Something from nothing.

Everything that is, always has been, and always will be.


I see the universe as being comprised of two perspectives. Existence, and meta-existence. Existence is what is; all macro, micro, atomic, and subatomic particle. Every force; nuclear, strong, weak, gravity, and magnetic. The void of space, and the fabric of space-time. While the other half, meta-existence is everything that can be, has been, and will be. It is a part of everything that is. If you think about yourself from the view of existence you can see the atoms that comprise you in every variation and position they have and ever will be in. You will see everything from the moment the universe was created, to the moment the last particle was rendered inert. However in the realm of meta-existence you don't just see every atom from it's beginning to its end. You see every atom, in every variation infinite in every direction. You see every possible creation, and destruction of those atoms. You see versions of them altered by different circumstances that may have occurred during their lifetime. You literally would see every possible outcome of every single atom infinitely stretched forever. This is because there is no end, and there is no beginning. Everything that is simply is. The persepctive of Meta-Existence is in essence the physics of allowance. This meta-existence attached to the particle allows it to be perceived in any point. It allows it to exist in any capacity.


When you look at cosmic expansion we can only account for a very small portion of the gravity necessary to drive the cosmos. We attribute the rest of the 94-96% of needed gravity to 'Dark Matter' and 'Dark Energy'. The problem is we cannot see, measure, or even detect Dark Matter/Energy. We only infer its existence because we see galaxies and other objects that move much too fast for the amount of observable gravity.
Our understanding of the universe is either wrong, or this form of energy must exist somewhere. Could it be that If the 4-6% of gravity in the universe consists of the actual matter of stars, and planets, etc which is quite a lot, that meta-existence somehow contributes to an actual weight attached to those particles? I don't think mathematically it would make sense that the gravity of a particle in all it's possible variations could be measured as Dark Matter, because if meta-existence is the infinite possible configuration of that particle, the gravity would be infinite and every particle would just rip-through space time. As well as if Dark Matter was attached to other particles directly their weight would simply just be increased. But maybe the nuclear forces, space-time, and existence itself somehow contribute to this equation. However whatever the case may be as of now we still scavenge the cosmos for clues about Dark Matter/Energy.

According to Friedmann and many other physicists at this point. The universe began from a singularity. An infinitely dense single point. When this singularity rapidly expanded outward it thrust all the energy and matter that would ever be into the Universe. Gravity began to pull at all the particles in the Universe. Larger bodies attracted smaller bodies as the actual curvature of space time was bent with the presence of matter. Gas particles compressed and stars were born lighting the Universe up. Primordial black holes may have been created under the pressure and heat of these early particles, and over time galaxies started to form while simultaneously all moving away from one another. Into the far outreaches of space.

It's postulated by Roger Penrose that when a singularity exists it is shielded from the sight of nature. This is known as the "cosmic censorship hypothesis" Stephen Hawkings posits that past the event horizon a singularity may be always in the future or always in the past. The reason for this is, in the case of the singularity that gave rise to our Universe for instance, as it was in a state of infinite density the ability to predict events was impossible and as space-time was infinitely curved time as of that moment was not an actual constant. However in the case of a black hole that is created by the collapse of matter (say a large star) when the weight of the matter compresses and a singularity is formed anything that enters past the event horizon instantly ceases to exist. Because time is not a constant, gravity is bent inward on itself infinitely and the laws of physics break down.

It's a rather interesting idea to think of an entire universe in infinite form yet without time, without physics. Though according to what we observe in the known Universe this had to be the case. That in some sense shows that time and physics do not need to be in place for something to exist. And without the pesky need to explain how something came to be from nothing we may just find the Universe didn't have to come from nothing in order to be created.

Time is a concept, a perceived event. It's not uniformly distributed. It's known that a particle traveling at the speed of light experiences time much differently than a static particle. As well as a particle stuck near the event horizon of a singularity. Time is distorted so that the experience of that particle in relation to itself is the same as any other circumstance, but outside of the range of distortion it seems to move slower, and slower until alas it stops altogether. Endlessly hanging at the border of the event horizon. Of course you can never observe this since not even light can escape the force, but it's an accepted theory all the same.

In the same way time is not necessary for something to exist. It's necessary for it to exist in multiple variations, and it's necessary for it to evolve and change form. But the rudimentary state of being is not dependent on time. Therefore it seems likely to me that creation, and destruction are Human concepts. Not truths of nature. Everything that is always is and simply changes form. Even the state of existence.

Water loop.

Took about an hour to get the loop built, then spent nearly 5 hours leak testing.

I was planning on 24 hours leak testing, but I needed my rig sooner.



But since I can just look up and essentially "leak test" it's not as much an issue.



Stable running 3.8ghz CPU by 1600mhz RAM at a smooth 30c idle, 55c load.

That's with the north bride on the loop. (It's around 40c.)




Skill ;)

Specs:
1000watt Corsair PSU,
300g Velociraptor HDD,
1tb data drive,
320g backup drive,
4870x2 GPU, (Loop)
i7-920 CPU @ 4.0ghz (Loop)
6gigs Corsair Dominator DDR3 RAM @ 1600mhz
Foxconn Bloodrage x58 mobo, (Loop)
EK - Supreme cpu block,
Bloodrage northbridge block,
320-qp RAD,
Laing D5 Vario pump,
Tygon tubes,
3 Yate loon pull, 40cfm
1 slipstream pull, 110cfm
NZXT Fan controller,
Xtreme gamer X-fi soundcard,
Coolermaster Cosmos S case with custom side window.

