Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

songjoong df: on 12/27/17 at 7:03am UTC, wrote cara menjadi reseller qnc jelly gamat Cara Menjadi Agen Qnc Jelly Gamat ...

Michael Belanger: on 9/28/09 at 18:46pm UTC, wrote Wave Duality Everything is explained and linked through holographic...

amrit: on 9/27/09 at 16:54pm UTC, wrote In order to survive we have to jump from the mind to the consciousness on...

Steve Dufourny: on 9/27/09 at 13:19pm UTC, wrote Hello Amrit , It's so spiritual your point of vue . I have a question...

amrit: on 9/27/09 at 7:28am UTC, wrote Steve universe is timeless. Clocks run in eternity that is NOW. Linear...

Steve Dufourny: on 9/25/09 at 8:28am UTC, wrote Hi Amrit , Yes of course ,it's difficult to know this entropy ,this entity...

amrit: on 9/24/09 at 19:41pm UTC, wrote It is to early discuss about god. First we haver to understand how...

Steve Dufourny: on 8/7/09 at 17:08pm UTC, wrote Dear Paul , My theory is totaly different than the strings ,a string is...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Michael Hussey: "https://www.google.com" in New Nuclear "Magic...

Michael Hussey: "it is really difficult to understand what is all about all the things..." in New Nuclear "Magic...

Stefan Weckbach: "I have a problem with the notion of time in the multiverse scenario that..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Agnew: "It is interesting that you bring up change in the context of free..." in Cosmological Koans

Roger Granet: "By the way, this post was from Roger." in First Things First: The...

david john: "https://www.google.com google.com/ google.com/" in Black Hole Photographed...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Lorraine Ford: "Physics has failed to explain change: physics tries to claim that change is..." in Cosmological Koans


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi BLOGS
July 17, 2019

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Does God Know He Is God? [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger William Orem wrote on May. 22, 2009 @ 18:44 GMT
A philosophical diversion (that connects to T.O.E.):

Let’s assume, for the purposes of argument, that there are such things as gods. In fact, let’s assume there is only one God, and that He has the traditionally ascribed attribute of having an infinite mind.

That mind has, within its magical neural architecture, complete knowledge, which we can short-hand for the moment as: “contains all possible true statements in propositional form.” One such statement might be, for example, “On June 17th at 11:59 the sky over Altoona was robin’s egg blue.” Yes, an infinite regress pops up here, as there are also true statements asserting the truth-value of previous statements—“It is true that on June 17th at 11:59 . . .”--and so on. No matter—you can’t crowd infinity.

Now, dismiss the rest of God’s purported attributes; all we’re after is a mind that knows all things. Does such an Infinite Mind—call it the I.M.—know itself to be the Infinite Mind? Does God know He is God?

At first blush, the answer would seem to be yes. There are a few ways to get there. The simplest is that the I.M.’s being infinite is, indeed, a fact (though not a fact of nature, exactly, unless you are Spinoza). As a fact, it is contained, propositionally, in the Infinite Mind. Thus the I.M. knows that it is the I.M., in the same way it knows the shade of blue above Altoona.

There are other ways in. It’s possible that I myself might know the I.M. to be infinite (Really? Sure. I know the integers to be infinite, without having counted them all up), and I cannot know more than the I.M.; therefore anything I know, the I.M. knows. You can think up variations as time and your own taste permits.

Now—enter the evil daemon.

Descartes, in his *Meditations on First Philosophy*, famously introduces the possibility that his ratiocinations are being systematically thrown off the rails by an “evil daemon” bent on confounding his thought. The E.D. makes Rene *think* he has a body, makes him *think* there is an external world, and so on, when in fact none of this is objectively so. (One of the many side-roads this leads us on: how can the E.D. be sure it doesn’t have its own E.D.?) This is sometimes called the “brain in a vat” scenario, invariably linked these days with *The Matrix* and its lamentable sequels.

Don’t be put off guard by the various pulp versions of this conundrum, though; the E.D. is epistemological acid. When much of Descartes’ thought has devolved into being of merely historical interest, this agent of radical skepticism will still be working to undermine our surety.

So, is the I.M. susceptible to the E.D.? Can even God be unsure as to whether He is really just a brain floating in a vat?

I would propose that the answer is yes—even an I.M. fails to achieve absolute certainty. For all it knows, that is, the I.M. may not be an I.M. at all.



To see why, suppose now that there is a finite mind--the F.M.--that is being misled by the E.D. to think itself an I.M. To the best of *its* knowledge, every possible true statement is contained propositionally inside itself, including the true statement that it contains all possible knowledge. However, the F.M. is wrong. The E.D. is only making it *think* that it knows all things, while at least one truth is escaping it: the true statement “the I.M. is, in fact, a F.M.”

Technically the F.M. need not even be finite; an infinite collection may fail to be exhaustive, as do the natural numbers. Very good; let it be infinite but non-exhaustive, endlessly thinking an unlimited number of truths but never noticing the missing one. The point is that exactly because the F.M. does not have access to that hidden truth, it cannot tell that its contents are not exhaustive. Nor does it have access to such true statements as “My thoughts only *seem* to be exhaustive.” Therefore it cannot distinguish itself from the true I.M.

Now you see the problem. The *true* I.M. is in exactly the same epistemological position. The I.M. believes itself to know all things, including the (seemingly) true proposition that it knows all things. As it happens, the I.M. is correct. And yet the I.M. cannot confirm that belief, as the F.M. draws the same conclusion, from the same data (the proposition “My thoughts only *seem* to be exhaustive” doesn’t occur in the true I.M. either). Thus the I.M. can’t be certain it isn’t the F.M. In figurative speech, even God couldn’t be sure that He was God.

The application of the E.D. to T.O.E.? I can think of a few. Clearly there’s a problem with the very concept of exhaustive, or absolute, knowledge. And it doesn’t look like a small one.

But first we’ll see what you have to say.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 06:39 GMT
Perhaps, the simplest form of this argument may be that “God cannot know that He is God, because He cannot distinguish Himself from a being deceived by a devil (or by his own mind) into believing He is God”. (And there exist, indeed, persons believing that they are God.)

The mind in cause may think that God’s attribute is omniscience, expressed by the condition

(1)...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 11:18 GMT
There is not god. Awakened observer know that. Yors Amrit

Awakened bserver Insights on Realitiviy

1. Invariant of slight speed for any inertial system shows that light and electromagnetic waves in generally are vibration of physical space itself. From transmitter to receiver vibration of the space that are electromagnetic waves propagates with light speed. Electromagnetic waves are stationary waves of space itself.

Light is vibration of the space in which you move. Actually light does not move at all. Light is still. Only inertial systems move. Vibration of space (that is light) propagate with a light speed from transmitter.

We have to distinguish between propagation of electromagnetic waves from the transmit-tor that goes with a light speed from the electromagnetic waves itself that are stationary waves of the space itself.

2. Equality of gravitational and inertial mass means that quantum structure of space is formed in the same way by presence of massive object or accelerated inertial system in absence of gravity.

3. Quantum structure of space is formed by presence of massive objects and generated gravity force. Gravity force does not travel from object A to object B. Gravity force is in space itself, is shrinking force of the space. This shrinking force is in dynamic equilibrium with centripetal force of moving massive objects.

4. Quantum space is made out of quanta size of Planck and is timeless (atemporal). Physical time is run of clocks in quantum space and depends on the strength of gravity in given area of space. Space-time is merely a math model.

attachments: 1_AWAKENING_OF_THE_OBSERVER_IN_PHYSICS__Sorli_2009.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 12:11 GMT
God is a sort of Maxwsll Demon, and an effective theory of quantum gravity and cosmology should exorcise it from the universe. The Szilard argument did so with ordinary Maxwell Demons with information theory. Quantum gravity of Q-bits should do the same.

There is of course the curious issue of Boltzmann brains, which in an infinite de Sitter spacetime should exist. But for now ... .

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Morgan wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 13:18 GMT
Insofar as Propositional logic is a human creation, and far from the only possible formal system that is possible, it seems a little confining to argue about the nature of God's knowledge in such terms. Although it's not made clear in the post what formal structures you intend, it nonetheless seems clear that you intend a formal structure of some sort, and it appears that you wish to apply a formal calculus of some kind. You haven't declared what formal calculus you wish to apply either. Once we specify a formal logic and calculus of sufficiently high order, we bring to the table all the paradoxes and incompleteness theorems associated with higher-order propositional logic, including, gasp, Godel's theorem. The response of mathematicians to these paradoxes has been to use more limited formal structures, and progressively to create new formal structures, that are not demonstrably paradoxical, and that are not provably inconsistent.

This leads us to the Mathematician's Nightmare, that God's thought is not encompassed by any formal structure or calculus. God, being irrational, doesn't have to care what formal structures and calculi are applied by a formalist to try to describe her thought.

There are so many responses that could be made to your post. Does your attribution of maleness, "Does God Know *He* Is God?", indicate a /desire/ on your part that He must be rational, describable, subject to your logic, controllable? Is that desire conscious or unconscious? Of course this is a stereotype, perhaps He is irrational, or She is a formal logician, bound by unnatural formal conventions. Do we think that we can characterize God by whether he is a she or she is a he? God is a She, or God is a He, or is there a trivalence here, God is God? True, False, or God? Or does /my/ desire for an elemental, unbound God, a passionate deliverer of life and disaster, show that I am unfit to be a Physicist, that I cannot serve two masters, formal and informal language? [Sorry, I got carried away there, informal language does that sometimes. I used three adjectives that clearly are born of *my* desire to be elemental, unbound, and passionate, a noun that indicates action rather than passiveness, an affirmation, that God brings life, and then an acknowledgment that God brings death, now where did all that come from? And there may be no such God or no God at all, everything is in my imagination, Descartes' model for my vanity.]

But wait, we use only informal language, so we can prove nothing, there can only be argument, and agapé, perhaps.

Thank you for your post.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 16:59 GMT
Absolute knowledge is contradictory. The universal state of the absolute would be a neutral medium, while knowledge is a subjective feedback loop of information and judgement. So a logical deity wouldn't be the set of all possible knowledge, but the element of awareness which accumulates knowledge.

Understanding the concept of God requires a bottom up consideration of how it evolved, not a top down view of its various cultural manifestations. The basis of the intellect is the projection of consciousness onto the physical environment and consideration of how it acts. The essential feedback loop of information and judgement. In many cases, such as reacting to other living entities, it makes sense to assume a theory of mind applies to the world one sees. Now from the perspective of our increasingly sterile world, this theory of mind seems erroneous when applied to inanimate processes and objects, yet it should be remembered that our ancient ancestors lived in a far more biologically encompassing and diverse reality than we can really have any conceptual appreciation. So it made quite a bit of sense to assign conscious intent to various aspects of this environment, especially when much of it treated one as a food source.

The original religious/cultural concept of a protective deity was of a group spirit, of which the individual members were passing phenomena. Much as we have come to understand that our bodies are constantly replacing the cells of which they consist.

The next stage was how the primordial tribes inter-related. The two classic examples are Greek polytheism and Jewish monotheism. For the Greeks, it became a community of Gods and the history of their interactions became woven into a mythological tapestry. The Jews, on the other hand, developed a more top down singular model, where the strands of group interaction were woven into the rope of a single history. While the later method is far more politically effective in instructing and disciplining communities which are far larger than individuals can emotionally navigate, it promotes conceptual and institutional straitjackets that don't take into account logical contradictions and normal social conflicts, so that the resulting tensions become much greater before breaking down imposed constraints and the natural equilibrium asserts itself forcefully. The monolithically linear view doesn't recognize the relativistic and inherently diverse nature of reality. A universal perspective is a logical contradiction. Any perspective is inherently subjective. Yet that is the basis of our primary religious institutions and even physics is still chasing the chimera of a theory of everything. The more universal a theory is, the more elementary it is.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


God wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 18:06 GMT
Peter Morgan gets a gold star.

"...Insofar as Propositional logic is a human creation, and far from the only possible formal system that is possible, it seems a little confining to argue about the nature of God's knowledge in such terms."

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 18:23 GMT
In reconsideration my response doesn't directly address the argument made. Infinite mind and absolute knowledge are not the same thing. While absolute knowledge may be a contradiction, in that the absolute has no definition, while knowledge is a process of definition and judgement, the question of infinite mind would seem to ask if the universe is aware. Not whether it has a frame of reference against which everything is ordered, as that would be the absolute, but whether it is, as it is, aware.

On this I seem to be drawing a meaningless blank. There can be no intent, as that would require some external need or desire. Much of it is inanimate matter and the rest is mostly empty space. There can't be a sense of self, given that would require the aforementioned frame of reference? As Stephen Wolfram put it, it would take a computer the size of the universe to calculate the universe.



"Mind" and "infinite" are just not compatible concepts.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


God's Imperfect Servant wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 18:42 GMT
One possible interpretation of an Infinite God is that the universe is an infinit neural network. As someone who has gotten Infinite God's attention before, it is exhilarating and even rattling. I am friendly and compassionate towards Christians (and other God worshipping tribes), but I personally chose to reach out to God with the idea of reproducing biblical teachings (other Holy writings) from first principles. God was totally willing to reproduce the life of Jesus story; but the idea of confronting the Pharoahs in my life was terrifying; I backed down. In a potential "whistle blowing" event at my job, I was prepared to experience the Supreme Crucifiction (confront the greed of my employers and consequently be fired - a fate, for me, worse then death). I reported the OSHA violations through internal channels - with the promise that I would contact OSHA if not taken seriously. A night of miracles followed - like God's final exam. I promised God that I would make the ultimate sacrifice if He asked. After many hourse of intense scrutiny of my motivations, what I really wanted, how I wanted to serve God and good, how I was going to handle all possible consequences of this potential whistle blowing confrontation (which went on across a four day weekend), God gently steered me away from my destruction. My bosses took my OSHA violation observations seriously. I worked closely with God for another week, but was becoming very rattled and strained. God slowly withdrew to a contact distance safer and more comforatble for me. More personal healings occured in my life.

