The BIBLE and SCIENCE

[charter.rights]

On the one hand hand you can't talk of Christianity and ignore what is written by Jesus's apostles.

Yes I can...especially since the Bible has been altered and amended and parts of it rejected from its original form.

Doing this reveals you are delusional and the real moron.

I think we have already established that I hold a superior intellect. That ummmm.....makes you the moron in this discussion.

Christianity is about words and the meaning behind them.

Only when people like you mold Christianity into the limited religion you have made it into.

Calling me a Psychopath when I put forward literal passages contrary to your abstract reference to christianity is projection on your part.

I haven't called you a psychopath....but if the shoe fits....and the voices tell you.....well then!

For anyone who knows the principles of Christianity knows it is unchristian to degrade anyone and call them names.

Again you are totally wrong. Jesus rebuked the merchants in the marketplace for doing business on the sabbath. So there He did not "turn the other cheek". But then again what you see as attack could really be helping a brother, since those who are lost and cannot see need direction and insight. You only see this as an attack because you fear you can be harmed and you fear that unless you attack first you will be defeated. Jesus did not teach the kind of fear that you embrace but taught freedom from it.

In Christianity you are of Christ or you are of Satan.

Wrong again, goofy. Jesus taught that all are of Christ. Only those that believe in sin are of the devil, for only those who see themselves as sinners can never see they are of Christ. Just like you who are a sinner cannot understand The Christ because you embrace sin as your weapon.

In Christianity it is either/or.

How can someone be as wrong as you have in this one reply? But alas you ARE wrong again.....

Christianity is not being "Of Christ". It is about conforming to the rules set out by the elites of the Church, often for their own personal gain. Being "In Christ" is knowing that there is a reality that defies your limited understanding. That it is not found in conformity but by challenging conformity. Miracles are not found in people who believe they are to be held out for special occassions.

In the NT the emphasis is on "works/deeds". You can beleive what you want but your actions and words is the defining fact that makes you christian or not.

Damn, you're wrong again. The NT deals in faith with results. There is no purpose in holding onto faith if you cannot prove it in your deeds. Thus you fail the third test that has been put to you. You have faith without works, and that makes you dead to Christ.

You can't have a christ consciousness if you are unaware of the principles of Christianity and the addition of one commandment by Jesus.

So wrong...again. The principles of Christianity have been corrupted by people like you. And so they no longer stand, nor are they sane ideas. Really, they are retarded and psychopathic ideas brought to the Church by charlatans and fakers. They are promoted by morons and nutbars without any idea of The Truth...at least as Jesus taught it. And here is your problem, remember. While you may claim to have faith, you have no works. Without being able to demonstrate the Christ consciousness you are unable to teach it. (I think God left this one precisely for people like you:)

Matthew 15:14

Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

2 Corinthians 4:4

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

You are blinded by your own ego, in which you try to out-shine others. I believe you have fallen into a ditch and can't get out!

If you don't know what that commandment is then you truly are a moron.

There are two which replaced all others...and you have forgotten one. But even if you remember the second one, you still do not understand WHY they are important. Only in Christ is it possible to know who your enemies really are.....

[whowhere]

Yes I can...especially since the Bible has been altered and amended and parts of it rejected from its original form.

I think we have already established that I hold a superior intellect. That ummmm.....makes you the moron in this discussion.

Only when people like you mold Christianity into the limited religion you have made it into.

I haven't called you a psychopath....but if the shoe fits....and the voices tell you.....well then!

Again you are totally wrong. Jesus rebuked the merchants in the marketplace for doing business on the sabbath. So there He did not "turn the other cheek". But then again what you see as attack could really be helping a brother, since those who are lost and cannot see need direction and insight. You only see this as an attack because you fear you can be harmed and you fear that unless you attack first you will be defeated. Jesus did not teach the kind of fear that you embrace but taught freedom from it.

Wrong again, goofy. Jesus taught that all are of Christ. Only those that believe in sin are of the devil, for only those who see themselves as sinners can never see they are of Christ. Just like you who are a sinner cannot understand The Christ because you embrace sin as your weapon.

