 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / October 2005The Theory of Intelligent Design as it relates to E=MC2
I know that E (energy) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2 means. It means there are actually two universes existing side by side. And light particles from each bounce back and force between the two. The universe is "bi-polar" just like me! And - in one universe - the negative happens, in the other one, all the positive happens. And the rapid negative-positive energy charge actually creates two universes that are making so much energy, that they are expanding contually... Thus, light (energy) bouncing back and forth at the speed of light squared (negative and positive charges) between *two universes* creates the known universe. There is, literally, another version of the universe existing right beside ours in which our "twin" makes the exact opposite choice that we do. Actually, I lied. There may be three charges: "negative," "positive" and a Universal Version that is "neutral." Currently, by the way, we are in the "Neutral Universe," which is why everything is so f.cked up right now! So, Einstein really did figure out God's thoughts. Einstein figured out that *He* was God, because he figured out God's ultimate secret: The Grand Unification Theory Einstein did it! And I am just some a.shole that figured it out! -Paul Whiting Hey, Wilhelm, can you run the numbers on this badboy to see if I'm right? Let's publish this motherf..ker! You're name goes 1st. The Theory of Intelligent Design *is* the Grand Unification Theory. E=MC2 Einstein did it! But he forgot to talk about neutral, or (the void), which he was afraid was actually *proof* of hell. But, he was wrong! The void is ZERO. God is NOTHING without US. Yet, zero kept collapsing the calculus equations! So, we are NOTHING without GOD Thus, Neutral, or the vaccuum, is HEAVEN. Because the WAR IS FINALLY OVER. We ALL won! Welcome to heaven! Love always, -Paulee Oh sh.t, I was wrong! Okay, in the two universes, which exits side by side, each side *alternates* between making the best choice and making the worst one. I realized that if they were true exact opposites, that would not create *stability.* Thus, we have the pairs of opposites (good/bad, right/wrong, light/dark God/Devil) existing in compliment to each other, but in different dimensions. And we have light particles from *both* universes popping in and out of existence within *each* universe at the speed of light. And we have the vaccuum (The Void), in which both universes are "suspended." And what keeps the whole thing stable is gravity, which is "God's Love." Because gravity pulls everything together. And if I remember correctly, gravity is really electromagnetic fields, so "love" can attract, or it can repel, depending on what kind of electromagnetic field two or more objects have that bump into each other. Now, obviously there can be more than two universes (or dimensions). It seems like I heard once that, at last count, Quantam Mechanics had figured there were twelve dimensions (or was it 16)? Damn! I need to learn calculus! -Paulee And just a friendly reminder to all of those out there playing "The Game," if you try to steal this from me, *I will come after you.* I have documentation proving that *I* thought of this first and that proof is located on several websites (which is why I cross-posted it!). I can de-construct *anything* in a way that *any* jury can understand. Get my drift? They will believe *me* and NOT *you,* because I have a) written proof and b) I can explain this thing inside and out in *plain language.* The only exception to the above rule is Wilhelm Godschalk whom I know and trust. You can take anything I have, Wilhelm, because you helped me in my hour of need. I am zero. I am nothing. And I can take all of you down, unless I LOVE YOU. :-) Just a friendly reminder... Yours in Ultimate Power, -Paul Whiting "I am the dark side of the light." > And just a friendly reminder to all of those out there playing "The > Game," if you try to steal this from me, *I will come after you.* [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > I am zero. I am nothing. And I can take all of you down, unless I LOVE > YOU. :-) Paul, are you off your meds, it would seem that you taken a swing towards the deep end I hope your all right? Gary Stein >Paul, are you off your meds, it would seem that you taken a swing towards >the deep end I hope your all right? What are your credentials, again, Gary? Oh! And when you can walk a mile in my shoes, feel free to judge me. -Paul Whiting >>Paul, are you off your meds, it would seem that you taken a swing > towards >>the deep end I hope your all right? > > What are your credentials, again, Gary? Well lets see I have BS in Computer Science, an MBA, and spent from 1996 to 2001 devoting around 8 hours a day to educating myself on HIV, AIDS, the treatment of OI's and the pharmacology of ARV. > Oh! And when you can walk a mile in my shoes, feel free to judge me. Fondoo and I could say the same about you. In that you claim to have suffered no ill effects from your HIV infection while we have. As to my concern about your mental state it was sincere you proudly mentioned in one post today that you are bi-polar and then shortly after that started a chain of posts that are not at all reflective of