ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 13th August 2017, 04:53 AM   #1
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,383
Universe described only with words

This article helped me. I would be interested in other opinions.

It starts,

QUANTUM SPACE ELEMENTS (QSE)


INTRODUCTION

This is a non-mathematical proposal introducing a cosmological model that is cyclic, deterministic and infinity-free. For the purpose of achieving this objective a number of new concepts are introduced. The framework of this proposal is structured over a number of assumptions, leading to various considerations of cosmological concerns. Furthermore, verification methods are suggested of both, observational and mathematical nature.

http://www.quantumspaceelements.com/...FRoKKgod588IFw
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 10:05 AM   #2
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 10,015
This:
Quote:
Saturation: Each space element can accommodate only a finite amount of information. It then becomes saturated.
And this:
Quote:
Black Holes: Perhaps not as exotic as the name suggests.

Fully saturated information regions. As such, the space elements they occupy are unable to accommodate or transfer additional information. Information is “trapped” within the region. Time as we understand it, breaks down because the rate of change is zero. Any additional inflow results in expanding the boundary of the saturated region.

Black holes are solid bodies that expand. They are not dimensionless. They occupy an ever-expanding cloud of fully saturated space elements. The "event horizon" is the boundary between space and the solid body that remains hidden behind. Going through the event horizon would result in a catastrophic crash upon the densest entity in the universe.
Seem to imply that the information content of black holes should be proportional to their volume. But its not, the information content of a black hole is proportional to the surface area of it's event horizon.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 12:15 PM   #3
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 17,324
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 12:52 PM   #4
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,526
It seems like they're just making **** up.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 01:11 PM   #5
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,526
I mean, take this business about "black holes". Have they ever observed a black hole? Do they even know what specific phenomena they're trying to describe? Without the math, how do they even know what they're talking about?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 02:07 PM   #6
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,005
https://xkcd.com/1123/,

Just three words that sum it all up.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 02:12 PM   #7
C_Felix
Master Poster
 
C_Felix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Just outside Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,573
Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.

The Universe is a very big thing that contains a great number of planets and a great number of beings. It is Everything. What we live in. All around us. The lot. Not nothing. It is quite difficult to actually define what the Universe means, but fortunately the Guide doesn't worry about that and just gives us some useful information to live in it.

Area: The area of the Universe is infinite.

Imports: None. This is a by product of infinity; it is impossible to import things into something that has infinite volume because by definition there is no outside to import things from.

Exports: None, for similar reasons as imports.
__________________
Eqinsu Ocha!
Eqinsu Ocha!
C_Felix is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 02:16 PM   #8
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,923
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
This article helped me.
How? To do what?

It's made up drivel without a shred of evidence to support it.

It's not like there aren't plenty of layman's guides to real science written by real scientists. Why waste your time on this rubbish?
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Pixel42; 13th August 2017 at 02:30 PM.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 04:10 PM   #9
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,268
The "About" section of that site doesn't fill me with much confidence. Imagine a less incoherent version of Timecube set on a universal scale...
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 07:00 PM   #10
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
Imagine a less incoherent version of Timecube
That's easy. If you want a real challenge, try to imagine a more incoherent version of Timecube.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2017, 08:03 PM   #11
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,340
Originally Posted by C_Felix View Post
Area: The area of the Universe is infinite.
We don't know this for sure, we just know that it's bigger than the area we can see.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 02:04 AM   #12
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,383
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
How? To do what?

It's made up drivel without a shred of evidence to support it.

It's not like there aren't plenty of layman's guides to real science written by real scientists. Why waste your time on this rubbish?
I quite like the idea of a digital universe, not analogue. Space is discontinuous. But I don't know if I am on the right track.
I am guessing, I struggle with the whole thing.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 02:09 AM   #13
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,923
Don't guess, learn.

https://www.coursera.org/learn/astro...Eeem6zMxXzlr6w
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 02:32 AM   #14
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,344
It was the step to describing the world with mathematics by people like Lavoisier, Galileo and Maxwell that allowed us to develop modern technology. Words dont allow for the same predictions or understanding. It was the edge Lavoisier had over Priestly in recognising the discovery of Oxygen and what turned Faraday's notions into building radios among other tech.

Our language has evolved to function in human practices that take place in our human scale world. Its analogies and terms understandably fall flat in attempts to describe the alien worlds of the very small or very fast.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

Last edited by Sideroxylon; 14th August 2017 at 02:36 AM.
Sideroxylon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 03:41 AM   #15
RationalVetMed
Graduate Poster
 
RationalVetMed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,460
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Slight derail but "The University of Arizona… Home to two allopathic medical schools in Tucson and Phoenix…"

Eugh

Niall
__________________
Visit rationalvetmed.net and rationalvetmed.org - because nothing is as good as homeopathy...

