Ten Things About The Universe That We May Never Understand

 

An interesting video on YouTube is about the mysteries of the universe – see link below.  Here’s their top ten list of mysteries:

• What exactly is gravity?
• Is the universe infinite?
• Why does The Double-Slit Experiment work?
• Will the universe someday cease to exist?
• What set off The Big Bang?
• How does spooky action (quantum entanglement) work?
• Are there more than the three dimensions in our universe?
• Is time travel possible?
• Will the universe become invisible?
• Could other universes exist?

The problem with science speculating on such subjects is that pure science is based on observation and measurement. The questions above are mostly theoretical in nature and while interesting to discuss are beyond the scope of science because they relate to matters which cannot be observed or measured.  Not now and not ever.

As a result, what passes for science today is theories, in essence formulae written on a chalkboard probably by some theoretical physicist.  Those theories are confined to existing scientific thinking on the subject. While the theories will no doubt evolve over time, they will continue to be nothing more than theories.

However, since I do not have a scientific background it is much easier for me to think outside the box, so to speak. So, here’s my ideas on some of these questions.

• We obviously don’t know if the universe is infinite. The better question, however, is what is the universe?  Does it exist at all or is it just an illusion?
• Why does the Double-Slit experiment work? Well, why not? Obviously, we have a problem with this because we don’t understand the laws of the universe. So, again, we’re asking the wrong question.
• Will the universe cease to exist? Well, I suppose that depends on how you define the universe and how you define life. After all, Einstein said that energy can not be either created or destroyed. If you can’t destroy energy, then the universe could possibly cease to exist in its present form, but the energy would still be there.  The energy would not cease to exist. However, Einstein’s statement that energy cannot be created is incomplete, at best.  Creation (of energy) happens all the time in ways that we can’t understand. For example, the great void of space is not a void at all.
• Is time travel possible. Of course, why not? Keep in mind, though, that time is an illusion so it’s not so much that you would travel through time but that you would create a timeline that you would be an observer in. This would not be unlike how you would edit a movie.

From some of the other questions, one can infer that scientists realize that things exist beyond, or outside of, our universe.  Of course, the answer is that life does exist outside of our observable universe.  Seeing as how our field of observation is so limited, however, it is problematic as to how we will ever observe the things that are necessary to answer those questions.

It is not an accident that we are so limited.  Someone, or something, is denying us access to a complete picture of creation.  Without that complete picture, our laws of the universe are, relatively speaking, meaningless. In any event, scientists will no doubt endeavor to try to answer the unanswerable without even addressing the big picture. This is painfully obvious in Dr. Michael Turner’s comment on the Big Bang: “If inflation is the dynamite behind the Big Bang, we’re still looking for the match.” Problem is: they should be looking for the matchmaker.  Only then, would the laws of the universe make any sense.

Link – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MA7jLKnQ4c

 

“The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe.” – Albert Einstein

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sharia Law: No LGBT Allowed

 

I wonder if the LGBT community realizes the ramifications of Sharia Law.  That is, homosexuals are executed under Sharia Law in most Muslim countries. Here’s the rundown.

Brunei, a predominately Muslim country in Southeast Asia, recently converted to Sharia Law and will now be executing gays. Their crime – homosexuality.  Of course, Brunei is not alone as homosexuality is punishable by death in most Muslim counties including Afghanistan, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen.  Of course, Sharia Law applies to all people in those countries whether they are Muslims or not.

In this country, the problem is that Sharia Law is incompatible with American law, American culture and American values.  For example, under Sharia Law, women are treated as possessions and it’s allowable to rape non-Muslim women (see what’s happening all across Europe, for example), or even kill them in the case of “honor killings” …and, of course, there’s the LGBT issue.

So, as Islam becomes more prevalent in this country, it’s inevitable that some Americans, and especially LGBT, will become increasingly threatened by the lack of assimilation on behalf of Muslims.  After all, while Muslims may feel perfectly comfortable under Sharia Law, many Americans will not.

The Global Cooling Phenomena

 

Global warming was supposed to be bad for the planet, but I’m here to tell you that global cooling is so much worse.  All the cold weather this past winter produced record snowfalls, especially across the Midwest.  When spring came, the snow melted and now we have an apocalypse of flooding.  The following article refers to it as “an agricultural disaster without equal in modern American history.”– see link https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-30/midwest-apocalypse-satellite-data-show-least-1-million-acres-us-farmland-devastated

Get ready for a disaster at the supermarket.

Of course, weather runs in cycles and we know from past cold weather eras, like the late 17^thcentury, that cold weather can wreak havoc on the planting and harvesting of crops.  Never mind the loss of animal life which we are experiencing in record numbers across the Midwest and in Australia in particular.

