A HISTORY OF BRIEF TIME

Q: Is 0.9999… repeating really equal to 1?

Posted on May 11, 2011 by The Mathematician

Mathematician: Usually, in math, there are lots of ways of writing the same thing. For instance:

 =  =  =  = 

As it so happens, 0.9999… repeating is just another way of writing one. A slick way to see this is to use:

 

One.

Another approach, that makes it a bit clearer what is going on, is to consider limits. Let’s define:

…
and so on.

Now, our number  is bigger than  for every n, since our number has an infinite number of 9′s, whereas  always has a finite number, so we can write:

 for all n.

Taking 1 and subtracting all parts of the equation from it gives:

Then, we observe that:

and hence

.

But we can make the left hand side into as small a positive number as we like by making n sufficiently large. That implies that 1-0.9999… must be smaller than every positive number. At the same time though, it must also be at least as big as zero, since 0.9999… is clearly not bigger than 1. Hence, the only possibility is that

and therefore that

.

What we see here is that 0.9999… is closer to 1 than any real number (since we showed that 1-0.9999… must be smaller than every positive number). This is intuitive given the infinitely repeating 9′s. But since there aren’t any numbers “between” 1 and all the real numbers less than 1, that means that 0.9999… can’t help but being exactly 1.

Update: As one commenter pointed out, I am assuming in this article certain things about 0.9999…. In particular, I am assuming that you already believe that it is a real number (or, if you like, that it has a few properties that we generally assume that numbers have). If you don’t believe this about 0.9999… or would like to see a discussion of these issues, you can check this out.

• Email
• Print
• Facebook
• St

EINSTEINS SECOND EQUATION

Loading Earlier Messages... (1773)

August 26Joe Black
Also the earlies galaxies are made of the same stuff as our milky way.
They have not evolved which means there may not have been time.
Maybe the universe expanded faster than light and it is a young universe.

August 26Nils Baeté
galaxies not evolved? Wel observations do not really agree with you.

August 27Joe Black
yes the lastest observations show galaxies have not changed with time I have lost the link but you can google it.
In lansing Michigan during the winter we don't get many sunny days but last tear God blessed us with one of those beautiful days and it seemed that almost everyone was thanking God except me As I left my office a man said what a wonderful day were having.This is a gift from God. To which I replied Yes but were getting snow later this week.

August 27Joe Black
What ingratitude......!! So christians give thanks for the good things atheists don't give thanks so there minds are darkened and that don't see how God has blessed them.
If God let you have everything you want it would be hell if it all turned out exactly the way you planned.In some other universe maybe it does turn out the way we wanted and we end up seeing the wisdom of Gods plan by how bad it is.
What if hell is the mutiverse.?
Hell is some other alterntaive 1984 kind of universe.
Did you look at Justins quantum big bang big crunch simulator.

August 27Joe Black
Using infrared photography, a team of astronomers at the European Southern Observatory have taken pictures of what are said to be extremely distant galaxies. Their press release of 11 December 2002 assures us that ‘The resulting images reveal extremely distant galaxies, which appear at infrared wavelengths, but are barely detected in the deepest optical images acquired with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST).’1

These galaxies are so far away from us that, according to normal theories of how light travels in space, it would have taken many billions of years for their light to have reached us. According to God’s revealed Word, the Bible, the whole universe was made only a few thousand years ago.2


Hubble’s deepest-ever view of the universe. The image is said, by NASA, to offer a view ‘ … back to the beginning of time’, and offering ‘… important clues to the understanding of the evolution of the universe’. This picture covers a view of the sky about 1/30 the diameter of the full moon and represents a typical view of galaxies over the whole sky if we could see it.
There are different models to explain how the light could have reached us in such a young universe,3 but the bottom line is as follows. If the evolutionary astronomer’s ‘big bang’ hypothesis is correct, then light from the most distant galaxies has taken the longest to reach us. Therefore, galaxies billions of light-years away would also be billions of years closer to the time of the proposed primordial ‘explosion’.4 Thus, since we are seeing these galaxies not as they are now, but as they were when the light left them, ‘big bang’ believers expect us to be observing them as being in much earlier stages of their alleged evolution than ones near to us.

In fact, these recent findings fit well with a Biblical viewpoint, i.e. a young universe. One of the most telling admissions in the recent article was the following:

‘… a few of [the galaxies] are clearly rather large and show spiral structure similar to that seen in very nearby galaxies [see photo opposite]. It is not obvious that current theoretical models can easily account for such galaxies having evolved to this stage so early in the life of the Universe … .’ [Ed.: according to the big bang scenario, these galaxies are less than two billion years old, in a universe that is currently said to be 13.7 billion years old.1]
Spiralling problems
Galaxies are rotating, and the outer parts rotate more slowly than the inside. They commonly show a spiral structure, which is supposed to be the result of this rotation, starting from a simple bar structure. But this means that after a few rotations, galaxies will ‘wind themselves up’ so as to destroy the spiral structure.


A unique galaxy pair known as NGC 3314, located about 140 million light-years from earth. In this alignment a face-on spiral galaxy lies exactly in front of another larger spiral galaxy.
Both nearby galaxies and these faraway ones show the same sort of spiral structure. The evolutionist astronomer is thus ‘caught’ in two ways:

The nearby galaxies should not be spirals anymore, because in the time that is supposed to have elapsed, they should have wound themselves up long ago, blurring the spiral appearance.5,6
These recently-observed galaxies are ultra-young (according to ‘big bang’ belief) because they are so far away. So they should not have had time to develop even the beginnings of a spiral.
The article further highlighted the confusion facing long-age astronomers by saying:

‘… in contrast to the galaxies at similar redshifts7 (and hence, at this early epoch) found most commonly in surveys at optical wavelengths, most of the “infrared-selected”? galaxies show relatively little visible star-forming activity. They appear in fact to have already formed most of their stars [italics added] and in quantities sufficient to account for at least half the total luminous mass of the Universe at that time. Given the time to reach this state they must clearly have formed even earlier in the life of the Universe and are thus probably amongst the ‘oldest’ galaxies now known.’1
The results seem consistent with the notion that the Lord, who spoke the stars into existence, made the galaxies much ‘as is’. He may well have had some unwound, some not and some fully, and the variety would ‘declare the glory of God’ (Psalm 19:1). In an instant, He spread out the heavens (Isaiah 48:13) and on Day 4 of Creation Week, just as He says in His Word, ‘He made the stars also’ (Gen. 1:16).