How can someone be as wrong as you have in this one reply? But alas you ARE wrong again.....

Christianity is not being "Of Christ". It is about conforming to the rules set out by the elites of the Church, often for their own personal gain. Being "In Christ" is knowing that there is a reality that defies your limited understanding. That it is not found in conformity but by challenging conformity. Miracles are not found in people who believe they are to be held out for special occassions.

Damn, you're wrong again. The NT deals in faith with results. There is no purpose in holding onto faith if you cannot prove it in your deeds. Thus you fail the third test that has been put to you. You have faith without works, and that makes you dead to Christ.

So wrong...again. The principles of Christianity have been corrupted by people like you. And so they no longer stand, nor are they sane ideas. Really, they are retarded and psychopathic ideas brought to the Church by charlatans and fakers. They are promoted by morons and nutbars without any idea of The Truth...at least as Jesus taught it. And here is your problem, remember. While you may claim to have faith, you have no works. Without being able to demonstrate the Christ consciousness you are unable to teach it. (I think God left this one precisely for people like you:)

Matthew 15:14

Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

2 Corinthians 4:4

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

You are blinded by your own ego, in which you try to out-shine others. I believe you have fallen into a ditch and can't get out!

There are two which replaced all others...and you have forgotten one. But even if you remember the second one, you still do not understand WHY they are important. Only in Christ is it possible to know who your enemies really are.....

Once again you flip flop. You said you are not Christian yet here you are throwing stones of Judgment as to what is and isn't christian. Christian is a word, a word derived of the Latin Alphabet which was introduced by Roman Christian Missionaries to Great Britian in 5th AD. In 16th Century Ad the Masoretic Jews collaborated with English scholars to bring forward the King James Bible. Because these are Roman Letters you are in fact in the domain of the God of Jupiter and these words and letters belong to him. However, Jupiter is the king of all Gods and anyone including you lack the capacity and intelligents to establish your own alphabet will continue to humilate yourself in his domain and space. So go on and retreat to your abstract Christianity which is beyond words because Jupiter will deal with you accordingly.

[charter.rights]

Once again you flip flop. You said you are not Christian yet here you are throwing stones of Judgment as to what is and isn't christian. Christian is a word, a word derived of the Latin Alphabet which was introduced by Roman Christian Missionaries to Great Britian in 5th AD. In 16th Century Ad the Masoretic Jews collaborated with English scholars to bring forward the King James Bible. Because these are Roman Letters you are in fact in the domain of the God of Jupiter and these words and letters belong to him. However, Jupiter is the king of all Gods and anyone including you lack the capacity and intelligents to establish your own alphabet will continue to humilate yourself in his domain and space. So go on and retreat to your abstract Christianity which is beyond words because Jupiter will deal with you accordingly.

Wrong again goof. I don't subscribe to the self-serving religion of Christianity. Yet I can read the Bible, and draw conclusions from it. That is perfectly within my right. And there in lies your problem with Christianity. You can't see the Christ, for the Christians.

The rest of your post is nothing more than an attempt to show big, when in reality you are dead.

[Charles Anthony]

Guys,

Stop the childish personal attacks and insults. If they continue, posting privileges will be suspended.

Ch. A.

[whowhere]

Wrong again goof. I don't subscribe to the self-serving religion of Christianity. Yet I can read the Bible, and draw conclusions from it. That is perfectly within my right. And there in lies your problem with Christianity. You can't see the Christ, for the Christians.

The rest of your post is nothing more than an attempt to show big, when in reality you are dead.

Good for you to have read the bible and draw conclusions. In your arrogance and quickness to draw flawed conclusions you are beaconing yourself the real goof on this thread. Yes I see the christ from the Christians. The Christians are those who parade around saying they are christians yet they do not EMULATE what christ and his apostles preached to the people. I have yet to come acoss such so called christians including you. It is against the spirit of christ to insult people. If you were truly of christ you would take the insults and not dish them out.