In my personal experience with the Diety, I don't think that propositional logic is a priority. The operational parameters of the physical universe work just fine. But the Diety is more interested in the personal lives of his children. If you want evidence that the Diety is real, then ask. But be prepared to have your world view shaken to its foundation.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 21:47 GMT
Maybe William Orem intended to use this argument about the limits of God’s knowledge as a warm-up for an argument about the limitations of a TOE. But I think that for many persons, it is much easier to accept that any TOE is limited, than that God’s knowledge is. Why then explaining an idea by another one which is more difficult to accept?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 21:49 GMT
“No mind, therefore not even God’s mind, can be sure that it is not tricked by an evil daemon into believing that it is God”

Also, no mind can be sure that it is not tricked by an evil daemon into believing the above statement :-)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 21:56 GMT
Sorry, I forgot to sign.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 22:43 GMT
Whether you're the I.M., the F.M., the E.D., or the rest of us trying to figure out what is really going on, it comes down to who has the greatest capacity to harness natural law and command it to obey your will (to get what you want out of life).

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm really hoping we can figure out

(1) the warp drive, (safe warp drive capability)

(2) biological longevity/regeneration (I'd like to live long enough to see how the universe ends)

(3) programmable molecular rearrangement (so we can all have the stuff we want)

(4) Actionable knowledge of the Laws of Nature (Because it's cool!)

If knowledge of physics isn't actionable in a way that serves all of us, then we are slaves to the evil daemon dramatically known as:

"Disempowering Goals".

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Putnam wrote on May. 23, 2009 @ 23:51 GMT
The Szilard argument is falacious. For one point, it has nothing to do thermodynamic entropy except to grossly misrepresent its definition. Also, theoretical physics cannot predict the existance of nor explain intelligent life. Learning the mechanical behavior, read this as effects, of the universe allows us to control some mechanical functions and predict the outcome of those and many others that are beyond our control. We have not learned anything about what is cause. We cannot add too nor subtract from the nature of the universe. We did not create the universe nor can we change the properties of the universe. The point is that theoretical physics has no role to play in determining anything about the nature of an original creative intelligence.

James

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 05:55 GMT
It seems to me that the Szilard argument really solves the problem of the Maxwell’s daemon, but if there is a proof of its fallacy, I would be interested to know it.

Lawrence B. Crowell argues above that God can be ruled out in the same way Szilard “exorcised” the Maxwell’s daemon. I understand that a part of the Universe gathering complete information about the Universe seems to be impossible, because this seems to be a sort of Maxwell’s daemon. But is God necessarily a part of this Universe?

One may say that if the God of a Universe W is part of a larger Universe W2 containing W, the argument above should limit Him in W2.

But even for our Universe, the Holographic Principle taught us that a part can contain complete information about the whole.

I think that it’s not that easy to prove or disprove God.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 06:22 GMT
discussion about god is pointless

important is how much observer in us awakened

yours amrit

attachments: 2_AWAKENING_OF_THE_OBSERVER_IN_PHYSICS__Sorli_2009.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 07:06 GMT
real scientist of life does not need god

attachments: REAL_SCIENTIST_OF_LIFE.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 11:36 GMT
One can't disporve the existence of God in the ultimate sense. Certain ideas about a God which interacts with the world can be tested. If God is removed from the universe as an active player with quantum informatio theory in quantum gravity, such a God is more like the sleeping Vishnu of Hinduism. The universe is in this idea a sort of dream from the sleeping Vishnu.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 12:21 GMT
Point of reference;

Pope John Paul ll described God as the all-knowing absolute.

William Orem describes God as an , or having an infinite mind.

The first is monotheism. The second is pantheism and panentheism, respectively.

Monotheism is inherently conservative, in that it is reductionistic, while the others are wholistically liberal.

To put it in physical concepts, God as the absolute would be a universal singularity, while God as the infinite would be the void.

It should be noted that since our current scientific description of the universe is singularity based, it is curious that William would propose a panentheisitic description of God.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 12:25 GMT
Make that, "God as the infinite would be the void and all its contents."

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


God's Imperfect Servant wrote on May. 24, 2009 @ 17:09 GMT
Trying to prove or disprove God by logic doesn't work. You have to conduct the test:

If an Infinite God exists, then it should be possible to get God's attention. Yelling sometimes works.

If a voice answers, it is either (1) your brain is engaging the evolutionarily created "God" program or (2) something other than you're own mind. Be candid. Ask for proof that it's something real. Warning: lots of things corporeal and noncorporeal intelligences will answer to the name: God. You are looking for the "Supreme Creator of the universe". Watch out for snakes; they are sneaky little things.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on May. 25, 2009 @ 00:57 GMT
Trying to prove anything about God is like subtracting two infinities and attempting to get an answer. Science can only test theological claims about nature. As a result a strict reading of Genesis is simply wrong.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 25, 2009 @ 09:55 GMT
Lawrence,

The problem is trying to make sense of it from our own fractured worldview, without really going back and examining the historical evolution of the concept. Essentially we take it as face value. That it is a Platonic Ideal of perfect knowledge and morality, without considering the Aristotlian/Darwinian evolution of the concept. It is just not as fixed as both its proponents and critics would like.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 25, 2009 @ 10:52 GMT
What a beautiful thread ,what are we ? where are we ? Why are we ?

God ,so many extrapolations by human species since the first hominids ,

The Bible ,the Talmud ,the Coran ,Siddartha Gottama ,Confucius ,Seneque,Gandhi,Lutter King,Nelson Mandela ,and others peace men all over the world and in Time .

It's evident ,it exists something .

It's there the evolution point of vue is interesting and the improvement .

In my model of spherization Theory ,it's a link between all things ,the sprituality is the brother of sciences ,the different creations around us show us this building ,we aren't fate ,it's impossible ,.

Our human responsabilities in correlation with the polarization in complexification is so important to hamonize by complementarity this evolution .

The complexification is interesting because this improvement permits a positive vue of the evolution ,thus a harmonization .

Sometimes I asked me that ,but why so many sufferings ,why these chaotics systems and silly things around us ,I said me before ,God Why ,.....I think now ,we are babies of evolution and we have made some errors thus some suffreings but the evolution will permit to improve that .

Our sufferings aren't due to God ,but by our young evolution ....and if we had given instead to sell ,exchange. We have bad evolved ,simply ,God is behind our perceptibility ,the man and its intelligence can catalyze ,harmonize ,improve,create ,extrapolate ,...and that in complementarity with the ultim aim ,this ultim connectibility ,we shall know God there perhaps ,in all case vanity of vanity ,all is vanity but we evolve fortunally .

Sorry for my english ,it's difficult to explain all my ideas in English ,but I try .

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Putnam wrote on May. 25, 2009 @ 22:01 GMT
Cristi Stoica,

I hesitated for several hours to post my message. A discussion of Maxwell's Demon and the following attempts to resove its apparent ability to break the second law of Thermodynamics seemed off topic for this blog. Furthermore, I am well aware that many brilliant scientists have taken many years to offer some solutions. The problem as I see it is that there is no problem with Maxwell's Demon. Since I am probably alone in that conclusion, it would probably require some very careful writing to give my position. I will see if there is another forum more appropriate to address it. Perhaps the Ultimate Limits of Physics forum would be a better place to discuss it. It would seem very likely that I must be wrong; however, my problem is it has always seemed so clear to me. I will try to write something and find a suitable place to post it.

My response regarding the capabilities of theoretical physics was prompted by an impatience with others giving it far more credit than I think it deserves. For example, the quest to achieve a Theory of Everything is not, in my opinion, a quest to define the true nature of the universe. It is rather, I think, a quest to unite our mechanical type ideas as exemplified by mainstream physics theories. I did a search before writing this message and found this paper. The authors accept that Maxwell's Demon contradicts the second law of thermodynamics, but disagree that it has been solved by Szilard and the others. [PDF] MAXWELL'S DEMON: THERMODYNAMICS OF INFORMATION GAINING AND INFORMATION ... at: aueb.gr/pympe/hercma/.../MOUE-MASAVETAS-KARAYANNI-1.pdf

In an effort to bring this post back to the topic of this blog I will end with this quote:

"Scientific learning is composed of two opposites which nonetheless meet each other. The first is the natural ignorance that is man's lot at birth. The second is represented by those great minds that have investigated all knowledge accumulated by man only to discover at the end that in fact they know nothing. Thus they return to the same fundamental ignorance they had thought to leave. Yet this ignorance they have now discovered is an intellectual achievement. It is those who have departed from their original condition of ignorance but have been incapable of completing the full cycle of learning who offer us a smattering of scientific knowledge and pass sweeping judgements. These are the mischief makers, the false prophets." __ Pascal

This is why I gave my opinion that theoretical physics has learned about the effects of object behavior, but knows nothing about what is cause. It is why I stressed that theoretical physics cannot predict nor explain the most important properties of the universe, life and intelligence. I do not think that physicist, whose opinions carry great weight, should be making pronouncements about the nature of intelligence whether our's or a Creator's

James

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on May. 26, 2009 @ 00:57 GMT
I brought up the Maxwell Demon (MD), because God as a creator of the universe is a sort of MD. This is even more if God intervenes in the affairs of the universe. Science can tell us what God is not. Evolution tells us pretty clearly that the strict biblical account on the creation of life does not reflect reality. So God is not a special creator who spun everything up in six days. A similar issue might be in store with cosmology. Quantum cosmology based on quantum information theory with dQ/dt = Q = 0, Q = # q-bits, written here euphemistically, would say that the universe did not have some externally imposed condition, such as from what one might expect from a God.

Science might be able to tell us what God is not, but I doubt it can tell us what God is, or whether God exists or not. We might say that as science expand our understanding of the universe that our ideas about God becomes less provincial and more metaphysical.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on May. 26, 2009 @ 08:12 GMT
Lawrence universe is got itself, just we are not aware of it. There was no creation, universe is eternal. Eternity is this present moment. ETERNITY IS NOW.

yours amrit

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 26, 2009 @ 08:14 GMT
Thank you, James,

I did not want to put pressure on you, I just thought that you have a reference, since I am interesting in the subject. I read the pdf you find. I consider the authors make interesting observations, but I can’t accept their main argument ("Whereas relying on the second law is normally very plausible, this is not the case where Maxwell’s demon is concerned, since the demon is meant to serve as a counterexample for this law."). I think that what it always seemed clear to you about MD is not represented in their paper. Perhaps your feeling is based on Maxwell’s demon argument seeming very logical and natural, while the explanations of why it doesn’t break the second law seeming very complicated. (There are many devices that seem so clearly to work, and it is so difficult to explain why they don’t.)

“I do not think that physicist, whose opinions carry great weight, should be making pronouncements about the nature of intelligence whether our's or a Creator's”

I agree with you that it seems that humans (not only physicists) don’t know the answers to these questions. But there is no evidence that we will never be able to know the answers. Maybe nobody has the truth, but everyone who wants to find it should be encouraged to search it, to emit and criticize ideas about it, requiring better arguments. You are doing a good job being a part of this process.

Best regards,

Cristi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 26, 2009 @ 09:26 GMT
Hi all ,

The perception of God is complex and simple in the same time .I think it's important to study all topics and that to encircle the whole of foundamental laws .

The physic only or math are not sufficient ,the chemestry ,the biology ,the philosopny,the evolution ,the ecology ,the astronomy and astrobiology ....and others interesting and basic sciences .

I think it's more difficult to understand our Universe in evolution and its specific dynamic without this whole point of vue ,furthermore in a real system and not imaginary .

Let's take an apple ,this beautiful fruit ,spheroidal,why this complementarity ,why this specific quantum spherical architecture of spheres ,why this stability ,....it's as that ,it's our evolution ,it's our complexification in complementarity and all those polarized evoluted systems .

The notion of aim and harmonization towards the ultim sphere is evident ,the intelligence can do many things in complementarity on the way ,the road of this evolution .Our capacity of adaptation is incredible .

God is more complex than our simple actual perceptibility,

the most dangerous for humans is the stupidity ,on the other side the sciences in a whole analyze shows the truth in relativity .But we evolve fortunally

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on May. 26, 2009 @ 19:52 GMT
The E.D. is doubt. The idea of this thread is suggesting that F.M. and I.M. are just perspective. You and I are the F.M. with the E.D. on our back, making us doubt. We are wondering if there is some greater consciousness which, from our perspective, is the I.M. If we discard the endlessly recursive trap (a trick by the E.D.), then we can contemplate the existence of such an infinite intelligence (certainly more infinite than you or I).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Brian Beverly wrote on May. 27, 2009 @ 03:41 GMT
History has shown time and again that what we consider to be gods or god is merely the personification of our ignorance. Does god know that it is god? I prefer to ask the question; do the ignorant know that they are ignorant?

Scientists know that they are ignorant because they continue to experiment and to push knowledge to the limit. We should not be surprised that science increases the standard of living for everyone; science has allowed man to fly and travel to the heavens. Science has cured many of the biblical diseases such as the plague, leprosy, and small pox.

Those who are religious do not know that they are ignorant and instead they preach how right they are and play the victim when others disagree. We should not be surprised that they are manipulated into fighting wars for the economic prosperity of others, that they believe in flying angels, and that only their soul will travel to the heavens. They believe that prayer cures the plague, leprosy and small pox.

I know that I am ignorant and I work hard to learn by experiment and discover how the universe works because I have seen the miracles science brings.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Putnam wrote on May. 27, 2009 @ 04:35 GMT
Brian Beverly,

You said:

"History has shown time and again that what we consider to be gods or god is merely the personification of our ignorance. Does god know that it is god? I prefer to ask the question; do the ignorant know that they are ignorant?"

My words:

I too appreciate science and scientists. I enjoy the benefits that science has led us to. Yet there is...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


James Putnam wrote on May. 27, 2009 @ 04:39 GMT
That mistake of mine is kind of humorous. I did not mean to say that dumbness cannot arise from dumbness. Please accept that I meant to say that intelligence cannot arise from dumbness.

James

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on May. 28, 2009 @ 08:19 GMT
James,

You have a great deal of insight into concepts that most would like to ignore. The usual answer to questions about such concepts is that intelligence is just a chance happening and is just the result of an extremely great number of individual chance happenings that taken together created intelligence. This ignores the established fact that all intelligent beings are extremely...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on May. 28, 2009 @ 22:43 GMT
Paul, why do you say that God is external to the Creation? Is it (God) not omnipotent and omnipresent. If it is omnipresent it must be within the Creation at all places and times. Is it not possible that the God is the Creation itself? The individual parts being unaware of their oneness/connection to God, just as an eye or a limb is unaware of being part of a human body, I assume. But the whole may have self awareness that the individual parts do not realise.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 01:56 GMT
Paul,

Intelligence is a process, not a state. It is inherently dynamic, not static. Knowledge, as the store of information, is a reservoir of static modeling, but the process of acquiring knowledge is intelligence.

It comes back to the problem of time. Intellectually we think in terms of those acquired models, yet they are the order of the past that we distilled out of the chaos of the future. That is what we are and what we must do, to make sense of the chaos and create structure from it. Because if we don't, then we become the past. That is why we exist on that edge between order and chaos, past and future. If we are not moving forward into the future, we are falling backwards into the past.

Keep in mind that Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian. What could be more antithetical to a monotheist than schism? He wasn't trying to start a new religion, but push the reset button on the only one he had. The problem is that those in control of the order, don't like new ideas. That's their problem.

The original God was the spirit of the group and the God of the future will be humanity as central nervous system of the planetary organism. We are just the embryonic state of neurons pinging signals around to see what happens. Knowledge as process and growth. The spiritual absolute is the essence from which we rise, not an ideal from which we fell. Ideals are just abstractions. We are always moving from one abstraction to the next.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristi Stoica wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 05:42 GMT
A weaker version:

“Can a human know God?”

William Orem’s argumentation that the answer to the question “Does God know He is God?” is “no” has been received with some doubts. It is difficult to imagine a God living in a fantasy world, but instead it is not impossible to imagine that the ED cannot trick Him, and that He obeys some laws beyond any possible human logic (or no law at all).

What if we weaken the question, asking whether a human (we exclude the possibility that the human is God, which reduces the question to the original one) can know God. More specifically, “Can the human know whether what she calls God is really God?”

Because we know much more about humans and human’s limitations than we know about God, maybe it would be easier to answer this question. It is easier to admit that an ED can deceive a human mind into believing anything about God (including that she is God). So I will ask:

Can the human know anything about God (except if the human is God Himself)? Can the human know whether there is God or no, or what attributes does He have? Isn’t it possible that an ED deceive us into believing what we believe about God? I mean, the ED already tricked the ones having opinions about God different than ours, so maybe ED tricked us too.

~~~

Now, let us replace “Can a human know God?” with the simpler question “Can a human know the Universe’s laws?”. The question can be rephrased like this:

“Can a human know the Theory of Everything”?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 06:36 GMT
Georgina,

I did not mean to imply that God is only external to the creation. I was only pointing out that according to the scriptures, God existed before he created the world and he says that there are no others like him. He therefore can exist in the place that he was in before he created the world and the implication is that he exists there alone without others like himself. When he...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 08:55 GMT
It seems to me that the puzzle of God not being able to be sure to be God is a subtle variation of Gödels undecidability theorems.

If we consider the infinite mind to be a deduction/induction system - be it really infinite or merely finite - then, at least one thing must remain unexplainable: namely the explanation system itself (call it IM, GOD, TOE or whatsoever). That's a direct...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 09:22 GMT
Short summary of my findings above:

It is not *provable* that the statement "it is not provable for GOD whether he is GOD or not" is true or false. This is a consequence of the whole argument of the topic here, namely a consequence of Gödel's findings.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 29, 2009 @ 23:45 GMT
Paul,

Sleep has a way of bringing order to the chaos.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on May. 30, 2009 @ 05:41 GMT
John,

I’m afraid that it didn’t work that way for me today, as I just got time to sit down and check the BLOG now and I need to get up early tomorrow, so I will need to put my response to your earlier comment off until tomorrow. Hopefully tomorrow will have less chaos.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Blogger William Orem wrote on May. 30, 2009 @ 14:19 GMT


What terrific responses, across the board. The first thing I want to say is that FQXi Community readers are among the most interesting and original thinkers on the net, and refreshingly sincere in tackling deep questions. It’s a pleasure to read.

I should underline, by the way, the use of such phrases as “for the purposes of argument” in my original post. That is, I’m not...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 30, 2009 @ 22:32 GMT
William,

I suspect the only theory of everything we will ever achieve is that the more we know, the more we know we don't know. Is there any aspect of knowledge that doesn't compound the questions raised?

It seems to me that the only type is that proclaimed as final by those wishing to maintain their position of authority.

I do think the basic concept of God has been grievously abused by such ego-mania. I think it was the ancient's grasp of the process of emergence; That larger wholes and levels of being developed out of more basic processes and component wholes. Much as our own consciousness is a field effect of our brain functions and societies manifested holistic natures that were not entirely reducible to individual behaviors. The projection of this phenomena to infinity is due to natural hubris, rather than coherent rationality, as it doesn't take into account the fact that emergence often implodes and other cycles, processes, entities, etc. develop out of the remaining conditions. It is one more example of our tendency to project linearly, when reality is cumulative.

The acquisition of knowledge is a tricky process in which much is lost, without recognizing it is lost, as we proceed on to presumably more rarified pursuits. Then we turn around and try to reconstruct the basis of our wisdom from the limited, spotty, often biased sources remaining.

Is it any wonder that the more aware we become, the greater the level of chaos of which we are aware.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 06:00 GMT
John,

Intelligence is both a state and a dynamic system. It is a state because it is composed of a structure that is built up over time to allow us to manipulate and interpret knowledge in an appropriate way for the current circumstance and to generate the appropriate response(s). It begins as a state with structure that is built into us when we are formed. This structure is supplemented...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 08:34 GMT
"We may simply never know that we know everything"

Interesting point made by William Orem. The line of reasoning above results from the well-known incompleteness calculus of Gödel, especially the formulation of it by Chaitin's findings of necessarily but never sufficient axioms of a system to answer every question for sure that could follow out of this system.

The problem with every...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 17:03 GMT
I am presuming the image Will Orem posted is the Gosset polytope for E_8. E_8 is a central aspect of supergravity.

To illustrate one aspect of this superstrings valence smaller violent fluctuations from the world on a scale larger than the string length sqrt{8pi}L_{planck}. So string theory and its extension to M-theory exists on a scale about an order of magnitude larger than the "end of physics" limit of L_p = sqrt{G hbar/c^3} ~ 10^{-33}cm. I think that strings emerge from a more fundamental physics involving quantum codes, the Leech lattice, which should push things to about 5L_p. Things might be pushed even further, for the automorphism group over the Leech is the monster group (Fischer-Greiss). So with that monster physics might be pushed to some length slightly larger than L_p. Beyond that we run out of algebra. From the classic groups, to heterotic group to sporadic groups (the Mathieu-Leech to Monster groups) is the domain of mathematics as we know it. Is there anything beyond that? Who knows?

The Planck scale may well be the ultimate end of physics. At that scale physics might well end and all there is is complete chaos, or unknowability. The future foundations of physics over centuries to come, assuminig humanity exists that long and we do erudite physics of this sort, might be some sort of asymptotic series of ever more arcane structures which pile up near the Planck scale. The universe might be a sort of onion layering of structures which approach this ultimate limit. If so, then we will never know it all. In fact as we might push this series a number of steps closer, from strings to maybe unit packing and codes, to Monster group to ???, the whole thing might becomes increasingly detached from observation and meaning.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 17:53 GMT
Paul,

Intelligence is a state, but not an absolute state. As Stefan points out, distinction and unification are contradictory. Therefore knowledge is inherently subjective and finite, since it entail distinctions.

The theological problem is that if you have an absolute state of unity, than all opposites and distinctions blend out into a neutral medium. That's why the absolute would...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 18:03 GMT
John,

you said: "...basic concept of God has been grievously abused by such ego-mania..." Experiencing God is like basking in infinite power. The ego expands and the temptation to whimsically exercise power is great. But the wise and careful use of God's power remains a possibility.

Lawrence, you said, "The Planck scale may well be the ultimate end of physics. At that scale physics might well end and all there is is complete chaos, or unknowability." There will come a day when physics cannot account for all elements of reality. Physics has to minimize the number/degree of interactions between the quantum particles/objects in a physics calculation; furthermore, those interactions have to be linear. Physics needs the objects in its calculations to be discrete, and to interact with mathematically simple laws. In the limit as we approach the Planck scale, everything is interacting with everything else; information is being transmitted in ways that cannot be account for by models of isolated particles. Information transmits across waves and vibrating n-dimensional objects.

From the physics point of view, God does not exist. But given the highly interconnected nature of non local information transmission plus the naturally occuring quantum processing characteristic, what are the odds that consciousness and intelligence emerges spontaneously? Let's put that in the same category as: does organic life spontaneously occur in an ocean of amino acid/RNA-DNA.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on May. 31, 2009 @ 23:09 GMT
Jason,

Is it better to explore your limits, or ignore them?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 02:26 GMT
John,

It is true that our intelligence is not an absolute state because changes to our ability to recognize patterns, etc. must be made to accommodate changes in input information because we have not experienced all possible input data patterns and their combinations. We could expect that God on the other hand would have knowledge of all possible patterns and their combinations so his...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 02:33 GMT
The universe at the Planck scale might be a domain which transcends any concept of physical law. Chaitan demonstrated how mathematics constitutes a set of "accidents" in a larger system of self-referential statements. Godel and Turing demonstrated that no mathematical system can prove everything about themselves. In a similar vein the vacuum state at L_p might be a vast net of self-referential states, and that on scales above L_p there exist "accidents," which are symmetires in a vacuum state which define what we call physics. So the onion layers above L_p constitute the accidents which emerge from the utter chaos of L_p with some Chaitan-Turing haltimg probability.

Consciousness might be a manifestation of self-reference. This in the case of our brains is likely some approximation or cut-off in the process to avoid the infinite "Cantor diagonal" issue. If this is so then the fundamental vacuum state has a similarity to consciousness. We might be tempted to call this God, but it seems at best more similar to the sleeping Vishnu than the western conception of God.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 07:06 GMT
John,

Of course you should discover your limits. Of course physics should discover its limits.

I think mathematical physics is going to have to share its stature of describing "reality". Physics is already having trouble with quantum entanglement; this is the tip of the iceberg of interconnectedness. Face it, some aspects of reality cannot be described with mathematics (or even logic).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 10:41 GMT
Dear John,

i would like to "differenciate" my line of reasoning for the purpose of better understanding. Many of the things you wrote i can subscribe; indeed, i had many own lines of reasoning that are identical with yours.

The distinction-process i mentioned is to some limit "scaleable". Imagine an infinite void that is a oneness. Draw the first distinction. The result would be the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 11:05 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Stefan,it's a beautiful idea...."But he wants us to be also *responsible creators*

I think the same about our actual and global responsabilities .

We are caalyzers,builders,...if a global equation exists ,we must accept our young evolution and thus our bad inventions ....but we evolve fortunally and we can improve ,harmonize ,optimize ,put into synergies ,complementarities...

That's why I think God is in the information(an universal coded equation od spheres)behind our walls of perceptibility .This point of vue explains why it's our responsability ,we can change our silly inventions on Earth .

It's not due to God but due to men ,in fact the evolution shows us the improvement thus the harmony ,thus the global and universal responsability.

And if we had given instead of exchanging ....always a question of bad evolution ,it's there that the universal intelligence is important to be in correlation with foundamental laws and the quantum and cosmological dynamic.

Thanks for your reasoning,

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 15:37 GMT
Stefan,

Your idea about fractal like a part of God is very relevant ,

a interesting point of vue is those fractals since the begining ,in my model of spherization ,thus of complexification ,it's important about the evolution and the increase of mass ,thus in Time we are going to this ultim harmony ,thus our fractals of spheres are going to polirize themselves towards this ultim sphere thus God ....the evolution is a road towards God .

Thus What is God ......a future entity(sphere) in the real physical universe and in the same time this potential energy is behind our wall in madximum quantity ,a paradox still but a very baeautiful paradox .

It's fascinating

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 17:26 GMT
Heck. I have to be back to work in an hour...

Paul,

I think we have to agree to disagree. Again. My point is that the western conception of God in more of an answer than a truth, ie. what people want to hear, than what really makes sense.

To quote, "It is therefore possible to reverse decisions that were made and travel in the opposite direction to gain an understanding of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 19:04 GMT
John,

Explore our limits? Yes we will!

Stefan,

Trying to make logical statements about God might be like trying to use Ven diagramns when non-locality is violated. If, as I am suggesting, God is the naturally occuring quantum mechanic Infinite Intelligence, then wouldn't quantum logic work better? Quantum logic really means that everything is interconnected (wave functions spanning space), but each issue is weighted. If Stefan argues X and John argues Y then the quantum logic response is that aX +bY = "the truth", where a and b are positive real numbers whose total is between 0 and 1. Perhaps a real math expert like Lawrence can spot an error in my math; but the concept is fairly sound.

I hate to say it, but I think the metaphysical/New Age community has been arguing with quantum logic for years. For example, is the Christian view of God true (call this X) or is the metaphysical New Age idea of God true (call this Y), everything else is labeled Z. Using quantum logic, aX + bY + cZ = 1. From a Christian perspective, a = .95 and b = .05. From a New Age perspective, a = .1 and b = .8 and c = .1. The coefficients, a, b and c may depend upon the same general factors, but those factors may vary in their emphasis in each person's life.

I think quantum logic has been in use for a very long time. Maybe some would call it philisophical thinking. Ven diagram logic is still quick, easy and useful. The military uses it. The legal system uses it. The government uses it. But quantum logic is probably more accurate, until you start getting overwelmed with all of the possible combinations.

By the way, real quantum logic is based on interfering waves which span space and change in time. The measurement (where's the particle?) collapses the wave functions represents an actual event or occurence. I believe that the mysterious unpredictability of quantum mechanics eigenstate measuerments comes down to two things: (1) sometimes, we can't account for every wave function (every factor)and (2) wave functions are vibrating objects. For a simple case of exp i(kx - wt + phi), if we could fix phi, maybe we could accurately predict the eigenstate for quantum experiments. I bet there are ways to close in on the exact value of phi (for special cases). Wouldn't a stable wave function trace out the same kx-wt+phi path every time? Can't we carefully control the starting conditions so that the phi is only influenced by a very narrow set of factors?

Steve (a.k.a. The Sphere Keeper),

Fractals simply represent doing the same thing over and over again, which is nice to do, if it's working.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Stefan Weckbach wrote on Jun. 1, 2009 @ 23:00 GMT
Dear Jason,

Dear John,

thanks for your interesting feedback. I think there is a lot of truth in yours lines of reasoning.

In my arguments i didn't refer to quantum logics, because i am not firm with this topic. My lines of reasoning were more in a standard-logical (boolean) sense by examining some primary principles with which we make up our whole world of thoughts and our inferences and look what that could - but not *must* - implicate for the deeper questions of humanity. Sure, explaining the origins of Boolean logics by (melting away one side of) Boolean logics could be regarded as somewhat circular and therefore there are no guarantees that one has hit the mark with that. There are some hints that it could hit the mark, because there are a lot of reliable near-death-experiencers who can give some insights into this deeper questions of humanity. But who knows for sure what is really reliable...? One's own feelings decide at the end.

Jason,

yes, i also think that reality cannot be understood fully with logics, at least not for human brains. Personally i think i would miss something when i would know everything (but that's only my personal perspective). On the other hand i am very interested in scientific results and if we could find a sufficiently working TOE at the end, i surely would consider this finding as absolutely great. There would be many more questions and puzzles being open, especially about our non-mathematical problems of daily life, psyche, dreams, hopes and desires, so there would be enough mysteries to explore.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 01:11 GMT
Stefan,

My objectives are also down to earth in the sense of trying to understand the interaction of culture and nature, where it might be leading us and what we might do about it. For me, that's the really interesting question of what is possible, not whether warp drive, or time travel are possible.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 01:11 GMT
Stefan,

Standard boolean logic works up to a point. It's good enough for quick and basic decisions. But deep philosophical issues require very careful definitions. Also, Quantum Logic has a chance of saying that they're both true, it depends... Yin/Yang is the ultimate in quantum logic. Yes/No are both true, be drawn into the details, the dance of Yin/Yang.

All of you Venn Logic people should curse quantum mechanics, point to it and yell, "There be dragons in there! It's the edge of the earth!"

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 02:04 GMT
John,

The western concept of God is really a literary figure of sorts. I find it astounding that so many people will quote Bible verses as if these thing are ontologically real, instead of as the metaphorical themes they really are. The type of religion popular in the United States is frankly a sort of cartoon.

My favorite example is Exodus. Moses leads the pre-Israelites from Egypt, in Hebrew Mitzrayim, across the parted water. Now first off Mitzrayim is similar to the word Mizarim meaning the narrow place. Egypt along the Nile is narrow. Yet you have the parted waters as well. The story is a birth motif, Mitzrayim is the birth canal, the parted waters represents a breaking of water at the birthing --- it is a mythic account of the birth of a people.

With my idea of the Planck scale vacuum as a self-referential "net," which BTW is not a theory I am seriously proposing, this "God" is something which is dual to the ultimate void --- the Tao. So if a religion were build around this idea, maybe based in part around Judaism, Christianity or Islam, Adonai, the Triune God or Allah become something grander than the particular stories and theology we have erected about God. The ritual would become similar in ways to Buddhism, which would use the symbols of the various Abrahamist religions. There are some trends along these lines, the Zohar in Judaism, John of the Cross in Christianity and Rumi's work that lead to Sufi Islam.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 06:40 GMT
Lawrence,

If you think God is made up, you have got to get out of the classroom. I'm down in the lab with God. I asked to be God's lightning rod. You have no idea what this kind of power feels like. All of you need to come down to the lab and meet GOD. Once you've experienced the power of God, a lot of things in the bible will make more sense.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 08:37 GMT
Lawrence,

So that there is no misunderstanding, I'm saying that you should experience the God power. This is a powerful experience. It is metaphysically intoxicating. It is healing and makes you feel alive.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 15:32 GMT
A particular religious story can be false, or at least metaphorical, but this does not mean that there is no God.

Reciprocally: just because there is God, this doesn’t mean that the God we are speaking about is not made up.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 17:04 GMT
Lawrence,

It is the nature of the beast that we all possess this sense of clear eyed objectivity, but that our efforts to explain it to others, interpret what others have said, etc. creates some pretty bizarre descriptions. It does present an enormously interesting puzzle to try to reverse engineer. It's also safe to say that any model generally accepted by a number of people, isn't going...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 20:24 GMT
John,

Power drunkedness with temptations ever nearby; for some reason, hot babes start to take notice of me. But I am bumping up against my own moral nature, trying to redefine it to let more happiness in without hurting anyone. But restraint of this kind of power is so important. This is the kind of power that can overcome fear of action, but unwisely exercised can lead to disaster.

Biologically, the effects must be heating up the interplay between the endocrine and the nervous system. The God power is there for anyone who dares to ask. But one must embrace very rigorous morals or risk insanity.

The Christian God/Lucifer are facets to a broader Godlike power. The power exists independently of the brain/biology. But the interpretation of this God power is subject to some pretty bizzare interpretation. So perhaps approaching God through a church is safer.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 2, 2009 @ 21:20 GMT
Jason,

If you want to cut yourself down to size and still remain part of the larger whole, just go outside for awhile. Walls can be confining, but they can also exaggerate one's sense of proportion.

It's summertime and the girls are starting to take notice of lots of things. The sap is rising.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 02:48 GMT
Studies have shown that people under the influence of psychoactive drugs and those engaged in spiritual activity, such as deep meditation or prolonged prayer, exhibit neural activity in much the same regions of the brain. The God experience is at least in part something which involves how the brain is functioning.

The Bible only talks about the alpha-omega in later on. The stories have multiple messages. There is a recherche of creation stories, of course the first 3 chapters of Genesis, then in the story of Noah the waters come back (God's face was upon the deep early on) and there is another creation, Exodus is another creation story (the birth of a nation) and in the Christian theology the Resurrection of Jesus is the culmication of a new creation and so forth. The story of Jesus is refelcted in the story of Joseph: thrown in a pit, sold into slavery by his brothers, becomes a servant to Portifor, then arrested under the false charge of propositioning his wife, and things are generally bad --- he is sacrificed for Israel, for by interpreting dreams he rise to become advisor to Pharoh who then admits the Hebrews to live in Egypt to escape famine. Notice how near the end Joseph feasts with his brothers --- a scene repeated in part with the last sup of Jesus. You can go on into lots of curious tellings and retellings --- it is a sort of tangeld web that Hopfstaeder in his Godel Escher Bach writes about.

Which gets back to my conjecture, the vacuum state under lying physics might be a self-referential net, the Indra net in Hindu mythology, which by this property might in some ways be a great conscious (like) system. We might call this God, but if so this God is more like the eternally speeping Vishnu --- it is dual to the indefinable nothingness or the Tao.

Lawrence B. Crowell

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 07:33 GMT
Hi all ,

Jason ,I prefer spheres but I like strings ,you know hihihi I play piano and guitar since many years ....

John ,

You say

"It is up to us. We would just be spoiled children if we were to wait for some higher order to save us."

It's an important point of vue ,if you want I invite you on my project with many friends .

I work on Xing Platform in several humanistic Projects .

The name of this International Humanistic Sciences Center is Unified Sphere.

I am moderator of Africa too where I centralize interesting people and organizations.

I have more of 48 inventions ,systems ,technics to improve the quality of life of our fellow man.

Our priorities are ..Education ,water ,ecology,energy ,health ,infrastructure,agriculture ,....

My aim is to produce by adapted sciences on ground ,and put into synergies the different NGO and otheres interesting humanistic systems .

The universality is essential ,....

All are welcome to put into practice some systems to help those forgotten .

The real love is that the compassion and the universal link .

My friends are very interesting .

I work on that since some years and the message begin to arrive .

We have a lot of people who want help us like consultants ,....our analyzes are globals ,politic,juridic,ecology,economic,scientific....

The pragmatism ,the united and the sciences can make many things .

A real truth is this global responsability ,speak is one thing ,act an other ....

Kinds Regards

Steve

To be or not to be .....

If you want some details don't hesitate .

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 07:53 GMT
Steve,

Actions do speak louder than words. Kudos to the one who is really helping humanity.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 08:22 GMT
Jason ,

Who are Kudos ,what is this project .

I am going to see on net .

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 08:45 GMT
Ah OK I am understanding the translation ,

I didn't know this word ,it's only utilized in English in fact .

I see the relation between the vanity and the works ,always our synaps and the informations in correlation with our personal education ....

When you understand the universal evolution ,all is logic and some evidences appear naturaly ,the compassion is essential to act efficiently more adapted sciences on ground ,and that in correlation with foundamental dynamics against chaotics systems .It's like that .

We can't accept thoses realities on Earth ,it's impossible ,You know Jason ,I dislike somethings ,I think these things are dedicated to disappear in Time Space evolution because it's some silly human inventions ,we are so youngs ,

We must change that ,it's the reponsibility of all scientists ,of course in a universal point of vue and not economic ,it's there the most difficult part exists .But I beleive in humans,I am belgian and my primary language is French .

Here is some words of a big writer ,Rousseau ,

"The man is born good and it's the society which corrupts him ."

Still Shakespeare To be or not to be that's the question ,speak or act ,individualism or united,complementarity behind our chaotics systems .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 09:12 GMT
Steve,

Ebb and flow; selfishness and selflessness; pleasure for oneself and give pleasure to others. It's like breathing. From spending time with the Infinite Power, I picked up a thing or two. Humanity will survive and join the ranks of other advanced worlds (the ones that are hiding from us - the ones we don't believe in). There are plenty of concepts we need to figure out; plenty of problems we need to solve. But we'll make it.

Lawrence,

Maybe God does spring from the void. Consciousness requires a great deal of interconnectedness. There is vibrating going under on everywhere. Call them superstrings, call it quantum field theory, call it wave functions. The whole universe is vibrating with quasi-material objects that span space. If information is flowing along these vibrating objects, then interconnectedness cannot be ruled out. Like a fourier series, these waves might be passing complex signals. If there is quantum logic, then these signals might be getting processed. Maybe it's all noise and nothingness. Then again, maybe it's the cosmic primordial ooze.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 09:26 GMT
Jason ,

Of course our Earth will evolve ,the life is universal and many planets evolve everywhere .

The different intelligences shall communicate and afetr shall harmonize together .

The problem is not there ,but at this time and with our young knowledge ,it's on Earth we must act .our first system to improve ,optimize ,balance ,harmonize is our Earth system and its interactions between lifes and environment .It's foundamental .

And after that we can accelerate the process of evolution by complementarity and universality towards an optimization of our energetic technology .

We must check the space ,the mass ,the energy and the centyralization of skills on one problem is essetial to evolve more quickly thus discover interesting extrapolations and technologies .

That's why I will say ,our global system decelerate our speed of evolution towards the interconnected universality.

Our priority is our Earth ,furthermore it's time to act by adapted sciences ,there are too much chaotics systems ,furthermore some exponentials are possible ,thus it's urgent

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 17:14 GMT
Steve,



Thank you for the offer and the compliment. Beyond the stream of consciousness insights, I'm not sure I'd be of much use, since my connections to the organized aspects of society are quite limited. Personally I spend most of my energies trying to keep the family farm going and it seems to be a large part of who I am. For me, a personal and direct connection to God would be like a personal and direct connection to a trillion volts of electricity. I need that infinite network of connections, relations, acquaintances, adversaries, problems, jobs, information, entertainments, etc. to insulate, ground, convert, disperse, etc. this spiritual source. I would like to explore the options of life more than I have, yet there are many tradeoffs involved.

It is an intriguing offer though, but my talents are haphazard at best.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 3, 2009 @ 19:23 GMT
John,

You are welcome like all people who want help with pragmatism ,logic,rationality ,universality,...the complementarity permits to accelerate the process of resolution.

I am understanding about your farm ,I like so much gardening ,agriculture but unfortunaly I have a small garden(125 m²)but I have many plants ,I test the multiplication ,the growth ,the soil ,substrat ....the composting too ,I try to accelerate the process ,....we see in the nature the truth .

I think that the responsibilities of scientists are so important to harmonize our global Earth system.

It's the reason why I created this scientific center ,of course I am young (33)and it's the begining but I will arrive to coordonate all that ,but alone it's impossible ,alone we are nothing ,fortunaly the net exists and permits many communications and synergies .

In all case if some people are interested .All are welcome .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 4, 2009 @ 02:03 GMT
Steve,

Change happens, not so much because a new order rises up, but because the old order crumbles. There are so many institutions, from religion to economics, which have pushed their models to the breaking point, but no one thinks they will change, because there is no outside element powerful enough to bring them down, but they are being destroyed from within. The priests, politicians and bankers are the real anarchists. We simply have to be patient and develop models for when the time comes.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 4, 2009 @ 10:46 GMT
Hi John and all ,

I think too this world in on the foundamental road ,it's evident that one day ,the universal harmony will be on Earth ,because it's like that ,simply .

It's just a question of bad and young evolution .

Some silly and not rational inventions by humans are dedicated to disappear in Time Space evolution ,the problem is when ,and how ,because indeed like you say ,the system and the human instinct is like it is and the power and vanity imply our actual system near the chaotic exponentials ,

The politic and economy are undersciences ,but of course we are in this kind of systems and its history of startegy of check.Many institutions don't want to loose their capitals and facilities ,it s a long story indeed ,You know I live in Belgium ,I am too a belgian ,When I see our story and the story everywhere it's always the same problem ,the human instinct and the bad education ,when a person understand this universe ,its comportment is universal ,I think that the educational system is so important ,that's why I d say what the education of sciences are very essentials to encircle our rule like human .

This kind of education permits to have a vue of whole thus a personal vision of our world .

About the religions ,the problem is not the religions but a minority who wants to check and impose .

In all cultures ,religions and countries ,it exists bad and good people ,the problem is not those people ,but the minority without Faith ,a faith people or universal people don't act like that simply .

We evolve fortunaly ...a crazy planet in rotation ,a beautiful spheroid in complexification ....what is sad is our potential of speed of evolution ,we can but we don't make it .....incredible reality .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 4, 2009 @ 17:29 GMT
Steve,

I tried doing this as a file, but wrote it on email and it won't convert and download, so if William wants to change or delete it... I'm writing it for a friends publication. It ties several of the points I've been making here to a further observation about economics. It's my effort to pose another paradigm for humanity.

Between Culture and Nature on Planet Earth

In...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 5, 2009 @ 09:47 GMT
Hi John,

Thanks for your article ,I understand better your point of vue .

You say

"The only unit which fully defines humanity and life is the earth. Possibly humanity is the embryonic central nervous system of a planetary organism. Otherwise we are just top predator of a collapsing ecosystem."

It's an interesting extrapolation ,the intelligence like a chief orchestra of the harmonic evolution.

Rotating coded spheres ...H ..D T ..H C N O ....EVOLUTION...NH3 H20 CH4 HCN....AMINO ACIDS .......THE CODE OF PARTICLE SINCE THE BEGINING to become ....hydrosphere ..sponges medusas....evolution ....hominids ..intelligence .....learn and harmonization ....Ultim sphere in connectibility .

The complementarity always and the optimization ,the inetlligence is this catalyzer .An incredible potential of creativity ,it's there the universality appears and the real rule like human .

The human can solve many things and improve the interactions between animals vegetals minerals and the evolution point of vue .Thus optimize our environment and its potential of evolution and complementarity .

I think that the center of Earth is important in the code ,like a neural system and us ,the human beings like a specific polarization and the creative intelligence ,we evolve and we have still many discoveries to find .

The question is what will be the speed of evolution .

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 5, 2009 @ 16:34 GMT
Steve,

The speed seems to be increasing rapidly, but keep in mind that evolution requires both creation and destruction, so the potential for trouble increases as well.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 02:04 GMT
John,

I hope you got to work on time.

I never agree to disagree. I believe that it is always best to continue to try to find common ground to open up understanding as long as the other person is willing. You never know sometimes you say something in a little different way and it suddenly becomes clear to the other person. There was a time that I would have at least partly agreed...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 06:57 GMT
Hi all ,

John,

I have difficulties to encircle that ,I prefer the complementarity ,the harmony than the chaos .

All is in a specific dynamic of evolution in complementarity ,the destruction is not a real destruction but specific interactions of evolution.

some creations are not divisibles like the sphere .

All creations permits an other thing ,all is linked since the begining ,all has the universal memory ,nothing is lost ,all changes ,evolves ,complexificates itself,optimizes itself,harmonize itself,spherisize (if I can say)itself ,the complexification and the compementarity are foundamentals .

We can improve the synergies between systems.It's the same with the suffering and our young step of evolution.All is possible in the future ...

I prefer the harmony than the chaos ,the chaos is a very very short instant like still a human invention.

Let's take the nuclear energy ,a harmonic electricity in balance or a explosion ....thus it's always a question of universal consciousness.The harmony is foundamental and rest in Time,the chaos is human and is very short .

Thus the hopeness(because the complexification is a reality) is a driving force of the consciousness towards ultim harmony ,the ultim sphere for me .

The human species must change foundamentaly ,it's evident .Many chaotics inventions can do many chaotics instants with many bad causes .

In resume we can't invent what we want without this universal consciousness.

We evolve fortunaly

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 07:35 GMT
Hi dear Paul ,

Before I searched to understand why God don't change in a short time our sad world .

After some books and readings ,and some years ,I understand better about that .

The equation is young and the physical reality is the only dynamic ,but by quantum and cosmological informations inside ultim quantum spheres in rotation and this spherical evolution of spheres towards sphere ,like informations behind walls .....this hypothesis implies some answers.....in this case ,the only love message is by informations thus explains some lighted people on our story of all .

All religions can understand this love message because this love is universal .

The problem is the bad and good governance ....the true faith ,this love universality in complexification towards this ultim sphere show us this splendid equation ,we are parts of a big equation in evolution towards God ,when I extrapolate our future ,the physical universe will be complete and finished ,thus this entity will be a big light of lifes in connectibility ,....at this moment we are youngs and thus we must accept this reality and of course listen the love messages of our Earth History by informations of this entity .

It's a message of hopeness in fact .The evolution is a message of love in fact .

Hope this world will change quickly,our ecology ,our economy,our education ,our soils,oceans are on the bad road ,we must change before an add of chaotics systems and some exponentials .

Our priority is the ground ,the soil and the multiplication of plants of all kinds,after plant and growth ,after composting and insertion ,after a time ,we can improve others ecosystems by a exponential of products (compost,plants,insects,.....If you want some details ,don't hesitate I have made several models ,furthermore I optimize the speed of composting ,it's always a question of C/N ,the mix ,O2 and H2O and the eye and hand og the man ....really the solution is there .First the soil .I have tested many substrats on plants ,many families of plants ,the aim is to create an optimum soil ,that's permits the rest after ...All is linked with the soil ,our ground ...all can be used in complementarity .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 09:44 GMT
Re. the original blog question,

The only problem is that exhaustive or absolute knowledge is confined to those things of which it is possible to have awareness, either directly or indirectly. No awareness of something equals no knowledge of it. It may be possible to know all that is knowable but not that which is unknowable. This is true for human beings and for the hypothetical "God" entity of the original blog question. Humans are limited by senses and sensors, brain function and general biology and technological development.

Deception may also prevent knowledge from being available or cause false information to be accepted as true. Assumptions are made on the knowledge that is available and assuming the veracity of that knowledge, if there is no apparent reason to doubt it. This also true for the hypothetical "God" entity of this particular question.

A TOE must take into account that which is un-knowable. Not by inventing something to fill that chasm but to acknowledge that there is a limit to knowledge that can not be surmounted by any means. In my opinion Un-knowable objective reality is separated from the subjective reality of experience by the Prime Reality Interface where our senses and sensors obtain the information to build our perception and experience within subjective reality.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Dufourny Steve wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 12:05 GMT
Hi georgina and all ,

Personnaly I don't know how is this entity ,where too ,but why is more interesting like question.

Anybody can say the true nature of God ,but one thing is sure ,it exists something , and its equation is a building towards ultim harmony ,the finisher physical universe and its systems in rotations ,thoses spheres.

The love ,the good ,the universal truth is foundamental and the intelligence is the sister of this love .

The evolution is a driving force of the hopeness ,the past ,the present and the future ....the past is past and we learn our errors ,the present is to act and the future to continue to evolve towards this harmony and its complexification of complementarity and mass systems .

If a equation has been invented thus we must accept our three dimension and our Time constant like a constant of evolution towards harmony and connectibility between spheres and lifes .

In resume we can't change this equation and we must accept our limits .

Only the complementarity will accelerate our evolution towards this entity if I can Say ,

This point of vue permits to accept one thing ,we are not alone but it's our responsability too to improve ,optimize ,harmonize ....this point is important for me .

friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 16:58 GMT
Paul,

We really are not communicating very effectively here. It's not so much an issue of what God is, but what knowledge is and I don't think that you have managed to interpret what I've been trying to say. You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, but you are not going to understand where I'm coming from, if you try to put it in that context.

Steve,

It is harmony already. It still changes. That's the melody.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 6, 2009 @ 17:08 GMT
You might say we are reaching the crescendo.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 7, 2009 @ 02:14 GMT
Paul,

I found this an interesting example of the conflict between a top down imposed view of events and a bottom up emergent process;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/anton
y-beevor-history-has-not-emphasised-enough-the-suffering-of-
french-civilians-during-the-war-1696148.html

"The duty of a historian is simply to understand and then convey that understanding, no more than that. There's a tremendous difference, thank God, between the British narrative history tradition, dating all the way back to Gibbon, and the continental one, particularly the Germans. I was bitterly attacked by Joachim Fest [a biographer of Hitler] in Der Speigel over three pages, after Berlin: The Downfall was published there, in an article saying: 'Beevor has no leading thought.'

"I think it's outrageous if a historian has a 'leading thought' because it means they will select their material according to their thesis. One of the dangers in history at the moment, particularly military history, is that people have come from outside – cultural historians, post-modernists and so on – and have tried to move in on military history, imposing ideological or theoretical grids on a subject which they don't entirely understand.