References and notes
Deepest Infrared view of the universe—VLT images progenitors of today’s large galaxies, ESO Press release 23/02, 11 December 2002, <www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2002/pr-23-02.html>. Return to text.
Since Einstein, one has to specify a frame of reference, as time has been shown to flow differently for different observers/locations. In particular, gravity slows time. So here the Earth is the reference frame. For further information, see Humphreys, R., Starlight and Time, Master Books, Arizona, 1994. Return to text.
See Batten, D. (Ed.), The Creation Answers Book, Creation Ministries International, Queensland, Australia, chapter 5, ‘How can we see distant stars in a young universe?’ 1999. Return to text.
‘Big bang’ cosmologists don’t conceive of this as an explosion in the usual sense, but as a rapid expansion of space itself from a point of infinite density. Return to text.
Scheffler, H. and H. Elsasser, Physics of the galaxy and interstellar matter, Springer–Verlag, Berlin, pp. 352–353, 401–413, 1987. However, this postulates a complex theory of spiral density waves as a solution to the problem. But this is an ad hoc solution, i.e. there is no evidence for it, and it is an arbitrary assumption merely concocted to solve the problem, and requires much fine-tuning. Return to text.
This is compatible with Humphreys’ time dilation ideas—see How do spiral galaxies and supernova remnants fit in with Dr Humphreys’ cosmological model? Return to text.
When a light source is moving away from the observer, the lines are shifted towards the lower frequency (red) end of the spectrum, hence the term Red Shift. But for distant objects, the red shift is mainly caused by the expansion of space itself which carries these objects. The famous lawyer-turned-cosmologist Edwin Hubble (1889–1953), after whom the HST is named, discovered that distant objects had red shifts approximately proportional to distance from us. Therefore, according to ‘big bang’ dogma, objects with similar red shifts should have been formed at about the same time. Return to text.
Also available in Portuguese.
Deepest Infrared View of the Universe - VLT Images Progenitors of Today's Large Galaxies
www.eso.org
An international team of astronomers [2] has made the deepest-ever near-infrared Ks-band image of the sky, using the ISAAC multi-mode instrument on the 8.2-m VLT ANTU telescope. For this, the VLT was pointed for more than 100 hours under optimal observing conditions at the Hubble Deep Field South (H...
Share

August 27Joe Black
Here is the info that means a young universe that is inflation took place faster than light so it didn't take as long as we thought.

August 27Joe Black
http://sendshack.com/download/134znxgc
Sendshack » Send a file free
sendshack.com
Share

August 27Joe Black
Check out this simplified version of my clock 111 years from 1948 to 2059.http://sendshack.com/download/134znxgc Six minutes per year is rounded off.........

Sendshack » Send a file free
sendshack.com
Share

August 27Joe Black
http://creationsafaris.com/epoi_toc.htm

Evolution: Possible or Impossible? by Dr. James F. Coppedge
creationsafaris.com
Selections from by Dr. James F. Coppedge
Share

August 27Joe Black
http://creationsafaris.com/epoi_toc.htm

Evolution: Possible or Impossible? by Dr. James F. Coppedge
www.creationsafaris.com
Selections from by Dr. James F. Coppedge
Share

August 27Joe Black
Reasons to believe there is a God.......Now nils Jesus never doubted that his father existed he had no choice but to believe in His own father he could have choosen to disobey him.But he could not doubt that He was loved because he knew His father was love.It is the same for believers we know our father and we know that he loves us.

August 27Joe Black
Whoever drinks of his blood and eats of his body remains in him.Sceptics say holy communion is not actual change in matter from water to wine for example although there is an example of this transmuation in the bible.
The above is my favourite book the one I recommend to everybody and is the arguement that brought me a young atheist to faith in Jesus Christ.
Can you speak Dutch there is a dutch translation.

August 27Joe Black
God was jesus father like Darth was Lukes father he could not deny his own father any more than Like Could deny Obi 1

August 27Nils Baeté
Holy crap! so much text ... xD it will take me ages to read all that
"Obi 1" haha good one

August 28Joe Black
Iam Obi 1 still Luke and Iam you father and Iam telling you to build the supercomputer for Beligium might as well be simon sais.
You know the game simon sais.It is like Star trek Data said Will Riker could be presented with many options but he had to choose the ones that make him the man that he is............It is the same with us the world presents us with many options but you have to choose the ones that are right for you to be to thine own self be true.

August 28Joe Black
you don't just do what people say unless your own conscience bears witness your gut feeling that it is the right that you are the man for the job.
You know if you are jealous of the man who is doing the job and think you could do better.
And if you don't want to do a job because you know how hard it is that probably means it is what you are good at and that you should do the job.
Did you read all the text about the most distant galaxies being not evolved when compared to our own galaxy that could be explained by inflation faster than light making the universe much younger.
And the evolutioist say chimps can make stone tools but they can't unless they are first trained to do so by humans.
And they certainty can't invent a light bulb like edision or an A bomb like EInstein or even my clock.
Maybe if you gave a monkey a clock he could work out when he would be fed but not the eliptical orbit of the earth given a calculator ( and no maths books).
no access to Newton.
if he could work it out on his own with an accuracy of six minutes a year he would be one smart chimp.

August 28Joe Black
Try a difference of 20 minutes from a sidereal and solar year with the constant box.
Steve Clock (5).zip

August 28Joe Black
Clock wil work on windows..........
Same spiral structure of distant galazies to our own that is a dealbreaker for a universe as old as they say it is inflation could mean a much younger universe.
Like not luke could deny Obi 1 get it.
Observations agree with me that galaxies are not evolved.

August 28Joe Black
Can you dispute that in all honesty considering the lastest evidence.

August 28Nils Baeté
There where many more spiral galaxies long long time ago in comparison to now. Now there are more elliptical galaxies in comparison to long long ago. The "evolution" is often due to the influence of nearby galaxies.

Maybe there isn't a clear evolution in the galaxies itself but there is a sort of evolution in the ratios of the types of galaxies. Besides nowadays there seem to be no (or maybe a very very few) quasars anymore. They only appear at huge distances. That looks like a sort of change to me ...

August 28Nils Baeté
Besides galaxies can be teared appart or can collide with other galaxies, changing their shape and structure and star forming rate drastically.
Ofcourse there where spiral galaxies like our own (as far as we are correct about our own galaxy since it is hard to know how our own galaxy looks like). But there is an evolution in how much every type of galaxy appears. And galaxies can obviously change too due to influence of nearby galaxies.

August 29Joe Black
http://creation.com/anyone-for-tennis

Anyone for tennis
creation.com
Opponents of biblical creation often hurl objections as if in a gun battle, instead of acknowledging when they lose a point as in a tennis match.
Share

August 29Joe Black
Do you ackowledge my last point or not do not change the subject.
Read the above article our discussions should be like a game of tennis rather than a gun battle.
Andromeda is a spiral like our own galaxy it is a twin do you ackowledge this point.

August 29Joe Black
The other distant galaxies are like andromeda.
Any interest from others at university in the supercomputer idea.
You can get one for $1000 you university can ask for money on kickstarter for the BABBLER PROJECT.

August 29Nils Baeté
Hurling objections? Changing object?
Oh wel sir ... who is the person spamming my inbox with christian stuff even while it has nothing to do with the subject? Who is always involving some sort of clock-thingy in every conversation and every question i have?