In anycase the witching hours has come upon the so called christians. You want to beleive in your christianity you better learn the language Jesus spoke.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_language_did_Jesus_speak

what Language Did Jesus Speak?

Answer

Jesus, though born in Bethlehem of Judea, spent most of his life in the north - in Nazareth and the surrounding area of Galilee, where the local language is Aramaic. Therefore, as a citizen of Galilee, and not Judea, Aramaic was his mother tongue. This is born out in the incidents in the gospels where he uses it. These include the cry to Jairus' daughter "Talitha cumi" meaning 'Little girl, get up" [Mark 35:41] and the cry from the Cross as Jesus was separated from his Father at the moment he took all sin through his death - "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani"

If you are a so called jew you better learn what moses spoke.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_moses_speak_hebrew&alreadyAsked=1&rtitle=What_language_did_Moses_speak

Did moses speak hebrew?

Moses most likely spoke Aramaic, which is the ancestor language of Hebrew and Arabic.

Also Egyptian and Ethiopian. His first wife was an Ethiopian Princess

In anycase moses, jesus, Muhammad did not use these Latin letters. As they are not here to directly communicate with you, you have to rely on what is written. Two books exist in written form portraying the God of OT. The septuagint written 300 BC (existed in Latin) and the masorectic king James written 1604 transcribed to English using latin letters.

AS for your right to pollute jupiters words with your garbage, no you do not have that right. If you are going to use a word, use it properely or not at all. If you are going to parade around ascribing yourself of christ when in fact the words contained in the NT are contrasted against you the only outcome for you is this

Matthew 13 (King James Version)

42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 10 (King James Version)

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

[whowhere]

If neutrinos are capable of transmitting information the human body is supposedly....

http://technolog.it.umn.edu/technolog/mayjun99/neutrino.html

A surprising source of neutrinos are people. The human body contains roughly 20 milligrams of potassium 40, an isotope that undergoes beta decay and emits neutrinos. Therefore, without even knowing it, you emit close to 340 million neutrinos each day.

[whowhere]

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6891310/description.html

US Patent 6891310 - Neutrino light to photon light converting matrix

A NEW LAW OF NATURE

This patent application is based on acceptance of the following new law of nature:

A FORCE MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE ROLE OF NEUTRINOS

If the neutrino is phase modulated by atoms off which it has bounced this is an effective distributed modulation over this entire bandwidth. The number of bits of information that neutrino light can then carry is effectively infinite. That is, it is a quantized infinity! Surely enough bandwidth to carry information describing all life forms of the universe. Can this information then direct the combination of atoms of hydrogen, carbon and oxygen into life forms producing the range of hydrocarbons found, say in deep oil wells? It is known that hydrocarbons are formed by a spectrum of bacteria that form methane from atoms, gasoline from methane, oils from gasoline, and tars from oils. The basic atoms required are apparently a product of nuclear reactions deep within the Earth. Again all these results may be coded in neutrino information which drive the reactions.

http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html

An even more exotic form of radiation that is not made of light or matter, is neutrino radiation. Neutrinos are particles that travel at the speed of light just like electromagnetic radiation, but they are not made of matter and are also not produced by electric or magnetic fields.

Edited February 16, 2010 by whowhere

[Shwa]

They don't need my permission, they, unlike you, know what they're talking about. You're not going to get me to validate your ignorance, no matter how much you insult me. You have no idea what you're talking about.

More tautology. Yawn.

[Shwa]

You can believe in c-r's "electron soup", or you can believe in "context" as we've just described it, but you can't believe in both because they're mutually exclusive.

I am not sure. When CR says 'electron soup' I don't see the amorphous state even if that is what he means. Since we have agreed on context, then I don't think it is a matter of selecting one concept at the expense of another. That is, it's not a contest.

What difference does a "stacked communications path" make?

The notion that each level has some sort of coding/sending & reception/decoding mechanism that interacts with the level above and the level below until the 'message' is sent/received along its most basic carrier path.

