If E=M, than it must follow M=E

e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein's proven right
…

PARIS (AFP) – It's taken more than a century, but Einstein's celebrated formula e=mc2 has finally been corroborated, thanks to a heroic computational effort by French, German and Hungarian physicists.

A brainpower consortium led by Laurent Lellouch of France's Centre for Theoretical Physics, using some of the world's mightiest supercomputers, have set down the calculations for estimating the mass of protons and neutrons, the particles at the nucleus of atoms.

According to the conventional model of particle physics, protons and neutrons comprise smaller particles known as quarks, which in turn are bound by gluons.

The odd thing is this: the mass of gluons is zero and the mass of quarks is only five percent. Where, therefore, is the missing 95 percent?

The answer, according to the study published in the US journal Science on Thursday, comes from the energy from the movements and interactions of quarks and gluons.

In other words, energy and mass are equivalent, as Einstein proposed in his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905.

The e=mc2 formula shows that mass can be converted into energy, and energy can be converted into mass.

By showing how much energy would be released if a certain amount of mass were to be converted into energy, the equation has been used many times, most famously as the inspirational basis for building atomic weapons.

But resolving e=mc2 at the scale of sub-atomic particles -- in equations called quantum chromodynamics -- has been fiendishly difficult.

"Until now, this has been a hypothesis," France's National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) said proudly in a press release.

"It has now been corroborated for the first time."

For those keen to know more: the computations involve "envisioning space and time as part of a four-dimensional crystal lattice, with discrete points spaced along columns and rows."

Ego is a singularity

I got this idea from one of my favorite books: "The ReEnchantment of the World" by Morris Berman.

The singularity bit is mine though.


The entire monotheistic methodology of religion, since the Jews first entertained that thought process is from a point of view that is like a 'singularity'.

We view the universe from OUR point of reference, every thing is measured, distance for example, measured as "we're here" and "that's over there".

My take on this is as follows:

There is no time, and yet we're all going to die.

The only *time* that's real is NOW.

Our ego has no alternative but to live in the past for the express purpose of future probability estimating. 

Our Ego is genetically incabable of living in or operating in the NOW.  All our ego knows of "NOW" is a theoretical possibility. 

It's ONLY FUNCTION is to hunt through our past experiences to see if "X" new incoming stimuli has ever crossed our paths before (it checks the database of past experiences) 

and it can not do any thing other than that.

What is our ego looking for?

It wants to formulate a possible profile. Why? What for?

It thinks it's job is to do probability estimating of potential dangers or benefits... of "X" incoming stimuli as it relates to X's impact on the future.

Ego has no choice other than to observe the known universe from "ITS" perspective.

Ego assumes that there IS NO OTHER perspective.

God on the other hand views ALL perspecitves 

how does he/she pull that off?

by not having ANY perspective.

God is no where.

Because he is ALL wheres (there isn't any*where* for him to go, cause he's there already)

This is Emmanuel Kant's idea I think...

so in summary: Ego see's the world as if the world was a singularity

God or Source Energy and our soul see's the world from 180°  out.

From a singularity point of view... time is linear

From God's point of view... there isn't any *time*

the universe was created a moment ago

... and we're still gonna die and we still have to pay taxes.

dual or parallel universes that are incongruent with one another