this and it happens billions of times every second on the quantum level.

An imaginary photon that doesn't exist, creates a particle and anti-particle that follow different paths for a certain length of time, then they collide into each other and annihilate each other, emitting the photon that created them in the first place.

It is theoretically possible that the universe is a vacuum fluctuation. h=Et, where h is Planck's constant, E is energy and t is time. So a particles energy, multiplied by the amount of time it exists for, equals Planck's constant.

The universe has positive and negative energy. The positive energy is expanding the universe and the negative energy is slowing the expansion of the universe (gravity). If the positive and negative energies exactly cancel each other out (critical density universe), then the universe could have been created out of nothing and exist for an infinite amount of time, given by h=Et.

If the positive and negative energies don't quite cancel out, then the universe will exist for a less than infinite amount of time.

So basically, quantum mechanics allows the universe to be created from nothing, as long as it has no net energy or it has energy but only exists for a less then infinite time.

 The question I have with that though... does it happen billions of times at the quantum level... or is their a level beloew the quantum level we can't see yet.  I think we'll be long dead before we have anything related to the creation of the universe even remotely understood.



Around the Network
MrBubbles on 14 May 2008

@superchunk,
i find your views too far out of check with reality, so i wont be continuing such a discussion with you.


There are no so blind as those who will not see.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

luinil on 14 May 2008
Kasz216 said:
tombi123 said:
Just to let everyone know, something can be created from nothing. The uncertainty principle allows this and it happens billions of times every second on the quantum level.

An imaginary photon that doesn't exist, creates a particle and anti-particle that follow different paths for a certain length of time, then they collide into each other and annihilate each other, emitting the photon that created them in the first place.

It is theoretically possible that the universe is a vacuum fluctuation. h=Et, where h is Planck's constant, E is energy and t is time. So a particles energy, multiplied by the amount of time it exists for, equals Planck's constant.

The universe has positive and negative energy. The positive energy is expanding the universe and the negative energy is slowing the expansion of the universe (gravity). If the positive and negative energies exactly cancel each other out (critical density universe), then the universe could have been created out of nothing and exist for an infinite amount of time, given by h=Et.

If the positive and negative energies don't quite cancel out, then the universe will exist for a less than infinite amount of time.

So basically, quantum mechanics allows the universe to be created from nothing, as long as it has no net energy or it has energy but only exists for a less then infinite time.

The question I have with that though... does it happen billions of times at the quantum level... or is their a level beloew the quantum level we can't see yet. I think we'll be long dead before we have anything related to the creation of the universe even remotely understood.


 Meh, This is all I need to know about how science works:



Luinil - Marisa (FE:SS). She's calm, collected, and really likes swords. (Courtesy of Words of Wisdom)
Tag: luinil - "Liberalism is a mental disorder." - Thanks fkusumot!
superchunk on 14 May 2008
Griffin said:
superchunk said:
Griffin said:
superchunk said:
MrBubbles said:
i dont know how anyone who can see israel at 60 years since its re-establishment and not see some sort of a divine hand at work. Logically there is no way they could have lasted so long surrounded by so many enemies.


You are so wrong on so many levels. This thread isn't about the history of zionism and Israel so I won't dive into it too much, but you really need to study your history. Simply put though, how can you consider an nation that was trained in European militaries, has always had a larger force than all of this foes combined, and has always had better weapons some kind of miracle? There is no divine hand keeping them alive, it is the fact they are, and have always been, better trained, equiped, and larger than anyone else in the region.

If you want to continue this off topic discussion please pm me. However, I couldn't leave this fallacy in this thread untouched.


Larger force then all its foes combined, i guess you must of read the History books wrong. Israel has always had a smaller force then its foes, and has continued to smash them in each war they have had. During the Yom Kippur War this was what the Military was like. Syria and Egypt were also buying and receiving top of the line Military from the USSR. They had the best Anti-Tank and Anti-Air missiles they could get their hands on for this war.

isreal had
415,000 troops,
1,500 tanks,
3,000 armored carriers,
945 artillery units,
561 airplanes,
84 helicopters,
38 Navy vessels

Egypt:
800,000 troops
2,400 tanks
2,400 armored carriers
1,120 artillery units
690 airplanes
161 helicopters
104 Navy vessels

Syria: 150,000 troops
1,400 tanks,
800–900 armored carriers,
600 artillery units
350 airplanes,
36 helicopters,
21 Navy vessels,
Iraq: 60,000 troops,
700 tanks,
500 armored carriers,
200 artillery units,
73 airplanes,

Without a source you are just rambling.