Define "twin". If you mean with "twin" that they are gravitationally bound to eachother and that they will collapse in the far far future ... then yes.

Not all galaxies are spirals. I can give many examples: M87, M60, LMC, SMC, M32, M110, Sculptor Dwarf, Pinwheel Galaxy, ...

Sorry but i can't build a computer now i have other things to do. You want me to screw up my studies for some supercomputer project? lol

August 29Joe Black
No but you always need a diversion when you are studying you can't study all the time.......
Hey I did not mean we are like that just that I thought the tennis arguement was a good idea.You answer the question first before moving on to something else.

August 30Joe Black
Yeah Nils Iam guily of hurling objections and changing subject who isn't though I think everybody has done it at some time........
Maybe you can build the supercomputer in your next break from university or give the job over to your IT department to somebody qualified............Raisng money for a supercomputer is not hard on quickstarter and you are studying physics so I think it is on the subject.
You need to write a masters thesis or something like that don't you.
Did you have a look at Justins program for the big crunch Quantum sim.

August 30Joe Black
I have attatched the program
QED Sim.zip

August 30Joe Black
Here is the clock and if you remember I have a clock theory of everything so it is on subject....that is everything the subject is how everything got to be like it is creation or evolution
Steve Clock (5).zip

August 30Joe Black
Actually the definition of twin is that they look alike from the outside andromeda tells us what about galazy would look like
Computers get generate a picture of our galaxy too from the outside.
Yeah Iam guilt of raising the clock thingie all the time and changing the subject but the clock is important to my theory of everything.

August 30Joe Black
Data said that Riker has many options but must choose those that make him the man that he is.
If building the supercomputer the babbler is being the man that you are then go ahead with that great responsibility.If you turn out to be a lesser man not worthy of such a great responsibility then just don't bother.
Obi 1 under the control of the dark side.
Did Obi 1 get you to change your mind.??

August 30Joe Black
The dice is the heart of the supercomputer.
Dice Graph (9).zip

August 31Joe Black
here is the dice game with Hawkings dice
oddmanout2.zip

August 31Joe Black
So if building the supercomputer is the right option for the man that you are then you will do it if not someone else will do it.
And they will get the praise and the money as a result.

August 31Joe Black
But that is the great temptation to believe the dice and 2+2=4 is the answer.If you believe QM and GR can work in tandem and there isn't only one truth just the dark side and the light side ying and yang then why don't you build the machine it would seem to be the right thing for you since you believe in a duality.

August 31Joe Black
It has been fun.
The banter back and forth you never know what you have learned until you put it into practice.
Hey I told you 2+2=4 used to prove EInstein wrong is the work of the devil why didn't you believe me.
if you think God has a purpose for the babblet supercomputer you might be right like some people to prove what is not right.
Star Trek is more fun than star wars you should be into that I think you would be happier than with the star wars trilogy.
Back to the future is a great trilogy too.
A great start to star trek is to watch the last episode of next gen that is ALL GOOD THINGS..........must come to an end.
And college is like that all good things come to an end so enjoy it while you can enjoy all the friends and the work the work is great.

August 31Joe Black
Hey Iam sorry If you thought I meant you were an opponent like in a war game a game of tennis is fun for everybody I thought if you ackowledge when you lost a point we should both do that point taken there are other types of galaxies besides spiral.
pinwheel glaxies.
But maybe the universe is young that is a point for me and maybe we are not related to monkeys not chimps anyway maybe we don't have a common ancestor...............
So maybe God did it after all.........That is what I would have concluded before I became a christian.

August 31Joe Black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sLpjI44AtY

Four Spiritual Laws
bill bright version
Share

August 31Joe Black
If you want to become a chirstian if you want a personal relationship here is Gods door behold he stands at the door and knocks if you open to Jesus he will dine with you.
You have to want to believe Nils..............

August 31Joe Black
Proposed Ideas for the Tract

Some time ago, Christians used the tract “The Four Spiritual Laws” to share their faith with others. I would like to propose a tract that will pose four questions or ideas relevant to Generation Y.

Option One

More than ever, the idea that mankind is simply an evolutionary bi-product and not responsible to a creator—or other humans—infiltrates the morality of this generation. It also leaves people adrift, searching for meaning with no hope of really finding it. After all, if we’re nothing more than a rung on the evolutionary ladder, it’s difficult to find true meaning in life.

Question 1: Can we find meaning in our lives if we believe we’re nothing more than an evolutionary bi-product? (section to include headlines promoting evolution)

Question 2: Can we find purpose if we examine the evidence that the universe and everything in it is the work of a creator? (section to include brief quotes from creation scientists)

Question 3: Must we go beyond the idea of an intelligent designer to find this purpose? (section to include evidence of the Creator’s ongoing involvement)

Question 4: Must we accept the idea of a loving creator to find purpose? (section to include summary of the gospel of Jesus Christ)

Option Two

Observation 1: There are a million and one reasons on every newsfeed to believe the bad news. (section to include some of the latest headlines relevant to Gen Y)

Observation 2: There are a million and one reasons circulating in cyberspace to believe the good news. (section to include headlines and brief synopsis of some of the good things happening throughout the world)

Observation 3: It is up to you to believe the good news of the gospel. (section to include thoughts on perspective; should we dwell on the bad news or on the good?)

Observation 4: When you allow this Good News to change you, you will gain a new outlook. (section to include quotes from Gen Yers who have been given a new outlook)

Either tract to include relevant scripture passages and a challenge to examine and believe the gospel that leads to salvation.

Created in God’s Image or Insignificant Product of Evolution?

More than ever, the idea that mankind is simply a link in the evolutionary chain and not created in God’s image infiltrates our thinking, our motivation, and our sense of worth. If we’re nothing more than a product of evolution, people are left to drift, searching for meaning with no real hope of finding it. If, however, we are created in God’s image, that changes everything.

Question 1: Can we find meaning if we’re nothing more than products of evolution?
There are lots of busy people hurrying here and there, but do they really have a sense of purpose? Perhaps they want to become rich and famous. Perhaps they just want to make it through another day. It could be that they can’t wait until the weekend when they can kick back and relax. Maybe they give some thought to the Big Questions like “Why am I here?” and “What is my purpose?” or maybe they don’t.

Thousands of people are living extremely productive lives, but if humanity is nothing more than a blip on the radar, does any of it really matter?

Question 2: Can we find purpose if we examine the evidence that the universe and everything in it is the work of a creator?
There are many well-educated scientists who do not hold to the theory of evolution. They see the evidence differently. From the wonder of the atom to the vastness of the universe, they recognize that we are more than just a link in the chain.

You can read the writings of these men and women at sites such as those listed below:
The Institute for Creation Research – http://www.icr.org/
Creation Science–http://www.bestbiblescience.org/

If indeed we are created in God’s image as it says in Genesis, we can be confident that we were created for a purpose.