The real key to understanding the whole global warming/cooling debate is this. Food can’t be grown when it’s cold but can when it’s warm.  If temperatures got real hot and the major ice floes melt and sea levels rise, that would be a problem for populations along coastlines.  However, the planet would survive.

Note: We all wouldn’t perish in 12 years even if CO2 levels increased dramatically. That is, CO2 is good the planet, not bad. It’s a scientific fact that we need to have CO2, and lots of it, to exist on this planet despite what Al Gore thinks.

However, with cooling, things could get really bad especially in the Northern Hemisphere. There’s a reason why the Northern Hemisphere was not populated during some ancient periods (ice ages). To survive, the northern populations, which constitute 90% of the world population, would all have to move way south.  Good luck with seven billion people trying to survive on one-third of the planet’s land mass and with very little in the way of food production because food is primarily grown in the Northern Hemisphere.

Here’s the rub.  The media isn’t reporting on the implications of our weather problems.  That’s because they might have to explain why cold weather is far worse for us than warm weather.  Fancy that. However, when people wake up to the reality of major increases in food prices and/or empty shelves in the supermarket, there will be hell to pay. Better get the parkas out as the cold weather isn’t likely to end anytime soon.

 

Epilogue

A study published in Nature Climate Change looked at the four major warming periods of the last 5,000 years. Of the four, the coolest one was for the period recently ended in 1980. in fact, the Minoan warm period approximately 3,500 years ago was 4°C warmer than today. None of the four warm periods were associated with failing ecosystems despite being warmer than the 20th century.  So much for the threat of global warming.

The Game of Life, A Video Game

 

What are you?  Who are you? What’s your purpose in life? Everybody wants to know.  Well, here’s a few clues.

There are a few recurring mathematic/geometric patterns in Nature. For example:

• Pi – The ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter (3.14159265359…)
• Golden Ratio – An irrational number found by dividing a line into two parts so that the longer part divided by the smaller part is also equal to the whole length divided by the longer part (1.6180339887….).
• Fibonacci sequence – A sequence where each number is the sum of the two preceding ones. It is pervasive throughout nature, art, music, biology, and other disciplines.

Pi and the Golden Ratio are significant because they produce a result that cannot be exactly calculated (at least not in this universe).  That is, they are infinite numbers in a finite universe.  They indicate that something exists outside of this universe.  Further, all three show that our universe has intelligent design.

Physicist James Gates Jr. has stated that scientific theories which describe the fundamental nature of the universe contain embedded computer codes. Gates was talking about the 1s and 0s found in the software of modern computers. Think programming.  Again, intelligent design.

Einstein believed that time was an illusion; that the past, present and future exist simultaneously. This kind of “reality” can only be found in video games or movies. Many movies/TV shows were made with a message to the viewer about the true nature of reality, including The Matrix, The Truman Show, Blade Runner and Westworld.

 

The Game of Life

So, let’s start playing the game of life. First, what’s the purpose of life?  I would suggest that the purpose is to exit the game. Think of Tron.

Why Tron?  Well, in Tron the main character exists outside the game and subsequently becomes trapped inside the game, and then has to find his way out again.  So, the object of the game is to find the door, to find the exit from the game of life. Why? Well, because the programmers of the game require it. Remember, intelligent design.

What is reality like inside the game? So, if our reality is a video game/simulation what can we deduce about it? First of all, this is not a material world. The universe simply consists of information. It’s digital. For those of you who argue over a flat earth, the earth is neither round or flat, it’s holographic.

So, how do we experience this reality? Actually, in our mind. Everything is a function of consciousness. Even Einstein and Planck realized that.  Our physical bodies have sensory equipment that send information about the nature of our surroundings to the brain where that information is “translated” giving us an “interpretation” of reality. The interpretation of reality, based on sight, does not take place outside of our bodies but rather in the brain where there is no light whatsoever. As for thinking, science has demonstrated that the vast majority of thinking is done by our subconscious mind without our awareness. These apparently are the rules of the video game. When you play the game of life, you operate based on your “perception of reality.” Of course, you have no idea that you are inside of a video game.  All you have to go is your perceptions to go on.

So, where is the door? Here’s another clue. Remember, perception is everything. Think of yourself as being the game itself, instead of being trapped inside. Games actually can be quite interesting when you know the rules…and are aware that it’s actually a game.

