There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?

It is the final catagory.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

wrote in message
...
| Check Your IQ
| http://www.iq-test.pl/?d=6422


It didn't know my password.

Androcles wrote in message

--
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

wrote in message
...
Check Your IQ
http://www.iq-test.pl/?d=6422


It didn't know my password.

Doesn't matter.
You are too stupid to have a measurable IQ either.

Dirk Vdm

On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?

It is the final catagory.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

xxein: Half-good for once. Why do you invent stupid ideas though?

When we do physics, we have to account for things. We do so under
different theories of how things happen. We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.

Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.

You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god.
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. I no
longer live in that climate).

Time is overrated. Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.

Well, we come close. We give it a velocity (but only relative). We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.

We don't know diddly sh*t. It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.

What is your next post going to be? Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

On 10 Apr, 02:36, xxein wrote:
On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?
It is the final catagory.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
xxein: *Half-good for once. *Why do you invent stupid ideas though?
When we do physics, we have to account for things. *We do so under
different theories of how things happen. *We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. *This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.
Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. *However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.
You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god.
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. *I no
longer live in that climate).
Time is overrated. *Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. *But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.
Well, we come close. *We give it a velocity (but only relative). *We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.
We don't know diddly sh*t. *It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.
What is your next post going to be? *Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

That's what makes physics fun. Just imagine, if metaphysics worked,
how far ahead the Ancient G(r)eeks would have been! They would have
invented everything and left us all waiting for welfare!? Conversely,
though, we have had to invent everything their legacy discovered in
principle - but left out! Gravity is an obvious candidate for debate -
with its occasional disruptions to normally physical routines!

Do I include poltergeists and UFOs? Sure! Why not? I don't want to be
part of a cargo cult.

By the way, I am not just skeptical but also mainly, cynical! And rate
of change of rest can only be relative under eternity, as Goethe knew!
--
'foolsrushin.'

On Apr 9, 11:43*pm, "foolsrushin." wrote:
On 10 Apr, wrote:





On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?
It is the final catagory.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
xxein: *Half-good for once. *Why do you invent stupid ideas though?
When we do physics, we have to account for things. *We do so under
different theories of how things happen. *We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. *This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.
Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. *However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.
You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god.
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. *I no
longer live in that climate).
Time is overrated. *Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. *But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.
Well, we come close. *We give it a velocity (but only relative). *We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.
We don't know diddly sh*t. *It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.
What is your next post going to be? *Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

That's what makes physics fun. Just imagine, if metaphysics worked,
how far ahead the Ancient G(r)eeks would have been! They would have
invented everything and left us all waiting for welfare!? Conversely,
though, we have had to invent everything their legacy discovered in
principle - but left out! Gravity is an obvious candidate for debate -
with its occasional disruptions to normally physical routines!

Do I include poltergeists and UFOs? Sure! Why not? I don't want to be
part of a cargo cult.

By the way, I am not just skeptical but also mainly, cynical! And rate
of change of rest can only be relative under eternity, as Goethe knew!
--
'foolsrushin.'- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

xxein: You have a good start. Are you going to finish?

But I don't understand why such relativity should forget/ignore the
river we live in.

On Apr 9, 7:43*pm, "foolsrushin." wrote:
On 10 Apr, 02:36, xxein wrote:





On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?
It is the final catagory.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
xxein: *Half-good for once. *Why do you invent stupid ideas though?
When we do physics, we have to account for things. *We do so under
different theories of how things happen. *We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. *This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.
Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. *However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.
You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god.
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. *I no
longer live in that climate).
Time is overrated. *Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. *But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.
Well, we come close. *We give it a velocity (but only relative). *We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.
We don't know diddly sh*t. *It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.
What is your next post going to be? *Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

That's what makes physics fun. Just imagine, if metaphysics worked,
how far ahead the Ancient G(r)eeks would have been! They would have
invented everything and left us all waiting for welfare!? Conversely,
though, we have had to invent everything their legacy discovered in
principle - but left out! Gravity is an obvious candidate for debate -
with its occasional disruptions to normally physical routines!

Do I include poltergeists and UFOs? Sure! Why not? I don't want to be
part of a cargo cult.

