[S.T.D.]

Your theory don't make any sense sir. You gotta try harder sir. Besides, you did not even answer my question at all.

its not my theory stupid fuck, it did answer you directly in fact i spoonfeed you way too much but you are too stupid to understand it. my fault? its not my problem you are born stupid

[brraverishhh]

No sir, you never answer where did the energy came from. I asked clarification questions and you scramed remember my fren? You just gotta do better this time. come on, show us what you are made of brother.

[Slonopotam845]

No sir, you never answer where did the energy came from. I asked clarification questions and you scramed remember my fren? You just gotta do better this time. come on, show us what you are made of brother.

stupid idiot, i answered you question by saying vacuum = energy. asking this question merely display your stupidity more. it merely shows that you are too dumb and stupid to understand the reply.

[HedgeYourBets]

No sir, you never answer where did the energy came from. I asked clarification questions and you scramed remember my fren? You just gotta do better this time. come on, show us what you are made of brother.

Since you crave for an answer, I will give you my Theravada Buddhist understanding of the answer. It goes like this:

Consciousness exists dependent on physical matter as a requisite condition.
Physical matter exists dependent on consciousness as a requisite condition.
When one exists, the other also exists. There is no Creator. There is only co-dependent existence.

I quote the Sheaves of Reeds sutta as the basis for my understanding.

"Just now, friend Sariputta, I understood your statement as, 'It's not the case, Kotthita my friend, that name-&-form is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made & other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously. However, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form' But then I understood your statement as, 'It's not the case, Kotthita my friend, that consciousness is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made & other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — it arises spontaneously.' However, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.' Now how is the meaning of these statements to be understood?"

"Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form.

You may also like to read this article by Ian J. Thompson:

Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness: A Causal Correspondence Theory

`New' Metaphysics
These ideas have the possible disadvantage (or feature) that the operation of ordinary inert physical processes requires further analysis. Basically, since the propensities for physical processes derive from mental processes, all physical dispositions must derive (or have been derived from) some prior psychical level. This may sound like pan-psychism, but I am not saying that all physical processes include their own consciousnesses. There is a simpler solution, if you can accept the new metaphysics that there is some kind of Source, composed of suitable `psychic' propensities, from which everyday material propensities perpetually derive. Since the operation of this Source is always according to past physical events, we saw above that this operation amounts to the constant production of new propensities as if a `physical law' were prevailing. That is the way most scientists prefer to see the world. It is only that sometimes things are not so simple.

There may be some reaction to the apparent `dualism' in these ideas, as I have postulated minds existing separately from brains. However, this separation is only in our theory: in practice they need each other, and function together as a unified whole - as the person.

[MannoFr]

Unfortunately my fren. Big bang theory does not teach what you imagined.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
It says nothing about vacuum energy being the source of the big bang at all.

You are just trying to BS here and it doesn't work and you end up looking like a fool. Ahahahahahahahah..............

cheers

[MannoFr]

No sir,

Since you call us Sir.

Then hurry up wash the toilet and mop the kitchen ! Don't be lazy bum !

[Fegasderty]

Thats correct, you can wash my toilet sir.

[Ifroham4]

Unfortunately my fren. Big bang theory does not teach what you imagined.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
It says nothing about vacuum energy being the source of the big bang at all.

You are just trying to BS here and it doesn't work and you end up looking like a fool. Ahahahahahahahah..............

cheers

try enter university and take some basic physics course for god sake.
this is an well established theory stupid fuck, in fact that video the forumer earlier just now explain it in details. by the way ignorant fuck, that fellow in the video is a leading famous physcist, not your lan jiao church pastor trying to bullshit what is science

[Peptobismol]

don't know say don't know la. Talk so much for what?

told you, and you still wont listen. what to do? some people are just plain incorrigible.

[MannoFr]

try enter university and take some basic physics course for god sake.
this is an well established theory stupid fuck, in fact that video the forumer earlier just now explain it in details. by the way ignorant fuck, that fellow in the video is a leading famous physcist, not your lan jiao church pastor trying to bullshit what is science

A video on youtube says God created the universe sir. You believe?
A video can say anything about anything, the proof is in credible sources such as wikipedia.

You see, when confronted by credible sources, you just get stuck and can't explain your way out anymore.