Question 3: Must we go beyond the idea of an intelligent designer to find this purpose?
There are scientists who have come to the conclusion that mankind is more than just the product of random chance. Some of them believe there is adequate evidence to indicate that our ancestors are the product of an intelligent designer. Perhaps this “creator” was a watchmaker-type god who simply set everything in motion and left us to fend for ourselves. Others think it all began with a superior alien race—which presents the question “Where did they come from?” But that discussion is for another time.

The God of the Bible, however, is not merely an absentee father. From Genesis through Revelation, He is portrayed as being involved every step of the way.

Question 4: Must we accept the idea of a loving creator to find purpose?
The ultimate evidence of God’s love for humanity was His willingness to send His Son, Jesus Christ, to the earth. Jesus fulfilled prophecy in a way no one else ever could. He lived a perfect life, died in our place, and rose victorious over death.
It is said of this same Jesus in John 1:2-4 (NIV) that “He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.”

Even Genesis 1:26 (NIV, emphasis added) says, “Let us make mankind in our image . . .” God is indeed three-in-one: Father, Son, and Spirit.

And the most exciting news of all is this: While there is purpose for our earthly lives—a purpose that can be discovered by prayerfully studying the Word of God—we also have hope for eternity. John 3:16 is a very familiar verse, but it should never cease to fill us with wonder and anticipation.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16 NIV).

Our loving Creator gave us a purpose for today and for all eternity.

The Institute for Creation Research
www.icr.org
It was once the banner fossil behind the idea that land-walking creatures emerged from fish with overgrown fins. The lobe-finned fish was found in strata deemed 400 million years old—close to the time when land creatures supposedly evolved—making a tidy evolutionary story. But that didn't last long....
Share

August 31Joe Black
Created in God’s Image or Insignificant Product of Evolution?

More than ever, the idea that mankind is simply a link in the evolutionary chain and not created in God’s image infiltrates our thinking, our motivation, and our sense of worth. If we’re nothing more than a product of evolution, people are left to drift, searching for meaning with no real hope of finding it. If, however, we are created in God’s image, that changes everything.

Question 1: Can we find meaning if we’re nothing more than products of evolution?
There are lots of busy people hurrying here and there, but do they really have a sense of purpose? Perhaps they want to become rich and famous. Perhaps they just want to make it through another day. It could be that they can’t wait until the weekend when they can kick back and relax. Maybe they give some thought to the Big Questions like “Why am I here?” and “What is my purpose?” or maybe they don’t.

Thousands of people are living extremely productive lives, but if humanity is nothing more than a blip on the radar, does any of it really matter?

Question 2: Can we find purpose if we examine the evidence that the universe and everything in it is the work of a creator?
There are many well-educated scientists who do not hold to the theory of evolution. They see the evidence differently. From the wonder of the atom to the vastness of the universe, they recognize that we are more than just a link in the chain.

You can read the writings of these men and women at sites such as those listed below:
The Institute for Creation Research – http://www.icr.org/
Creation Science–http://www.bestbiblescience.org/

If indeed we are created in God’s image as it says in Genesis, we can be confident that we were created for a purpose.

Question 3: Must we go beyond the idea of an intelligent designer to find this purpose?
There are scientists who have come to the conclusion that mankind is more than just the product of random chance. Some of them believe there is adequate evidence to indicate that our ancestors are the product of an intelligent designer. Perhaps this “creator” was a watchmaker-type god who simply set everything in motion and left us to fend for ourselves. Others think it all began with a superior alien race—which presents the question “Where did they come from?” But that discussion is for another time.

The God of the Bible, however, is not merely an absentee father. From Genesis through Revelation, He is portrayed as being involved every step of the way.

Question 4: Must we accept the idea of a loving creator to find purpose?
The ultimate evidence of God’s love for humanity was His willingness to send His Son, Jesus Christ, to the earth. Jesus fulfilled prophecy in a way no one else ever could. He lived a perfect life, died in our place, and rose victorious over death.
It is said of this same Jesus in John 1:2-4 (NIV) that “He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.”

Even Genesis 1:26 (NIV, emphasis added) says, “Let us make mankind in our image . . .” God is indeed three-in-one: Father, Son, and Spirit.

And the most exciting news of all is this: While there is purpose for our earthly lives—a purpose that can be discovered by prayerfully studying the Word of God—we also have hope for eternity. John 3:16 is a very familiar verse, but it should never cease to fill us with wonder and anticipation.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16 NIV).

Our loving Creator gave us a purpose for today and for all eternity.

The Institute for Creation Research
www.icr.org
It was once the banner fossil behind the idea that land-walking creatures emerged from fish with overgrown fins. The lobe-finned fish was found in strata deemed 400 million years old—close to the time when land creatures supposedly evolved—making a tidy evolutionary story. But that didn't last long....
Share

August 31Joe Black
When you reject the idea of the supercopmuter based on the dice you are not far from the kingdom of God take that one step further and accept him.
He accepts you just as you are but you have to invite him in you have to open the door then Jesus will come in and sup with you.

August 31Nils Baeté
No i won't sorry

September 1Joe Black
Maybe you will change your mind after you have build the supercomputer based on the light and dark side of the force.
It is Jesus doing the asking through me there was a rich young ruler who was asked to follow Jesus but he said no because he has much wealth and he was sorry for the rest of his life and always had Gods second best for His wife.Do you want Gods best for your life His perfect will don't assume that it will be different to what you wnat for your life.

September 1Joe Black
A man asked Lord buddha I want happiness.
Budda said take away the I that is ego.and take away the want that is desire and you are left with happiness.
A lot of people don't know that Jesus beatitudes are about how to find happiness Blessed in the bible means happy.
But CS Lewis said If I thought God would help me happy I would prefer a stiff scotch.
So maybe it is a kind of joy of knowing Christ that the world can't give and the world can't take away.
There was a guy in the bible who said I won't and later changed his mind and went so he did the will of his father.
If you believe the bible the people of your country are going to hell because of unbelief in God.You can be used by God to change that if you are willing to follow Jesus.
And be used by him in your choosen profession.
Like Micho Kaku is used to talk to theworld about science and ex-nihilo creation............He makes a difference because he doesn't believe the big bounce.

September 1Joe Black
Are you angry at God do you believe he exists but are you angry at him for some reason.
Even Elijah and Jonah were angry with God but they saw the error of their ways.

September 1Joe Black
http://youtu.be/OBN9BRqmoEY

Would You Like to Know God Personally Trailer
Much controversy about the conclusions arrived at by scientists such as Albert Einstein and Charles Darwin, among others, has arisen over the years. This DVD...
Share

September 1Joe Black
http://youtu.be/E2aUDkf99sE

I'm a good person. (The Good Test)
Are you good? Are you a good person? (This video is from http://www.chick.com/ copyright)
Share

September 1Joe Black
http://youtu.be/TCSUKIhjevo

Are You a Good Person?
‎"Are you a good person?" animation produced by Cedric Hohnstadt from www.cedricstudio.com Additional animators include Michael Foster & Chance Dodd Mr. Nice ...
Share

September 1Joe Black
http://youtu.be/kwzLGAuiKC0

Living Waters University: Jeff
Jeff is in a wheelchair due to a surfing accident and he seems somewhat open to the dialogue. A seed was planted. I hope to see him someday in Heaven walking...
Share

September 1Joe Black
OK Nils your finishing your degree then what.?