'No Way to Treat a Friend: Lifting the Lid on Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine' book now available to order.
RationalVetMed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 09:33 AM   #16
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,179
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I quite like the idea of a digital universe, not analogue. Space is discontinuous. But I don't know if I am on the right track.
I am guessing, I struggle with the whole thing.

A much more thorough treatment of a digital model of the universe was developed by Stephen Wolfram and presented in Chapter 9 of A New Kind of Science. He's made the entire book available online at wolframscience.com.

Wolfram's discrete spacetime mesh is not a grid (even though most of his example models in earlier chapters of the book are based on grids). He acknowledges that a regular grid of cells has properties that aren't observed in space, such as preferred directions. And such a grid would not be able to expand as the universe is observed to; there's no way to insert extra cells uniformly without distorting the grid in ways that would have observable consequences. So his model is based instead on a directed network. In the course of the chapter, he shows how features of the evolution of such a network over (discrete steps of) time would give rise to observed relativistic effects and could possibly explain other phenomena including quantum phenomena and gravitation.

His cosmological theory and models are far from complete, of course. And there doesn't appear to have been much advancement or filling in of details since the book was published in 2001.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 11:14 AM   #17
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,526
I bet Wolfram's book has math in it, though.

This signature is intended to irradiate people.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 11:16 AM   #18
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,703
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
https://xkcd.com/1123/,

Just three words that sum it all up.
Love it.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 12:05 PM   #19
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,177
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I quite like the idea of a digital universe, not analogue. Space is discontinuous. But I don't know if I am on the right track.
I am guessing, I struggle with the whole thing.
See that's part of the problem. Math uses words as well. "digital", "analogue", "space" and even "discontinuous" (particularly when applied to a space) are all words that have meaning in mathematical and set theory contexts. Culminating in information theory for the apparent context of the OP article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_data

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_signal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_(mathematics)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_space

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory

So a description "only with words" doesn't actually avoid math and mathematical concepts it simply helps remove (or technically just hide) the specific relevant context and meaning. One of the advantages of math is that it is a formal language. By abandoning that formality for more of a just common parlance you remove that advantage and can get hung up it the concepts that are better served with such formality.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/p...or-continuous/

Quote:
Next to guiding the development of a theory of quantum gravity, finding evidence for space-time discreteness—or ruling it out!—would also be a big step towards solving a modern-day paradox: the black hole information loss problem, posed by Stephen Hawking in 1974. We know that black holes can only store so much information, which is another indication for a resolution-limit. But we do not know exactly how black holes encode the information of what fell inside. A discrete structure would provide us with elementary storage units.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 14th August 2017 at 12:06 PM. Reason: typo
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 01:31 PM   #20
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 7,402
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
It was the step to describing the world with mathematics by people like Lavoisier, Galileo and Maxwell that allowed us to develop modern technology. Words dont allow for the same predictions or understanding. It was the edge Lavoisier had over Priestly in recognising the discovery of Oxygen and what turned Faraday's notions into building radios among other tech.

Our language has evolved to function in human practices that take place in our human scale world. Its analogies and terms understandably fall flat in attempts to describe the alien worlds of the very small or very fast.
If you don't understand the math, you don't really understand the science. Non-mathematical description might give you some insight into the concepts, but without the math, you can't really say you understand it. I don't really understand General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics. The math is beyond my education. I do have a pretty solid understanding of Newtonian physics and Special Relativity. The math isn't all that hard for Special Relativity, but many of the concepts are counter-intuitive.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 01:51 PM   #21
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 13,179
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I bet Wolfram's book has math in it, though.

Surprisingly little, if by math you mean typical physics equations (differential calculus and similar). It's about the sometimes complex behavior of simple "programs" (sets of rules, procedures). The sets of rules examined in that light do (in later chapters) include the axiom systems of mathematics (symbolic logic, predicate calculus, geometry, arithmetic, algebra, group theory and others) but that's not the main focus and it's not necessary to know those fields to follow the arguments.

Indeed, one of Wolfram's theses in NKS is that while traditional science has focused on computational "shortcuts," where solving equations can be used as a shortcut for predicting the future states and behavior of systems (e.g. plug in "t" for time in a physics equation to find out the position or velocity of a body at that time), such predictably through computational shortcuts is relatively rare, and most systems are "computationally irreducible," which basically means predictable only by replicating the computations the process itself is performing. In practical terms, that means describable better by programs than by mathematical equations.