If the collective intelligence we're discussing is a network of many independent processors, then you're with me and against c-r's idea that everything is a part of a single nondistinct entity that just "Is".

I see CR's "is" as a simpler expression of simultaneity nothing more. Kind of like those independent processors organized into a network of sorts.

However, I'm not open to the idea that humans are unknowingly exchanging ideas through neutrinos and radiation and electromagnetic waves and the other pseudoscience ideas being presented here by some people.

But that is a conundrum isn't it? Because humans are knowingly exchanging ideas through photons and electrons already. Yours is a problem of media. I don't think that magnetic influences on animals is pseudoscience, so we'll have to agree to disagree here.

it would certainly represent a sum of an incalculably huge number of random processes,

Why "sum?"

Edited February 16, 2010 by Shwa

[Shwa]

Just for fun - hot soup!

[whowhere]

Just for fun - hot soup!

It appears those who platforming themselves on science are retreating and ignoring science that doesn't fit their constructs. It appears many are fixated on the electron when it appears the neutrinos have characteristics in common with an electron. In electricity Voltage is potential/pressure and current means the flow of electrons. Volage and current are concepts which could be adapted and adjusted for neutrinos. Maybe neutrinos won't be considered electricity in the traditional sense but it can't be denied that neutrinos are flowing like electrons. To get the neutrinos flowing pressure voltage or whatever would have to occur. It appears there is difference between a neutrino and an electron in that an electron is apart of a circuit and returns to the source/pressure/voltage wheras a neutrino is set in motion to destination unknown with no requirement of returning to the source. They have the ability to go through anything and everything and are not affected by electromagnetic forces.

http://www.ps.uci.edu/~superk/neutrino.html

neutrinos are real and quite interesting. certainly on the fringe of technology.

[Oleg Bach]

Burn the BIBLE AND start believing in goodness and God.

[whowhere]

Burn the BIBLE AND start believing in goodness and God.

http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html

What is space radiation?

These particles slip right past ordinary matter and can escape from the core of the sun in only a few seconds. Billions of these neutrino particles are flowing through your body every second! Like other forms of radiation, they carry energy away from the place where they were created. When they are absorbed, they deliver this energy to the body that absorbs them.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Neutrions-Could-Be-Used-for-Communications-123423.shtml

Neutrinos Could Be Used for Communications

Neutrinos are currently being investigated as a possible alternative to ELF waves, because they can transmit up to 100 bits of data per second, three orders of magnitude more than radio waves can

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061005222628.htm

Human Brain Region Functions Like Digital Computer

A region of the human brain that scientists believe is critical to human intellectual abilities surprisingly functions much like a digital computer, according to psychology Professor Randall O'Reilly of the University of Colorado at Boulder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_eye

The third eye (also known as the inner eye) is a mystical and esoteric concept referring in part to the ajna (brow) chakra in certain Eastern and Western spiritual traditions. It is also spoken of as the gate that leads within to inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. In New Age spirituality, the third eye may alternately symbolize a state of enlightenment or the evocation of mental images having deeply personal spiritual or psychological significance. The third eye is often associated with visions, clairvoyance (which includes the ability to observe chakras and auras),[1] precognition, and out-of-body experiences, and people who have allegedly developed the capacity to utilize their third eyes are sometimes known as seers.

The pineal gland

Some writers and researchers, including H. P. Blavatsky[5] and Rick Strassman, have suggested that the third eye is in fact the partially dormant pineal gland, which resides between the two hemispheres of the brain. The pineal gland is said[who?] to secrete dimethyltryptamine (DMT) [6][improper synthesis?] which induces dreams, near-death experiences, meditation, or hallucinations. Various types of lower vertebrates, such as reptiles and amphibians, can actually sense light via a third parietal eye—a structure associated with the pineal gland—which serves to regulate their circadian rhythms, and for navigation, as it can sense the polarization of light.

Toadbrother, Gosthack rational enough?

[Bonam]

Heh so much crap here about neutrinos. Just to set some things straight:

1. Neutrinos are indeed "matter". There are many fundamental particles that exist in the universe. Just because neutrinos are not protons, neutrons, electrons, or combinations thereof, does not make them "not matter".

2. Neutrinos do not pass "completely unhindered" through everything. They have a finite (very low) probability of interacting with other types of matter in one of several processes. This is how we are able to detect them.

3. Neutrinos are not practical for communication purposes with any current or foreseeable technology. A million km of solid material would still only intercept/detect only a tiny fraction of the neutrinos passing through it. There is no way to build a neutrino receiver that would not simply miss the vast majority of any data it is supposed to be receiving.

4. Neutrinos do not travel at the speed of light. They have finite mass and as such it would take infinite energy for a neutrino to travel at light speed. Because their mass is very very low, they travel very very close to the speed of light, but they do not travel AT the speed of light.

5. Electron have charge and so their motion is affected by electromagnetic fields and obeys the Maxwell equations. Electricity is the movement of charge. Neutrinos have no charge, and do not interact with electromagnetic fields. You are not gonna have "neutrino electricity" any time soon. Neutrinos interact gravitationally, but that interaction is negligible due to their extremely tiny mass. They also interact via the Weak Nuclear Force, which is a short range interaction within atomic nuclei, but the cross-section for this interaction is also very small, which is why neutrinos can pass through matter to the extent they do.

6. US Patent 6891310 is a bunch of pseudoscientific garbage.

Just thought I'd interject that into this thread.

[whowhere]

Heh so much crap here about neutrinos. Just to set some things straight:

1. Neutrinos are indeed "matter". There are many fundamental particles that exist in the universe. Just because neutrinos are not protons, neutrons, electrons, or combinations thereof, does not make them "not matter".

2. Neutrinos do not pass "completely unhindered" through everything. They have a finite (very low) probability of interacting with other types of matter in one of several processes. This is how we are able to detect them.

Who the eff are you?

I suggest you trace this link

"http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html"'>http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html"

http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov (In case you haven't realized it yet, yes NASA!!)

Neutrinos are particles that travel at the speed of light just like electromagnetic radiation, but they are not made of matter and are also not produced by electric or magnetic fields. Billions of these neutrino particles are flowing through your body every second! Like other forms of radiation, they carry energy away from the place where they were created. When they are absorbed, they deliver this energy to the body that absorbs them.

The only one who needs to get something straight appears to be you.

[GostHacked]

Who the eff are you?

......

The only one who needs to get something straight appears to be you.

Both you and Charter Rights like to call other people stupid.... a lot. Does that help your argument? Do you really think people will be more open to your ideas when you call everyone an effin idiot? No.

But what Bonam posted is interesting and kind of goes with the notion that me, TB and others have said here. Neutrinos can't be effectively used for communications.

[charter.rights]

But what Bonam posted is interesting and kind of goes with the notion that me, TB and others have said here. Neutrinos can't be effectively used for communications.

Only if you ignore the future in the discussion. I believe that I have amply provided that the possibly exists to use neutrinos for communication purposes IF there is sufficient understanding and advancements in the way they work.

Edited February 19, 2010 by charter.rights

[charter.rights]

dbl post

Edited February 19, 2010 by charter.rights

[whowhere]

Both you and Charter Rights like to call other people stupid.... a lot. Does that help your argument? Do you really think people will be more open to your ideas when you call everyone an effin idiot? No.

But what Bonam posted is interesting and kind of goes with the notion that me, TB and others have said here. Neutrinos can't be effectively used for communications.

You can trace the links I provided. Information is only as good as the source. He was posturing himself as an expert of neutrinos and provided nothing to back it up. I did not call him stupid, you did. I only mirrored his post back unto him.

[GostHacked]

You can trace the links I provided. Information is only as good as the source. He was posturing himself as an expert of neutrinos and provided nothing to back it up. I did not call him stupid, you did. I only mirrored his post back unto him.

Hey you are posturing just as much with your 'expert knowledge'. I also have to apologize because it seems that CR has called you an idiot as well.

Just to put this into perspective.

TB, me, and now Bonam have essentially said the same thing. I am no expert, Bonam indicated he has studied this type of thing in school. But yet our conclusions seem to be quite consistent. You and CR advocating the other side hardly agree with each other. This baffles me to be honest.

I have read the links, but I am not seeing or interpreting the information the way you are processing it in your brain.

[Bonam]

Who the eff are you?

I suggest you trace this link

"http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html"'>http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov/outreach/space_radiation.html"

http://radbelts.gsfc.nasa.gov (In case you haven't realized it yet, yes NASA!!)

The only one who needs to get something straight appears to be you.

The NASA article is a simplified explanation for the public. Most articles on the NASA website intended to be read by laymen are this way, they contain inaccuracies that would be unacceptable to other scientists, but are effective in conveying the general idea of a topic to the public. A good review on the topic of neutrinos is presented here:

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2008/reviews/rpp2008-rev-neutrino-mixing.pdf

As you can see in the paper, neutrinos are not massless. Any particle that has a finite mass cannot travel at the speed of light, that is fundamental to the theory of relativity. If you prefer something a bit more accessible, the very first sentence of the wikipedia article on neutrinos:

"Neutrinos (Italian pronunciation: [neuˈtriːno], meaning "small neutral one"; English pronunciation: /njuːˈtriːnoʊ/) are elementary particles that often travel CLOSE TO the speed of light, are electrically neutral, and are able to pass through ordinary matter almost undisturbed and are thus extremely difficult to detect."

Only if you ignore the future in the discussion. I believe that I have amply provided that the possibly exists to use neutrinos for communication purposes IF there is sufficient understanding and advancements in the way they work.

Neutrinos cannot be used for communications because they have such an extremely high chance to pass through ordinary matter. The world's largest neutrino detectors count merely a few of the hundreds of trillions of neutrinos that pass through them every second. There is no way to miniaturize neutrino detection technology - you simply need a huge amount of matter with which a neutrino can interact, so as to get an interaction probability that will actually let you detect a couple neutrinos. Even if you put aside all the technical difficulties with encoding information with neutrinos, and could build a neutrino "transmitter", it would do you no good, because the receiver would pick up at best perhaps 1 out of every trillion neutrinos that you transmitted. Your data would need to be many trillions of times redundant in the transmissions if you were to hope to extract any information from your receiver.

Meanwhile, instead of sending those trillions of redundant neutrinos, you could simply send one photon and get the exact same result. Don't forget that making neutrinos takes energy, specifically, the energy that is released in certain types of nuclear reactions. So you are gonna have a giant gigawatt radioactive neutrino transmitter that can occasionally successfully deliver one bit of information to a receiver, or you could have a tiny little antenna that can communicate using electromagnetic waves taking a few milliwatts of power and with a 1:1 relationship between data transmitted and data received.

[whowhere]

The NASA article is a simplified explanation for the public. Most articles on the NASA website intended to be read by laymen are this way, they contain inaccuracies that would be unacceptable to other scientists, but are effective in conveying the general idea of a topic to the public. A good review on the topic of neutrinos is presented here:

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2008/reviews/rpp2008-rev-neutrino-mixing.pdf

As you can see in the paper, neutrinos are not massless. Any particle that has a finite mass cannot travel at the speed of light, that is fundamental to the theory of relativity. If you prefer something a bit more accessible, the very first sentence of the wikipedia article on neutrinos:

"Neutrinos (Italian pronunciation: [neuˈtriːno], meaning "small neutral one"; English pronunciation: /njuːˈtriːnoʊ/) are elementary particles that often travel CLOSE TO the speed of light, are electrically neutral, and are able to pass through ordinary matter almost undisturbed and are thus extremely difficult to detect."