September 1Joe Black
http://www.atstracts.org/Cartoon_Tracts-Then_What.html

Then What? - Cartoon Tracts by American Tract Society
www.atstracts.org
American Tract Society - Then What Concept of the The Roman Road (Ron Wheeler) - Secure Online Store
Share

September 1Joe Black
You would be better off leaving college with a knowlege of jesus Christ and failing phyiscs..........but you can have both you can have your cake and eat it too.
That is what the gospel is like having the cake and eating it too.
It is abundantly above all you could ask or think that is what God has in mind.

September 1Joe Black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G35mSePboj0

Romans Road to Salvation 0001
Share

September 1Joe Black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G35mSePboj0

Romans Road to Salvation 0001
Share

September 1Joe Black
Hey the gospel is good news it is like you are a prodigal son and you father is waiting at home looking out the window for a sign you are coming down the road................

Romans Road to Salvation 0001
Share

September 1Joe Black
And you say you are not worthy to be called your son and the father puts the ring on your finger the ring of a son and slays the fatted calf.
What could be better than that.

September 1Joe Black
http://www.matthewmcgee.org/roman-rd.html
Roman Road to Salvation: How to be Saved
www.matthewmcgee.org
‎...I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth;...
Share

September 1Joe Black
http://www.voiceofthegospel.org/messages.html

Gospel Messages
www.voiceofthegospel.org
The word "Gospel" means "good news" but it can only be "good news" when a person realizes the "bad news." The "bad news" is the fact that no one can either merit or inherit a place in God's Heaven, and therefore will be consigned to eternal torment. The "good news" is the fact that anyone can reach ...
Share

September 1Joe Black
Listen to these messages from my friend Pastor Minor Hawk they are terrific..............
You can know that you are saved and that you are on the road to heaven.

September 1Joe Black
http://youtu.be/uuxXGp3jVDk

Romans Road
Approximetly 45 MIN Come walk with me down the Roman's Road and I will take the Bible and show you how you can know 100% where you will spend eternity.
Share

September 1Joe Black
Hey Nihls you really should watch this video. What then we should eat the bread of sadness for their sins that the jews ate in babylon.For repentance is the bread of life John the baptists second cousin.
Repentance and faith in the gospel is the bread of life the jews ate in babylon................Maybe you are descendant from a long line of religiious folk it is your heritage.....
Never forgive Hitler never forget.
Belgium was occupied in the war and it was like walking in the dark when it came to faith in God that is the root of the problem.
Hitler taught you not to believe in God.
Or in Israel.
You really need to watch this 45 minute video it is great for what it is an introduction to chirstianity for new believers.

September 1Joe Black
I will welcome you as a brother in Christ if you accept the romans road gospel.Belgium is a catholic country and the romans road is not fully understood that is the problem with the church in Beligium..
It is lukewarm because it has not begun with being born.......
Once you have accepted the romans road you need the second blessing so you can recieve power from above to be a witness and work the miracles that jesus worked...........Anyone who wants to trust Jesus Christ as a saviour can if they eat of his flesh and drink of his blood that is the Holy Spiirit which we should add to the romans road...................

September 1Joe Black
God wants us to have the gift of eternal life he has already prepared a life of good works that we might walk in them............
There is a purpose driven life for you..Jesus Christ paid for sin.
So you could have an abundant life.You can understand in your mind what God said you don't need to add to the equation Jesus said Iam the way the truth and the life and no man comes to the father but through me.
You must drink of his blood.............You must walk down to that fifth mile marker you must not only understand it intellectually you must recieve Jesus Christ into our hearts eternal life is a gift.
Whosover shall call upon the name of the Lord shalll be saved includes you and me and anyone who will simply ask Jesus to come into your heart and save your soul.
The alternative is to be doubleminded and believe that Hawkings dice are the answer to the universe YING AND YANG THE DARK AND THE LIGHT SIDE OF THE FORCE........
And you can believe OBI 1 is your father and that 2+2=4 is the answer or you can believe EInstein that God does not play dice with the universe.
You can't reject the gift of the Holy Spirit.
And be saved.
Hell is like believing that 2+2=4 proves EInstein wrong because nutrinos and tacheons travel faster than C.
Hell is the confusion that results in the mind by believing the answer is 2+2=4 rather than creation ex-nihilo.
Believe what the baptist church teaches about the gospel and also the deeper life teaching of the pentecostal church.............And you will be a complete christian.
All who live godly in Christ will suffer persecution your friends wil not all accept your decision to follow jesus although not all are prejudiced.

SundayJoe Black
The supercomputer is a joke computer you don't have to build it ot get the thought experiment it just produces babble when equations are added 2+2=4 for the mutiverse.
If you want to build it in faith in the power of the Holy Spirit then there is no condemnation to him in Christ Jesus who lives everyday in the spirit of the Lord.
If you want to do it in faith believing for a purposeful outcome other than proving evolution then it is NOT OF SIN.................
As many as are led by the spirit of the Lord they shall be the sons of God according to His word so If you believe God is leading you to build it then ask him for a scripture to build it on.............You need to build on the rock.

SundayJoe Black
http://youtu.be/hW7DW9NIO9M

Einstein's Proof of E=mc²
Ever wonder how Einstein proved E=mc²? This is how. Pi day (3.14) is Albert Einstein's Birthday! To celebrate, we'll explain 4 of his most groundbreaking pap...
Share

SundayNils Baeté
"Proving" E=γmc² sounds a bit weird .... it can only be verified or disproven with experiments, to see if it is consistent or inconsistent with experiments or observations.
And it is consistent with all exêriments (Or atleast up to special relativity. I'm not sure if it is the case with general relativity because i haven't got any course yet about general relativity.)

SundayNils Baeté
Btw what is being told in that vid is not really what E=mc² is about. (Actually it schould be written like E = γmc² or
E² = m²c^4 + p²c²)
On of the biggest misconceptions amongst non-physicists is that E=mc² means that nuclear energy is related with the change in mass multiplied with c². This is also true yes, but it is not basically what the formula is really about.

SundayNils Baeté
It actually has to do with special relativity and the particle-wave duality.

Consider a particle wich has mass "m" in it's restframe(!), wich is called the restmass of the particle (and in the case where m is not 0). In the restframe this particle has energy E = mc² .
In a frame in wich the particle has a speed v (and moves along a straight path), it's energy will be higher ofcourse (atleast for the frame in wich it moves). In this frame it's energy will be
E = γmc² where γ = 1/√(1-v²/c²) . in case of the restframe v=0 wich means γ=1 wich means E = mc² .
γm is also called the relativistic mass. It increases with increasing speed.
Hence nothing changed about the particle, we only considered it in different reference frames.

