What holds the nucleus of an atom together?

[Dontaskme]

Remember pal, this is my thread that you're trying to hijack with your agenda. Science and religion don't mix like oil and water. If you want to talk about religion, go post your religion thread in the religion category as you don't want to talk about science.

PhilX

Listen pal.

Lets just wait for science to figure out the answer to your op question then.

Oh okay, like that is ever going to happen.

.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Remember pal, this is my thread that you're trying to hijack with your agenda. Science and religion don't mix like oil and water. If you want to talk about religion, go post your religion thread in the religion category as you don't want to talk about science.

PhilX

Listen pal.

Lets just wait for science to figure out the answer to your op question then.

Oh okay, like that is ever going to happen.

.

It will with all the time we have.

PhilX

[Dontaskme]

It will with all the time we have.

PhilX

It's already known.

Otherwise nothing would be working, functioning, being.

[Philosophy Explorer]

It will with all the time we have.

PhilX

It's already known.

Otherwise nothing would be working, functioning, being.

Just like your brain.

I could email you YouTube science videos. I'm sure you would like to watch them and learn from them.

PhilX

[uwot]

Meh, I want proof man, proof, where is the proof? show me the proof, otherwise you are wasting my time.

Have you tried finding your own proof Phil?

Why wait for someone else to show it to you...if they have it, then surely you can have it too, else where in the heck are they getting from?

By doing experiments. You too can find your own proof, if you happen to have a Large Hadron Collider in your back garden.

[Dontaskme]

It will with all the time we have.

PhilX

It's already known.

Otherwise nothing would be working, functioning, being.

Just like your brain.

I could email you YouTube science videos. I'm sure you would like to watch them and learn from them.

PhilX

One doesn't learn to be. Learning is to be something, which is illusory power.

Learning knowledge is power, illusory power, for the real power lies in the causeless causer of life.

It's self transcending, and self organising.

The nucleus of an atom is invisible as the electromagnetic force field. You are that field.

.

[Philosophy Explorer]

It's already known.

Otherwise nothing would be working, functioning, being.

Just like your brain.

I could email you YouTube science videos. I'm sure you would like to watch them and learn from them.

PhilX

One doesn't learn to be. Learning is to be something, which is illusory power.

Learning knowledge is power, illusory power, for the real power lies in the causeless causer of life.

It's self transcending, and self organising.

The nucleus of an atom is invisible as the electromagnetic force field. You are that field.

.

Learning is acquiring knowledge, which you haven't.

PhilX

[Dontaskme]

Meh, I want proof man, proof, where is the proof? show me the proof, otherwise you are wasting my time.

Have you tried finding your own proof Phil?

Why wait for someone else to show it to you...if they have it, then surely you can have it too, else where in the heck are they getting from?

By doing experiments. You too can find your own proof, if you happen to have a Large Hadron Collider in your back garden.

All visible matter consists of atoms, but unlike a molecule, a virus, or a bacteria, the atom cannot be seen, even under an electron microscope. They cannot be seen, but are known to exist from over a hundred years of experimentation.

Matter is the illusion of light with the tendency to be both a particle and a wave simultaneously.

I'm not the one demanding proof, I don't need to prove that I am...I am without doubt or error. I'm not separate from the atom, so why do I need to know what's holding it together. I'm already being held together, and it's not me holding myself together is it. It's everything doing it, aka no thing doing it.

The eye cannot see itself, it doesn't need to, it is the seeing. What is seeing, what is visible?


Hebrews 11:3 states that “… things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

You, don't actually exist, you are an image of the imageless.



.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Meh, I want proof man, proof, where is the proof? show me the proof, otherwise you are wasting my time.

Have you tried finding your own proof Phil?

Why wait for someone else to show it to you...if they have it, then surely you can have it too, else where in the heck are they getting from?

By doing experiments. You too can find your own proof, if you happen to have a Large Hadron Collider in your back garden.

All visible matter consists of atoms, but unlike a molecule, a virus, or a bacteria, the atom cannot be seen, even under an electron microscope. They cannot be seen, but are known to exist from over a hundred years of experimentation.

Matter is the illusion of light with the tendency to be both a particle and a wave simultaneously.

