[talanum1 (OP)]

You said this
Quote from: talanum1 on 14/01/2021 11:18:04
I made protons and electrons with my mind - they talk to me telepathically
What did they tell you?

I didn't include the particles in the list - they are just particles. They told me when other particles tried to bind with them and they told me the other particles think they are imposters.

I can put two eggs in a box, but it does not follow that I can put two elephants in that box.
There is a rule that stops me.
I can't do that because elephants are too big.

If you suppose the elephant are points, you can put them in the box (by the premise and that you can put points in a box). Similarly, for the electrons, you can superimpose them (by the premise and that you can superimpose points).

[Bored chemist]

If you suppose the elephant are points,

then you are wrong.

But you still can not superimpose electrons because of the electrostatic repulsion.
You also can not do it because of the Pauli principle.

What you are saying is " we could do an impossible thing, and that is illogical because it is impossible".
The point is that you can't do the impossible thing, so the logic  issue can not arise.

[talanum1 (OP)]

What you are saying is " we could do an impossible thing, and that is illogical because it is impossible".
The point is that you can't do the impossible thing, so the logic  issue can not arise.

It is illogical because it turns out to be impossible. You're not thinking like a Logician.

As I said:
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 10:21:46
a lot of lies are on the internet.

You won't believe it unless you experience it for yourself. And you will - after death.

[Bored chemist]

You're not thinking like a Logician.

Said the man who thinks protons talk to him by telepathy...

The US constitution doesn't prohibit electrons electrons occupying the same space, and nor does the mathematical behaviour of points.

But the laws of physics do prohibit it.
So it doesn't happen.
And, because it doesn't happen, it doesn't violate those laws.

[talanum1 (OP)]

But the laws of physics do prohibit it.
So it doesn't happen.
And, because it doesn't happen, it doesn't violate those laws.

The premise is supposed to suspend the laws governing particles, you just suppose it is points.

[Kryptid]

They could tell me things I didn't know.

Such as?

[Bored chemist]

premise is supposed

By whom?
Who supposes that?

[talanum1 (OP)]

Such as?

I can't remember, but I did have to look it up in the Dictionary. I just remember I've seen it black on white. I'm talking about old voices (which I believe are persons) not the particles. The particles I know it was outside me since I felt it at a certain position. I can pinpoint where voices come from.

The word "telepathy" exist so it is likely the phenomenon exists.

By whom?
Who supposes that?

Whoever can.

[Bored chemist]

The word "telepathy" exist so it is likely the phenomenon exists.

The word "unicorn" exists.
Your logic is deeply flawed.

[Bored chemist]

Whoever can.

That makes your original statement a tautology; true, but meaningless.

[Kryptid]

I can't remember, but I did have to look it up in the Dictionary. I just remember I've seen it black on white.

Not particularly compelling evidence, much less that of a scientific caliber.

The particles I know it was outside me since I felt it at a certain position. I can pinpoint where voices come from.

Tactile hallucinations are a thing, so that could still be all in your head.

The word "telepathy" exist so it is likely the phenomenon exists.

By that reasoning, Cthulu also likely exists.

Your argument against particles being points is actually self-contradictory, because your definition of a space-time event is "the point in space together with a local time at the point." But modern physics doesn't require particles to be points anyway. They are just point-like to the extent that we can measure their size, which is limited both by our instruments and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

https://www.whiteoutpress.com/scientists-prove-mental-telepathy-real/

The last paragraph on that article states:

As a lifelong believer in ESP, this author noticed there was one major ingredient missing from the successful experiment. The senders needed to be connected to a computer via electrodes attached to the skull. The receivers were similarly connected. And a computer was required to detect the brain activity of one and stimulate brain activity in the other. The piece of the puzzle still missing is the human brain’s ability to stimulate another brain without the help of electrodes and computers. When the world’s scientists figure out how to do that, mental telepathy will truly be a reality.

