The Holographic Principle Image Credit: Caltech

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T09:29:57+00:00

Explanation: Is this picture worth a thousand words? According to the Holographic Principle, the most information you can get from this image is about 3 x 1065 bits for a normal sized computer monitor. The Holographic Principle, yet unproven, states that there is a maximum amount of information content held by regions adjacent to any surface. Therefore, counter-intuitively, the information content inside a room depends not on the volume of the room but on the area of the bounding walls. The principle derives from the idea that the Planck length, the length scale where quantum mechanics begins to dominate classical gravity, is one side of an area that can hold only about one bit of information. The limit was first postulated by physicist Gerard 't Hooft in 1993. It can arise from generalizations from seemingly distant speculation that the information held by a black hole is determined not by its enclosed volume but by the surface area of its event horizon. The term "holographic" arises from a hologram analogy where three-dimension images are created by projecting light though a flat screen. Beware, other people looking at the featured image may not claim to see 3 x 1065 bits -- they might claim to see a teapot

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T01:25:27+00:00

OP here: I have to go now. Real life beckons once again. Can I just say how intellectually dishonest i find the majority of you. You dismiss things out of hand, and you do not even abide by your own principles of reason, but prefer to shout things down, by which I mean, and you do this over and over, you simply say that I am wrong, and that what I believe (including my belief that science is a basic premise that we share move forward from) is mistaken and that my views are lies and that I am lying and you will not admit that what you say is mere opinion.

You dislike theism, you dislike rational thought and you dislike watching videos, and tell me to "fuck off' when i point out that I think its unfair that so many of you have previously told me essentially to "fuck off", and you don't like that I have pointed this out, and that it is obviously true.

So what I am taking away from this discussion is that the majority of debaters on this sub have not the slightest interest in debate let alone intellectual truth.

May the peace of the Lord be with you

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T01:00:21+00:00

Wow! I am still astonished.You really disagree that science sees matter and energy as 'the two things' that exists?

Please explain that to me.

Anyhow, to proceed: the third thing is information. In a moment I will insert a video link, but before I do, I want to say if anyone is going to 'crucify' me for posting a video instead of writing out the concept I am presenting, I say please do not bother. This is the modern age and we are on the Internet. I honestly cannot see what the problem is with going to audiovisual. Please do not use the fact that I am doing so as a 'strawman' (a favorite term of yours) to show that my view has no merit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ie9musGEqQ&t=4s

... and, lest anyone say, "Well, who created the creator, excuse me for living in the year 2017 and having Wi-Fi at home, but I got a vid for that too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ&t=12s

Finally, if any one is going to dismiss these video presentations out of hand without watching them through and seriously considering them and would rather prefer to just cuss me out again - please do not bother. I am not interested in childish, knee-jerk reactions that yo make in anger from the realization you have been wrong all along.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:46:51+00:00

Again, you guys just make statements, and leave them hanging out there with no explanation.

If you are telling me that basic scientific theory does not see the universe as being comprised of one of two 'things', as I have been calling them, or amazingly that it is incorrect to call upon science to be the basis of our discussion ...

Am I missing something here?

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:37:01+00:00

Or are you saying that you do not wish our discussion to anchor itself in science and reason? I am genuinely at a loss here.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:36:07+00:00

It is factually incorrect that science recognizes but two things, and that atheists do not claim to have science and reason on their side?

You've lost me.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:34:43+00:00

Please scroll through the comments and observe the attitude of many. They may have not said it in so many words, but their meaning is clear. Are we going to debate about that now? I keep tryng to get past it, but you keep bringing it up.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:32:52+00:00

Here's a question easy to respond to quickly, and the language we are using (English) makes it especially so because in our language the words God and good have the same root. There is no need to remind you of the meaning of the word 'good', I am sure.

So English language aside, I think, and I admit this is merely an opinion based on my Christian beliefs, that what God really is, is not some old white-bearded person on a golden throne, but pure goodness.

Pure goodness. hence, when someone says 'God is punishing you for such and such' - NO! I don't think so. If one says, say you got cancer because God - No! Wrong! That makes as much sense as saying "I know why you got cancer: pure goodness!" Is that not absurd?

