Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
Total psycho though. 
Ah but you've got form.
Caught using a sock puppet pretending to be someone else. Repeatedly caught not knowing how to spell a fundamental key word in law any lawyer must know.
Just pretending to be a lawyer. Typos my ass.
Face it, you're simply a fraud at heart.
Why not just fess up and say what 'outside agency' you are hoping could be the "Tuner" that Stephen Hawking doesn't even mention.
Hawking proposes NOT the bottom-up 'outside agency /eternal inflation' approach, as he explains it leads to no explanation.
The three letter word that starts with g, ends with d, but gives no explanation is that "Tuner" you keep trying to insinuate.
Evidence and truth Lol. Just two more things you and your ilk are only able to pretend.
You admitted to being a sockpuppet after you were caught using a sockpuppet.
After 3 and more attempts to correct you using the wrong spelling of a word that would be fundamentally key in your proclaimed profession , that's no typo.
Sure, and as I say, you keep trying to insinuate one(faith) into the other (science).
1. first of all you are not even the original stu.
so you are perhaps the longest standing troll sock puppet on et.
2. I seems I revealed the suituation of using a different machine at work with a different login by saying...
"10-17-10 01:11 PM
This is jem. I know the lawyer telling people to move back in.
I spoke with him on the phone a few months ago. "
3. yeah I did not know the difference.... that would be odd considering I typed the word correctly at times too.
4. Its clear to everyone that I present the science on the fine tuning of our universe and a troll and few sock puppets try and change the subject, bring up strawmen or lie and misrepresent the science. This has been going on for years on this subject.
and I know that when I present the science it kills you...
so here it is again.. and look not religion insinuated.
By the way in your troll response has been to say this is taken out of context or you say he does not understand statistics...
which was a joke because this is one of the smartest guys in the world on the subject and he wrote a book which I have linked to detailing the science and the stats.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/WhGdVMBk6Zo?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
so you are perhaps the longest standing troll sock puppet on et.
2. I seems I revealed the suituation of using a different machine at work with a different login by saying...
"10-17-10 01:11 PM
This is jem. I know the lawyer telling people to move back in.
I spoke with him on the phone a few months ago. "
3. yeah I did not know the difference.... that would be odd considering I typed the word correctly at times too.
4. Its clear to everyone that I present the science on the fine tuning of our universe and a troll and few sock puppets try and change the subject, bring up strawmen or lie and misrepresent the science. This has been going on for years on this subject.
and I know that when I present the science it kills you...
so here it is again.. and look not religion insinuated.
By the way in your troll response has been to say this is taken out of context or you say he does not understand statistics...
which was a joke because this is one of the smartest guys in the world on the subject and he wrote a book which I have linked to detailing the science and the stats.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/WhGdVMBk6Zo?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Lol. Just when it seemed you couldn't do more crazy, you managed it. 
Now you've admitted that you admitted to being a sock puppet after you were caught being a sock puppet, but at the same time deny being a sockpuppet and you call me a sockpuppet.
Priceless. You sure take absurd to new lows.
You don't present science at all. I doubt very much you even know what you are doing or saying half the time.
The bonehead non-arguments you keep coming up with only exist by being purposely confusing in themselves and therfore obviously you.
But seeing that you asked, it's really straightforward.
Stephen Hawking says...
Don't use bottom-up, it can make no predictions and you end up with things called 'outside agencies' or 'eternal inflation' which explains nothing.
Use top-down. That way, with Feyman's sum over histories, as particles follow every possible path to reach their current condition, so does a universe.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
Roger Penrose says...
Cyclic cosmology does away with any need for fine tuning.
So again, if your nonsense is not about trying to slot some god into things, just what is your problem.
Now you've admitted that you admitted to being a sock puppet after you were caught being a sock puppet, but at the same time deny being a sockpuppet and you call me a sockpuppet.
Priceless. You sure take absurd to new lows.
You don't present science at all. I doubt very much you even know what you are doing or saying half the time.
The bonehead non-arguments you keep coming up with only exist by being purposely confusing in themselves and therfore obviously you.
But seeing that you asked, it's really straightforward.
Stephen Hawking says...
