Creation ex nihilo

[tvf] "What then are we to assume will happen when two such unit particles collide?"

[Skarp] "No units (forms) composed of nothing will ever collide .... they interact."

A few points:

1) You did not answer the question. I assume you did not answer because you cannot.

2) You frequently make statemnts that seem non-sensical, because they use familliar words in non-familliar ways.

For example, most people know that a collision is a type of interaction. Despite this, you say that forms (real things, like protons and rabbit pellets, made from your hypothetical fundamental particles) interact but cannot collide.

===

It is possible that you have some other type of interaction in mind, but since you didn't explain what you meant I suppose we will never know.

It is more likely that you are just blowing smoke. (Trolling.)

Skarp,

Are you serious about trying to discuss an idea of some sort?

Communicating in general is not easy. (I'm sometimes amazed that it happens at all.) Communicating about technical and scientific matters is even harder. By engaging in troll-like behavior you reduce the chances that your idea will make sense to another mind.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">1) You did not answer the question. I assume you did not answer because you cannot.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Toms question was in regards to marbles. Since there are no marbles in an the analogous way he considers marbles to be, at least from my standpoint, there really is no point in answering in a way that would be to his liking.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">2) You frequently make statemnts that seem non-sensical, because they use familliar words in non-familliar ways.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> I did type in this sentence -{{I realize this isn't the normal way of looking at things, so comprehension may not set in all that quickly. }} I'm not expecting you to eat the sandwhich in one bite, and your lack of comprehension could very well be my fault for poor choice of words. Take a chill pill .... it might help your understanding?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">For example, most people know that a collision is a type of interaction. Despite this, you say that forms (real things, like protons and rabbit pellets, made from your hypothetical fundamental particles) interact but cannot collide.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Collide is a word that might be used for a pair of marbles hitting each other, where they weren't hitting beforehand. In the case of these hypothetical particals, how is it possible for them to collide if they are already in contact conceptually? I'm interacting with the moon right now. Would you call it a collision?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It is more likely that you are just blowing smoke. (Trolling.) By engaging in troll-like behavior you reduce the chances that your idea will make sense to another mind. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Perhaps you can explain to me where this troll like behavior is taking place, then maybe a solution can ensue, because I have no idea what you are talking about.

Anyone who has looked into the composition of matter knows that it's leaning away from marbles, and beginning to ride on waves entirely. How could you have a problem with this?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />A countable infinity, divided by a countable infinity is a constant. ... Dividing by zero is indeterminate ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You might want to brush up on the meaning of "indeterminate" in this kind of math context. The two statements just quoted are incorrect. Any infinity divided by any infinity is indeterminate. And of all divisions by zero, only 0/0 is indeterminate. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Skarp</i>
<br />I'm interacting with the moon right now. Would you call it a collision?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You could not be interacting with the Moon if nothing was colliding. In Meta Science, classical gravitons blocked by you and the Moon are doing the colliding.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Anyone who has looked into the composition of matter knows that it's leaning away from marbles, and beginning to ride on waves entirely. How could you have a problem with this?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Because it seems to have come from a dream state of yours. Define a wave. In conventional physics, it is the organized motion of the constituents of a medium in response to a disturbance. My dictionary defines "wave" in physics more formally: "an oscillation that travels through a medium by transferring energy from one particle or point to another without causing any permanent displacement of the medium". Either way, "marbles" (the medium constituents) are an essential part of any wave.

Moreover, waves in a single medium cannot collide of affect one another. So if substance were waves at any fundamental level, contact would be impossible. -|Tom|-

[LB] You are trolling.

[Skarp] I don't know what you mean.

===

***[Skarp] "Tom's question was in regards to marbles. Since there are no marbles in an the analogous way he considers marbles to be, at least from my standpoint, there really is no point in answering in a way that would be to his liking."

No, his question was specifically about your fundamental "particle". Whether your particle resembles a marble, a swarm of bees, a wave or something none of us has ever seen is irrelevant as far as the question is concerned. (But it might be relevant in the answer.) Since you have not given us any details about your idea, he was asking for some.

(NOTE - this sort of "misunderstanding" is troll-like behavior.)


***[Skarp, quoting Skarp from earlier in the thread] "I realize this isn't the normal way of looking at things, so comprehension may not set in all that quickly."

This means you know that the &lt;stuff&gt; you are posting here is not understandable in its present form. And yet you post it without making any attempt to explain what you really mean.

(NOTE - this sort of "I wonder if thay can make sense of this" posting is troll-like behavior.)


***[Skarp] "Collide is a word that might be used for a pair of marbles hitting each other, where they weren't hitting beforehand."

Trivially true. It is a word that might be used for other things as well. So what? The real question is (still, after all this effort): "what does Skarp mean when he says this-or-that particular word?"

NOTE - this sort of verbal squirming (Tom calls it "word salad") to avoid explaining what you mean is troll-like behavior. Especially after someone has explicitly accused you of trolling.)

===

The only appropriate response at this point is for you to post definitions and/or explanations of all the words and phrases you believe could be misunderstood by someone that is not an expert on your idea.