More about this later but i have to go back to work.

To be continued ...

MondayJoe Black
p2 is momentum right.?
Einsteins second equation is for mass approaching the speed of light the change in momentum can't find this on the net.
But E=MC^2 has invariant mass as was the case in EInsteins equations he did not seem to be writing here about mass approaching the speed of light.
Momentum is determined by state so if you had four states in one you would have a variation on the them

MondayNils Baeté
p is momentum yes

MondayNils Baeté
I'm not sure anymore it has been a while ago but i think that for momentum it was p = γmv for particles with mass.

Now what about massless particles?
Wel first of all for waves you have E = ħω = hν (ω is pulsation wich is 2πν with ν the frequency) (Greek "nu", not "V")
Now it seemed that these waves (waveparticles, hence the wave-particle duality introduced by Einstein in his work about foto-electric effect wich gave him the Nobel price) also have momentum:
p = ħk = h/λ (with k the wavenumber wich is 2π/λ with λ the wavelength)
Since c = ω/k = λν you can see that E = pc (!)

So these are all important formula for particle properties and wave properties

Particles:
E = γmc² (in restframe: E = mc²)
p = γmv or maybe just p = mv (i'm not sure anymore, it's been a while  )

Wave:
E = ħω
p = ħk
And the relation between them is E = pc

Now this can be unified in the following relation:
E² = m²c^4 + p²c²
This means E/c = √(m²c²+p²)

This formula works for all "particles" or objects, with or without mass.

In the case you have a massles particle (wich ofcourse travels at lightspeed in vacuum since it has no mass) this will reduce to:
E² = p²c² (since m=0)
wich means E=pc (this is indeed the correct formule for waves  )

In case of a particle with mass m and with respect to the restframe (this means speed v = 0 ) this formula will reduce to:
E² = m²c^4 (since p = mv = 0 )
wich means E = mc² (and this is indeed the famous intrinsic energy relation for a particle with mass in the reference frame  )

Now in special relativity Einstein worked with space-time wich is 4 dimensional using the Minkowski metric (actually a pseudo metric since it is not a corret metric by mathematical definition. The only thing that differs from a strict metric is that the Minkowski metric can also result in negative distances (!) ).
In this 4 dimensional space you use "four-vectors" isntead of the usual 3D vectors.

For instance If the 3D vector of position is (x_1, x_2, x_3)
(With _ i mean subscript, or an index ... but the pc doesnt allow me to use subscripts here. So x_1 means x with index 1 (first component of position). But i guess you understandwhat i mean right?)

But the 4D vector of "position" in space-time is
(x_0, x_1, x_2, x_3) = (ct, x_1, x_2, x_3)
Does this has the dimensions of distance? Wel x_1, x_2 and x_3 are spatial position components so yes they have. x_0 is the same as ct . This is the time component multiplied by c. Since t has dimensions of time, and c has dimensions of speed (wich is distance/time) ct will have dimensions of time.speed = time.distance/time = distance

So ct is a sort of distance (or a component of distance) in space-time. This might sound weird since t is time, but actually it isn't that weird at all. ct is the distance that information (light for example) maximally has travelled away from you in a time t.

For example if you have a flashlight and you put it on very shortly and put it off again, then after a time t the maximal distance the light can have travelled wil be ct. And this means that ct is the maximal distance at wich someone else might see you flashing your flashlight during the time t.

So come to think of it this actually does make sence right?

Since p is actually a 3D vector, you can also define a "momentum 4-vector".
the 3D vector p consists of 3 components ofcourse:
p = (p_1, p_2, p_3)
(p_1 is in the direction of the x_1 axis, p_2 in the direction of the x_2 axis, and so on ... )

The momentum 4D vector is:
P = (E/c, p_1, p_2, p_3)
The 3 spatial components of P are just p. The new component is E/c.
You can also check if E/c has the dimensions of momentum but i wont do it here or it might be to long, but if you do then you will see it indeed has the dimension of momentum.

Still i haven't proven anything since it was pretty long ago and i can't remember, but i have done the derivations myself once and they worked out.


I hope this was a bit informative? If you want i can also say something interesting about the length of the 4D vectors using the Minkowski metric.

It might be useful as a theoretical model to consider the universe contracting to the size of a single atom, Not a singularity, Since

 

Esmating total mass,

 

 

density

4.5 × 10^-30 and 1.8 × 10^-29 grams per cubic centimeter

 

Radius

3 × 10²⁶ meters

1.8 * (10^(-29)) (grams per cc) = 1.8 × 10^-23 grams per (cubic meter)

 

total mass= D * 4/3(PI)R^3=  2.035752e+103 or

 

 (2 * 10^100 kg, nice even number, low end est.)

 

 

  could see that during the early moments the expansion  particle number quickly increases as force decreases. The expansion initially accelertes based on star lifespns and later contrancts due to stars dimming essentially. Photonsmight evolve into atoms based on frequencies. That mass could also give a direct ene estimate based on e=mc^2+ momenum term.

SCEPTICAL LOOK AT MY THEORY-JUSTIN LEIGHTON

Thermodynamics would not reverse in a crunch imo. Time will still be
going forward, simply decreasing volume with the same energy, thus
entropy would decrease to zero at the start point, while temperatures
ironically rise. At the moment the singularity exists, temperature
(defined as the motion of particles) would be zero and therefore
entropy (total degrees of motion) of the system will reduce to zero.

In expansion phases, entropy will continue to increase as average
temperature falls, total energy remaining unchanged. (more complex
systems have greater entropy)

Since the temperature is falling, and the acceleration will be proven
to be powered by galactic evolution, the expansion will turn from
speeding to slowing, just as slope does that half way up a sin wave.
That is because the "dark energy" (virtual particles) will begin to
decrease in density,  the virtual particle density being lowest toward
the center. That will be the apex of the sin wave, and the point of
maximum entropy (most complex energy forms).

As the dark energy becomes depleted from central regions. the inward
acceleration will begin due to the dark matter and energy (virtual
paticles). With the overall size of the universe decreasing,  the
total energy and temperature climb toward infinity, while entropy
falls. Again the system crosses the crunch point and exists with no
informational states. This ocurs because in a singularity, no
information can by definition exist. Two particles must be compared to
derive what we call data or information.


What causes the particles to arise is beyond me. I have a hunch that a
superluminal particle condenses the instant after the big bang. If the
particle is able orbit another particle, it could give rise to quarks,
photons etc. The establishment tends to claim that dark energy and
matter accounted for much of the early universe along with photons.
Matter seems to srt of evolve from the dark matter and energy.

ONE TO ONE

One-to-One Correspondence 

in mathematics, the correspondence between elements of two sets such that each element of the first set corresponds to a specific element of the second set and each element of the second set corresponds to a specific element of the first set. A one-to-one correspondence is a particular form of a function or mapping, in which the given function and its inverse are single-valued. If a one-to-one correspondence can be established between two sets, then these sets are equivalent. For example, the sets of integers and their squares are equivalent since the correspondence n → n² is a one-to-one correspondence.