Above all you have to remember that Israel has always had a mandatory military service for all Jewish Israelis (Men and women). This alone gives them a considerable force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War is a good summation of sources on the closest war they have ever had. Even here Israel's forces were nearly twice that of Arab's.

My main source is an highly recommended book Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Fourth Edition: A History with Documents by Charles D. Smith a leading expert in Middle Eastern history at the University of Arizona. Where I had a minor in Near Eastern Studies and took a class on this conflict taught by a retired US ambassador to Egypt that used this book and another general Middle Eastern history class taught by Charles Smith himself.

This book details all records from that time including population figures and all original documents for the entirity of the conflict.

Israelis from day one were always larger, better trained, and better equipped. The only reason Yom Kippur was initially successful for Arabs was because they struck first when Israel wasn't prepared and had not massed their reservists. Once that was done, they took over. Plus, Israel had mostly US armaments which were almost always superior to their older Russian counterparts, especially in regards to Tanks.

Again, if you would like to continue this in great detail, I can, just PM me.


How can you saw they were always larger when i just showed you the Miliatary numbers for the Yom Kippur War. They were out numbered and were attacked first giving the Egyptian/Syrian armies time to plan and equip themselves for the war. And here is the source. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War#Nuclear_alert

Now yets take a look at the numbers for the 6day war. As you can see the Israel army was outnumbered again . And here is the Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

Israel
264,000 (incl. 214,000 reserve troops)
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks

Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq:307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks

Did you actually read the troop assessments from wikipedia? You gave the totals for 100% of Egypt and Syria estimated standing armies. Not the numbers they actually sent into war which are far, far less.

Example. Compare your totals above to the top section of the same wikipedia page you linked.

Egypt: 800,000 troops (300,000 deployed, 80,000 crossed), 2,400 tanks (800 crossed), 2,400 armored carriers, 1,120 artillery units,690 airplanes (220 crossed, about 60 participated in the Mansourah battle), 161 helicopters, 104 Navy vessels,
Syria: 150,000 troops (60,000 deployed), 1,400 tanks, 800–900 armored carriers, 600 artillery units, 350 airplanes, 36 helicopters, 21 Navy vessels,
Iraq: 60,000 troops, 700 tanks, 500 armored carriers, 200 artillery units,73 airplanes

Again, you are not correct, Israel has alwasy had the larger fighting force in every conflict. None of these countries ever sent their full force. That would have been stupid had they been totally wiped out leaving their entire country unprotected. Israel always had superior weapons and were the only ones actually unified under one leadership and goal. It doesn't take rocket science to tell Arabs were going to lose everytime.

Pick a used copy of the book I recommened (less than $5 on amazon). It is a great source with many prime sources duplicated in original form.

 

OP: sorry for this side discussion. But, this is one area that really irks me and I can't let misinformation just be there. Too many people already have been brainwashed in this conflict.



MrBubbles on 14 May 2008

ummm....superchunk *whispers* even with your additional information...the arabs still had a larger force.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

superchunk on 14 May 2008

ummmm... MrBubbles use a little reasoning and deduction ...

deployed =/= who went into Israel. Why do think there is a separation of deployed and crossed?

Israel's standing army in the beginning was about 150k, within 1-2 days, after reservists were sent it it was about 450k.

Egypt only sent about 80k into Palestine/Israel and left the other 220k or so in the Sinai, as that is all they were really concerned with anyways.

Syria only sent about 60k into the Golan Heights and pretty much made no further advancements, again Syria only really wanted to get that back.

Iraq sent its 60k to help Syria. None actually went any further than Golan.

Jordan, which isn't even mentioned here, sent about 10k mostly on small cross border raids as they were never really engaged.

A few other countries, also not listed also, sent about 15k to assist.

So we have a total of about 500k Israelis and about 225k Arabs actually entering Palestine/Israel.

Arabs knew that they had the initial hand and thought that would be enough ensure that when Israeli reservist came in it would be too late. However, to Israel's benefit it was very easy to build up the ranks since it was a holiday and most were in Synagogues or at home due to the holiday. That helped Israel quickly become a force bigger than the invading Arabs.

Furthermore, as in all of their wars each Arab group had its own leadership that didn't really discuss anything as the war progressed with others. On top of that each countries goal's were primarily to get back land from 1967, not the destruction of Israel. That was only their common war cry so others would help financially, etc.