Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

An idea

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on May, 15 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Hi, ATS. Long-time lurker, first time thread-starter, yadda yadda. How’s it hanging?

I’d like to share a hypothesis with you.

To preface this, I should mention that I don’t subscribe to any religion. If you say “I’m a Christian” or “I’m a Muslim” or “I’m a Hindu” or whatever, you automatically associate yourself with an inflexible set of beliefs. I’m with Rufus from the movie ‘Dogma’ when he says (I’m paraphrasing): “It’s better to have ideas than beliefs. You can CHANGE an idea.”

So here it is:

Let’s go back as far as possible. Before the big bang.

Even the most rational, scientifically minded person must occasionally ask themselves: “What caused the big bang? And what caused whatever caused the big bang? And what caused etc.”

Bottom line, we don’t know. No-one knows. All we can do is guess, experiment, learn, and repeat. Anyone that tells you they have definitive answers to the mysteries of life is either lying or deluded (and sometimes both).

Now, for my idea, I’m going to start with a conscious, creative force that I like to call “Intelligent Energy”. (You can call it “God” if you’d prefer.) Where this energy came from, we do not know. But let us imagine that, in the beginning – or as near to the beginning as we can get – there is Intelligent Energy, and Intelligent Energy is ALL THERE IS. Nothing else exists.

Let us suppose that, at some point, Intelligent Energy gets a bit bored, and chooses to flex its creative muscles. It decides to make a universe.

Here’s the vital part: if Intelligent Energy is ALL THERE IS, then anything it creates it must create FROM ITSELF. If Intelligent Energy wants to make a universe, then that universe (and everything within it) will be made up of Intelligent Energy.

Is there any evidence for this?

Break everything in our universe down, and we get atoms. Go further – atoms are mostly empty space, comprising a nucleus made of protons and neutrons, orbited by electrons. Go further – what are these subatomic particles made of? Quarks? What about them?

As far as my admittedly limited brain can gauge, IT’S ALL ENERGY. (Perhaps any particle physicists reading this can correct me if I’m wrong?)

If this hypothesis is correct, then you and I, the sun and the sky, the grass, the rain, the apple pie you ate for dessert, it’s all a manifestation of the same thing. If you want to call it “God”, then we are ALL God. EVERYTHING is God.

Now, then: if everything, without exception, is God, and our universe contains both “good” and “bad” things, then God must contain within itself the seeds of both good and bad.

(Side note – I’ve always pondered the reasoning behind the origin of “evil” in the Bible; to any Christians reading this – if you want to say it’s all Satan’s work, fine … but didn’t your God create Satan? Isn’t your God supposed to be omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent? I would genuinely like to know what you think of these paradoxes.)

Instead of viewing God as a perfect, infallible force that knows everything and can do no wrong, does it not make more sense to think of God / Intelligent Energy as a work in progress? Something which is continuously learning and developing and evolving – much like ourselves?

Over time, the human race seems to be becoming (by and large) more peaceful / tolerant / understanding. In the last 60 years alone, we’ve had the civil rights movement and the spreading legalisation of gay marriage – not, I might add, because there’s a massive “gay agenda” conspiracy underway, but because more and more people are realising that we’re all human beings and all deserve equal rights and opportunities. As a species, we are (veeeeery slowly) making progress. Who knows … perhaps a couple of centuries down the line we’ll have found a way of organising our society that doesn’t result in a few greedy self-promoters blowing up foreigners for money.

When our race has finally evolved to the point where we can stop fighting each other and actually pool the whole planet’s talents and resources together, we might finally be able to peacefully explore space and make contact with similarly advanced societies. (That’s the dream, anyway.)

I’m not saying I’m right. But I AM saying “Isn’t this an idea worth considering?” Granted, it doesn’t answer all the questions; but at least, when you view the universe this way, no-one gets left out or told that they’re evil or worthless. If we’re all “God”, if we’re all one and the same, don’t we owe it to ourselves to stop the fighting and make some REAL progress?

Or perhaps the fighting (much as I dislike it) is all part and parcel of our continually evolving experience? If we’re all a manifestation of the original Intelligent Energy, or God, then maybe “war” is just God arguing with itself.