your normal posting style nor equal to your normal level of logical thinking thus I am concerned about you and asked if you were off your meds. Gary Stein >As to my concern about your mental state it was sincere you proudly >mentioned in one post today that you are bi-polar and then shortly after >that started a chain of posts that are not at all reflective of your normal >posting style nor equal to your normal level of logical thinking thus I am >concerned about you and asked if you were off your meds. Excuse me? What, precisely, makes you think I take *any* prescribed medications? I have not been to a doctor in years... I *used* to take paxil for generalized anxiety disorder but, then, I discovered Qi Gong and found that *natural method* took cared of my axiety. As you can see, I have *no fear* now and am happy to complete the task for which I was sent: bringing down the AIDS paradigm. -Paul Whiting >"pauleewhiting" <pauleewhiting@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> What are your credentials, again, Gary? > >Well lets see I have BS in Computer Science, an MBA, and spent from 1996 to >2001 devoting around 8 hours a day to educating myself on HIV, AIDS, the >treatment of OI's and the pharmacology of ARV. Did the *astounding* thought ever occur to you that you were studying and *incorrect* premise? Did you *bother* to think *critically* about what you were being told? Did you look to find the anomalies in the equation? (That last one is SUPER important.) Mathematics: The Language of God. -Paul Whiting >>"pauleewhiting" <pauleewhiting@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> What are your credentials, again, Gary? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Did the *astounding* thought ever occur to you that you were studying > and *incorrect* premise? Yes I saw the denialists websites, and found there content utterly devoid of evidence. > Did you *bother* to think *critically* about what you were being told? Yes, do you? > Did you look to find the anomalies in the equation? Yes especially in regards to OI's and ARV treatment. > (That last one is SUPER important.) Yes it is sadly you seem completely unable to apply it to the denialists dogma you are so enamored with. > Mathematics: The Language of God. Says who? Mathematics' is the purest science that exists, whereas the existence of a "language of god" implies faith in a supreme being, mathematics' does not and can not address issues of faith. Gary Stein >> Mathematics: The Language of God. > >Says who? Mathematics' is the purest science that exists, whereas the >existence of a "language of god" implies faith in a supreme being, >mathematics' does not and can not address issues of faith. Gary, I respectfully disagree with you! My co-worker, Matt, pointed out that C2 isn't really the speed of light twice, as I had it before. It's the square root of the speed of light! Thus, E(engergy) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) My question to Iconoclaster is: What is the square root of the speed of light? C2 = ? By the way, does this equation of Good Ol' Eistein, line up with Quantam Mechanics, if you take into account that Zero(God) can collapse the equation? And, thus: 0(God) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) Or: E(engergy) = 0(God) So... God is nothing! God is ZERO! God is so powerful S/He can be *everything* and *nothing* all at the same time! In other words, God is the portion of *every* equation that can collapse it! God is Absolute Zero. -Paul Whiting >God is nothing! God is ZERO! God is so powerful S/He can be >*everything* and *nothing* all at the same time! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >God is Absolute Zero. And, finally, we have: E(energy) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) or 0(Absolute Zero, or vaccuum) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) 0r E(energy) = 0(Absolute Zero, or vaccuum) Three equations that explain the entire universe! Einstien *did it!* He just *didn't realize* that he had! I think he thought zero/vaccuum proved the existence of Hell and/or The Devil, because everytime he would insert zero into his equation (as you must be able to do, since everything has to have an absence of value), it *totally* freaked him out! I think the thought never occurred to Einstein that God could be nothing! And, of course, God can be *anything,* including *nothing.* Nothingness, is how God rests! The vaccuum of the universe is where God exists, because from there, S/He can go *anywhere* and/or be *everything* and *nothing* at the same time. -Paul Whiting Paul, there is probably nobody here in misc.health.aids who can influence the direction of any university's, corporation's or government's research in physics. You might try posting your physics discoveries in either or both of these groups: http://www.talkaboutscience.com/group/sci.physics/ http://www.talkaboutscience.