The Science of God

page: 7
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


I haven't had the chance to read all the posts yet so forgive me if this has been said. As stated in one of the videos our observation creates the reality, if we look for ever smaller parts or ever larger structures then they will exist simply because we believe they may...so it follows that as long as we continue to look back in time searching for a beginning there will always be another beginning even further back...as long as we exist to ponder it. Perhaps that is an aspect of infinity.

[edit on 5/22/2009 by MsSmartypants]




posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnG
 


I dont understand!

You say that the third dimension didn't exist before the big bang?

How can energy exist if it has no space to be in?

Space is measured in Height. Length and Width.

That means energy is already within a third dimension. That also mean that the energy must have a third dimension of some kind.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by pandorashope
www.abovetopsecret.com...

With regards to hypothetical communication with God;

"At present, human scientists are attempting to communicate outside our species to primates and cetaceans, and in a limited way to a few other vertebrates. This is inordinately difficult, and yet it represents a gap of at most a few SQ points. The farthest we can reach our "communication" with vegetation is when we plant, water, or fertilize it, but it is evident that messages transmitted across an SQ gap of 10 points or more cannot be very meaningful. What, then, could an SQ +50 Superbeing possibly have to say to us?"

– Robert A. Freitas Jr, (Wikipedia Sentience Quotient page)




Hey Pandora I found the information about the point scale of intelligent life relating to God VERY interesting. I had to take a good deal of time to think about it because I have never even heard of it before. Thank you very much for teaching me something I have never heard of. I have come up with a counter argument.

We cannot just add up a point scale of intelligent communication because there exists a plateau where once you get to the top of it you can look down on everything beneath you and carry on further. A monkey might have a certain point score that is that much higher than a plant but until it reaches the intelligence plateau where it is capable of understanding the plant AND itself then it would be incapable of understanding a god.

The human race has reached the plateau where it is capable of communicating or working on communicating with every living thing on Earth. We attempt to understand HOW things communicate and use our 5 senses and our technology to translate that communication to our understanding.

THIS is the key difference. Something might have a +50000 point communication leap on humans but based on our theory of evolution it was AT ONE TIME at a communication score of the big phat goose egg zero.

It had to have reached this same plateau at one time. It must surely have an understanding of how a great many more things communicate then us. More technology and more success at translating and communicating back.

Then if you were to plug a God into this you would have to make statements like

OMNIPOTENT = Unlimited power

GOD = unlimited power

GOD understands ALL forms of Science

GOD understands ALL forms of communication

GOD understands HUMAN forms of communication

GOD can FLAWLESSLY without MISINTERPRETATION communicate with humans

What do you think? The argument of what could a +50 Superbeing possibly have to say to us could countered by what WOULDN'T a +50 Superbeing have to say to us

That is like there is a 50/50 chance of a god existing

There is a 50/50 chance that it would want to talk to us



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   
What if GOD and the Creator was two very different things? What if the creator was actually space and through cause and effect it had the ability to gather mass intelligence from through out the universe, it became vast intelligent. What if the GOD was just that a god. Not the all knowing according to all of the books I have read GOD has been looked at as a limited being by showing anger and other emotions which would actually contradict what most spiritual books claim that he is.

What if the creator is a it and it is a vast intelligence that is the first and the last the beginning and the end space. The black matter that never dies out only planets and suns and solar systems dies out. Space continues to create. We are walking energy plants. We are walking batteries our programs are the tv and the radio constantly programming our minds what to think, how to perceive what we deem as logic. The more intelligence we have i feel the more dumber we are or the more further away from the truth of life we get. What if it was so simple that human beings made it complicated so we would never know the truth. What is GOD? What is the creator?

Science has already proved what the creator is it is what it is it is existent and non existent. But then the question is what is GOD? What is GOD that we pray to? Why does it i need our energy to pray and worship it on a daily basis? Why must we make sacrifice to it on a daily basis. Why is he being worshipped on a Sun Day. Why is there so much ritual involved? Why has there been so much killing in the name of GOD and why has all the prayers in the world not stopped the famine, the killing, the robbing, all things that are not natural to the human life to survive? Could it be perhaps that the GOD we have been praying to does not have the best interest in human life what so ever?

Could it be that the being we refer to as god is not the all mighty creator and giver of life, peace and harmony?

What is the creator? What is GOD? I think science already explained what the creator is.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neilc1972
reply to post by Eitimzevinten
 

an interesting point. i dont start my degree for a couple of months so any info at this point is a bonus so i have to thank you for that
but again it doesnt explain the very simple question, what was there before anything??? i know that its probably a question that can not be answered but any insight any one might have would at least be a start!!


You'd have to know how the changes stopped to know how they started. To know that, you'd have to be independent of time as we see it.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Neilc1972
 


Everything we see exists in 3D but before matter, the dimensions of a vacuum are impossible to measure because they don't have any.



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamtherealest
 



There is a thing i have noticed about the phrase:

God created us in His image.

Then i think about!! what image do people see God in. Well we see God in our image.

We have created God in our image. And i dont know if that's what God had in mind at all.

