Recent Changes - Search:

Blog24.05

Today: Nov 21, 2024white bgcolor=#4169e1 padding=3px

Apr May Jun
S M T W T F S
28 29 30 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 01

< 0515 | 0516 | 0517 >


0516#t0500

The massless quantum is the photon. It's so-called speed is virtual and always the same in a vacuum. Its speed, virtualness and sameness and every other point about it every time is also a photon, i.e., a word, word-definition and word.


0516#t0600

If everything is word, word is the point that is every time, everywhere at once.


0516#t0700

Word is what anything is anywhere any time, absolutely, namely what everything is, its physical or any other kind of [word] definition.


0516#t0800

Is the Photon in a Vacuum Nothing or is It the Point, i.e., as soon as Anything is Something?

Current AI-overview of the photon.

“According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, photons have no perspective because time slows down and distances shrink as an object moves closer to the speed of light. From a photon's perspective, the universe is timeless and dimensionless. For example, if you move through space quickly, you move through less time. From an observer's perspective, it takes light about eight minutes to travel from the Sun to Earth, but from the photon's perspective, the journey is instantaneous.”

Ronald Green,

I think this is a very important point and question. If the photon has no perspective, since its time dilation is absolute the time it technically experiences is zero, over any distance at all [in a vacuum].

Here is the kicker. If anything or its medium of travel has any inertia, it has perspective, since its speed is below the speed of light thus it has time to have perspective in. So, is the photon in that it is massless, if in a vacuum, nothing or is it invariably the point, i.e., as soon as it is non-vacuum (non-zero)?

Is the photon not in a vacuum in that it is massless, the point that is the symbol, a word, word definition (physical or otherwise) and word? What else is anything at all if it requires a concept that invariably is a symbol to be reality at all?


0516#t0900

Psychology is Specifically Not Religion. It is Ultimately Metastasis via AI

“Psychology is AI-Religion — Pierre Rousseau”— Vito Hayes quoting me in a purple skulls background.

Not quite, because I specifically say that it is a secular phenomenon. It is not a mere religion. It is far worse. It is second-tier setup of man as human and post-human in fallacy, self-deception, and mental disorder as if it is mankind's nature.

To further illustrate the strawman of the OP where I am quoted against the purple (feminist, Satanic) skulls background. I stress that farce serves as diversion to facilitate psychology's homuncular rationalization of man as having a psyche (secular soul analyzed) that experiences something or empirically hypothesizes it to be falsifiable to thus be definition other than word definition to which word definition is mere sign... a setup to minimize, demonize and deny word and mankind. I see psychology as the denial of word-definition (word, symbol) as the only conceptual thus virtual reality, which (the denial) is very different to religion namely formal belief in God's Word.

I still have no idea what the skulls symbolize. If it is what I think it is, namely retribution, that is exactly what I've had against the setup and training of mankind as naturally prone to be fallacious, self-deceptive, and farcically mentally disorderly. In the very long historical view of cultural development I see retribution truly as the most atrocious institution of scapegoating, ultimately metastatic subversion, genocide and extinction.


0516#t1000

I guess the psychologistic psyche-zombie henchman is the new boogeyman.

Therefore, so what. I'll tell you what.

It is assaulting our children and our women to castrate mankind to genocide and extinction.


0516#t1100

Light is the universal medium, and light is a point.
Light is symbol, word-definition and word.
Light is the photon, which is the point.


0516#t1200

Anything, i.e., any definition, that in any way excludes the point that the definition of its whole or any of its parts is word definition is the universal fallacy.


Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on May 16, 2024, at 01:07 PM