I don’t know. No-one knows. All I know is that I prefer this malleable, evolving energy type God to an angry, judgemental guy that demands my worship (or else).

But hey – it’s just an idea.

I look forward to your comments




posted on May, 15 2013 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Your "idea" makes perfect sense to me and has for a long time now.

For me, making sense of all that is, is a priority within my mind and helps understanding the systems including but not limited to the scope of life and death.

I concur on every paragraph and or word you wrote.


Good job thinking... and thinking outside the box.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   
OK, i read your Idea, and it seems similar to Intelligent Designer, which has been rendered useless many times.

I usually jump the ship when theories or ideas relating to origin applies a human emotion, personifies. Like for example, your being got "bored".

What happened before big bang? i simply do not know.

But people are welcome to make up whatever they can but it being a creator(or intelligent energy) is just as me
saying the whole universe was created by me but i erased my memory so i can live among my creations.

My idea would be just an energy... not intelligent... just energy. It could have been everlasting an does not have a start or an end or it could have had something else create it. Maybe the whole universe is a giant loop, we gave birth to the universe and universe gave birth to us! a paradox!



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   
You might enjoy reading the philosopher Spinoza. His pantheistic view of the world is quite similar to yours.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   
As for your intelligent energy, I see it as the elements of time and space. There are some theories around like The Reciprocal System of Physical Theory in which everything is based on motion, or time and space. As for a beginning, I am leaning towards the theory that there is not one. I know such a concept of infinity can mess with the mind, but so can trying to imagine a time when time did not exist.

To make it a bit easier to comprehend, say we had some super fast spaceship that can go trillions of times the speed of light and pick any direction to travel in. We may come across all sorts of problems like black holes, nebula's and other galaxies, but I fail to comprehend how we will eventually hit some kind of wall where space no longer exists. Space just goes on and on and on and on... a bit like time as they are both infinite.

As for how the first energy and matter arrived in this vastness, there have been some interesting theories supported by some interesting physics in how all energy and matter is derived through time and space looping back on its self.
edit on 15-5-2013 by kwakakev because: formattting



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Toromos
You might enjoy reading the philosopher Spinoza. His pantheistic view of the world is quite similar to yours.


Thank you - I've never read Spinoza, I'll have a look



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream

OK, i read your Idea, and it seems similar to Intelligent Designer, which has been rendered useless many times.



You misunderstand me; I'm not talking about Intelligent Design in a creationist way. I'm not saying this energy designed everything from scratch. I believe the theory of evolution is the closest we've come to a correct theory, although there are gaps that need filling. Perhaps it all just started with atoms, and evolved from there?


Originally posted by luciddream

I usually jump the ship when theories or ideas relating to origin applies a human emotion, personifies. Like for example, your being got "bored".



That's a fair point; ascribing human emotions to that kind of energy is probably unfair. I'm not sure why I used the term "bored" - I guess to try and involve people. If we're talking about something that is so far beyond our human comprehension, it makes some sense (I think) to refer to it in ways that people have some hope of relating to.


Originally posted by luciddream

people are welcome to make up whatever they can but it being a creator(or intelligent energy) is just as me
saying the whole universe was created by me but i erased my memory so i can live among my creations



It would be wrong of me to entirely discount this theory.

I'm not trying to force a "Creator God" on people. I'm just saying, does it not make more sense for us to think about the universe in these terms? If people thought that they were all connected, all part of one thing, maybe they wouldn't hurt and kill each other so much.


Originally posted by luciddream

My idea would be just an energy... not intelligent... just energy.



This is an interesting topic of debate: can energy that is NOT conscious distort itself? Can any quantum physicists out there help me?!



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 


By what way did you come upon this idea?

What were you thinking about at the time?



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


I've been working out my ideas and feelings on life, the universe and everything for some time. In fact, it's a bit of an obsession. I guess I should read more philosophy - people are always saying "Oh, you mean like Plato's _____" or "Ah, you're referring to Nietzsche's theory of _____". Really, I have very little knowledge of philosophical movements. I just think and write and go back and look at what I've thought and tweak it, and carry on thinking and writing!