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/  SignatureDavid Canzi "I am not denying anything." -- Celia Farber snip. >It's the square root of the speed of light! No. >Thus, E(engergy) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) Yes. >0(God) = M(mass)C(speed of light)2(squared) No. More interestingly, the speed of light = the square root of (E/m). Your angel of light, Lucy Fur >More interestingly, >the speed of light = the square root of (E/m). > >Your angel of light, >Lucy Fur Are you saying that C = EM2 is the equivolency of E = MC2 which is something Einstein said? Your angel of darkness Auntie Christ >>More interestingly, >>the speed of light = the square root of (E/m). [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >which is something Einstein said? No, that's not what I said. I said: the speed of light = the square root of (E/m). c = square root of (E/m) (sorry, hard to put it in ascii) Gotta learn some basic algebra first, Paul!!! >Your angel of darkness >Auntie Christ LOL. >>>More interestingly, >>>the speed of light = the square root of (E/m). [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Gotta learn some basic algebra first, Paul!!! He thinks gravity is electromagnetism and is related (somehow) to God's love, and that good and evil are physical quantities. His understanding of the word "dimension" comes from comic books, where a "dimension" is another universe "parallel" to ours. Perhaps he knows Mr. Mxyzptlk personally. He has explained to us his revolutionary new physical theory based on his interpretation of E=MC^2, and warned us not to try to steal the credit for it... but he doesn't understand the difference between a square and a square root. Nevertheless he's a towering genius who can revolutionize any branch of science he chooses to examine. Archimedes Plutonium has a new and powerful competitor here. SignatureDavid Canzi "I am not denying anything." -- Celia Farber snip >Archimedes Plutonium has a new and powerful competitor here. LOL...whatever happened to him??? >>Archimedes Plutonium has a new and powerful competitor here. > >LOL...whatever happened to him??? He's currently in sci.math, working on a disproof of the Riemann hypothesis. Perhaps he should collaborate with James S. Harris. SignatureDavid Canzi "I am not denying anything." -- Celia Farber >He has explained to us his revolutionary new physical theory >based on his interpretation of E=MC^2, and warned us not to >try to steal the credit for it... but he doesn't understand the >difference between a square and a square root. David, sweetheart, At least I am willing to "put myself out there" by taking chances with sharing ideas that pop into my head, and being authentic in my humanity by throwing myself into the fire of learning. You're right. I don't know everything. You're right. Sometimes my understandings are incomplete. You're right. I have an abiding belief in the universe as being a "non-accident." But, hey, at least I am trying. At least I am bettering myself by asking questions. And, at least, I am not stupid enough to think that nature would create a virus that de-differentiates by *only* being able to mimic the diseases that other microbes cause - a virus that manages to jump from the heterosexual population on the African continent directly into the homosexual population in the rest of the world but, somehow, miraculously steers clear of the heterosexual population in the porn industry, despite the fact they are engaging in both high-risk behaviors (tons of vaginal *and* anal sex with *multiple partners* and *without* condoms). Say, where *is* that "straight plague" in the heterosexual porn industry, anyway? Why aren?t straight porn stars dropping like flies? Are they not the *highest risk* group ever? If you can't see the major discrepancies in this highly flawed theory, then *I am* a towering genius compared to you, because a junior high school student could pick out these gaping holes in logic from a mile away. -Paul Whiting Some of the greatest minds in the history of mankind (one of which you most assuredly are not) have tried to apply science to faith and failed utterly and completely they are mutually exclusive concepts. Faith can not prove Science and Science can not prove Faith Gary Stein >>> Mathematics: The Language of God. >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > Sent via Health Newsgroups > http://www.healthnewsgroups.com > Some of the greatest minds in the history of mankind (one of which you most > assuredly are not) have tried to apply science to faith and failed utterly > and completely they are mutually exclusive concepts. No, it's more like the Heisenberg principle. B/ >Some of the greatest minds in the history of mankind (one of which you most >assuredly are not) have tried to apply science to faith and failed utterly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >and >Science can not prove Faith Well, thank God an *intellectual giant* such as yourself, Gary, is here to tell everyone what capacities science and faith have in finally being understood as one... -Paul Whiting "I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details." --Albert Einstein. >>Some of the greatest minds in the history of mankind (one of which you > most [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > to tell everyone what capacities science and faith have in finally being > understood as one... Your welcome Paul.....................glad I could be of service. Gary Stein >Your welcome Paul.....................glad I could be of service. Great comeback, Gary! I have taught you well, my young apprentice... -Paul Whiting "I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details." --Albert Einstein.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.