2 YEN= 2 DOLLARS= 1 RUPEE.......... then 2=4 is true for the QM and Gr equations in tandem

#}##pDRAFT#######E###########################################################################################################}##ONE AUTHOR AGAINST EINSTEIN IS ENOUGH WHEN HE IS WRONG ABOUT �
####´#ð#e#´#ð######VIRTUAL PARTICLES.
.####################################################

Einsetin said that only one author was necessary is he was wrong �
about anything in his thoery.
And that is arrogance because even Einstein is only a man and he �
makes mistakes.
.lm  
And he has made one hell of a mistake.Because virtual particles �
in Einsteins thoery have infinite graviational mass because they �
have infinite energy and energy and mass are the same thing.But �
the  the measurement of virtual particles which is not proven �
100% 100% shows that they have zero gravitaional energy so we �
have to renormalise QM and that means Fenyman diagrams for GR.And �
we can't renormalise fenyman diagrams and if we could renormalise  �
Einsteins theory of relativity then we could make QM and GR agree �
on one thing that virtual particles have zero G.And then like �

Hawking used radiation to unify QM and GR we could make a start �
on a new theory of gravity.And nothing is further from the truth �
gravity is not QM it is GR and it cannotbe renormalised to �
zero.If it could approach zero Einstein would be wrong and so �
would QM so it would not do any good to say that G>0 <infinity �
then it is a very large number which means the universe will end �
in a big crunch.Because the total value for Expansions is the �
consological constant plus the gravitaional force of virtual �
particles and the the dark energy which must be greater than the �
dark matter and in fact dark matter must be> dark energy if the �
unv uuniverse will end in a big crunch.........But the universe �
is aaaccelerating and that means G is not great enough to slow �
the expansion so g for virtual particles must not be a very large �
number and it can be very large and still not slow the �
expansion.But if it infinite then it will stop the expansion �
totally rigth now and it does not..So maybe they are wrong that �
the universe is accelerating then G could be a very large value �
if there is a lot of dark matter and not so much dark energy and �
therethere is a lot of G from virtual particles

.And this does not �
prove Einstein wrong but means his theory needs a little tweaking �
like making it right for a Godel universe in 10 large spacial �
diemddimensions a godel can contract but cannot expand and it is �
just right for a big crunch because the orbits are circular and �
atoms cannot exist without the electrons spiralling into the �
nucleus and this is annihilation because the natural repulsion �
between electrons is overcome by strong gravity and the mass of �
the supereclectron is equal to the proton so when they are in the �
same space at the same time in the same state then they anni#�
hilate producing gamma rays and nuetrons which then form a new �
kind of singularity which results in a big bang.........Einstein �
cannot be expressed in ten large spacial dimensions only in 4D �
space time you cannot convert EInsteins equations to 10 D.And if �
not then you cannot prove string theory to be correct.Because �
string theory is in only six dimensions that are curled up and �
four that are large spacial no one except me has ever suggested �
that string theory could be in ten large spacial dimensions.But i �
think that they could have been open and as the universe con#�
tracted six of those dimensions curled up.And it doesn't make # 
ð
would not exist as it requires a dimension of time to exist that �
means there had to be three dimenions of space.......The universe �
requires it that is why it had to be that way............But this �
is paln B and does not prove EInstein wrong even if string thoery �
does not agree with his theory in ten dimesnions.Since it is an �
imag imaginary universe a Godel where time can be reversed.And �
everything is determined this kind of universe cannot predict the �
initial starting conditions of our universe and the equations for �
Einsteins theory that result from it.............

Einstein is a very smart man but even the most clever men make �
mistakes.And that is the arguement we shall use about virtsual �
particles.They do not really exist and that is a very positive �
thing because they are confusing and if we simplify and say there �
are no virtual particles then they have zero gravity.And that �
solves the problem the universe will go on forever.And will never �
stop expanding until it is a  total vacume and the idea that it �
will ever become another big bang is totally stupid the unverse �
will not forget it's size and become tiny again this is just a �
fudge to make it work when it doesn't.Maybe the universe will �
contract because dark matter> dark energy.And this is again a �
very positive point of view because there is more than enough �
energy in virtual particles to end the universe we don't need �
dark matter to explain contraction................And if it is �
there then why is the universe expanding faster and �
faster............It must be because dark energy> dark matter.And �
this is the kind of equation I used in the first book. Energy is �
greatet than matter and if dark energy is greater than dark �
matter when it comes to G the universe will expand �
forever........And that does not include virtual particles they �
can only make a good thing bad.Because they can cause the uni#�
verse to contract even if dark matter> dark energy.
And of course dark matter will be greater than virtual particles.

But if niether dark matter nor dark energy exist then virtual �
particles>0 and less than infinity they are very> a very large G �
number and that was my first hypothesis that Gravity is greater �
than the expansion............Even if our present unverse does �
not crunch it may have begun with a big crunch in a different �
kind of universe with different laws where a crunch can happen.
And if the intial conditions are all predetermined by the big �
crunch then the idea that we do not know what happened before is �
not true.And time may begin again a second time with the big �
bang.But we can still predict teh inital starting conditions.
And this is crazy to believe time can start again.But it can stop �
and the watch can start again from where it left off.That means �
we can know when time stopped and when it started again.