There is also something very interesting about the phrase:

From dirt we where made and to dirt we will become.


Why don't people see from energy we were made and to energy we will become. Its the same thing. Dirt is energy just like everything else is.

God= energy
Dirt= energy
Humans= energy
everything= energy

When you think about this: We are all made up of energy and can never disappear. That means we will be a part of something else in the future.









[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Amazing job da mod I really like the view you brought on these subjects. i only wish the people on here who are arguing with you actually took time to read and watch the videos and actually looking at this with an OPEN mind. i dont mean open where you just skim what hes saying then pass judgement based on your knowledge but open to the fact that you like all of us have no idea whats going on, because face it none of us do. We think we know but in reality we have no idea, for all we know the universe could be expanding and contracting like a lung and our history of events cycle like our orbit. To those saying he's wrong. what makes you right? If your gonna base right and wrong off of just books then Christopher Columbus was the first person to discover America and we're all going to burn in a hellfire eternally. Ya'll seem like the ones that woulda bashed the man who first said the earth was round just because it contradicted your understanding. Now im not saying you guys are wrong in anyway im just pointing out that none of us are right and your arguing should show how flawed our science and ideas are. I love the concept of this science of god, i love the videos u put up about consciousness especially the flatland and mind over matter which i think everyone should look over at least twice.

So i guess what im getting at is that instead of automatically disbelieving all his concepts try to find common ground to where both of your ideas coincide with one another. Until then we'll never be able to advance.

My bad for diverting away from the subject



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SugarCube





[edit on 22-5-2009 by SugarCube]


I really enjoyed your contribution SugarCube .

The concepts expressed in the image above are mightily thought provoking .


Its the particles of light , pressing into edge/shell of the universe that i marvel at,its hard to image our expanding universe not displacing "something" , but such limitations are just a product of my particular human perspective.




We can only take our Earth bound , human analogies and similes so far in representing novel abstractions.

I like Prof. Dawkin`s thoughts on "Middle Earth".



"Middle world is like the narrow range of the electromagnetic spectrum that we see," he said.

"Middle world is the narrow range of reality that we judge to be normal as opposed to the queerness that we judge to be very small or very large."





Our brains had evolved to help us survive within the scale and orders of magnitude within which we exist, said Professor Dawkins.

We think that rocks and crystals are solid when in fact they were made up mostly of spaces in between atoms, he argued.

This, he said, was just the way our brains thought about things in order to help us navigate our "middle sized" world - the medium scale environment

===============================================






He mused that perhaps children should be given computer games to play with that familiarise them with quantum physics concepts.


Something that i would love to see happen ....

Edit to add Source of quotes above.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by UmbraSumus]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Thanks for setting this train of thought in motion DaMod , i have thoroughly enjoyed reading just about everybody`s input.
Your OP set a nice tone , which has persevered 7 pages later .


I will be shattered at work tomorrow, but i have some good "thought fodder" to chew on .



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Iamtherealest
 



What is GOD that we pray to? Why does it i need our energy to pray and worship it on a daily basis? Why must we make sacrifice to it on a daily basis. Why is he being worshipped on a Sun Day. Why is there so much ritual involved? Why has there been so much killing in the name of GOD and why has all the prayers in the world not stopped the famine, the killing, the robbing, all things that are not natural to the human life to survive?



You have just inserted religion and religious ritual into the equation. This is where many go off.


Could it be perhaps that the GOD we have been praying to does not have the best interest in human life what so ever?


How about active at times and others; indifferent? How about checking out this thread: Is God Cruel or Just Misunderstood?



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eitimzevinten

: The forces of the early universe could have been thousands to trilions of times faster than the speed of light. So light and all electromagnetic energy may just be a "slow motion replay" of a universe that has played out cosmic events several billion years in advance even up to its demise which may have already happened.

How can our perception of time, and time occuring at that rate coexist? Again, time is a measure of change. We cannot measure change happening at that rate. We can only measure change against the fastest changing thing we know (which is the speed at which light changes position in a vacuum).

If there were a consciousness that could measure things faster than the speed of light, it would always see into the future because it has seen the travel of energy that light is portraying or catching up to. Basically for there to be a god, there almost certainly has to be something that occurs well above the speed of light.


Wow ..........


Fascinating concepts indeed , Eitimzevinten.
Some contributions to this thread stand out , yours certainly have for me.

Again cheers .


[edit on 22-5-2009 by UmbraSumus]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 



I also agree to that. Light comes from a source. And is a product of that source. That doesn't make light the fastest source of energy.

If we have a infinite dimension space: Height. Length and Width. There is no limits to speed or changes. The limit is within the source of energy it self. And our resources to observe them. Because we have to use energy to observe energy. Making the observer and his resources the limit of observation.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually "God" is quoted in the bible as saying "Let us create man in our image." I'm not sure what exactly that implies but it's interesting to note. It might just mean the intelligence to significantly alter ones environment.

Ancient cultures worshipped the sun as a god or god itself. Since they would see plants that thrived in sunlight but died in the shade, this wasn't all that abstract an idea to assume the light was responsible for all life. It seems we've kept that idea close to heart in science as even today light is seen as the most important thing in our universe. Breaking the idea that nothing can go above light will prove difficult for various reasons.

