[Louis Lagae]

Wetenschappelijk wordt rigoureus nagedacht. Pas op, vrienden, voor syllogismen.

Je weet wel, ik kan in mijn pijama, mijn pijama kan in mijn valieske dus ....

[rudeman]

Pas op voor de logica? Waarom?

[Louis Lagae]

Voor dfe logica moet men niet oppassen. Wie beweert zo iets? Logica is echter zeer moeilijk, daar heb je gelijk.

[rudeman]

Jij hebt het over syllogisme, dat is niets anders dan logica..
Logica maakt alles juist heel eenvoudig.

[David]

Louis,

De omzetting van energie in een andere vorm ervan is niet altijd evident, maar wel steeds mogelijk. Of is dit niet zo? Ik kan geen voorbeeld bedenken waarin dit niet zo is. Alles bestaat uit een vorm van energie. Akkoord? Is het dan niet aannemelijk dat er niets anders bestaat dan energie? Als bewustzijn ook een vorm van energie is, kan het dan ook bestaan los van de hersenen? Zoals warmte ook bestaat los van een verwarmingstoestel. Als een verwarmingstoestel warmte maakt, en je elemineert daarna het verwarmingstoestel, dan blijft de opgewekte warmte bestaan. (wet van het behoud van energie)

Groetjes.

[rudeman]

Kan niemand van jullie iets zeggen over mijn theorie? Ik dacht dat dit forum over bewustzijn ging maar ik hoor daar niks over van jullie..

[Louis Lagae]

[rudeman]

[rudeman]

Since the mind and life institute is trying to explain more about science and spiritualism I would like to tell you my idea about consciousness. The thing is that men is looking in the wrong direction with A. Einsteins relativity theory. Not light itself is moving, we are moving true time and space with the speed of light. Light is only an energy leaving his source as a trail.

At the speed of light there is no time. So nothing can move.
From the point of view from a person each distance is a possibility into the future. While we travel true time we are able to see all options what the light is showing us.

To prove my idea I wrote the following text...

I can prove that the relativity theory of Einstein is wrong. The good point is that I can make this understandable for many people in a very simple way. The issue I try to prove with my idea is that our own consciousness is the absolute border of the universe. To prove this I have to prove that the speed of light is not 300.000km/sec but actually zero. I know that this sounds completely strange but read on and I will try to explain you in a short way how I think to prove this.

The first thing to know is that there is no time at light speed. How can something move if there is no time to move? Looking to the twin paradox a traveler true space leaves the earth and comes back and is only 1 second older. The person on Earth is than for example 2 years older.

If the traveler true space only became one second older, he never could make a longer trip than 300.000km. He had only 1sec to travel! The person on earth was traveling in the same "period" at least 30km/sec, because that is the speed of earth around the sun. Well, 2 years x 30km/sec is a lot more than 300.000km.

Off course I have to explain you a lot more than this, I just hope that I can open some eyes of the scientists working with this theory. If the theory is relative, you also should put it upside down. If light moves with 300.000km/sec one way, we are moving with the same speed the other way. Notice that we measure seconds, not the photon. You need time to move.

I would like to tell you a lot more about the way it is possible that we can "see" things if light is not moving, also this is not to difficult to understand. From the point of view from the individual all other positions are possibility's in the future. The person travels true time ( to tomorrow and so on..) while light leaves a trail into the past from the point of view where it comes from.

I hope that you understand my idea what I would like to show to the people. The idea of a multiversum is so a lot closer to mankind ( everyone is the middle of his own universe) ans consciousness is the border of the universe. We can chose our own future.

Misschien dat bovenstaande kan helpen in deze discussie..

[rudeman]

Weinig reacties, heeft dan niemand een mening over mijn stelling?