 

“I’m trying to free your mind, Neo. But I can only show you the door. You’re the one that has to walk through it.” – from the movie The Matrix

 

Saving The Planet

 

I’m having pizza tonight at the local pizza place and exchanging pleasantries with the owner. A really nice guy.  Very engaging sort.

He’s bemoaning the fact that the world is going down the tubes, times are harder with little hope for the future. He says that he thinks that we need to have a war to save the country. Well, okay wars do sometimes solve certain problems, but for every winner there has to be at least one loser, if not more. So, on a global scale that doesn’t solve anything.  Just more endless wars.

Being the outspoken person that I am, I say that there are really only two events that can truly save the planet.  One possibility is extraterrestrials and the other would be the next step on Nature’s scale of human evolution.  Why these two? Well, extraterrestrials (e.g. a type II Kardashev civilization) if they exist and if they are friendly and if they want to help (I know, it’s a lot of ifs) by definition would have to be a more advanced civilization than the human species, so perhaps we could learn something from them.

Evolution is the wild card in all of this. We know from looking at the geology of the Earth that the planet has gone through many evolutionary cycles, some of which happened almost overnight in evolutionary terms.  Why not a move by humans out of our three-dimensional universe into something whose energy vibrates at a higher rate.  We know, for example, that the Schumann Resonance (the heartbeat of the planet) has recently been skyrocketing up out of sight.  What if the increase in the vibrational rate of the energy in the universe turns the human species into a higher life form? I said what if.

Pooh, pooh these possibilities all you want. Unless you come up with a better idea, I’m the boss.  At least, I agree with AOC on something.

 

 

Greenland Is Melting?

So, supposedly it’s getting warm at the Arctic Circle and the ice is melting.  I said supposedly.  Apparently, it ain’t so in Greenland.

A new NASA study published in Nature Geoscience has found that the biggest glacier in Greenland has been growing, instead of shrinking, since 2016, and growing rapidly at that. NASA has been using satellite data to monitor ice accumulation all over the world. For example, NASA’s website has a study of Antarctic ice accumulation that shows that Antarctica has actually been gaining ice. This challenges the conclusions of other previous studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC), which have said that Antarctica is losing ice.

As for the weather, somehow it’s supposedly warm in the Arctic Circle but cold further south.  The cold weather coming into North America, for example, is supposedly a by-product of the warm weather in the Arctic Circle. Of course, that’s completely counterintuitive.  To try and explain it, a new term, polar vortex, has been coined. I said to try and explain it.

In any event, NASA says that the whole planet can expect a lot more cold weather, really cold. The headline in NewsPunch reads, “Scientists Find Earth is Cooling, Not Warming; NASA Predicts Mini-Ice Age.” So, it turns out that we’re going to need all the greenhouse gases that we can get to help offset the global cooling! Another NASA climatologist, Dr. Kate Marvel, was interviewed recently and said,“I’m not sure that climate change is an immediate threat to human existence.”  Obviously, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t convinced Dr. Marvel that we’re all going to die in twelve years.

 

Epilogue

Then, there’s the United Nations who are at the forefront of the global warming initiative. Basically what they have been doing is pedaling a political agenda as science consensus. However, Dr. Nils-Axel Marner who worked for the IPCC says that, “The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is misleading humanity about climate change and sea levels…In fact, it is more likely that sea levels will decline, not rise.” How’s that for a ringing endorsement!

 

 

“The sun is entering one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age…The lack of sunspots on our sun could bring about record cold temperatures, and perhaps even a mini ice age.” – Dr. Tony Phillips, NASA

 

 

Collusion, What Collusion?

 

So, Mueller finally turned in his report and the backpedaling is happening fast and furious all over town (inside the Beltway).  However, the bigger story is that of the real collusion with the Russian government. It’s a story that parts of are already out in the public but it is not being fully covered (yet) by the media.

You see, a gentleman by the name of Christopher Steele testified in a London court on a related matter.  You should get use to hearing Christopher Steele’s name because it’s likely to come up a lot in the near future. Steele testified that he was hired with regards to “the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election” (as reported by the Washington Times) and that based on his report (which has since been referred to as the Steele Dossier) “…parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”  Steele was specifically tasked with uncovering evidence “on the Trump campaign conspiring with Moscow on election interference.” So, Steele, a former British spy, was hired by Hillary Clinton in an unprecedented attempt to overturn the results of a presidential election.  All this with the apparent cooperation of certain members of the Russian government.

Here’s the salient points that you need to know about the Steele Dossier (excerpts from The Federalist):

• Christopher Steele was hired by a law firm on behalf of the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s Reelection Campaign.
• The sources for the Steele Dossier were senior Russian officials.
• The Steele Dossier was used as a basis of illegal wiretaps on American citizens.
• The primary focus of the Mueller investigation was the widely discredited Steele Dossier.