That's kind of an important thing to miss.

https://www.insidescience.org/video/telepathy-real

As with your first article, this is computer-assisted telepathy, not the psychic telepathy that you seem to claim:

Put all of this together and you have the first demonstration of telepathy: One person concentrates on something in particular, this is read as specific EEG brain activity, that is sent by wire to a TMS wand, and that stimulates another person’s brain and they see a flash of light. That was done back in 2014.

https://anomalien.com/scientific-evidence-of-telepathy
https://www.alittlesparkofjoy.com/telepathy
www.yogebooks.com/english/atkinson/1910telepathy.pdf

It would be preferable to show us some actual papers of peer-reviewed, successfully replicated experiments demonstrating the existence of telepathy. But that's really beside the point, as what you really need to demonstrate is that you, specifically, are telepathic. Can you demonstrate this?

[Hayseed]

The only time that one may super impose two particles, is if the two particles have opposite polarity........and at the same energy level.  The superposition will not last long, because the particles are unwinding each other and dissolving into space.........EM emission.

Science calls this a matter, antimatter reaction.

[talanum1 (OP)]

The only time that one may super impose two particles, is if the two particles have opposite polarity........and at the same energy level.  The superposition will not last long, because the particles are unwinding each other and dissolving into space.........EM emission.

Science calls this a matter, antimatter reaction.

The logical assumption is just that the particles are points with no other laws being supposed. After this assumption, the laws are brought to bear on the situation. Tell me if that is valid or invalid.

But that's really beside the point, as what you really need to demonstrate is that you, specifically, are telepathic. Can you demonstrate this?

I sent you a telepathic message and you responded: you told me not to put thoughts in your head again.

As for the tactile hallucination: it wasn't a physical feeling it was spiritual. You must have felt someone looking at you in the past - it is that power.

I wasn't hallucinating, I heard Earth complain about me making the particles. She put them in my throat.

I remember now: the word I didn't know was "ethereal".

Saying particles are point-like is just like saying they are points.

[Bored chemist]

I sent you a telepathic message and you responded: you told me not to put thoughts in your head again.

I don't think that is true.

Saying particles are point-like is just like saying they are points.

Not really

[Kryptid]

I sent you a telepathic message and you responded: you told me not to put thoughts in your head again.

Welp, that demonstrates that you're only hallucinating, as I never responded to any such thing. If that's not good enough for you, then why don't we do another test? If you can really send and receive messages mentally, then tell me what number I'm thinking of. It's between 1 and 1,000, so there is about a 0.1% chance that you'll get it right just by guessing.

As for the tactile hallucination: it wasn't a physical feeling it was spiritual. You must have felt someone looking at you in the past - it is that power.

Both of those things can still very much be hallucinations.

I wasn't hallucinating

You have yet to demonstrate that.

Tell me if that is valid or invalid.

Invalid. You can't just take the laws of physics out of the picture and expect to make correct logical deductions about physics.

I heard Earth complain about me making the particles.

Which could still be a hallucination. It sounds like you could have undiagnosed psychosis of some kind. I don't mean that as an insult. You should go see a doctor about it.

She put them in my throat.

Put what in your throat? The particles?

[Petrochemicals]

This has sunk to new depths of head screwing and make believe and does not belong on a science forum, even in the wacky section.

[puppypower]

Maybe we can discuss a parallel topic, that is a compromise. Can highly localized space-time events impact point particles that already exist? For example, the outer electrons of larger metallic atoms, can travel at a significant fraction of the speed of light and can thereby display relativistic affects; Relativistic Quantum Chemistry.

For example, the yellow color of gold can be explained as a local time shift, around the outer electrons of gold, such that all all colors that reflect off these the outer electrons of gold will take on a yellowish cast. The outer electrons of gold are in a different space-time reference; SR, than the nucleus of the same atoms. These two references will create uncertainty relative to the electrons and nucleus, since each sees different propagations of space-time events. This makes gold very inert, to most of chemistry, since most chemical space-time frames do not overlap very well with the relativistic frames of the outer electrons of gold. There is uncertainty.

As we go from the outer electrons, to the inner electrons of gold, the electrons move faster and faster, like a skater who pulls their arms in while spinning. These inner electron references are so different from most of outer electron chemistry, that the nucleus cannot easily steal an inner electron nor do these inner electrons have any connection to any physical property of gold we can measure, since they are in their own frame.