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 


Okay, awesome. *High Five*

I don't read much of main stream-ish philosophies either, and I naturally came to a similar notion as well. Only later did I see others are/have came up with similar thinking... I think its generally called quantum evolution, or some such thing.

Here is my version: Evolution of Concept

I was thinking about peoples ideologies, and the concepts they have, when I stumbled upon it; and although my idea is similar, it differs in that it ties in with religion...and I think I am a little further a long to understanding it, because of religion...but I'm not focusing on the differences here - I'm focusing on the peculiar similarities that arose naturally...

and I guess this sort of truth really is self-evident.


Maybe in a hundred years, the others will agree - the energy has an awareness.
edit on 5/15/2013 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


I've had a quick glance at your "Evolution of concept" theory, and I like it. I'll read it in more detail tomorrow, thank you



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream

My idea would be just an energy... not intelligent... just energy.



I have some sympathy for this idea, in considering the op. Scientists are now telling us that empty space itself (devoid of particles and energy) is acted upon by gravity. That it is unstable and capable of producing matter. Scientists like Krauss claim that even when we remove space itself, leaving literally "nothing", quantum physics predicts that "something" will eventually be produced from this "nothing", even an entire universe. There seems a radical redefining of the term "nothing", in science. Could there ever really be a "nothing", in the philosophical sense ? How would we know, even if there was?

Perhaps there is some underlying force or principle waiting to be found. Though not intelligent as in, able to make decisions, or meddle in human affairs. Or perhaps even this is just a very human way of looking at something in a way that makes "intutive" sense. Even when we can reasonably explain not only the very beginning of the universe and all the way up to present as a form of natural "evolution" (which science most likely will IMO), but even begin to understand the cause of the beginning, there will always be more it seems.

edit on 16-5-2013 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by CuriousAchilles
Break everything in our universe down, and we get atoms. Go further – atoms are mostly empty space, comprising a nucleus made of protons and neutrons, orbited by electrons. Go further – what are these subatomic particles made of? Quarks? What about them?


It does seem true that solid matter, in this sense, is an illusion. As Einstein is usually quoted saying "reality is an illusion, albeit a persistent one".



If this hypothesis is correct, then you and I, the sun and the sky, the grass, the rain, the apple pie you ate for dessert, it’s all a manifestation of the same thing. If you want to call it “God”, then we are ALL God. EVERYTHING is God.


I agree with the previous poster and his advice on Spinoza. It seems Einstein himself was given to a form of belief, that he mentions as being based on Spinoza's Pantheism. Though I have heard it claimed, this is just a nice way of saying "atheist".




posted on May, 16 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 


Op, I think you may enjoy this interview. Let me know your thoughts.





posted on May, 16 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


That was wonderful, thank you



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   
As for life here, In studying the DNA replication process from a programming perspective, life does not know where it is going, but it is looking for a better way. The replication process does make for an excellent search algorithm where there is limitless possibilities.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 


Op, I think you may enjoy this interview. Let me know your thoughts.




Fascinating, especially the "real"science part. It seemed to degenerate into pseudo science though, in the end with the same worn old creationist logical fallacies.

Something metaphysical "enters" our universe.............WTF?

Fair enough as a belief, but to pretend science supports this or finds it likely....

As to the claimed "fine tuning" argument.....


[T]his universe is 99.99999 percent composed of lethal radiation-filled vacuum, and 99.99999 percent of all the material in the universe comprises stars and black holes on which nothing can ever live, and 99.99999 percent of all other material in the universe (all planets, moons, clouds, asteroids) is barren of life or even outright inhospitable to life. In other words, the universe we observe is extraordinarily inhospitable to life. Even what tiny inconsequential bits of it are at all hospitable are extremely inefficient at producing life—at all, but far more so intelligent life …
...in fact, if we put all the lethal vacuum of outer space swamped with deadly radiation into an area the size of a house, you would never find the comparably microscopic speck of area that sustains life (it would literally be smaller than a single proton). It’s exceedingly difficult to imagine a universe less conducive to life than that—indeed, that’s about as close to being completely incapable of producing life as any random universe can be expected to be, other than of course being completely incapable of producing life.

The End of Christianity-John W Loftus (pp. 295-96)





new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join