Cathode stereo.

Well the 9v finally died lol, but I was determined to get lights going in my receiver.

This time I went with cathodes!

I jacked out of a really old computer some almost worthless PSU. Then rigged it up as a test unit and stuck it behind the receiver. (Safely)
I took two UV cathodes and horizontally mounted them in my stereo receiver with electrical tape. Hooked them to a transformer that I installed in the stereo already, and then ran the 12v line out of where a screw used to be to plug into the PSU behind the unit. :)
It's working fine, and now I have an empty test area on top of the receiver in reach of molex power!

Pics!

Riddle. (EASY!)

Decode using the same principle of what happens on either end of the carbon bonds of a double helix.
Reply with the full message along with the explanation of what happens on either ends.
Unscrambling does not count as decoding.





I wtnaed ao wriae in gode so ahta only somewhta inaellecautl people gould undersatnd me.



Bua I rtn inao ahe problem of btse ptrinc providinc sub-ptr engodinc.





Send this back to me decoded and I will promote you as a smart being.






Tip to solve this and encode your own in mere seconds.
(Providing you have the application.)



faec-inpe-ndl!-dra! (4x4) horizontal.

Open Source

http://www.7-zip.org/ For RAR files

http://www.openoffice.org/ Production suite

http://www.pidgin.im/ Instant messenger

http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html Digital minipulation

http://www.gainward.de/support/support_uk.html GPU control

http://www.winamp.com/ Media player

http://www.ntfs.com/iso-burning.htm .ISO burner

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/ Browser

http://www.reallyslick.com/ Screensavers

ID

Intelligent Design

What makes a man? Cells.
A cell is by no means simple. It's an EXTREMELY complex system, which is run by chemical reactions. But here is the issue. DNA simply put is data. It tells the cell how to act, how to reproduce, what to produce etc. It's sort of like a line of code.
//Create human
include ..;
int main(Chromosome){
std::cout < "Make another cell with variable X"..n;
std::cin < "Y Chromosome"';
} return man.

Where did that code come from? Well considering we are made out of chemicals and all around us are chemicals and throughout the cosmos are chemicals it's not hard to surmise where the resources originated.
But how about the code itself?
If you look at human DNA though our genetic code is very dense and complex, it's very messy as well. There are expressions that aren't even used in humans anymore. Even organs that serve no real function anymore. This is all a bi-product of evolution.
What Intelligent Design has to say is rather sketchy. There are the Ben Stein's who present a well manicured and neat philosophical version of Deism with the I.D. name-tag slapped on-top. And then there are the die-hard creationists who use I.D. as a selling point for Creationism.
However neither of these are really a real representation of I.D. The real origin of the now mainstream version of I.D. began with a book entitled "Of Pandas and People". In it the authors explore the possibility of a Deistic or Theistic God-like entity creating life on Earth, in a rather subtle way. It's implied that creatures did not evolve into present form but where intelligently created in their current form. The entire theory is based on the idea that certain organs or traits of animals are so perfect that missing any single part it could not be useful in anyway and therefore could not have evolved.
For a true breakdown of this theory and it's absurd notion that an evolved characteristic should be perfectly formed in order to have any functionality I'll elaborate further some other time.
But for now back to I.D. itself.
There's been much controversy surrounding this book and though it was primarily written for students as a text-book it's been rejected from being taught at the schools that tried to implement it as curriculum.
The main issue with I.D. is most likely its lack of uniform theory or a true model of the said 'theory'. And though there are a lot of people championing it as some scientific 'revelation' it really has no scientific support.
And to those who would retort to me that the probability of chemicals on any single planet organizing by chance so that the first self replicating molecule was introduced to 'life' then I have one more point to make. First let it be understood that it took millions of years of evolution to get to this point. The first molecule did not need to be complex at all. Just a single molecule that could replicate is all that was needed to begin the flourishing of life that has sprung onto our fair planet.
Now what do you think the probability would be on any specific planet, that at some point in the eternity of time these molecules, that are so abundant in the Universe could coalesce?
Would you say 1 in 100? 1 in 1,000? 1 in 100,000? Or even 1 in 1,000,000?
Well how about we just try 1 in 1,000,000,000.

The conservative number of planets in the Universe is a billion billion. Which means that if we applied the probability of one in a billion that any one planet may create that single self replicating molecule an estimate 1,000,000,000 molecules may be produced. The probable chance is astounding. Now of course those molecules would also have to evolve Mitochondria and all the other necessary traits that shaped life. As well as survive many threats and extinctions. But it's still a very possible beginning to life.

Prop 8?

This is a country founded on freedom. You have the freedom to believe in your religion. You have the freedom to even speak out against anything you don't like. But you do not have the right to take others freedoms away.
Our race has spent 200,000 years trying to free ourselves from hatred, slavery, and wars. (Or 10,000- for you creationists) But here we are in the 21st century and we are still not free from our superstitions and ways of old. It's time to change people. We have the technology and the capacity to do so.
It's due time we realize that with all this power comes great responsibility. It's time we stop running a world motivated by greed and hatred, and run a world motivated by discovery and synergism.