These examples do not use space-time references to create particles, but it does use space-time events to manipulate particles that already exist. For example, proton or electron tunneling could be explained by shifts in the local space-time grid, so particles can break out of one expected reference, and enter another reference so it can move to the beat of its own drum. On the other side it exists the space-time induction,

In this case a collection of atoms, such as in liquid water, two overlapping spar-time grids appear, one in the nucleus reference and the other in the electron reference. These two grids can impact their own kind more that the other kind. In the case of water the hydrogen proton becomes very mobile and can even tunnel in pairs. This is very useful for creating and sustaining life, which depends on the free migration of hydrogen protons via hydrogen bonding.

[Bored chemist]

Maybe we can discuss a parallel topic, that is a compromise. Can highly localized space-time events impact point particles that already exist? For example, the outer electrons of larger metallic atoms, can travel at a significant fraction of the speed of light and can thereby display relativistic affects; Relativistic Quantum Chemistry.

For example, the yellow color of gold can be explained as a local time shift, around the outer electrons of gold, such that all all colors that reflect off these the outer electrons of gold will take on a yellowish cast. The outer electrons of gold are in a different space-time reference; SR, than the nucleus of the same atoms. These two references will create uncertainty relative to the electrons and nucleus, since each sees different propagations of space-time events. This makes gold very inert, to most of chemistry, since most chemical space-time frames do not overlap very well with the relativistic frames of the outer electrons of gold. There is uncertainty.

As we go from the outer electrons, to the inner electrons of gold, the electrons move faster and faster, like a skater who pulls their arms in while spinning. These inner electron references are so different from most of outer electron chemistry, that the nucleus cannot easily steal an inner electron nor do these inner electrons have any connection to any physical property of gold we can measure, since they are in their own frame.

These examples do not use space-time references to create particles, but it does use space-time events to manipulate particles that already exist. For example, proton or electron tunneling could be explained by shifts in the local space-time grid, so particles can break out of one expected reference, and enter another reference so it can move to the beat of its own drum. On the other side it exists the space-time induction,

In this case a collection of atoms, such as in liquid water, two overlapping spar-time grids appear, one in the nucleus reference and the other in the electron reference. These two grids can impact their own kind more that the other kind. In the case of water the hydrogen proton becomes very mobile and can even tunnel in pairs. This is very useful for creating and sustaining life, which depends on the free migration of hydrogen protons via hydrogen bonding.

That post also
"has sunk to new depths of head screwing and make believe and does not belong on a science forum, even in the wacky section. "

For example, the yellow color of gold can be explained as a local time shift,

No, it can't.

The outer electrons of gold are in a different space-time reference; SR, than the nucleus of the same atoms.

Why?
Same gravity; same speed.

like a skater who pulls their arms in while spinning.

Not really.
More like a skier who's going down hill (and not much like that either).

These inner electron references

What is it with you and the word "reference"?
You seem to stick it randomly into stuff.

These examples do not use space-time references to create particles,

Good... because that's meaningless.

On the other side it exists the space-time induction,

Word salad.

In this case a collection of atoms, such as in liquid water, two overlapping spar-time grids appear, one in the nucleus reference and the other in the electron reference. These two grids can impact their own kind more that the other kind. In the case of water the hydrogen proton becomes very mobile and can even tunnel in pairs. This is very useful for creating and sustaining life, which depends on the free migration of hydrogen protons via hydrogen bonding.

More word salad.

[talanum1 (OP)]

If you can really send and receive messages mentally, then tell me what number I'm thinking of. It's between 1 and 1,000, so there is about a 0.1% chance that you'll get it right just by guessing.

Your thinking of the number 120.

Welp, that demonstrates that you're only hallucinating, as I never responded to any such thing.

Maybe it's in your subconscious. Please do a search and let me know.

Put what in your throat? The particles?

Yes, the particles. I felt her putting it in.

I wasn't hallucinating because the happenings happened in a coherent sequence and Earth fetched the particles from the correct location.

[Bored chemist]

I wasn't hallucinating because...

Yes you were.