From 2012 XVIVO

It’s not captioned, so you have to watch the other vids to see what is happening if you are not a cell biologist.

Here’s a featured vid: Antibody immune response:

Saturday, June 06, 2020

Serving The Intelligent Design Community

From 2012 XVIVO

It’s not captioned, so you have to watch the other vids to see what is happening if you are not a cell biologist.

Here’s a featured vid: Antibody immune response:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Off Topic: For anyone who believes that super-string theory may have purchase as to accurately describing ‘ultimate’ reality (I have reservations myself), The following video may be very interesting for you to watch (actually it was very interesting for me to watch, and as I said earlier, I have my reservations about super-string theory)

Dr. Sylvester James Gates, Jr. Presents Evidence For Intelligent Design – video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BMYtnv_OnI

“Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code,” first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940’s, has been discovered embedded WITHIN the equations of superstring theory!

Why does nature have this? What errors does it need to correct? What is an ‘error’ for nature? More importantly what is the explanation for this freakish discovery?

The most obvious conclusion for this discovery is Intelligent Design.

Recent NPR interview with Professor Gates:

http://being.publicradio.org/p.....symbolsofp…

Gates original paper:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.0051

Gates wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_James_Gates

@ba

Wow, that’s pretty interesting. A couple questions:

1. I’m pretty weak when it comes to comsology. What’s a good and recent book on the subject? I think Stinger and Krauss (was that him on the right?) have been arguing against it? Where can I find recent developments in the debate?

2. With the discovery? of the higgs, is string theory on the way out?

Well JoeCoder, I usually refer to Professor Peter Woit of Colombia University when dealing with some of the overextended hoopla coming from super-string theory. Here is his website:

Not Even Wrong

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/

His website is named after the book he wrote on the subject. His treatment of string-theory has been less than gentle to put it mildly:

Here are some entries of his along that ‘not to gentle’ line:

String Theory Fails Another Test, the “Supertest” – December 2010

Excerpt: It looks like string theory has failed the “supertest”. If you believe that string theory “predicts” low-energy supersymmetry, this is a serious failure.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=3338

This Week’s Hype – November 3, 2011 by Peter Woit (Ph.D. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia)

Excerpt: the LHC has turned out to be dud, producing no black holes or extra dimensions,

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4118

SUSY Still in Hiding – Prof. Peter Woit – Columbia University – February 2012

Excerpt: The LHC (Large Haldron Collider) has done an impressive job of investigating and leaving in tatters the SUSY/extra-dimensional speculative universe that has dominated particle theory for much of the last thirty years, and this is likely to be one of its main legacies. These fields will undoubtedly continue to play a large role in particle theory, no matter how bad the experimental situation gets, as their advocates argue “Never, never, never give up!”, but fewer and fewer people will take them seriously.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4437

The Ultimate Guide to the Multiverse – Peter Woit – November 2011

Excerpt: The multiverse propaganda machine has now been going full-blast for more than eight years, since at least 2003 or so, and I’m beginning to wonder “what’s next?”. Once your ideas about theoretical physics reach the point of having a theory that says nothing at all, there’s no way to take this any farther. You can debate the “measure problem” endlessly in academic journals, but the cover stories about how you have revolutionized physics can only go on so long before they reach their natural end of shelf-life. This has gone on longer than I’d ever have guessed, but surely it has to end sooner or later, – Peter Woit – Senior Lecturer at Columbia University

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4194

“string theory, while dazzling, has outrun any conceivable experiment that could verify it”

http://www.uncommondescent.com.....verify-it/

Theory Bubbles – Peter Woit – April 2012

Excerpt: With no reality check, a less than rigorous hypothesis such as string theory may linger on,,,, By contrast, a hypothesis such as string theory, which attempts to unify quantum mechanics with Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, has so far not been tested critically by experimental data, even over a time span equivalent to a physicist’s career.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4558

F-theory Phenomenology – Peter Woit – March 2012

Excerpt: So, the long-standing ideology that supersymmetry stabilizes the weak scale, and seeing its effects will finally give evidence for string theory unification looks like it is crumbling. With this hope gone, string theory unification becomes a completely unpredictive subject, with no hope of connection to experiment. One has an infinite array of mathematically highly complex models one can spend time studying, but it’s hard to characterize doing so as any recognizable form of physical science.

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4506

String theory now “thoroughly irrelevant” to Large Hadron Collider work? – May 8, 2012

Excerpt: The extent to which string theory is now agreed to be thoroughly irrelevant to LHC physics is kind of striking. The few people like Kane claiming otherwise are being ignored as an embarrassment. If evidence for SUSY or extra dimensions had shown up, this would be very, very different.

http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ider-work/

JoeCoder, although I am certainly far from understanding the mathematical intricacies of string theory, one thing that the ‘computer simulation’ (Matrix) conjecture had going for it, in my view, is that ‘ultimate reality’ is actually shown by quantum mechanics to reduce to ‘bits of information’ (which I personally hold to be more conducive to the ‘Logos’ of John1:1 than to a computer simulation):

The following articles show that even atoms (Ions) are subject to teleportation:

Of note: Materialism had postulated for centuries that everything reduced to, or emerged from material atoms, yet the correct structure of reality is now found by science to be as follows:

Yet even though the ‘MATRIX’ computer simulation has this information basis of reality going for it, it should be noted that this popular science fiction conception of the universe ultimately being ‘merely’ a computer simulation (as in the ‘Matrix’ movies), is far too simplistic in its conception as to accurately describing ‘ultimate reality’:

Moreover string theory ultimately tries to unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, yet the conflict of reconciling General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is far more severe than most people realize. The ‘conflict’ primarily arises from the inability of either theory to successfully deal with the Zero/Infinity problem that crops up in different places of each theory:

Moreover, this extreme ‘mathematical difficulty’, of reconciling General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything’, was actually somewhat foreseeable from previous work, earlier in the 20th century, in mathematical logic by Kurt Godel:

In fact, in their postulation of string theory, of their postulation of a mathematical theory of everything, it seems that mathematicians and physicists have completely forgotten this ‘number 1 breakthrough’ in mathematical logic in the twentieth century:

Godel, who logically proved you cannot have a mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, without allowing God to bring completeness to the mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, also had this to say:

And indeed, if one allows that ‘God can play the role of a person’ then a successful resolution to the zero/infinity conflict of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics readily pops out at us:

Of note: I hold ‘growing large without measure’ to be a lesser quality infinity than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The reason why I hold growing large without measure to be a ‘lesser quality infinity’ than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero is stated at the 4:30 minute mark of the following video:

Verse and music:

OT:

Here is a interesting related note on ’roundness’:

The delicate balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars is truly a work of art. Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), a famed astrophysicist, is the scientist who established the nucleo-synthesis of heavier elements within stars as mathematically valid in 1946. He is said to have converted from staunch atheism into being a Theist after discovering the precise balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars. Years after Sir Fred discovered the stunning precision with which carbon is synthesized in stars he stated this:

Sir Fred also stated this: