The Universe

I have been contemplating the idea of the universe existing through forms. Rather then the universe ending or the idea of a multiverse i have come to the conclusion that the universe exist with in forms. Ok..

At the edge of the universe rather then it ending i have realized that it changes form. That this universe is a manifestation of form through the idea of the dimensions existing within the form of the outer reaches of the universe.

But there really isnt an outer edge or reach, its experience. It manifest itself through all forms throughout space dimensionally, or non dimensionally.

Im still grappling with this idea but this is where im starting at with it at least as how i can explain it.

Enjoy.

As far as I can tell, the universe can be whatever you want it to be, or wish to be.

It is called subjective thinkin'

but still,

very interesting.

reply to post by onequestion


Maybe it's too early (05.30 in Scotland!) but I'm a little confused.

Please ellaborate though. Sounds interesting.

reply to post by onequestion


Enjoy?
I did. You are tossing around a whole bunch of stuff there. I enjoy listening to people who are wrestling with thoughts like those, not already set in stone thoughts.
Thanks

I'm just wondering why so many people prefer to make up how they think the universe works, as opposed to taking some Physics and Astronomy.

Anyone, of course, is more than welcome and entitled to make up and believe whatever they desire about anything. It's just baffling to me, however, when folks are insistent on simply making stuff up when there's so many freely available online resources to open source education that explains it all.

700+ Free online Courses from top Universities

By all means, feel free to exercise your creative desires with wild abandon on and about anything, but, when, and if anyone is interested in learning about how things actually work, well, there's a link.

AliceBleachWhite

I'm just wondering why so many people prefer to make up how they think the universe works, as opposed to taking some Physics and Astronomy.

Anyone, of course, is more than welcome and entitled to make up and believe whatever they desire about anything. It's just baffling to me, however, when folks are insistent on simply making stuff up when there's so many freely available online resources to open source education that explains it all.

700+ Free online Courses from top Universities

By all means, feel free to exercise your creative desires with wild abandon on and about anything, but, when, and if anyone is interested in learning about how things actually work, well, there's a link.

This would be Philosophy and Metaphysics for a reason, or no? Don't listen to what this person says. Keep searching within OP, that's where the real answers are.

Pics are cool too. The Hubble "Deep Field" took a picture of the darkest part of the sky at highest magnification to see whats out there. Except for a few stars every dot in this picture is a galaxy.

Here is reality.


The Universe is just like this as far as the eye can see. Before we could see that far we didn't know what to think about that far. Now we see it. Place yourself on the farthest point of light in this photo and look further in the same direction (or any direction). Guess what you will see?

reply to post by onequestion


Are the forms manifestations of the forces or are the forces manifestations of the forms?

As you approach the boundaries:
do the forces change or just the forms change?
do both, force, and form, change?
does one ever cease to exist beyond boundaries?

reply to post by intrptr


Just to add to that, Hubble just found one of the oldest galaxies to date:

Astronomers say the galaxy, called z8_GND_5296, is the most remote one they can confirm with spectroscopy, a technique that looks for the chemical signatures of elements.

In this case, that element was hydrogen, the main fuel of stars. Researchers reported their findings in the journal Nature.

z8_GND_5296 -- no, that's not a typo, or a spam username -- is a window into the past. Because of its distance, it shows what things would have been like 700 million years after the Big Bang.

The universe is 13.8 billion years old, so 700 million years after the start is actually quite early by comparison.

CNN

It's pretty amazing to think that it took 13.8 billion years for the light of this galaxy to reach us:



And think, each galaxy has how many stars? It's quite humbling!

Hiasyouwant

This would be Philosophy and Metaphysics for a reason, or no? Don't listen to what this person says. Keep searching within OP, that's where the real answers are.

Philosophy is extremely well represented in the link I provided.

700+ Free Online Courses from Top Universities

Philosophy

A Romp through Ethics for Complete Beginners - iTunes Video – Web Video – Web Audio – Marianne Talbot, Oxford University
Aesthetics & Philosophy of Art – iTunes – Web – James Grant, Oxford University
Analytic Philosophy: Wilfrid Sellars – Web – Robert Brandom, University of Pittsburgh
Ancient and Medieval Philosophy - iTunes Video - Web Video – David O’Connor, Notre Dame
Ancient Philosophy – iTunes – David Ebrey, UC Berkeley
Ancient Wisdom and Modern Love - iTunes Video - Web Video – Professor David O’Connor, Notre Dame
Argument Diagramming - Web – Carnegie Mellon
Aristotle: Ethics – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Aristotle: Rhetoric – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Aristotle: Politics - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Authority & the Individual: Six BBC Lectures - Web Site – Bertrand Russell, Cambridge
Bioethics: An Introduction – Web - iTunes Video – iTunes Audio - Marianne Talbot, Oxford
Critical Reasoning for Beginners - iTunes Video – iTunes Audio – Web Video & Audio - Marianne Talbot, Oxford
Death – YouTube – iTunes Audio – iTunes Video – Download Course – Shelly Kagan, Yale
Eight Philosophy Courses by Gilles Deleuze - YouTube - Gilles Deleuze, Université Paris-VIII
Environmental Philosophy – iTunes Video - Web Video – Kenneth Sayre, Notre Dame
Existentialism in Literature & Film – iTunes – Web – Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
Existentialism in Literature and Film - RSS Feed - Sean Dorrance Kelly, Harvard University
From Gods and Back - Web - Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
General Philosophy – iTunes – Web – Peter Millican, Oxford University
Gödel, Escher, Bach: A Mental Space Odyssey – Web - Justin Curry & Curran Kelleher, MIT
Great Big Ideas – Web – Steven Pinker, Larry Summers, Michio Kaku, etc, Floating University
Hegel: The Philosophy of History – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit - Web Site - JM Bernstein, New School
Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit – Web Site - Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Hegel’s Philosophy of Right – Web Site - Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Hegel’s Science of Logic – Web Site – Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Heidegger: Being and Time - RSS Feed - Web Site - Sean Dorrance Kelly, Harvard
Heidegger’s Being & Time – iTunes – Web – Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
Heideggers Being and Time, Division II – iTunes - Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
History of Political Theory - iTunes – Wendy Brown, UC Berkeley
Hobbes: Leviathan and De Cive (1964) - Web Site - Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Introduction to Indian Philosophy – Web Site – Satya Sundar Sethy, IIT Madras
Introduction to Philosophy – iTunes Video – YouTube – Daniel Kaufman, Missouri State
Introduction to Political Philosophy – YouTube – iTunes – Download Course, Steven B. Smith, Yale
Introduction to Theory – iTunes Video – Multiple Professors, Wesleyan
Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? – YouTube – iTunes Video - Web Site - Michael Sandel, Harvard
Kant - Web Site - Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Kant: Political Philosophy – Web Site - Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Kant’s Critique of Judgment – Web Site – JM Bernstein, New School
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason – iTunes Video – iTunes Audio - Video/Audio on Web – Dan Robinson, Oxford
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason – Web Site – Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason – Web Site – JM Bernstein, New School
Later Heidegger – Web Site – Sean Dorrance Kelly, Harvard
Lecture Course in Ethical and Political Philosophy – Web Site - Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Lecture Course in Social and Political Philosophy (Economy) - Web Site - Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Walter Kaufmann Lectures on Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Sartre - Web Site
Kant’s Epistemology – iTunes – Dr Susan Stuarts, University of Glasgow
Logic and Proofs – Web – Carnegie Mellon
Machiavelli – Web - Allan Bloom, U. Chicago
Man, God, and Society in Western Literature - iTunes Audio – Web – Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
Marx – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Medical Ethics – Web Audio – David Solomon, Notre Dame
Merleau-Ponty’s Phenomenology of Perception - Web - Hubert Dreyfus, UC Berkeley
Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws (1966) - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Morality and Modernity - Web Video – David Solomon, Notre Dame
Natural Right – Web Video – Leo Strauss, U. Chicago
Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Nietzsche and the Postmodern Condition – Web Site – Rick Roderick, Duke
Nietzsche on Mind and Nature – Web Site – Multiple Profs – Oxford
Philosophical Issues in Brain Science – YouTube – Web Site - Pawan Sinha and Alex Byrne
Philosophy and Human Values – Web Site – Rick Roderick, Duke
Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature – YouTube - iTunes Audio - Web Site – Tamar Gendler, Yale
Philosophy in Film and Other Media - iTunes – YouTube – Web – Irving Singer, MIT
Philosophy for Beginners – iTunes – Video/Audio on the Web – Marianne Talbot, Oxford
Philosophy of Language – iTunes – Web – John Searle, UC Berkeley
Philosophy of Love in the Western World – iTunes – YouTube – Web – Irving Singer, MIT
Philosophy of Mind - iTunes – YouTube – John Searle, UC Berkeley
Philosophy of Mind – iTunes – Robert Stufflebeam, University of New Orleans
Philosophy of Religion - iTunes - Web - T. J. Mawson, Oxford
Philosophy of Science - Web Site - Richard Dien Winfield, University of Georgia
Philosophy of Society – iTunes – Web – John Searle, UC Berkeley
Plato’s Apology of Socrates – YouTube – Allan Bloom, UChicago
Plato Apology/Crito - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Plato: Gorgias – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago.
Plato: Laws – Web Site - Leo Strauss, U Chicago.
Plato: Meno - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Plato, Protagoras -Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Plato’s Republic – Web Site – Laurence Bloom, University of Georgia
Political, Economic and Social Thought – iTunes – Charles Anderson, UW-Madison
Proust & Philosophy – Feed – Johns Hopkins
Social Theory, the Humanities & Philosophy Now - Web Video - Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Harvard
Socrates – Web - Allan Bloom, U. Chicago
The Art of Living - Web Site – Team taught, Stanford
The Central Philosophy of Tibet - Web Audio – Robert Thurman, Columbia University
The Examined Life – iTunes – Greg Reihman, Lehigh University
The History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps - Multiple Formats – Peter Adamson, King’s College London
The History of Western Social Theory – YouTube - Alan MacFarlane, Cambridge University
The Self Under Siege - Web Site - Rick Roderick, Duke
The Moral Foundations of Politics – YouTube - iTunes Video - iTunes Audio - Web Site – Professor Ian Shapiro, Yale
The Nature of Mind – YouTube – iTunes Video – iTunes Audio - Web – John Joseph Campbell, UC Berkeley
The Origins of Political Science – Web Site – Leo Strauss, UC Chicago
The Secular and The Sacred – Web Site – Sean Dorrance Kelly, Harvard
Theory of Meaning - YouTube - iTunes Video - iTunes Audio - Web – John Joseph Campbell, UC Berkeley
Thucydides – Web Site - Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Truth & Subjectivity/The Culture Of The Self – Web Site – Michel Foucault, UC Berkeley
Vico: Seminar in Political Philosophy – Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago
Xenophon’s Oeconomicus - Web Site – Leo Strauss, U Chicago