In retrospect, we now know the story behind the story primarily because of all the testimony in front of the House Oversight and Judicial Committees. It was Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that recommended that James Comey be fired as head of the FBI and it was the very same Rod Rosentein who then hired special prosecutor Robert Mueller. Much of the special counsel appointment was based on the false claim that Trump fired Comey to end the Russia investigation. Then, Rosenstein conspired with other individuals (Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok et al) to overthrow the Trump presidency.  Meanwhile, the FBI was using the fake Steele Dossier to illegally get FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg. The rabbit hole is deep and the list of characters is long.  It features people like Donna Brazille, John Podesta and Sen.John McCain… and strangely enough even Seth Rich.

The full story is not for the faint of heart and many of the sordid details, such as Pizzagate, probably will never be revealed to the public. Maybe, that’s how it should be as the American people love anything that conforms with their own belief systems but can’t really handle the truth (cognitive dissonance). So, despite the end of the Mueller investigation, the topic of Russia collusion isn’t dead, rather it’s just getting started.

 

 

 

Saying Goodbye To Mueller

 

Not much to say about the Mueller report as there wasn’t much there worth reporting about. However, the reaction to the wind-up of the two-year long investigation requires a short take, although you’ve probably already had your fill by now.  Anyway…

The Mueller Report says that their investigation does not exonerate the president on the obstruction question. This line is causing angst all over Capitol Hill for all the wrong reasons.  The problem is that a prosecutor, which is what Mueller was, does not determine guilt or innocence.  A prosecutor’s only function is to determine whether or not there is enough evidence that makes it probable that a crime was committed, and, if so, to refer that case for criminal prosecution.

So, according to Mueller, there wasn’t enough evidence to refer an obstruction case against Trump for possible prosecution. Full stop. However, some people feel that Mueller needs to definitely say that Trump is innocent and if he fails to do so, then there are grounds for possible future investigation.  I am certainly not qualified to say whether there are grounds to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice.  The only thing that we do know is that Mueller did not have sufficient evidence to refer the obstruction case for prosecution.

Here’s what we do know, though.  According to Mueller, there was no collusion between Trump and Russia.  The reason is that the only evidence that Mueller had in that regard was a bogus dossier bought and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign.  It was a dossier that the FBI relied upon in getting illegal FISA wiretap warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.  That we know for sure because of testimony given by DOJ and FBI personnel before the House Oversight and Judiciary Committee.

So, the only possible meddling by Russia in the 2016 presidential election would have had to have been on behalf of Hillary Clinton.  Further, it has now been made public that the Ukraine has opened up an investigation about meddling between its own government on behalf of Hillary Clinton. How could the media have gotten it so wrong?

Caitlin Johnstone, a liberal political commentator, put it this way, “It has been obvious from the very beginning that the Maddow Muppets were being sold a lie…The insane, maniacal McCarthyite feeding frenzy that these people were plunged into by nonstop mass media propaganda drowned out the important voices who tried to argue that public energy was being sucked into Russia hysteria…Every politician, every media figure, every Twitter pundit and everyone who swallowed this moronic load of bull spunk has officially discredited themselves for life.”

Why is she so upset? Because the Democrats shot themselves in the foot by looking far worse than how they describe Trump. Far worse. They intentionally created the hysteria and then tried to blame it on Trump. Only it backfired. Spectacularly. Maybe, Pelosi et al. were secretly working for Trump to get him reelected.  If so, they may have just succeeded.

 

 

 

Jews For Anti-Semitism

 

What’s up with the Jewish people here in America?  They keep supporting known anti-Semites. For example, how can one even begin to explain why the people of the 5^thDistrict in Minnesota (which is heavily Jewish) elected Ilhan Omar to Congress? How could that have even happened? The following article in The Epoch Times sums up the situation quite nicely (see link).

https://www.theepochtimes.com/question-to-my-fellow-jews-how-can-you-still-vote-democrat_2849716.html

There is no doubt that the Democratic Party no longer supports Israel. No doubt. They support the Muslim cause instead. As a result, they tolerate anti-Semites in their midst (or, perhaps, it is a reflection of the fact that they are anti-Semitic themselves). That creates a problem for a party that claims to have the moral high ground.

It’s not just Democrats either. The Women’s March has refused to distance themselves from known anti-Semites such as Louis Farrakhan, Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory. Farrakhan and Sarsour, of course, are Muslims. Why women would want to be affiliated with Muslims, and by extension Sharia Law, is hard to fathom in any case.