By the way, I am not just skeptical but also mainly, cynical! And rate
of change of rest can only be relative under eternity, as Goethe knew!
--
'foolsrushin.'- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Rate of change of rest?
That is co motion of more than one object in a system moving together
at exactly the same rate. Einstein said there is No Absolute Rest but
there is the relative rest of co motion or when things are moving
together. The only absolute rest would be the unmoved mover who began
the universe and abides with us through gravity.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

On Apr 10, 6:53*pm, wrote:
On Apr 9, 7:43*pm, "foolsrushin." wrote:





On 10 Apr, wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?
It is the final catagory.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
xxein: *Half-good for once. *Why do you invent stupid ideas though?
When we do physics, we have to account for things. *We do so under
different theories of how things happen. *We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. *This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.
Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. *However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.
You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god.
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. *I no
longer live in that climate).
Time is overrated. *Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. *But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.
Well, we come close. *We give it a velocity (but only relative). *We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.
We don't know diddly sh*t. *It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.
What is your next post going to be? *Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

That's what makes physics fun. Just imagine, if metaphysics worked,
how far ahead the Ancient G(r)eeks would have been! They would have
invented everything and left us all waiting for welfare!? Conversely,
though, we have had to invent everything their legacy discovered in
principle - but left out! Gravity is an obvious candidate for debate -
with its occasional disruptions to normally physical routines!

Do I include poltergeists and UFOs? Sure! Why not? I don't want to be
part of a cargo cult.

By the way, I am not just skeptical but also mainly, cynical! And rate
of change of rest can only be relative under eternity, as Goethe knew!
--
'foolsrushin.'- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Rate of change of rest?
That is co motion of more than one object in a system moving together
at exactly the same rate. Einstein said there is No Absolute Rest but
there is the relative rest of co motion or when things are moving
together. The only absolute rest would be the unmoved mover who began
the universe and abides with us through gravity.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

xxein: Explain.

On Apr 10, 2:58*pm, xxein wrote:
On Apr 10, 6:53*pm, wrote:





On Apr 9, 7:43*pm, "foolsrushin." wrote:

On 10 Apr, wrote:

On Apr 9, 12:16*am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?
It is the final catagory.
Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008
xxein: *Half-good for once. *Why do you invent stupid ideas though?
When we do physics, we have to account for things. *We do so under
different theories of how things happen. *We observe a happening and
categorise it into what we call physics. *This "physics", however, is
proved to be only subjective in nature.
Very good explanations exist for how we measure --- which should lead
to a more objective thought of the physic. *However, it dies on the
vine because of belief.
You might as well say that this red raspberry is growing to be a god..
(speaking of which, I miss them even through the wasps and bees. *I no
longer live in that climate).
Time is overrated. *Yes, you can say that an object goes from here to
there in some such time. *But let's see you put/assign a 'property' of
time on any object.
Well, we come close. *We give it a velocity (but only relative). *We
can measure the spectrum of an exact atomic procedure and
differentiate the relative velocity from the gravitational effects.
Or so we say.
We don't know diddly sh*t. *It is all based on some prior belief which
was surely wrong.
What is your next post going to be? *Cinderella ice-cream bars sent
via internet?

That's what makes physics fun. Just imagine, if metaphysics worked,
how far ahead the Ancient G(r)eeks would have been! They would have
invented everything and left us all waiting for welfare!? Conversely,
though, we have had to invent everything their legacy discovered in
principle - but left out! Gravity is an obvious candidate for debate -
with its occasional disruptions to normally physical routines!

Do I include poltergeists and UFOs? Sure! Why not? I don't want to be
part of a cargo cult.

By the way, I am not just skeptical but also mainly, cynical! And rate
of change of rest can only be relative under eternity, as Goethe knew!
--
'foolsrushin.'- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Rate of change of rest?
That is co motion of more than one object in a system moving together
at exactly the same rate. Einstein said there is No Absolute Rest but
there is the relative rest of co motion or when things are moving
together. The only absolute rest would be the unmoved mover who began
the universe and abides with us through gravity.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

xxein: *Explain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

God controls the universe by doing one thing. He makes gravity.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

On Apr 9, 12:16 am, wrote:
There is no before the beginning of time. So what was God doing in the
timelessness?
We know the universe comes from the timeless no-thing.
What can you say about that?

"The gods created men to worship them; men created the gods for
blasphemy." - source unknown

It is the final catagory.

Thank you, Alex Trebek.

Tell Vanna White that when someone buys a vowel, she damned well
better deliver the right one.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA