Simple Nature, and Complex Physics

[Pincho Paxton]

I have seen so much discussion over the years, and so many complex, mathematical computer simulations, and so much talk about the complexities of DNA, and computer programs to simulate the production of natural physics, computer AI........................etc.

When the truth finally is discovered each time, it is mostly very simple. Take an MP3 player for example, it decodes a complex digital computer program, with compaction, laser beams, sliding doors, and graphic equaliser. However, we can just scratch a groove in a piece of wax.. Lol!

Computer AI was so complicated, yet somebody tried to copy the brain, and called it a Neural Network. It was so simple that they themselves were surprised that it worked. A learning computer from almost nothing at all.

If humans were Gods then Earth would be so much more complex. A millipede would have a million legs, our brain would have an imagination that created a holographic image in our minds, and Simon Cowell would know what good singing was.

Even the Big Bang is way too complex with it's singularity, and it's gravitational forces pulling planets together, and Atoms containing particles with all sorts of funny names.

At least Jesus is simple.. I'll give credit to the simplicity of breaking bread, and walking on water without any complex physics involved. God just created Earth in 7 days.. so that is as simple as you can get.

You can see that simplicity of God, and complexity of science will suite two types of different people. Einstein is a mystery.. in fact a lot of people believe both.

But what about nature? The actual events that really happen? Nobody is really taking much notice of nature without adding math's to it. Nature is a wind bellowing through vocal chords, vibrations, not a digital MP3. But scientist have to turn nature into an MP3 before they will believe in it.

The Universe was created by bubbles.

[paco]

Paxton,

Are you saying bubbles are the future of our world? Very clever.

[paco]

x2

[Pincho Paxton]

I'm saying that the universe is actually so simple that it is hard to believe. If it was complicated it would be easy to believe. But like a fly, we only see the final picture in hexagons, but there are so many hexagons in our vision that the shape of the world looks very linear. So.. we see a tree, and the fly sees a bunch of hexagons (just using movie examples here, I don't know if a fly really sees hexagons, but I know that we do). The hexagons that the fly sees are just a limited version of what we see, but we are also limited. So the tree is a bunch of branches that spin out in forks, and basically I could map those branches to a hexagon shaped grid. I could photograph them, and the photographic paper is made from atoms aligned like hexagons. Our eyes sensors are aligned like hexagons. We do not actually see the tree.. it is a cloud of bubbles, but our eyes pull the bubbles together.. well that's what focus does. the tree probably looks more realistic if we look at it blurred. That's a real problem for us to get our head around. How do we see something when all of our equipment is aligned in hexagon aligned atoms? How do we see something when light only passes through the centre of it? Like an egg.. we only see the yolk, light hits the yolk, but it doesn't hit the clear white substance around the yolk. We can't see it.

Why does water evaporate into the sky? Because heat makes the bubbles grow, and like a packet of Rice Crispies, the bigger ones are on the top, and the small broken ones go to the bottom. Why does water bend light? Because the egg yolks are at the centre of the bubbles, and light hits the egg yolks. The yolks have to move further apart, or nearer together when the bubbles expand, and shrink.. we can't see that happen. But we can see a heat wave, and a heat wave shows us a moving image rising upwards. This is because our eyes can't cope with the image being so unsteady. We are trying to see the egg yolks, but they keep moving around, and we are almost seeing the bubbles around them.

Science needs to simplify its understanding of the universe. It can't move forwards without saying...

The universe is made from bubbles.

[yana]

I have created true A.I . I'm a computer scientist / physicist and I have been working for google creating a better search engine for us all. Let me show you all my diplomas...

[Pincho Paxton]

I have created true A.I . I'm a computer scientist / physicist and I have been working for google creating a better search engine for us all. Let me show you all my diplomas...

What's that supposed to mean? Sarcasm is not understanding what somebody is talking about without admitting it, therefore like saying "I don't know what you mean therefore it cannot make sense." But it's far from genius when applied to something as simple as computer programming. Most 12 year olds can program a computer. Then you apply programming to HTML, and diplomas? Also true AI does not work as a sentence... (artificial reality... <> =....) So the closest is Neural Networks.

[yana]

It's not sarcasm dude. I am telling you the truth, I invented a form of A.I for googles search engine. Nothing coming from me is hostile by any means.

[Pincho Paxton]

It's not sarcasm dude. I am telling you the truth, I invented a form of A.I for googles search engine. Nothing coming from me is hostile by any means.

Ok, well try not to distract me too much. I am trying to figure out magnetism properly, because the Earth is about to switch (apparently) its magnetic polarity, and it could be very important to figure out what will happen. To figure this out I am having to first figure out what is inside an Atom, and then apply this to my model of the universe.. but so far I don't get a switch of magnetic polarity, all I get is it fading away, and that is definitely not good.. it holds the sun radiation back (apparently). So I don't want to be messed around too much.