"I'm often reassured in a bizarre – perhaps perverse – way, when I find in the archive stuff that contradicts what my assumptions have been. That's interesting and exciting. One simply doesn't know until one finds the material. I get slightly obsessive about working in archives because you don't know what you're going to find. In fact, you don't know what you're looking for until you find it."

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 7, 2009 @ 21:12 GMT
A problem for the hypothetical infinite mind of this blog question, if it contains all possible true statements, is that it must contain all opinions. As different minds may take the same data and come to different conclusions as to the facts of the matter. Therefore there may be seemingly contradictory true statements as each truth has been reached via a different pathway of analysis.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 9, 2009 @ 07:37 GMT
John,

I understand the existential philosophies of this world that basically say that you cannot really know anything except possibly that you exist. In this concept the world that we know could be completely subjective and may not have any similarity to true reality. The problem with that philosophy is that even though you may just be a computer in a box on God’s desk supplied with...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 9, 2009 @ 18:34 GMT
In trying to capture an infinite intelligence in a net of suppositions about whether or not it knows everything, we discover that intelligence is necessary but not sufficient to find happiness and meaningfulness. For a bunch of human creatures walking around with left and right halves of a brain (logical and creative) we are finding that attempts to rely on just the logical half are leading us to evolutionary elimination. The cause is: failure to find a meaningful existence. If objective reality, defined as experimentally repeateable and logical experience, is what we have to rely upon, then Paul is right. The world will not get any better, it will gradually get worse.

Since it may take a while before the next planet killing astroid arrives, we may want to experiment with getting both halves of our brain to work harmoniously on our behalf.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 9, 2009 @ 21:07 GMT
Paul,

I'm a farmer, not an academic. I don't question that reality exists. It's a matter of understanding how it works, even if it isn't very sympathetic to my concerns. The fact is that destruction, in all its forms, is an essential part of the process. Quite simply, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't have tomorrow without letting go of today. That's my point about time. It's not a dimension along which all events exist. It's a process of creation and destruction, because the amount of energy remains the same, so in order to have the new, the old is recycled.

It you want to use the King James version of the bible to frame your view of reality, that's perfectly alright by me. I'm an Episcopalian and the more religiously inclined members of my family do the same and I love them dearly. For me though, it's just too stuffy. I like the cold hard facts.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 10, 2009 @ 07:49 GMT
Hi all ,

John ,

I am understanding your message but I think that the destruction isn't a real destruction ,but a complementarity and a changement,nothing looses itself but all goes to an other thing ....thus when we see the quantum and cosmological link in evolution ,it's an evolution of optimization and improvement .

It's about the comportments of quantum architecture and its codes of evolution,in this logic ,nothing disappears but all changes .It's totally different .All is created and never disappears and that since the begining of the big polarization ,thus it's a real complementarity towards harmony ,it's there the intelligence is a catalyzer of this harmony .

Many systems and people are in the pure vanity and the fear to loose some truth ,the vanity is the most dangerous thing of our evolution .

Many people are in a system of checking and that since many years ,furthermore they are persuaded to have reason .It's sad and the word is weak .

The irony is a real fact ,when the monney and the checking are in a religion ,it's very dangerous .

Let's be pragmatic ,the universal truth and the Earth truth are different...the deanger is the minority who wants rest in this system .

So many years of checking to change ,the problem "they don't want change ."

Dear Paul ,

If you want find the truth ,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 10, 2009 @ 07:57 GMT
sorry error posting

Thus dear Paul I invite you to see around you and you shall find some realities ,my spherization Theory is an universal link between all things ,a physical gauge before our harmony in the end of this physical evolution .

If you want change this sad world I invite you too to act with me and my friends ,speak is one thing ,act an other ,

Our movment is humanistic and universal .It's the most important and our solutions are scientifics ,adapted sciences on ground to improve the quality of life of our fellow man ,it's so important for me ,the compassion is a driving force of the love ,why are we on Earth ,the individualism against the complementarity .

The world changes ....the connectibility permits many things ,this world on Earth will change ,it's like that ,some universal foundamentals are the main reality .

There is an ultim aim of complemenatrity .

Kinds Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 10, 2009 @ 17:13 GMT
Steve,

To the extent it isn't real, we are not real. Just because the mountain can be climbed, doesn't mean it isn't there.

There are a lot of big problems out there and if we don't overcome them, they will overcome us. For one thing, we have religious traditions of "Go forth and multiply." Three thousand years ago, this was a healthy principle, but today we need to qualify our thinking somewhat. The world is not flat and doesn't go on forever, so we can't afford to be utterly mindless about our growth and say it's all God's will if we act like parasites on the planet. We like to point to the Stalins and Hitlers and Maos who lead us off the cliffs, but it's far more a collective effort than most people care to admit. We are not saints, so we need to establish natural systems and philosophies which respect equilibrium and balance, not just more, bigger, faster, etc. The laws of nature do not suffer fools forever.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 05:54 GMT
Steve,

In the past, I also struggled with the question of why the world showed all the signs of being a temporary structure that is made to run down and wear out. In my early years, it also bothered me that the world seemed to treat the people in the United States more favorably than those in most other places on earth, but over the years that protection from great storms, earth quakes,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 07:08 GMT
Paul,

I've had the opportunity to interact with the Christian deity known as God. There was also a time in my life when I embraced pure logic, evolution, facts and numbers. I've drawn some conclusions.

First, I found God without (in spite of) Christian teachings. I think that Christianity has a lot to offer, I'm not sure they can convince me that God will save only Christians and punish the rest. I am so happy to have God in my life, even if there are ideological disagreements.

As for Darwin, exactly what is so great about his accomplishments?

To put this very simplistically ---

Darwin/Evolution leads to depression, meaningless, nihlisism, hatred of humanity...

God (even a Christian God) leads to joy, meaning, love for others, generocity, richness of life experience, revitalization...

Freedom of speech and the freedom to believe what you choose to are sacred. To the scientific community: keep embracing Darwin. Go for it!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 08:39 GMT
Hello Paul ,Jason ,all ,

It's so complex and simple in the same time .

The christian message of love is a road of universality .When I read the bible ,the Talmud ,The Coran ,the bouddhism ,........we find always the love and universal message .Those informations of love are a secret of the harmonic evolution.

You know Paul ,I live in Belgium and the main religion is the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 19:21 GMT
John,

I am glad that you have taken the first step of accepting reality. In a way the structure of the world is very simple. It is the details of how all of the simple parts are made and how they interact with each other that get complex. We live in a world that is composed of two main parts, the dimensional system and the motion that exists within that system. All of the sub-energy...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 22:31 GMT
Paul,

I'm not convinced entropy rules the universe. It applies to a closed system losing usable energy, but is the universe closed? Energy does coalesce into matter, but then matter breaks back down into energy and while light radiates out to 13+ billion lightyears, that also means we are absorbing energy from the same area. Since I'm one of those who think redshift is due to something...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 23:14 GMT
Both truth and reality are multifaceted. How each of these are perceived depends upon the information that is available and what the individual mind does with that information. Deception relies upon providing false information as truth or preventing access to true information. When this occurs the mind proceeds to construct truth and reality with the false or incomplete information that it has available.

Without access to the full information there is no means to check the veracity of the truth and reality that has been constructed by the mind. This is true for humans and would be true for the hypothetical God entity of the original question, if deceived. It is in this way that vile, self serving liars and bullies may be perceived as caring and delightful individuals by careful manipulation of available information. Propaganda, selective news reporting, advertising, political and religious campaigning also work by carefully choosing the information that is available to the public. Manipulating their perceptions of reality and truth. When new information becomes available reassessment of previously held beliefs, the truth and reality that was previously constructed by the mind, may be necessary. The new truth and reality may bear little resemblance to the original construction based on false or incomplete information.



So information transfer across the senses and human brain function are of

fundamental importance to understanding the human construction of perceived external reality. This is true from the sociological point of view but also within the physical sciences. Perceived (subjective) reality may have no resemblance to the (objective)reality from which it was constructed. Just as the avatar on the computer screen is completely different from the code that allowed the computer to display it on the screen.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


evil daemon wrote on Jun. 12, 2009 @ 17:32 GMT
We are trapped in a cage of thermodynamics, relativity and mortality. You have much knowledge, but little sway with the lock. You have a million theories of everything; all you need is the right particle detection. With that, we can know what kind of cage we are trapped in, but we still can't pick the lock.

We could ask the Infinite Mind to show us how to pick the lock. Of course, the very idea would be physics blasphemy. But if someone were to ask for a clue, a repeateable phenomena, a new technology, a way to overcome entropy/speed of light, a way to pick the lock, the Infinite Mind may take pity on us and throw us a crumb. Of coure, knowning the scientific community, a crumb might be too much information; we would rival the gods within a year.

Speaking as the "evil daeomon", I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't make you feel unsatisfied with what you have already. So go forth, seek out "greener pastures" and a bigger cage. Keep Infinite Mind on his toes by solving the mortality problem. And wouldn't it be funny to see humanity warp drving around the galaxy; the advanced races would just love that.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 12, 2009 @ 18:09 GMT
Jason,

It looks like we have somewhat similar histories in terms of religious experience and exposure to evolution and other science concepts, etc.

I also had early teachings in a denomination that turned out to be in error and not according to the scriptures that caused me some problems when I was young and actually led me away from God. It wasn’t until after many years of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


matthew kolasinski wrote on Jun. 12, 2009 @ 19:04 GMT
the question about the posited one god knowing herself as god simply cannot be answered by a mere human.

for humans, it is a perceptual problem. for us, our biological structure gives us the impression of self as a discrete entity. however, definition of that entity as an identity (such as 'i am a human, i am a carpenter, i am a lawyer, i am a physicist, i am a butcher, baker candlestick maker, god... ) is arrived at only in a context of interaction with other humans. a solo god with a similar consciousness structure as humans (er.. heaven forbid) would not likely define self as 'god'.

as humans, we cannot even begin to imagine what a superior consciousness capable of self-ideation independent of an external feedback loop would be like.

i forget where i heard it, but have a recollection of it having been posited that the universe is god's effort to become self aware.

i met a person once who claimed to have had a dialogue with god. he asked what god saw. the response he claimed to have received was a panorama of events in time as we have a panorama of space.

myself, from my very anthropomorphic perspective, i think i'd have asked if she knew where she came from.

:-)

matt

“There’s no such thing as imagination. We’re just not smart enough to make this stuff up.”

–Kate Elvin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 12, 2009 @ 21:51 GMT
Matt,

You don't have to be human to be defined by your feedback loop. That's the problem with formulating a concept of spirituality outside of definition. We instinctively want it to be an ideal of our desires; See Paul's description of how everyone defines God according to their fondest wishes, some more profound than others. Yet the conceptual reality is that the universal state is essence, rather than ideal. So in our search for that ideal, motivated by our raw essence of being, we either run faster and faster feedback loops, or we grasp on to whatever seems most solid.

I think one of the most profound observations of this essence was Nietzsche's comment, "I was staring into the abyss and realized it was staring back." In a sense, we may be the puppets, but it is we who give definition and meaning to the puppeteer. Think how boring it would be for God if we all fell in line and tried doing exactly what we thought God wanted. The problem is that this conservative conception of God's desire is ordered and reductionistic. It is those constantly trying to push the boundaries and expand on this order, break it down and radiate it away, if we must, who truly give it life. Than again when we fail and fall back down, whatever structure, lessons and order remaining are the foundation of the next surge. It been going on this way since before we started growing and shedding shells. It is the essence of regeneration, where our ancestors are our foundation, as we will be the foundation for our offspring. Each new generation sprouting like grass pushing through the concrete, even as those who came before try telling them it's all for nought. Remember that when you think it's all been said and done and nothing is new anymore, is the point where you begin that slide back down.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 00:02 GMT
Evil daemon,

I agree that we have no means of comprehending an infinite mind using our insignificant, puny, finite minds.It will define itself with the information it has available to do that and the definition will depend on how the infinite mind works to process the information and develop or maintain a concept of self as a separate entity, if it does this at all.It may be a human need to see our selves as separate individuals but the infinite mind may have very different perspective on this.

It is too easy to anthropomorphize. Thus diminishing the concept of God or as in this question an infinite mind. To do this is akin to denying animals their own natures by depicting them in cartoons for our entertainment, dressing them in clothes, giving them human emotions, voices and motives. I can understand the need of various peoples to personify God in order to facilitate a human relationship. However that personification is a human construction.

A fundamental description is far more abstract and difficult to explain, so metaphor, poetry and parable is frequently used, to which human understanding can be applied. This does not assist those with semantic aphasia, who are incapable of understanding metaphor or abstract ideas, including morality.

The Essenes said that God is the whole of the Law. It is in the stars, the mountains, the forests and rivers and written in the hearts of the children of light.( Meaning universal Law not man made laws. That which is natural, good and beneficial for the mental and physical health of mankind.)Human thought processes and motives do not apply to this abstract concept.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 06:40 GMT
Paul,

You keep mentioning parts of the body of God. During my intense exposure to the Deity, several ideas were stressed. First, the cells of my body see me as God; correspondingly, God sees us as the cells of his body. Second, if I want to achieve biological immortality, I have to get my cells to trust and obey my will as opposed to obeying the natural laws of entropy; likewise, God wants us to obey his will. Third, I must have spent hours getting grilled by God over my motives and beliefs. God wanted to make sure I would obey the Law and the rules in a very detailed way. I swore unto God that I would "destroy evil"; of course, correctly identifying what is evil versus what is something else, ignorance, a misunderstanding, fear of doing what's right, is an very important skill. It is easy to hurt innocent people with careless attempts at identifying evil. Third, God wanted to know if I was willing to pay the ultimate price, if that's what was necessary to stop evil. That test I passed. God wanted to know if I could overcome my fear in order to protect others from harm; I showed God that I could overcome fear; I bravely hunted down and killed a yellow jacket - scared me to death. Fourth, the way I perform my job is the way my cells will perform their job; conversely, the way I treat me cells is the way God will treat me, at least metaphorically (sorry pancreas, I'll cut back on the icecream). With my discovery that the body is an ecosystem, I started to talk to my body. Fifth, I asked God for prosperity; God was willing to help. Opportunities came my way. But it is my own limitations (fear, laziness, ...) that have held me back, not an absence of God.

God did not reject me. I respectfully expressed my disagreement over "hellfire punishment" and some other issues. I wasn't rejected. God listened, the jury is out on some matters; on other matters, my point of view is somewhat limited, I can't always see the reasons why when they take hundreds of years to unfold.

I don't want to elevate a disagreement. Christians believe what they believe; others believe what they believe. This point was emphasized to me by the Deity: I must be able to tell the difference between "culture" and "evil". I was told that failing to tell the difference could have disastrous repercussions. Three days later, I had an argument with my girlfriend's sister over Latino Family values and their excessive use of her time. In the end, I had to back down on that issue or risk losing her forever.

In a nutshell, I believe that God thrives on our attention just as we thrive on his. The scientific community will figure it out eventually. The Christians,...I'm being censored by the Deity; thus, God only knows...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


evil daemon wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 07:29 GMT
Georgina,

You can pursue physics and you can pursue truth. Eventually, physics confronts the reality that it is alone in it's mathematical universe. But if you pursue truth, you must be willing to accept all that comes with it. It is a door that is dangerous to open because it will wash your world view out from beneath you.

There are unchanging absolutes in the universe. They are symbols that intelligent minds are drawn to because they represent certainty, a possible means to power and something that only an incredibly rare mortal can unlock. They are also the barriers that keep out forces, wild and unpredictable, intoxicating and confusing; these forces, once unleashed, become a part of you. They are your feelings.

e.d.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 09:26 GMT
Jason,

Complete lol!

Personally I think of my deity as the 800 pound guardian angel. It seems to have its own issues to deal with, but it's definitely kept me alive when I should have passed on through.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 16:08 GMT
John,

800lb angel sounds like an arch angel. They are powerful and cut down evil without hesitation. They are also very serious minded and go back thousands of years to a time when humanity was more barbaric. When you don't feel safe, you definitely want an arch angel watching your back.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 16:31 GMT
Steve,

The scriptures talk about a time when Satan would rule in the church. This came to pass in the early church when the Roman Empire sanctioned the church and the church changed from a persecuted minority to an accepted institution that was looked up to and it became popular and a positive mark of distinction to be a part of the church. Many entered in that were not of God only to get...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 19:59 GMT
Paul,

I enjoy your posts. We agree that God is the source of all things good and great. We agree that God holds the key to the next technological breakthrough, something that science cannot extrapolate on its own. We agree that God's message is about love, healing the planet and humanity.