Is that enough, or should there, perhaps be more?

AliceBleachWhite

I'm just wondering why so many people prefer to make up how they think the universe works, as opposed to taking some Physics and Astronomy.

Anyone, of course, is more than welcome and entitled to make up and believe whatever they desire about anything. It's just baffling to me, however, when folks are insistent on simply making stuff up when there's so many freely available online resources to open source education that explains it all.

700+ Free online Courses from top Universities

By all means, feel free to exercise your creative desires with wild abandon on and about anything, but, when, and if anyone is interested in learning about how things actually work, well, there's a link.

Which one of the courses 'explains it all'?

reply to post by MystikMushroom

And think, each galaxy has how many stars? It's quite humbling!

And enlightening to be sure. I wonder how life travels between them?

reply to post by onequestion


This is some interesting thinking onequestion. The universe definitely has an outer edge, or limit. This has been proven because of the redshift seen in supernova that have been observed in such telescopes such as the Hubble. It started at a certain point and is moving away from it. What is curious is that the further it moves outwards the faster the material in the universe is traveling defying the laws of known physics, such as gravity, which should be pulling on the universe and slowing it down.

Our universe takes up just a fraction of the heavens it resides in. The universe is spheroid in shape, perhaps not a perfect sphere. And there are more dimensions to it than we can observe. There is an inner dimension upon which our universe sits. Super massive black holes, after converting whatever mass and even light that falls pass their event horizon and converts them to pure energy take that energy into the pedestal on which the universe sits which we cannot see, and it is eventually recycled back into the universe.

To give you an analogy of our universe, in comparison to the outward supernatural heavens, imagine a large city and a small tent set up within that city. Our universe can be compared to the tent that sits in, or resides in the heavens where God resides. So our universe sits in the heavenly realm as a part of it, but only a small part of it. The heavenly realm has nothing physical, nor does it have energy as we understand it. It has supernatural energy, dynamic energy from which the energy in our universe, and the matter contained within come from.

The heavens outside our physical universe is brighter than all the stars in our universe combined, but it is a light that we cannot see. It appears that God has set boundaries of that light so that it cannot penetrate the physical universe. The beings that reside in heaven are also brighter than stars, God himself being beyond imagining in brightness. With him there is no darkness and the light is unapproachable. In fact he is so powerfully sublime that his radiance would desintagrate anything physical that the rays of his face touched. Also, he is, although not being physical, larger than our physical universe. It cannot contain the being of God, it not being grand enough to do so.

God is actually the source of all energy both supernatural and of our physical universe.

Time is actually just our perception of energy in motion, and since energy has always existed, time has always been around. The idea of time travel is quite silly when you really understand this.

When angels descend from the heavenly realm outside the physical universe to the earth, it is much like when a human submerges to the depths of the ocean. But they have the ability to travel at speeds we cannot understand, and adapt themselves to our universe. There are many deceptive spirits that were once angels, who have been cast down to our realm as well and mislead many people.

No physical form from our universe would ever be able to penetrate into its supernatural boundaries.

Scientists like to play around with the fanciful ideas of multiverses and the inflationary theory, among other things. But it appears they have no support in reality.