Neutrinos cannot be used for communications because they have such an extremely high chance to pass through ordinary matter. The world's largest neutrino detectors count merely a few of the hundreds of trillions of neutrinos that pass through them every second. There is no way to miniaturize neutrino detection technology - you simply need a huge amount of matter with which a neutrino can interact, so as to get an interaction probability that will actually let you detect a couple neutrinos. Even if you put aside all the technical difficulties with encoding information with neutrinos, and could build a neutrino "transmitter", it would do you no good, because the receiver would pick up at best perhaps 1 out of every trillion neutrinos that you transmitted. Your data would need to be many trillions of times redundant in the transmissions if you were to hope to extract any information from your receiver.

Meanwhile, instead of sending those trillions of redundant neutrinos, you could simply send one photon and get the exact same result. Don't forget that making neutrinos takes energy, specifically, the energy that is released in certain types of nuclear reactions. So you are gonna have a giant gigawatt radioactive neutrino transmitter that can occasionally successfully deliver one bit of information to a receiver, or you could have a tiny little antenna that can communicate using electromagnetic waves taking a few milliwatts of power and with a 1:1 relationship between data transmitted and data received.

unless you can produce credentials showing you are educated in physics from an institution that knows what physics is all you are doing is regurgitating information you have googled to fit what you want to be the case. As it goes with the internet, information is only as good as the source. As for you slamming NASA, you know they have a space station and continuosly make expedition to space? They have been and seen space first hand. If Nasa is going to explain something to do with space I think we can hold that explaination in high regard. Perhaps you are not understanding the Neutrinos Nasa is talking about.

[GostHacked]

unless you can produce credentials showing you are educated in physics .....

What are your credentials? As for me, I have none.

[Bonam]

unless you can produce credentials showing you are educated in physics from an institution that knows what physics is all you are doing is regurgitating information you have googled to fit what you want to be the case. As it goes with the internet, information is only as good as the source. As for you slamming NASA, you know they have a space station and continuosly make expedition to space? They have been and seen space first hand. If Nasa is going to explain something to do with space I think we can hold that explaination in high regard. Perhaps you are not understanding the Neutrinos Nasa is talking about.

I have a degree in Engineering Physics from the University of British Columbia, and a Master's degree in Aeronautics and Astronautics with specialization in Plasma Science from the University of Washington. I am not slamming NASA, I have the highest respect for NASA and have worked on a number of projects funded by NASA. I was explaining the context of the statement you read - it was a simplified explanation, meant to convey a basic idea to people like yourself.

Here's a more accurate NASA link for you:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/wmap_five.html

Again, notice the key word:

The universe is awash in a sea of cosmic neutrinos. These almost weightless sub-atomic particles zip around at NEARLY the speed of light. Millions of cosmic neutrinos pass through you every second.

Edited February 19, 2010 by Bonam

[ToadBrother]

unless you can produce credentials showing you are educated in physics from an institution that knows what physics is all you are doing is regurgitating information you have googled to fit what you want to be the case. As it goes with the internet, information is only as good as the source. As for you slamming NASA, you know they have a space station and continuosly make expedition to space? They have been and seen space first hand. If Nasa is going to explain something to do with space I think we can hold that explaination in high regard. Perhaps you are not understanding the Neutrinos Nasa is talking about.

At what point do you just admit "I don't know what I'm talking about?" To anyone who knows anything about subatomic physics, even a layman, you're proving yourself ludicrously ignorant. You just google around, trying to find anything that your imagination and your inability to research a subject will indicate "Hey, I know more than that guy"!

What are your credentials? I mean, this a web forum, not a bloody of physics seminar, but to those of us with even a little knowledge, using neutrinos for communications is ludicrous, like trying to encode a message in a few hundred water molecules about to go over a waterfall and then somehow hoping that at the bottom you'll be able to capture them and reproduce the message.

I mean, why even bother with this line of reasoning, after it's been so thoroughly beaten to death. Why not concentrate on something more exotic, like entanglement? It probably won't help you much more than neutrinos, but at least its something that real scientists are considering.

Edited February 19, 2010 by ToadBrother