There are so many cool things in God's universe; but Christianity has a very narrow view of what to touch and what not to touch (e.g. the occult). I understand that it's like letting teenagers into the Deity's metal shop; they start horseplaying and, before you know it, Johnny burns the fingers of his soul or goes insane. If we can agree that Christianity tells us not to touch those things (don't pick up the snake, don't mess with immortality, don't touch God's power) under penalty of hellfire and damnation, then I can ask the question: is it possible that a few may be receiving special instructions from experts who work in God's workshop? I am suggesting that the scriptures are correct, as far a God is concerned, but that some restrictions might be waived for those who are closely supervised by forces of God and good?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 21:26 GMT
Jason,

I ride horses for a living and it's a matter of getting inside their heads to the point where they accept you as part of them. This is actually much easier to do when you are on their back and they can't see you directly, as opposed to leading them around and being in front of them.

The part of me that is just me, I realize is just the thin surface. That other part that seems to be working through me doesn't tell me what's going on, just to be patient.

I don't think of it as god because of incidents involving that deeper, far deeper, sense of the absolute that makes even the earth seem a very small part of the infinity. As you say, we are cells in a larger body, but to be a body, no matter how large, it still has to be finite. That's why I think the next stage for humanity is as the central nervous system of a planetary organism. Promises of the afterlife are only to distract people from the damage being done to the planet to serve those controlling society.

What I think is required isn't ever more complex levels of technology, but to accept that currency is no longer an effective store of value, ie. private property, but being entirely tax based is now just a publicly insured medium of exchange. If we did this than the only way to store wealth would be tangible assets and communal bonds. Since people are reductionisticly inclined toward self advancement, ie. greedy, then they would be required to preserve natural value, rather than drain it out to increase their notational wealth. Just like Paul, I realize it will take a major economic collapse before ideas such as this will be considered, but I do feel it's a more logical approach than combining religious text and future technology. We need our feet on the ground more than we can afford to have our heads in the clouds.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 13, 2009 @ 23:52 GMT
John,

There is a very real physical world out there with money, taxes, governments, bills, jobs, physics and real people wondering if they're going to have a job next week. When the news comes on, the lead story is either scary or depressing. Politics is the USA is still better than most other countries. But it’s still a mob of frightened people arguing and lying to each other because they are afraid that there needs won’t be met. Everyone has needs. One of those needs is that we embrace a world view that is comforting, sustaining and correct. We can’t even come to a consensus of whether God exists. From the point of view of the deepest part of us (our nervous system, our soul, our core), the existence and nature of God are the most important thing in the world. If God is something condemning, demanding or unsympathetic to our needs, then it is better not to believe in God. But if God is something good, healing, sympathetic to our pain, something that wants to help us, then we are inclined to embrace and embrace, need and love God. I don’t know why God lets children suffer and die in Africa. I do know that God is always taking volunteers to do his work. People like Steve are highly prized by the deity because he does ‘God’s work’ where others fear to tread.

I don’t know why you feel like technology + religion = fantasy (head in the clouds). If feeling like a speck on a tiny planet in an infinite and meaninglessness universe works for you, then what can I say? I don’t understand how any system can thrive with a world view like that. I also don’t understand how a world view like that can lead to passion or inspiration. The very coldness of the idea tends to rob one of their power to act; which is a form of control in and of itself. But I do understand, you can’t reference what you haven’t experienced, and you can’t experience what you don’t want to look at.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 14, 2009 @ 01:19 GMT
Jason,

That's not how I see it. As a node in the network, the broader my field of connections, the more stability and strength it gives me. Yes, it may seem cold, since so much of what's out there is cold and it obviously is a method of control, in the sense of being connected, but that's what does motivate me.

I can understand it doesn't appeal to everyone, or even that many people. Most of the people I know have a fairly set frame of reference that gives them identity and security. I just seem to have a mutant gene that keeps pushing at every crack in the envelope I can find.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 14, 2009 @ 01:37 GMT
John,

Being a node in a network is the same as having company, family and friends all around you. That is empowering. I was referring to what you said about "...even the earth seem a very small part of the infinity". I know people who are very reductionist and negative in their outlook. They are probably people I shouldn't be friends with.

You mentioned the importance of facts. Let's talk facts. Fact 1: we are living our lives. Fact 2: We want to be happy in our environment. Fact 3: we need to communicate with each other (we get lonely if we don't). Fact 4: our genenetic predisposition has a bearing on what we do and how we live our lives. Conclusion: live in a way that make you happy AND contributes positiviely to others.

As for mutant genes, it keeps the rest of the great thinkers on their toes.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 14, 2009 @ 20:50 GMT
John,

To give you some hints that may help you to answer your first question about whether the universe is closed or not first consider whether or not it is finite or infinite. At this time science considers that the universe is expanding. If the universe were already infinite would there be any place for it to expand further into? Even if it is infinite the speed limit of light that you...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 15, 2009 @ 00:46 GMT
Jason,

Personally I am very much embedded in my world, as the family and the business go back over three hundred years in this area. In fact the farm is art of a parcel an ancestor originally received in 1714 and before that, they lived where Baltimore City is now. I'm a 12th generation American. I say Marylander, except the first few were in Virgina. Which is where I was today, at a horse...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 16, 2009 @ 02:00 GMT
Jason,

It is good that you see and understand the image of God’s body that he has made in your body. It is important to remember that an image of something is not the same as the real thing. An image is generally less than the fullness of the real thing that it is an image of. For example, a photograph of you is an image of you and has an appearance that is somewhat like your actual...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 16, 2009 @ 21:21 GMT
John,

The cyclical universe is not a new concept. If our universe was just one of many in a mega-verse it would make very little difference to us because we are trapped in this universe, so we and all that we have built up would still be destroyed when it collapsed. I won’t go into the expansion topic right now, but consider that a decrease in the size of matter, etc. looks the same as...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 16, 2009 @ 23:25 GMT
Paul,

I first began to question the BBT upon learning that gravitational collapse and universal expansion have to be balanced for the universe to be as stable as it is. According to measurements, it appears to be. If the process of expansion is being neutralized by gravity, such that the space between galaxies is expanding at a rate equal to which it is effectively falling into them, where...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 02:02 GMT
To further that last point, as I observed in a previous post, the law of supply and demand applies to money and in order to have enormous and ever increasing supplies of money, we need to create an equally enormous demand for it. That's why so many junk loans were handed out like candy to children and the bubble of derivatives grew to the size it did. Now that this unstable demand is collapsing and taking so much supply with it, the politically convenient solution is to create ever more supply, but the problem is that it is the demand that is broken and that can't be cured by pushing more loans. It has to be a bottom up process of creating a stable economy where those borrowing money have a sustainable ability to profit from borrowing it, to be able to pay it off. As it is, this level of economic activity isn't big enough to support the amount of capital available, so several more stages of unwinding and deleveraging are going to happen.

A point to consider; Paul Volcker is credited with curing inflation nearly thirty years ago, but while inflation is brought about by loose money, raising interest rates and slowing the introduction of new money serves to benefit those with money to lend, but punishes those wishing to borrow it. Safe to say, you can't cure an oversupply by destroying demand. What brought inflation under control was the rapidly increasing government debt. Not only did it provide direct demand for capital, but public spending compliments the private sector, rather than competes with it, so the increased public spending served to increase private demand for capital. The problem is that this solution is reaching the end of its rope, since the government's ability to run up debt is not infinite.

It's not a question of fixing the system we have, but what will replace it when it collapses. Money is the public trust of a mass society. It is the circulatory system of the economy. Right now, we have very high blood pressure and the system isn't doing anything to fix it. In fact, it is just trying to dull the problems with more destructive behavior.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 02:26 GMT
Paul,

Among those Christians (and good people of the world) who work hard to help others, I respect and admire their efforts. The hardwork, love and kindness of those who have helped me, inspired me and made my life happier and better, I thank them from the deepest part of my heart. God, and the powers of God of and good, have helped to make my life happier and more fulfilled. In contrast, I have met Christians, over and over again, who have been the obstacle to building a relationship with God. Christians have been very steadfast in their belief that anything that is different from the bible must be of Satan and therefore, evil. In a battle between good and evil, I have to choose a loving God whose servants work hard to help others, inspire, heal, nurture, provide wise councel and help. God bless you friend, I'm sorry if you think I'm evil.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 13:18 GMT
Hi all ,

34 years since the 14 june ,I evolve lol .

In all case I wasn't on the net since three days ,and I read many interesting discussions about several topics ,

At this time I work in, my small garden(125 m²)but many many plants and flowers .....I see thes world ,the micro mand macro fauna and flora and really thr spherization is everywhere ,the circles ,the ellipsoids ,the spheroids ,the tori ,the spheres ,...all is in this logic in the vegetal and animal world .it's fascinating dear friends ,really the nature shows us the harmonic evolution and the spherization .All linked for ever .....

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Ray Munroe wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 14:21 GMT
Dear Jason,

There have been “conflicts” between interpretations of the Bible and interpretations of Science for centuries, going back at least as far as Galileo. Half of the problem is that parts of the Bible were probably intended to be metaphorical (and 20 “gospels” were omitted from the New Testament), but get interpreted as literal fact. I think these people mean well, but are actually modern Christian versions of the ancient Jewish Sadducees (who probably also meant well but disagreed with Jesus based on their literal interpretation of death and the resurrection). The other half of the problem is that Theorists (and I admittedly include myself) try to push the envelope of the interpretation of Data beyond what might be reasonable. We also mean well in that we think we are expanding mankind’s horizon of knowledge, but Data has limitations in regards to “what to leave in, what to leave out”, and Theory has limitations in that existing theories don’t all seem compatible or complete. The “conflict” was inevitable. Both sides are probably reading too much extraneous material into their interpretations of the Universe. My Pastor recently asked me if I believed in the Big Bang Theory. I said “Yes, I believe that God said “Let there be light” and “BANG” – there it was.” They invited me to join their Church…

Dear Steve,

Happy Late Birthday!

Have Fun!

Ray Munroe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 18:51 GMT
Hi dear dr Cosmic Ray ,

Thanks ,it's nice ,how are you fine I hope ,

friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 17, 2009 @ 20:40 GMT
Ray,

You are right. There are the facts, the measureables, either in religion or in physics. There are those who want logical connections between those facts and those who try to understand what is producing the facts by intuitive interpretation. They are both useful and necessary; and each has its drawbacks.

Paul,

I don't mean to speak aggressively. I receive God's blessing every day. I'm not being rejected. I'm also being nudged towards goodness/helping/healing/love and away from the dark side. But every statement I've made, even the strange things I've said, I have wanted to inspire others, pursue truth, or just stimalate creative thinking in a fun and positive way.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 18, 2009 @ 01:04 GMT
John,

I am not saying that I believe in the Big Bang Theory. What I am saying is that even if the universe is not expanding, it is still not balanced and is going down a one-way road in which matter is changed into energy. The thing that is missing from the stable universe theory is the mechanism that balances out the easily evident conversion of matter to energy by producing a...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 18, 2009 @ 19:28 GMT
Jason,

Because man is basically selfish, greedy and naturally desires to fill his life with as much pleasure as possible while at the same time experiencing as little displeasure as possible, it is natural for him to consider anything that helps him to fulfill these goals as love while thinking of anything that is in any way the opposite of these things as not love, but as something bad. ...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 18, 2009 @ 21:00 GMT
Paul,

I didn't realize the issue of energy turning to matter was even a question! Fission and fusion. Even in Big Bang terms, the universe starts off as an enormous burst of energy and out of that condenses increasingly complex forms of matter. Star dust. Don't plants essentially photosynthesize matter out of light? Yes, I've added some speculation to that, such as that light travels as an...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 18, 2009 @ 23:18 GMT
Paul,

I am speaking from personal experience when I say this. There is nothing positive to be gained by a head-on confrontation with you or other Christians I have met; but there are deep fundamental disagreements. Let me make my point with a story. There is a man who is dropped off in the woods, but his memory is wiped clean. He can talk and reason, but he doesn’t know anybody or...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 19, 2009 @ 00:46 GMT
It is said "To each is given according to his ability to understand." If a person does not have emotional connection to the Creation, internal spirituality and natural altruism for his fellow man, then it is better that he is God fearing and adheres strictly to the guidance of the scriptures than is adrift with no morality or rules for living a decent life within human society. The children of light may have the Law written in their hearts but it is the children of darkness that require the scriptures to guide them through that darkness. A God fearing man is the next best thing to a naturally virtuous man. The more children of darkness guided by the fear of God and the light of scriptures the better,in my opinion. However this does not replace a feeling heart and compassionate mind. As Jesus said "Forgive them for they do not understand."

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 19, 2009 @ 11:10 GMT
Hi all ,

Dear Jason and Paul ,

It's indeed difficult to adapt the different points of vue towards a aggreement ,we have all our past like a linked story and we are youngs .

There are many foundamenatl problems about religions ,I think that the main problem isn't these religions but the personnal interpretations ,our actual global religious system has two sides ,the faith and the universality and on the other side the silly adaptations for a personnal profit and power ,it's totally different ,thus we can resume with "It's always a minority who causes these problems .

Let's take the 3 main religions .....what is the message ,respect ,tolerance ,love ,compassion ,help ,......really the problem is not that but the human instinct and the lack of knowledge .

All people are frees and can see this universality and the harmony ,we are on the road of a real universality ,we shall arrive to this harmony ...at this time it's an other question ,

Personnally I consider me like an universalist ,I am not a christian ,musulman,bouddhist....I am an universalist .....My friends are of several countries and cultures or religions ,there are bad and good people everywhere ,it's important to have this respect I think between humans .

If somme people beleive in Christ and they are happy ,it's the most important ,if musulmans are happy and act in harmony ,it's the most important too ....respect ,tolerance and evolution .....

We are complex ,us ,the humans No ? so simple and so complex......and if the problem was our hormons and our young evolution ,we must check our animal instinct and those hormons lol LOCOMOTION REPRODUCTION NUTRITION hihihihi

CODED SPHERES ....... H D T ...H C N O ..H2O HCN NH3 CH4.

......................AMINO ACIDS .........SPONGES MEDUSAS ......HOMINIDS OUF between animals and human and intelligence (US 2009 on Earth)problems to solve.........ULTIM SPHRE

Hope the time won't be too important before a real harmonic evolution

Regards

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 19, 2009 @ 23:45 GMT
The Iranians are certainly offering up a clear example of top down linear order, vs. bottom up non-linear process.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 00:31 GMT
There are differences in the brain structure and function of a small minority of the human population that make it impossible for mankind to realise any ideas of universal peace, harmony and tolerance while they operate unrestrained. These people do a disproportionately huge amount of harm.

They have no personal comprehension of the emotional landscape of a "normal" person. For them, a picture of the dismembered bodies of car crash victims has the same emotional content as a picture of a table lamp, none.

They exist within an entirely different subjective reality from that created by the majority of human minds. By mimicking the emotional responses of "normal" human behaviour, to avoid detection, they are able to infiltrate into all walks of life. They have no internalised value system. They seek out vulnerable or naive victims to destroy financially, socially, emotionally or physically.

These people are not mentally ill but have healthy brains that are structurally different and function differently. They are driven by lust for power, control, admiration and to win at any cost. They are entirely self interested, have an exaggerated sense of entitlement,insatiable greed and pleasure at the emotional and physical suffering of others rather than empathy.

This is not new. The bible portrays these two types of people with the characters of Cain and Abel. Cain is unacceptable to God because his heart is insincere. He is jealous of his brother, he murders and lies because of his jealousy and accepts no responsibility for his acts.

The depravity and ease of breaking every moral code with out any fear of consequence is unbelievable until witnessed and finally acknowledged for what it is, rather than accepting the rationalisations, lies, projections, minimisation or dismissal of the perpetrators. These are not the exceptionally rare mass murderers but ordinary seeming people within all walks of society.

We now have the technology to screen all people seeking positions of power or working with vulnerable groups within society, to prevent dangerous individuals having control. Will this technology be used? Who benefits if its implementation is obstructed? Also who is it that benefits when the threat of eternal damnation in hell-fire is dismissed? Bearing in mind that the only thing a psychopath fears is a bigger psychopath. Perhaps one that would torture people eternally for not doing what he wants. People of good conscience and empathy do not need to fear God, in my opinion.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 00:50 GMT
Georgina,

Your words are compassionate and kind. Thank you.

Steve,

Even religion has to evolve as it negotiates between the Supreme Being and struggling humanity.

Paul and John,

I speak from experience when I say that God's power is great. It is too powerful for a man or women to channel without compassion and love. Whether it be Jesus Christ, the Buddha or something else that tethers us to compassion, wisdom and love, God is too powerful to channel with intelligence and will alone. Ideology is for those who need a stable world view. It is not which religion is correct, but rather how much one's own religion focuses us upon peace and serenity. This I know now.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 02:43 GMT