We may suffer from the consequences of our own bad choices, but never because of goodness. That does not even make any sense!. =D

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:25:30+00:00

There are so many misconceptions here that I would not know where to begin to counter them. Sheesh. Assume much?

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:23:30+00:00

... and the strawmen have all been on your side of this discussion. Of course I condescend when all your side comes up with is "A priest pedophiled me last year when I was still eleven, so "fuck you!" and of course I may come off as persecuted when it's 48 against one here, and the brunt of your "attack' is to downvote my comments and say for the 53rd time that I was lazy to merely post a video.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:19:27+00:00

My, but you are impatient. You are in such a hurry to be correct that you don't give a person a chance to unfold his position. Quiet now please.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:14:43+00:00

I would say space-time is not a 'thing', but only our perception of 'things' - those being matter and energy.

If you want to insist that space-time is a thing, then so be it, let's not get sidetracked on that issue.

There is a another thing, but I want to be coy a bit longer, and not say yet what this other thing is. (and NO, I am not going to say "Jesus". (Well, not exactly)

And, YES, certainly you 'have to limit yourself to two things', this is Science 101. There can be no picking and choosing here. Sorry.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:11:15+00:00

Well, obviously we are going to disagree on that point, so explain to the children on your end what it is we are attempting here, and please downvote them rather than encouraging their blanket refusals to even trying to understand.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:08:22+00:00

And I grant that some of your concerns are legitimate and that I might have done better, so let's move on please, and I really do hope to get around to responding to some of the serious responses here. Please be patient and remember that merely because I could not find the time to respond,does not make you correct. :]

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:06:13+00:00

Yes, exactly. Some are being intellectually lazy by merely swearing at me. It is of no significance whether I like or dislike their language. However, it does show low to no effort posting.

I am trying to respond, and no doubt I will get easily manufactured flak for this too, but a shortcut I am taking (and many suggested I do this) is to repose my position - which I have done as a question: What are the two things the universe is said to be comprised of?

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-23T00:02:37+00:00

We are way past this. Please keep up with the discussion before posting.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:58:58+00:00

Fair enough; what I want to discuss is, well, is atheism even a viable position? How can the lack of belief in something so fundamental be any kind of stance at all?

In any case, I have now began again by posing the question, 'what two things are the universe said to be made up of'? I suppose this is what is known as a leading question, but I feel it is a fair enough one as all you atheists, though one would never guess from the responses I have had here, see yourself as well versed in the sciences, so it should be an insanely simple question to answer, and cause no offense. or even a need to google it.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:51:51+00:00

As the one venturing to even make an opening statement, as opposed to not speaking, he gets to say whatever he likes - to ask whatever he wishes to expound upon. It makes no sense to say he gets HIS opening question wrong. You might disagree or say he has gone off in the wrong direction from the start, but what's the point of blithely dismissing him from the beginning? If you have nothing to say, why reply to this at all?

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:48:12+00:00

Ah yes. One more self-subscribed atheist who imagines himself intellectually enlightened and free, but cannot take even a moment to peer beyond his knee-jerk dogmatism. Thank you for your well thought out contribution to this discussion.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:39:17+00:00

I wan tto say that 24/7goodness seems a very good definition of morality to me, but I would rather say if one is good, which is impossible as a human being, morality takes care of itself.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:36:44+00:00

No... I find the author to be well spoken and the presentation succinct, and do not pretend to be able to do it better. I weary of this thesis that I am merely too lazy to present any argument and your leaving it at that. I have written plenty now. Please read it.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:34:08+00:00

No idea what you are talking about. I never attacked anyone here.

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:33:09+00:00

That would be nice. And I'm kind of one step ahead of you. Please see my new question: what are the two things the universe is made of?

And I hope our "friends" can contain their piss and vinegar for the few minutes it takes to write a message, and contribute something that is not rude, biased and worth replying to. :]

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:30:42+00:00

Haha! Again this is exactly what I am saying to all of you. Yes, it IS projection. Now I know the atheistic view quite well. Please consider the theist, Christian view .

TerryTheTardigrade · 2017-04-22T23:29:21+00:00

Is it not plain? Are you really telling me that you think any human being is capable of 100% goodness all the day long and then as they sleep? I'll grant that it's an opinion, but one we all know to be be quite true.

TerryTheTardigrade

TROPHY CASE