My string theory of everything is that black holes in another �
universe resulted in our universe.............And the other �
universe is one that contracts and it is a Godel and a Godel �
can't expand but can contract and rotate as well............A �
rotating black holein a godel universe is contradictory in time # 
ð
Hawkings reverse penrose equation we get a big bang in our uni#�
verse in four space/time dimensions.........But the Godel is in �
ten large spacial dimensions.And there is a reason six of those �
curled up when the universe contracted and formed a huge signu#�
larity which became our universe.But then we have two we do#�
n'thave one and we don't have a multiverse except backwards in �
the time dimension then there are infinite universes back in time �
which all may have different laws but not somewhere out there.If �
it makes sense to say out there where there is nothing there �
beyond our universe except in some other dimension.
And this thoery does make no sense execpet if you can get the �
equations for planet earth from 10^500 different rules that are �
random in other universes.
There could still be 10^500 different rules as we go back through �
the different universes from square one.
And there would be no square one.
But there must have been a begining even if there was a multive#�
rse back in time............Because 2+2=4.. And that is crazy how �
does that prove anything.
Put simply 2+2=4 does not balance for a bouncing ball energy is �
lost and does not balance with momentum which is Einsteins second �
equation.
E does not equal MC^2 for 2+2=4 big bounces..........and to make �
it work we need THE FUDGE the fudge is mass increases as the �
speed of light goes faster so energy balances with mass over �
2+2=4 bounces.
And this is totally rigthous.
Because the equation for the universe balances just like the �
cosmlogical constant.
Only mass must reach infinity with time going on �
forever...........
And maybe mass just appraoches infinity and time still goes on �
forever with mass reaching 99.99999 of the speed of light whatev#�
er that is back in time..............
If mass never reaches one then the problem is solved the universe �
can goon forever.
But if mass does have to reach infinity if time never ends then �
infinite mass is a dealbreaker for Einsetin.
And we can get rid of the infinities in Einsteins equations by �
tweaking it with virtual particles having large but not infinite �
energy.That is where the mistake is in EInsteins theory.
It has to be with infinity.
If we can make everything finite because of virtual particles �
then we have a quantum/Einsten thoery of gravity which is a �
little like a thoery of everythhing.
But we have three others forces which are already unified so to �
slove the problem is to unifiy everything.
And Iam not a mathematician and leave it to the maths profesors �
to work out whether my simplifiction makes sense mathematically.
But Einsteins did not notice the universe was expanding or that �
his equations allowed time travel.
And it is the same with virtual particles they are the answer to �
everything.
And if the universe can contract then it did in the past then we # 
ð
universe for the right set of Einsteins equations.The initial �
starying conditions for the universe can give you the set of �
Einsteins equations that will work for our universe.If the inti#�
tal starting conditions are wrong then our univers eis not predi#�
catble.And it is super the gravity and it is not that super that �
it can predict everything.And reversing the directionof time is �
not like unscambling an omelette and the order increases s it is �
eactly liek that so the order was created by evolution and that �
is how God did it.Because he is God he can do it anyway he wants �
to and he can't he has to obey the bible which was written by His �
holy spirit so it is not one book and it is totally one and seven �
as well.And maybe this thoery is 666 because it is what they �
beleive no instead of lamaires thoery.........And the catholic �
church still believes in the big bang.But no one else does be#�
cause they have listened to half a man the other half of captain �
kirk.And they are half men when they believe in the big crunch �
and they might be whole men who are halfhearted.Because if you �
believe in evolution the big crunch is right for you.If you �
believe it happened in another universe at a different time.And �
that just begs the question you have to have another universe �
where the big crunch works because it does not work in ours �
according to measurement and measurement is what science is all �
about.
We can propose a unified theory of everything based on  a uni#�
verse that may not exist and it will still work and it will be �
eovlutionary since the challenge is to make up a creation science �
theory of everything that can be taught alongside.And it cannot �
be done.Because there is no equation for God he is just a first  �
ccause in the big bang.But an exnihilo thoery of everything would �
make the word the source of all information and that is a begin#�
ing somebody else will finish the idea.And it doesn't matter and �
of course it does it matters not to loose the good we oft might �
win by fearing to attempt...........But I have made up a  thoery �
ofevolution because I was an evolutionist and now i know why my �
thoery is wrong because like Einstein I have proved my own thoery �
wrong with infinity..........You cannot have infinite �
mass.........or light cannot travel faster than C if it could �
then mass could be infinite.But it cannot ever be as large as �
infinity.So the only alternative is for mass to approach infinity �
and never quite equal then 2+2 does not equal four and that is �
proof that evolution is wrong.But you can ever understand that �
proof and you only need to look at a bouncing ball.If it will not �
work inour universe it may never work in any other.Because 2+2 �
will not equal four in any big crunch universe.And that is taking �
the glory back from satan he would say 2+2=4 is his thing but it �
really is a totally natural thing and it can subverted to be �
suprnature.And just because it is true doesn't mean that the �
devil can't use it.And just because it is not true that is this �
thoery doesn't mean that the devil can't use it.And that is what �
Marg said because she is a woman of God.Marg Weiland was inter#�
ested in the four laws but there is not time to discuss them �
here.
They are a great way to spread the gospel and thier is no subsi#�
tutute for the gospel and it is found in the book of romans we # 
ð
Ghost who we can recieve by faith.It begins and ends with �
faith.If it begins with works righeousness it will end with filty �
rags but if it begins with faith in the gospel it will end with �
faith in the gospel.
There must be a  universe where diracs 1938 electron proton �
annihilation equation works one rule out of 10^500 random rules.
You can add random equations with the dice for diracs equation �
and get a rule where it works in a 10 large spacial dimension �
universe with supergravity that overcomes the repulsion between �
electrons so that the mass of the proton equals the mass of the �
electron then they can annihilate.
It is this rule that is the key to the theory of everything.
This is a perfect theory that we can get the intial starting �
conditions and work out EInsteins equations for everything for �
our universe.But what if they don't work then it is back to the �
drawking board we can tweak the universe that preceeded ours to �
get the right equations but that is a cheat and that is far from �
elegant.But just like particle theory we can make it work by �
making it fit the obseverations and that is bad science you make �
the thoery fit the observations is good science but the thoery is �
meant to predict the observations not be modified to make it �
fit.And that is the whole idea of science we need to make the �
theory fit the onservations so we could argue forever.......But �
we can take what we can get and that is a great science thoery if �
we can'[t get a thoery of everything then we can get a thoery of �
ssomething or of nothing......or of something out of �
nothing...........And we may never understand how something came �
form nothing.But we need a bomb and we don't so maybe we should �
not ask for infinite energy maybe man can't handle that kind of �
power.And if he can then God knows how to make it safe for �
him...........Because if you ask God for a solution to the energy �
crisis then he does not give a scorpian he gives a loaf of bread.

Classical mechanics will work in a big crunch universe.But it is �
statement true or is it a lie.Heizenberg will work even in a big �
crunch universe where is no uncertainty and my arguement is that �
will not work where there certainty about the future.And since �
the future is the past reversed there are no questions that �
cannot be answered about a big crunch universe.But can we go from �
certainty to uncertainty if no is certainty then we cannot go �
from a no to a yes. And we can know the initial starting condi#�
tions which can give us the version of Einsteins equations that �
are right for the big bang in our universe.But what if the equa#�
tions ar enot right for our universe then it is Gods plan B.It �
can apply in 10^500 other universes but ours is special it was �
intelligently designed God intervened.And if he did intervene �
than no explaination without God will even satisfy the intial �
starting conditions.
Classical mechanics can explain why electrons spiral into atoms �
and why planets spiral into stars or off into space.
In ten dimensions large spacial dimensions classical mechanics �
works because there is no need for heizenberg in a contracting �
universe..........And this is so bright not one can deny it but �
they can say this universe is imaginary and even if the math is # 
ð
So we can create a classical theory of everything one that com#�
plements the standard model now that it is complete.What then �
when we have completed both models then we have to get both �
models to agree with string thoery and I have a handle on that �
too.
So that is the next step explain it all with �
strings...............In ten large spacial dimensions where we �
start with six extra open dimensions that curl up and leave four �
dimensions for the big bang....This is a perfect plan B for �
evolution but may not explain our universe and its fine tuning �
only ex-nihilo can explain how God is part of the process.And we �
can't leave him out of the equation or we get a babbler of a �
computer wih garbage being programmed in and garbage coming out