And in Wolfram's view, that's being borne out by current trends in science. From http://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2017/...-15-year-view/:
Quote:
Year by year, it’s been a slow, almost silent, process. But by this point, it’s a dramatic shift. Three centuries ago pure philosophical reasoning was supplanted by mathematical equations. Now in these few short years, equations have been largely supplanted by programs. For now, it’s mostly been something practical and pragmatic: the models work better, and are more useful.
(None of this bears directly on computational models of cosmology, but it explains how the mathematician who invented Mathematica can end up writing a 1200-page book containing relatively little conventional mathematics.)
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...

Last edited by Myriad; 14th August 2017 at 01:54 PM.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 03:07 PM   #22
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 12,177
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Surprisingly little, if by math you mean typical physics equations (differential calculus and similar). It's about the sometimes complex behavior of simple "programs" (sets of rules, procedures). The sets of rules examined in that light do (in later chapters) include the axiom systems of mathematics (symbolic logic, predicate calculus, geometry, arithmetic, algebra, group theory and others) but that's not the main focus and it's not necessary to know those fields to follow the arguments.

Indeed, one of Wolfram's theses in NKS is that while traditional science has focused on computational "shortcuts," where solving equations can be used as a shortcut for predicting the future states and behavior of systems (e.g. plug in "t" for time in a physics equation to find out the position or velocity of a body at that time), such predictably through computational shortcuts is relatively rare, and most systems are "computationally irreducible," which basically means predictable only by replicating the computations the process itself is performing. In practical terms, that means describable better by programs than by mathematical equations.

And in Wolfram's view, that's being borne out by current trends in science. From http://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2017/...-15-year-view/:

(None of this bears directly on computational models of cosmology, but it explains how the mathematician who invented Mathematica can end up writing a 1200-page book containing relatively little conventional mathematics.)

Sure but those programs, "the models" are based on, and employ those equations. So instead of getting just a position or velocity at "t" you get a possible span of positions or velocities from t to t + X. Now depending on the complexity of the model and the number of interrelated variables (and how they may change or be changed) each time you run t to t + X you may get a somewhat different span but it still defines a range of projections based on the inputs and the equations. See its not moving away from mathematical equations its recognizing that interrelation of the equations, the computations the process itself is performing, becoming even more fundamental to the description of the universe. They aren't just abstract notions but elements of the dynamic computational process we call the universe.*






*No I'm not going all Max Tegmark here the mathematical description of an electron still ain't an electron, least ways until it can repel other mathematical descriptions of an electron. I'm speaking more of input results in output, cause becoming effect.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 14th August 2017 at 03:08 PM. Reason: typo
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 04:07 PM   #23
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,344
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
If you don't understand the math, you don't really understand the science. Non-mathematical description might give you some insight into the concepts, but without the math, you can't really say you understand it. I don't really understand General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics. The math is beyond my education. I do have a pretty solid understanding of Newtonian physics and Special Relativity. The math isn't all that hard for Special Relativity, but many of the concepts are counter-intuitive.
Yes, becuase our intuitions spring from brains and language that have evolved to deal with our human-scale world.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th August 2017, 11:01 PM   #24
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,686
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
INTRODUCTION

This is a non-mathematical proposal introducing a cosmological model that is cyclic, deterministic and infinity-free. For the purpose of achieving this objective a number of new concepts are introduced. The framework of this proposal is structured over a number of assumptions, leading to various considerations of cosmological concerns. Furthermore, verification methods are suggested of both, observational and mathematical nature.


My first clue for knowing it is trash is that the introductory paragraph has at least one missing comma and at least one improper comma.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th August 2017, 12:32 AM   #25
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,580
Is it even possible to describe the universe in a scientific way without math?

Like it or not, you need math.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th August 2017, 12:49 AM   #26
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 23,215
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Is it even possible to describe the universe in a scientific way without math?

Like it or not, you need math.
Exactly. Not least because maths is precise whereas language is open to misinterpretation.....
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th August 2017, 08:42 PM   #27
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 20,740
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
...This is a non-mathematical proposal introducing a cosmological model that is cyclic, deterministic and infinity-free.
That quote alone reveals a web page without math or physics about a universe that is not ours. The page starts as essentially science fiction and degrades into fantasy and nonsense. Things are not better in the rest of the web site so overall we have the output of yet another Internet physics crank.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th August 2017, 12:29 AM   #28
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 23,215
[Barbara Millicent Roberts]Maths is hard [/Barbara Millicent Roberts]
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th August 2017, 04:32 AM   #29
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 21,508
Originally Posted by RationalVetMed View Post
Slight derail but "The University of Arizona… Home to two allopathic medical schools in Tucson and Phoenix…"

Eugh

Niall
Do they also study the heliocentric theory of the Solar System in the University of Arizona?
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:11 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.