I'm not the one demanding proof, I don't need to prove that I am...I am without doubt or error. I'm not separate from the atom, so why do I need to know what's holding it together. I'm already being held together, and it's not me holding myself together is it. It's everything doing it, aka no thing doing it.

The eye cannot see itself, it doesn't need to, it is the seeing. What is seeing, what is visible?


Hebrews 11:3 states that “… things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

You, don't actually exist, you are an image of the imageless.



.

You're dead wrong dam because atoms can be seen under an electronic microscope. Here's an excerpt:


"So we can regularly see single atoms and atomic columns." That's because electron microscopes use a beam of electrons rather than photons, as you'd find in a regular light microscope. As electrons have a much shorter wavelength than photons, you can get much greater magnification and better resolution.Mar 11, 2015...

PhilX

[Dontaskme]

You're dead wrong dam because atoms can be seen under an electronic microscope. Here's an excerpt:


"So we can regularly see single atoms and atomic columns." That's because electron microscopes use a beam of electrons rather than photons, as you'd find in a regular light microscope. As electrons have a much shorter wavelength than photons, you can get much greater magnification and better resolution.Mar 11, 2015...

PhilX

Like I said earlier, life is self transcending. To peer into the quantum level requires a quantum eye.

Can the seer be seen? only in what is seen, and what is seen is inseparable from the seer.

So no ''thing'' has ever been seen, ''things'' are only known to exist as seen by that which is ONE WITH ITSELF. (Self-transcending)

.

So how can any of us be wrong, we're all one.

Knowledge is the illusion, because we are trying to know what's already known to itself alone.

That which is known, cannot know anything, for it is inseparable from the knower.

This is so tricky for the mind to grasp.

.

.

[Philosophy Explorer]

You're dead wrong dam because atoms can be seen under an electronic microscope. Here's an excerpt:


"So we can regularly see single atoms and atomic columns." That's because electron microscopes use a beam of electrons rather than photons, as you'd find in a regular light microscope. As electrons have a much shorter wavelength than photons, you can get much greater magnification and better resolution.Mar 11, 2015...

PhilX

Like I said earlier, life is self transcending. To peer into the quantum level requires a quantum eye.

Can the seer be seen? only in what is seen, and what is seen is inseparable from the seer.

So no ''thing'' has ever been seen, ''things'' are only known to exist as seen by that which is ONE WITH ITSELF. (Self-transcending)

.

So how can any of us be wrong, we're all one.

Knowledge is the illusion, because we are trying to know what's already known to itself alone.

That which is known, cannot know anything, for it is inseparable from the knower.

This is so tricky for the mind to grasp.

.

.

Once again you're trying to convert this thread to your religious agenda. Not science related.

PhilX

[thedoc]

This is so tricky for the mind to grasp.

Yes it is.

[thedoc]

Nonsense is usually very tricky to grasp.

[Dontaskme]

Once again you're trying to convert this thread to your religious agenda. Not science related.

PhilX

I have no interest in religion or agenda, I'm a free thinker that's all, I look at what others are saying but then make up my own mind as to what resonates deep within my own being...I'm open to other ideas, different to my own...but your responses are typically programmed responses imposed upon you by your society that tell you how and what to think.

I agree that science has the overall authority on all matters of material knowledge, because how can that which is not physical or material be observed through observation and experimentation?

So I agree with you..lets discover together, our quest is on.

What we think we are going to do with what we are looking for when we discover it, or what we think is going to change, that hasn't already been thought about is another matter.

.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Once again you're trying to convert this thread to your religious agenda. Not science related.

PhilX

I have no interest in religion or agenda, I'm a free thinker that's all, I look at what others are saying but then make up my own mind as to what resonates deep within my own being...I'm open to other ideas, different to my own...but your responses are typically programmed responses imposed upon you by your society that tell you how and what to think.

I agree that science has the overall authority on all matters of material knowledge, because how can that which is not physical or material be observed through observation and experimentation?

So I agree with you..lets discover together, our quest is on.

What we think we are going to do with what we are looking for when we discover it, or what we think is going to change, that hasn't already been thought about is another matter.

.

You mentioned God on this thread in the science category when it wasn't your business to do so. You put up a YouTube video that had nothing to do with the OP.
That and your other shenanigans convinced me you have no interest in the subject matter of the OP so please disappear. Discussion over.

PhilX