It’s no coincidence that the Muslim cause has been supported in recent years, in both Europe and America, by the left-wing establishment.  Muslim atrocities in Africa and the Middle East, whereby Christians are routinely slaughtered, gets little to no press coverage and no consideration from the political establishment. While 50 Muslims die in a mosque in New Zealand, 120 Christians are killed by Islamic jihadists in Nigeria. A total of almost 2,000 non-Muslim people have been killed so far in 2019 by Muslims. Yet, hardly a peep of coverage by the media who refuse to label it for what it is: “Islamic terrorism.”  All we have is selective outrage over Muslim deaths which leads to the introduction of gun control measures and high-ranking female officials wearing hijabs.

So, when Jewish voters go to the polls in 2020, I wonder if they’ll remember that the Democratic Party has turned on them or do they just blindly vote Democratic as they have always done.  Either way, the rising anti-Semitism is a reflection of a bigger battle that is shaping up all across America. That battle includes a realignment of the political landscape which will now include Muslims but not Jews.  It’s a realignment that can not end well, regardless of the outcome. Hang on, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

 

“Five months after an antisemitic gunman murdered eleven Jews at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the worst attack on Jews in American history, the Democratic Party is struggling to condemn antisemitism…Democrats cannot bring themselves to offer a simple, straightforward condemnation of the hatred of Jews. Nor can they find the political courage to punish Omar, who has repeatedly used antisemitic rhetoric even after objections from party leaders and intervention by her own constituents.”  – Joel Pollak

Why Don’t People Like Me?

So, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez(AOC) thinks that her bad ratings are due to bias.  Well, if you need a bogeyman to blame things on, I guess that’s as good as any…or it could mean that she’s simply out of touch with the voting public.

Here’s a little background to consider:

• AOC’s legislative assistant Dan Rifle thinks that every billionaire is a policy failure and he thinks that the priority for Democratic staffers should be to burn the system down (per the Washington Free Beacon).

Comment: Burning the system down is about as out-of-touch as you can get. As for billionaires, every billionaire is actually a policy success. That is, if you don’t incentivize people to take risks, you won’t have a healthy economy. An economy with no billionaires is called communism and I haven’t heard anyone promote that since…well, since Bernie Sanders (and maybe Waleed Shahid).

•  Waleed Shahid, a former aide to AOC, has said that,“Democracy should mean taking power and wealth and making sure it belongs to everyone.”

Comment: First, America is a republic, not a democracy. Secondly, in any context, democracy is never about taking money from people and redistributing it. That’s more like communism, my friends.

• More Waleed Shahid: “…the Democratic Party’s voters look more like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez than Chuck Shumer and Nancy Pelosi.”

Comment: According to Pew Research, about half of Democratic voters are white and half are persons of color. When Shahid and the Justice Democrats say that they represent the majority of Democratic voters it’s simply not true. They live in a bubble in New York City which is not representative of Democrats across the country. How’s that for diversity! Does Shahid even know where Keokuk, Iowa is or what the Democrats of that area want?  Of course not, and he could care less.  He looks around in their group and what does he see – mostly people of color, everyone is under 35 and virtually everyone is from the New York City area, and still he wants to claim that they represent the Democratic party better than Schumer and Pelosi.

• AOC says that Democratic Party should target Democratic Representative Henry Cuellar from Texas in the 2020 election because his political views don’t match her own. She says, “Do we really want someone like that in the party?”

Comment: His views don’t match hers that’s true, but they do match a majority of Democratic voters from his own district.  After all, they elected him…to represent them in Congress. That’s true democracy in action.

 

So, when AOC complains about her ratings, here’s what’s she’s missing.  People dislike her because she’s for “open borders” which 75% of voters oppose  (according to a Gallup Poll).  Likewise, 75% of voters endorse “America First” which AOC opposes. Are you starting to get the picture, because apparently AOC does not.  Her poor ratings are not due to bias as she claims but to her simply being out of touch with mainstream America. What’s more, almost half of all Millennials polled by Gallup had an unfavorable opinion about AOC. Besides, Americans are a proud bunch. They don’t like their elected officials to tell them that they (the elected officials) are the boss. Especially, people in Keokuk, Iowa.

 

Epilogue

A new poll from Sienna College Research Institute shows that AOC’s favorability ratings in the state of New York have tanked. She’s at -13% as compared to Chuck Schumer at +10%. AOC’s approval rating is even lower than Trump (31% to 36%, respectively).  I wonder what AOC will have to say about that?

Or it could be that the following quote has something to do with why AOC’s favorability rating is so low. From AOC: “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs.”