In other words, you cannot explain what exploded and where did the energy came from.

[Lillie_Steins]

A video on youtube says God created the universe sir. You believe?
A video can say anything about anything, the proof is in credible sources such as wikipedia.

You see, when confronted by credible sources, you just get stuck and can't explain your way out anymore.

In other words, you cannot explain what exploded and where did the energy came from.

wikipedia WAS NEVER A CREDIBLE SOURCE. and stupid fuck, go search who the hell is that fellow that gave the talks, and he hang out with who, yes youtube cannot be trusted IF ITS A VIDEO MAKE BY STUPID FUCK LIKE YOU.

i lost count how many times i answered this. u are merely too stupid to understand it, its not my fault that you are born stupid seriously.

[softy54534]

wikipedia WAS NEVER A CREDIBLE SOURCE. and stupid fuck, go search who the hell is that fellow that gave the talks, and he hang out with who, yes youtube cannot be trusted IF ITS A VIDEO MAKE BY STUPID FUCK LIKE YOU.

i lost count how many times i answered this. u are merely too stupid to understand it, its not my fault that you are born stupid seriously.

I laugh until pengsang.......can't understand how come u guys have the stamina to entertain someone whose brain has got some loose screw......

[S.T.D.]

wikipedia WAS NEVER A CREDIBLE SOURCE. and stupid fuck, go search who the hell is that fellow that gave the talks, and he hang out with who, yes youtube cannot be trusted IF ITS A VIDEO MAKE BY STUPID FUCK LIKE YOU.

i lost count how many times i answered this. u are merely too stupid to understand it, its not my fault that you are born stupid seriously.

Wiki is a credible source.
It made no mention of vacuum energy as the source of BBT.

[Fegasderty]

Wiki is a credible source.
It made no mention of vacuum energy as the source of BBT.

Do a google on Wiki and u get:

"Wiki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
A wiki is a website which allows its users to add, modify, or delete its content via a web browser using a simplified markup language or a rich-text editor. Wikis ..."

Credible ???

as good as u, me and any of us who cares to input anything we wanted......that's all from me...and I shall be watching from the sideline for add'l entertainment...

[Drugmachine]

I laugh until pengsang.......can't understand how come u guys have the stamina to entertain someone whose brain has got some loose screw......

you hit the nail squarely on the head.
it is definitely a waste of time to replay to Kinana.

[brraverishhh]

Unfortunately my fren. Big bang theory does not teach what you imagined.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
It says nothing about vacuum energy being the source of the big bang at all.

You are just trying to BS here and it doesn't work and you end up looking like a fool. Ahahahahahahahah..............

cheers

unfortunately your stupid answer does not hold water too.
just because someone postulated this Big Bang Theory , you used it to counter an argument.
what makes you think that this theory is 100% correct.
and just to show your stupidity , suppose i accept the big bang theory of creation , it just prove that there is no creator god as you claimed.

[tgs]

Wiki is a credible source.
It made no mention of vacuum energy as the source of BBT.

hahaha..... wiki is a CREDIBLE source.....as credible as you, me or any tom dick and harry can edit it to be...

wiki.jpg

last one from me here else the screw in my brain got loosen.......with crackling nuts sound.......

[Drugmachine]

Wiki is a credible source.
It made no mention of vacuum energy as the source of BBT.

wahahahaha.....as credible as you, me and anybody who can type whatever we like into wiki....
wiki.jpg

just wondering if this loose screw guy is an Admin [or shielded by admin] since several of my friend's post don't seem to be able to get approve....? u guys better be careful who is behind this forum watching and gathering information to go after u later.......

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

First of all, it seems you did not follow the thread sir. I suggest that you go back n read b4 your next post

[Lt_Apple]

Wiki is a credible source.
It made no mention of vacuum energy as the source of BBT.

stupid fuck, i bet you never made pass O level. thanks for confirming your stupidity and education level via saying this silly statement. now everything is crystal clear why are you so stupid.

https://academicskills.anu.edu.au/re...se-do-not-cite

told you to study harder, at least enter poly. EVEN IN LOCAL POLYTECHNICS WIKIPEDIA CITATION FOR FINAL YEAR PROJECT IS NEVER ALLOWED From this silly statement of yours, it very much confirm the fact that you have never made it pass O level.