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite

AliceBleachWhite
Anyone, of course, is more than welcome and entitled to make up and believe whatever they desire about anything. It's just baffling to me, however, when folks are insistent on simply making stuff up when there's so many freely available online resources to open source education that explains it all.

Which idea do you prefer 'universe' or multiverse'?
Scientists make things up all the time - they have theories and then from a theory they take another step into the imagination.

Scientific models can back up each theory. www.space.com...

No one knows for sure how it works.

intrptr
reply to post by MystikMushroom

 

And think, each galaxy has how many stars? It's quite humbling!

And enlightening to be sure. I wonder how life travels between them?

Life in our universe would only be able to travel faster than light (ftl) by means of wormholes or warp drives. The problem with worm holes is that once inside you are only energy. (Think of it much like entering a black hole, only on a much much smaller scale, worm holes are smaller the a photon). The technology would have to be developed on either side of a worm hole to be able to reconvert that energy on the other end. Also since you would be converted into pure energy when inside a wormhole you would not be conscious to observe time in it.

Warp drive technology would warp, or bend the fabric of space to travel. There are other methods of space travel, but these two seem the only possible ways to travel great distances in the universe within reasonable time-spans.

Broom

intrptr
reply to post by MystikMushroom

 

And think, each galaxy has how many stars? It's quite humbling!

And enlightening to be sure. I wonder how life travels between them?

Life in our universe would only be able to travel faster than light (ftl) by means of wormholes or warp drives. The problem with worm holes is that once inside you are only energy. (Think of it much like entering a black hole, only on a much much smaller scale, worm holes are smaller the a photon). The technology would have to be developed on either side of a worm hole to be able to reconvert that energy on the other end. Also since you would be converted into pure energy when inside a wormhole you would not be conscious to observe time in it.

Warp drive technology would warp, or bend the fabric of space to travel. There are other methods of space travel, but these two seem the only possible ways to travel great distances in the universe within reasonable time-spans.

You are only ever just energy - there is only pure energy - what could this energy be contaminated with?
Energy is being itself.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


It is true that all matter is just a converted form of energy. Einesitn proved this with E=MC^2. So you can convert all mass into energy. This is actually exactly what happens when something is pulled past the event horizon in a black hole, or would fall into a wormhole. They would accelerate, anything would, until whatever passes beyond that point, is shredded and eventually converted into pure energy. Once you reach the event horizon, there is no escaping.

In fact even just a very small mass contains tremendous energy in it. Nevertheless we are not energy per se. We are matter, a stable form of energy. This energy of which we are made of, as well as everything else physical in the universe comes from the Supreme one who directed his dynamic energy to create the universe:

Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; he calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power,not one of them is missing. -Isaiah 40:26.

Broom
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

It is true that all matter is just a converted form of energy. Einesitn proved this with E=MC^2. So you can convert all mass into energy. This is actually exactly what happens when something is pulled past the event horizon in a black hole, or would fall into a wormhole. They would accelerate, anything would, until whatever passes beyond that point, is shredded and eventually converted into pure energy. Once you reach the event horizon, there is no escaping.

I am a little confused. What is mass contaminated with to make it not 'pure' energy?

Itisnowagain

Broom
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

It is true that all matter is just a converted form of energy. Einesitn proved this with E=MC^2. So you can convert all mass into energy. This is actually exactly what happens when something is pulled past the event horizon in a black hole, or would fall into a wormhole. They would accelerate, anything would, until whatever passes beyond that point, is shredded and eventually converted into pure energy. Once you reach the event horizon, there is no escaping.

I am a little confused. What is mass contaminated with to make it not 'pure' energy?

Just as you can convert mass into energy you can reverse the formula and convert energy into mass. All matter is energy that has been converted into mass. Thus we are not pure energy. We are physical entities. We are matter. When that matter is converted within the event horizon it is converted into energy, or pure energy.

You are misunderstanding the word pure as if it refers to something that has been purified. That is not the case in this instance, in this instance the word is simply being used to explain the process of transformation inside the wormhole from matter into energy. Even light cannot escape this destructive process once it becomes trapped within the event horizon.

Broom
Just as you can convert mass into energy you can reverse the formula and convert energy into mass. All matter is energy that has been converted into mass. Thus we are not pure energy. We are physical entities. We are matter. When that matter is converted within the event horizon it is converted into energy, or pure energy.

You are misunderstanding the word pure as if it refers to something that has been purified. That is not the case in this instance, in this instance the word is simply being used to explain the process of transformation inside the wormhole from matter into energy. Even light cannot escape this destructive process once it becomes trapped within the event horizon.

I do not understand what 'mass' is compared to 'energy'.
Is mass what can be seen, experienced? Is it that which has apparent existence?
Is pure energy that which cannot be seen or known? That which has no apparent existence?