I'd also like to think that at any one time there is a finite universe that could be measured accurately instantaneously. The edge of the universe at this time would have to be where forces and matter no longer act but they could easily expand with time. Inorder to expand or contract, you need atleast a hypothetical edge and upon reaching that edge, it no longer is the edge. Relative to light of course.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eitimzevinten
reply to post by spy66
 


I'd also like to think that at any one time there is a finite universe that could be measured accurately instantaneously. The edge of the universe at this time would have to be where forces and matter no longer act but they could easily expand with time. Inorder to expand or contract, you need atleast a hypothetical edge and upon reaching that edge, it no longer is the edge. Relative to light of course.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]


Finite is a expression of time. Finite is what dimension a matter/energy has at the time it is observed to it changes or becomes something else.
The energy that makes up the finite dimension can never disappear it just changes into another finite dimension of energy.

Energy is a finite dimension.

If the sun disappears then what? We loose quite a lot of energy if that happen.

But did we have less energy before the sun was created or was there just a different type of energy dimension back then?

I think energy is infinite like space. And i think that the infinite is always changing not expanding in the way we understand or see expansion.
Because if something is infinite it is as big as it gets. The only thing it can do is change.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


A different type with vastly different properties. If the sun were to fizzle, electromagnetic energy-mass equality would be preserved because the light is being emitted by mass, if the mass no longer emits light then its energy level has dropped (that is to say energy has been used in a different way than light).

I'm not implying that anything is "gaining" energy or mass by expanding just that the distance from which its light is visible will increase over time. That light particle will never gain energy, it will just be in a different place.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eitimzevinten
reply to post by spy66
 


A different type with vastly different properties. If the sun were to fizzle, electromagnetic energy-mass equality would be preserved because the light is being emitted by mass, if the mass no longer emits light then its energy level has dropped (that is to say energy has been used in a different way than light).

I'm not implying that anything is "gaining" energy or mass by expanding just that the distance from which its light is visible will increase over time. That light particle will never gain energy, it will just be in a different place.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]


This last part dont add up if you think of how matter and energy act with pressure. The particle of light will change if the environment (pressure) changes. It has to because light is a product of a energy that created the particle (light). Light is a product therefore it becomes a finite particle.

A absolute vacuum is nothing. It has no matter, energy, temperature or time. Not even light.

So even light has to change sometime. Because it is something.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Your opinion and post is exactly what I am referring to!!

You havent the intelligence or manners to discuss the OP, you would rather comment on peoples REAL opinions and comments.

Take your head out of your ass and post something interesting rather than trying to make irrelevant comments.

The only reason I replied to this is because I have nothing better to do so go write something that is interesting and write your negative comments to someone who cares!!



posted on May, 22 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


I'm going to be honest, thinking about this stuff hurts my brain.

An absolute vacuum is devoid of anything we could even remotely relate to as you said and the universe either started like that or its matter was pre-existing and was set into motion.

In order to advance the vacuum idea, there had to be something that changed and was significantly changed that would be unrecognizeable to us until matter and light came into play. So there is something that changes faster than light can reflect off of or matter can express outside the terms of electromagnetic energy. Because of this, the force that exceeds light can't slow down or it would randomly be visible somewhere in the universe at which point ongoing change would be halted because then there is nothing advancing progressive change in the universe.

Light doesn't show the present, it shows the relative past from the object it was reflected off of or emitted from, the further the distance the greater the difference between past (light you see) and present(real-time state). There's stars you see at night that are a lot different then the light you see portrays them.

Simplified (for my sake): In order for you to see sunlight on earth, the sun had to emit it 8 minutes prior to you currently viewing it. So it had to already be on its way for you to see it now. The problem is that we see in real time and the light we use to see is from various points in the past. Our night sky is a patchwork of light from the various points of the past that we observe and inturn dub the present.

The sun's light 4 minutes into the future is 4 minutes from the past relative to the present.

+4 - (-4) = a constant instantaneous difference of 8 minutes.

[edit on 23-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Alas, yet another contribution to the world of gobblygook. The first few statements you have made are just plain incomprehensably illogical.
Why?
1: There was no Big Bang. I have proven this, since cmbr delay is caused by the matrix of space, bosons mostly, being broken down into smaller particles by black holes inside each galaxy. Microwaves are a kinetic wave through bosons. This is why suns at the outer edge of galaxies spin faster than they should, because of the drag of particles out there moving into galactic center. The evidence for the so called "cold dark matter" is proof, and further it is proven since no cold dark matter has been found!!!
It's also why a star cluster at galaxy center exists, because of the massive outrush of particles being made by the black hole. Time moves slower there inside the massive heavenly bodies, because it relies upon larger particles under a greater flow opposition between inbound bosons and outbound leptons/etc.... so under this rule, atoms don't have as much gravity if you consider the FACT that the universe is particles only, not made of magical fairy photons.

2. There need not be God in order to have order, it could be something or someone else, but personally, I live in fear of what I don't know, more than I live in pride of what I do know.





top topics
 
57
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join