Don't use bottom-up, it can make no predictions and you end up with things called 'outside agencies' or 'eternal inflation' which explains nothing.
Use top-down. That way, with Feyman's sum over histories, as particles follow every possible path to reach their current condition, so does a universe.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
Roger Penrose says...
Cyclic cosmology does away with any need for fine tuning.
So again, if your nonsense is not about trying to slot some god into things, just what is your problem.
that was priceless troll bullshit.
1. note there was no denial STU is a sock puppet.
2. misrepresenting facts about the situation I revealed.
3. completely lying about Hawkings.
hawkings states that with our current model - bottom up - you either have to conclude a fine tuned universe or eternal inflation (eternal inflation is completely speculative and is deficient in that since every thing happens that models leaves you with no predictive ability... so he proposes the highly speculative top down model.
4. Show us a link where penrose says cyclic universe does away with the fine tuning of which he Penrose explained in his book and that video. You might pull this one off... but I would like to see it.
I see a few suggestions about this on other forums... but so far no links to penrose.
1. note there was no denial STU is a sock puppet.
2. misrepresenting facts about the situation I revealed.
3. completely lying about Hawkings.
hawkings states that with our current model - bottom up - you either have to conclude a fine tuned universe or eternal inflation (eternal inflation is completely speculative and is deficient in that since every thing happens that models leaves you with no predictive ability... so he proposes the highly speculative top down model.
4. Show us a link where penrose says cyclic universe does away with the fine tuning of which he Penrose explained in his book and that video. You might pull this one off... but I would like to see it.
I see a few suggestions about this on other forums... but so far no links to penrose.
Quote from stu:
Lol. Just when it seemed you couldn't do more crazy, you managed it.
Now you've admitted that you admitted to being a sock puppet after you were caught being a sock puppet, but at the same time deny being a sockpuppet and you call me a sockpuppet.
Priceless. You sure take absurd to new lows.
You don't present science at all. I doubt very much you even know what you are doing or saying half the time.
The bonehead non-arguments you keep coming up with only exist by being purposely confusing in themselves and therfore obviously you.
But seeing that you asked, it's really straightforward.
Stephen Hawking says...
Don't use bottom-up, it can make no predictions and you end up with things called 'outside agencies' or 'eternal inflation' which explains nothing.
Use top-down. That way, with Feyman's sum over histories, as particles follow every possible path to reach their current condition, so does a universe.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
Roger Penrose says...
Cyclic cosmology does away with any need for fine tuning.
So again, if your nonsense is not about trying to slot some god into things, just what is your problem.
1.Sockpuppets. Check it out Not only dishonest but you have a bad memory too.
2. Facts are facts. You are discredited and an extremely dishonest person at least on this board.
3. Now you're telling Stephen Hawking what is highly speculative. Lol.
4. How come you are not telling Roger Penrose what is highly speculative. How come his figurative 10 to the power of whatever is not highly speculative? You feel yourself knowledgeable enough to doubt Hawking but not Penrose. What conceit you have.
Using the arguments of idiots as you do, just makes you an idiot. It's why you can only keep repeat posting the same old assertions and claims and imputations that have already been destroyed. You are thinking and acting like an idiot.
The idea that the universe is so improbable that it needed a "Tuner" to make it probable, is answered scientifically with Gravity.
If your "Tuner" or "Creator" god had to set everything so precisely to make it work, then "It" is simply governed by the laws of physics that enable Gravity to do it anyway.
what a bunch of bullshit.
the fake non original stu...lying his ass off.
The lack of integrity a troll must have to take speculation and act like it is fact... you such a low troll stu. .
Here is our scientific reality according to Hawking.
The model science uses to prove things is bottom up...
".... In particular a bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency"or..
you can read the "or: yourself I have given it to you dozens of times.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf
the fake non original stu...lying his ass off.
The lack of integrity a troll must have to take speculation and act like it is fact... you such a low troll stu. .
Here is our scientific reality according to Hawking.
The model science uses to prove things is bottom up...
".... In particular a bottom-up approach to cosmology either requires one to postulate an initial state of the universe that is carefully fine-tuned [10] - as if prescribed by an outside agency"or..
you can read the "or: yourself I have given it to you dozens of times.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0602/0602091v2.pdf