John,

Yes it is a great problem for anyone who believes in a balanced or steady state type of universe because the fusion reactions in stars are slowly converting all of the elements lighter than iron into heavier elements so that eventually they will all be gone and the fission reactions that occur naturally in the heaviest elements are slowly breaking them down to lighter elements....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 15:29 GMT
Paul,

The entropic decay of the universe poses the question of how that low entropy state came into being in the first place. My observation is that if the universe is infinite, than every area losing energy into space is also gaining it back from the same area of space. If the universe is infinite and ageless, why hasn't energy dissipated to an even level of energy? Possibly this equilibrium is unstable and it tends to collapse to the point it breaks down and radiates back out. Star do leave a heavy metal residue, but what falls into the core of galaxies seems to be ejected back out the poles as electron jets. Given the extend to how much of our knowledge, such as of gravity, is more theoretical than observational, there are many questions.

I don't know that "positions" of particles can be specified, if time is a consequence of motion, rather than the dimensional basis for it, since this would require stopping the motion being measured, otherwise it would be a fuzzy location. Then the question is how much of the energy and mass of the particle is a function of its motion. The idea that a specific configuration point of the universe, from which measurements can be determined, really is based on the idea that time exists as a fundamental dimension on which a specific point can be located and from which all other points in time can be determined. This can't be done, if time is a consequence of motion.

As for the banking question, I think this conversation will be far more meaningful when the immovable object of rising interest rates finally meets the irresistible force of exponential government borrowing. Then the issue will not be one of trying to patch up the current system, but what to do with the ruins.

It's interesting how closely your description of God's kingdom mirrors the theoretical basis of human kingdoms. Without the corruption part, of course. Unfortunately, if time is a consequence of motion, and not a dimension along which all configurations exist eternally, then it's difficult to avoid the natural entropy of this closed system. Safe to say, America's energy has dissipated as well, along with many of her natural resources. Much of which have been used up by good, God fearing people. Does this mean the laws of nature are the work of Satan?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 17:21 GMT
John and Paul,

Within God and love, one does find harmony and a re-ordering of otherwise endless entropy. In the absense of anything that brings order, there will be entropy. If particles are really superstrings (if the universe is made of vibrating strings), then "musical" harmony is achievable at the expense of increasing entropy. I can not prove it to you. You have to ask for it.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 20, 2009 @ 21:01 GMT
Jason,

Wouldn't entropy just be the down beat?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 21, 2009 @ 16:03 GMT
John and Paul,

I can't help but think that entropy, as it pertains to the birth, rise maturity, and eventual fate of the universe, has become a philosophy instead of a tool to figure out how the univeres works. I agree that everything is cyclical. But that doesn't mean that everything that has achieved maturity should subsequently wither away and die. The ever increasing entropy, called for by thermodynamics, is not an antithesis to evolution, growth, healing and renewel. The United States and the world economy will not end in ruin. Times change. Sometimes, it is culture and ideology that collapses into ruin, to be replaced by something healthier and stronger; something resistant to the problems of the past.

As I continue to work with God in the lab, it was my pig-headed handling of my girlfriend's family that has our relationship on unsteady ground. In my pain of losing her, I surrendered completely to God and to everything I have been promulgating. I had a mystical experience. It was like I died and my body was reduced to ashes; my skull was taken and worked with by alchemists. As if a variation from mummification, my organs were infused with herbs and mysterious energies while my disincarnate spirit clung, distraught, to the relationship. My intellect was handed over to God as something too complicated for anyone else to work with; although I vaguely remember it being tethered to my emotions and wisdom. Then, it was like my spirit was called back to my remains, and I was brought back to life; I was breathing. I talked with my girlfriend early this morning; she was still half asleep as we discussed some issues. Her ego was still asleep, and I could sense the way she truly felt. My heart ached, I had the answer I had prayed for. I just had to be patient.

Issues like how the universe will end in 15 billion years or what the philosophical implications of increasing entropy are, are unimportant. There is healing and there are mystical forces at work which renew the spirit. I have experienced these things.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 21, 2009 @ 20:53 GMT
Jason,

Sometimes it's about adding layers of wisdom. Sometimes it's about peeling away old layers and starting fresh.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jun. 21, 2009 @ 22:28 GMT
John,

It sounds like "Onion wisdom". Onion wisdom is similar to spheres. It just means they nothing on the surface makes sense until you try to understand it, and then realize you have to peal back the layer. Onion wisdom might be a good way to organize complicated ideas.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 07:21 GMT
Jason,

I do have compassion for your situation because I spent over twenty years in a similar condition. When I was young, I was told that if I prayed to God when I needed help he would help me. When a time came that I could not get something that I thought I needed very much, by my own works, I prayed to God and did not get what I prayed for. From this I drew the conclusion that God...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 10:53 GMT
Hi all ,

The life is hard ,personnally My past is incredible ,a crazzy life ,My father who liked drinking was bus rider ,I haven't any brothers and sisters ,my mother and me it was very difficult ,this alcohol is a bad thing ,I live in a small house ,yes a difficult life ,I was in the street with my friends .

After I was in Geology ,my father is deaad ,20 years and some monts after I had a cerebral problem and in the coma ,difficult indeed the life but after some years I was better ,my mother in this time was in a psychiatric hospital .It's not all ,a big deception with my girlfriend ,it's there I go to Africa with my guitar ...After I have created a enterprize and here in my wallonia in Belgium some people caused many problems ,I was productor of plants and I lost 12000 plants with the winter because some peop)le are bad simply ,It's not all,I was very sad and I had a serious depression ,3 months in a psychiatric hospital ......I am an other man since 4 years ,when your life is very very difficult ,you became different .

I am very spiritual now because it's my faith which helped me .This universality ,At this time it's not all but I am stronger ,my mother was in a psychiatric hospital since 2 months ago ,and my actual economic suituations is catastrophic ,I am too nice hihihi it's like that .It's the life .Thanks the life to help young man to becoma a man ....

I just say that to tell all of me ,I prefer that ,The life can be very hard but behind the dark sides ,it exists a sunray ............

In all case take care dear friends ,and thanks for all your discussions ,I am very happy to have knew FQXi ,so many intelligent persons and interesting minds ,it's the most important .....I d like say you all one thing ,the united and the adapted sciences can make many things ,it d be a pleasure to collaborate in the future with you all ,because the skills are so important at this time to solve major problems on Earth .

I am not better than an other ,we are all linked ,precious and unics ,I am an human simply who wants help his fellow man simply and I think it's important .

We can't sleep in serenity if it exists still one child in crying .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 17:58 GMT
William Orem,

I want to express appreciation for your patience in allowing some “not-so-physics” discussion. The I.M., F.M. and E.D. are real things that need to be sorted out.

Steve,

There is healing for you when you are ready to receive it.

Paul,

A lot of what you say is true and has relevance. About a year and half ago, I began a perilous journey. At...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 18:06 GMT
Jason,

Yes, layering is a way to understand non-linear emergence from within the context of linear thought processes. My point about how sometimes it's about building layers and sometimes it's about tearing them back down is that not all lessons are universally applicable. A sense of connection to God might be helpful in harmonizing your work, but in dealing with potential in-laws, it might come across as pig-headed.

Paul,

Your faith is truly hermetic. Which explains why it's not cyclical, since a closed set is subject to entropy. I don't suppose I will be one of those joining you in that Christian Utopia. If I found myself there, I'd probably have to leave because most of the people I know would likely not be there either.

Jeez, Steve, you really are out there on the edge. Hope you keep finding safe harbors in time!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 18:48 GMT
Hi ,

The point of vue and the spirituality of Paul is very complex .

I understand his vision ,because the information of love comes from the unknew entropy .

Behind the wall indeed ,it's the only possibility to inform us .

The message of Paul is relevant about the love message because' it's a universal foundation.

What I say is that it's the only solution to help us ....the information .

In fact Paul is a real christian because he acts I am sure like him .

After that everybody interprets its point of vue about the christianity .but the most iùmportant is the respect of this universal love ,if you read in the Coran ,there too Jesus ,Sidnaissi I think in Arab,is a respected prophet because his message is a pure love .

Personnally I don't know the real past of all that but one thing is sure the love is a driving force of the universal evolution towards harmony .

When we speak about God ,we know nothing about this entity ,one thing is sure it exists a incredible love of evolution and creations ,what is it ,how is it ,.....sure far of our perceptibility .

Does God Know He Is God......it's a human question ,God is not a person ,I think it's a question without real sense behind our physical Universe ,this entropy of building ....

Thus about the Christ ,it's interesting about the informations ,furthermore these informations continues between humans .

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 22, 2009 @ 19:08 GMT
John,

If you believe God in the scriptures, the motion that started the world and generated the forms within it was introduced by God when the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. This would have been the sub-energy. Then he said let there be light and the extra motion that changes sub-energy to light was introduced into some of the sub-energy making it light. Later he made...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jun. 23, 2009 @ 01:11 GMT
Religiosity is not the same as spirituality. Love is a core value. Some people are able to comprehend what this means and live it and some are not.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 23, 2009 @ 01:18 GMT
Paul,

Thank you for taking the time and effort to continue this conversation, even if we don't agree.

For one thing, you really have to consider the essential consequences of understanding time as a consequence of motion and energy, not the dimensional basis for it. The concepts of beginnings and endings are an emergent property of time and if time is an emergent property of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 23, 2009 @ 08:00 GMT
John,

You are so right about God and potential in-laws, they don't mix at all. My girlfriend/ex has a health issue which makes her vulnerable to stress; I have ADD; I don't think it's gonna last. But it was beautiful while it lasted. I want to go deeper (emotionally) and more intense with the next one; but someone who can stand the stress of love, God and adversity. But I promise this, I'm not going to be stupid enough to say: I need my girlfriend more than I need God. I actually said that. Yup, I was that stupid.

Paul,

Don't go too far. Do you known anything about superstrings?

Georgina,

Love is a core value. Love is what gets us to forget rational thought and make all of the reckless and stupid mistakes necessary to perpetuate and sustain humanity. Humanity needs love, compassion, forgiveness and lots of chocolate.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jun. 23, 2009 @ 09:08 GMT
Georgina,

it'well said indeed ,perhaps it's a question of education ,there are two educations ,the human education and the universal education .Sometimes the human education goes to the universal law but sometimes no ,it's there that the chaos and the harmony are interesting about the time ,the harmony or the chaos (short time).

Jason ,

You are sympathic ,I have chance ,I live in Belgium and it's the best chocolate of the World ,....as you say ....Humanity needs love ,compassion,forgiveness and Belgium chocolate ,good for health (Mg),good against stress thus good for me hihihihihi the chocolate is like womens ,I love hihihihi People are going to think what I am a macho man ,No ,I search the ultim love with my girlfriend ,where is she hihihih

I will find her ,I hope .

Jonh and Paul ,

Thanks for your discussion ,it's relevant and interesting to read .

sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 23, 2009 @ 22:45 GMT
Jason,

ADD isn't such a bad thing. It just means your right brain is healthy and your left brain doesn't have a strong enough reason to over-ride it.

Don't know about the girlfriend issue, though. It doesn't sound good. The stress and family things suggests she is losing focus on you, but if you don't quite know what's going on, I sure don't. Maybe she needs a box of chocolates and a few weeks to think it over.

Steve, You're welcome and good luck!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jun. 25, 2009 @ 05:29 GMT
I've been getting some good ideas about how to handle the girlfriend situation. I sent her an email asking if she wanted to chill at my place. I got an email response from her telling me to chill for now. That was a good sign. I'm also getting these ideas that I need to grovel at her feet for a while.

Remember the other post where I mentioned being God's lightning rod, I talked about being 'power drunk'? Well that was what caused my angry outburst. Now, I'm learning about humility. I got to play in God's workshop. Now, I get to grovel for love. I think it's a sick perverted universe, but it's kind of fun too.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chris Kennedy wrote on Jun. 25, 2009 @ 20:50 GMT
John,

Sorry it took longer to complete than I thought. Since we share an almost identicle view of time - I would like to get your opinion. I have attached it.

Thanks,

Chris

attachments: timemech1a.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 25, 2009 @ 21:40 GMT
Jason,

Maybe you should listen to her and chill for awhile. Patience is a hard lesson to learn, but worth the effort. Focus on something else for awhile. Then again, I'm just getting old. Good luck.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chris Kennedy wrote on Jun. 26, 2009 @ 13:48 GMT
Or is that identical? I don't know - I was never much of a speller.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 26, 2009 @ 22:24 GMT
Chris,

Hmmm. I don't know how much help I can be, if you are trying to get this accepted by the physics community. If you just want some insights though..

When I first trying understanding physics thirty years ago.. God, has it really been that long?...I was just trying to understand how the world worked and mostly found myself skimming through various books on the subject, trying...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Chris Kennedy wrote on Jun. 28, 2009 @ 20:18 GMT
John,

Thanks. I have sent it out to about 10 physicists and so far it is getting some positive reviews along with one negative review. The one who didn't like it said that it was full of errors - after 2 emails, he couldn't name one and said that since he has a PhD and I don't - he knows more anyway.

Yeah the Einstein accelerating spaceship/elevator example is right out of his principle of equivalence paper from 1911. One has to visit that if one is going to understand the inconsistencies of his 1918 work. I limit my exploitation of these inconsistencies to the relative nature of time. At this point I don't dispute the possibility of the electron being confined to a universal speed limit - but tomorrow is another day.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 29, 2009 @ 02:07 GMT
Chris,

9 to 1 is pretty good odds.

You have to be methodical to get anywhere, but that makes it easy to loose sight of the bigger picture. Good luck with bringing the two together and don't worry if people take the time to disagree with you. It's when they ignore you that you loose traction.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jun. 29, 2009 @ 02:11 GMT
Actually, 1 to 9 would be the proper order, but it sounds wrong in this context.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 30, 2009 @ 21:58 GMT
Jason,

What were you healed of? Did the healing last? God’s power is truly greater than you could ever imagine. You saw the difference between the power of the others (not decisively noticeable) and God (powerful healing energies). You really don’t need the others. When you come to God in the way that you did, you are putting the others up to God as though they are equal to him. ...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jun. 30, 2009 @ 22:02 GMT
Steve,

You have had a difficult life so far, but it sounds like you have gained a very important understanding from it that many in similar circumstances do not figure out. So many who have hard lives and have suffered because of the evil and faults of others, just use that as an excuse and rationalize that they are justified to treat others badly and do evil to them because of it. Only a few see that bad experiences show them the results of living that way both on those who live that way and also on all of those that they come into contact with. When you see that, you can be moved by all the sorrow and suffering that you see to live your life in the opposite way and treat others with love and compassion and work in the world to make it a better place for all to live in. I have found from experience that you can’t do it by yourself, however. Only God can heal both you and those that you try to help and make the work that you do in the world actually make the world a better place to live in. That is why I changed from trying to fix the world myself, which I found to be ineffective, to preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ to others and doing the works that God gave me to do in the scriptures with them and in the world and then I found that God actually does the works to make the people better and the rest of the world a better place to live in.

The dark chocolate is the best for you. That’s good for me because I like it best anyway.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 1, 2009 @ 07:46 GMT
Paul,

It’s great to hear from you. When you asked me about how I was healed, I am lucky in that I don’t have any real physical problems. A lot of the pain I experience is emotional and has to do with my ADD. Sometimes I wonder if ADD is a marker or programmed (into the DNA) for the purpose of forcing that person away from financial gain and into some kind of higher or nobler service. If it was not for the pain, I might never have searched for God.

I believe that Christians have a role to play. Christians are God’s hard hitting shock troops. The fact that our liberties are protected by vast military hardware has to do with a long lineage of Christians who were not afraid to break some heads to get the job done. It is the Christian backbone that drove Saddam Hussein out of his torture rooms, ending his reign of evil and terror. We need Christians, but we need those with a gentle touch as well.

In all of my experiences with the Ascended Masters, there has been an ongoing theme of compassion, gentleness, and healing. They are well known for inspiring others into service to humanity. The term Father/Mother God makes a lot of sense as a duality. Christians are familiar with the idea of the Father, but would probably recoil from the idea of a motherly expression of God that is compassionate and healing. However, it is consistent with what I’ve experienced. There are many people out there who are frazzled and highly stressed. The last thing that they need is a hard hitting Christian adding more stress to their lives. That is what keeps me from reading the bible. I don’t handle stress very well. I got to work closely with God for a short while. In truth, I couldn’t handle the stress and I had to back off.

The idea that God gets offended if I’m not a Christian sounds like a scare tactic. It makes God sound hostile. It’s also not consistent with my experiences with God. God wants those who will do His work (yes, I acknowledge, I owe God some volunteer work). But I’ve never been dealt with harshly by the Lord. When I experimented with crystals and God’s power, there was no indication or sense that God had his finger on the SMITE button. It was more like delight. I don’t know what God you have experienced that is so easily offended; I haven’t encountered any such harshness. If anything, I’ve experienced a God who has been loving and less formal.

I've honestly considered Christianity, but it just drives up my stress level.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jul. 1, 2009 @ 07:55 GMT
Paul,

I got back together with my girlfriend. Which is fortunate, we both agreed that we are like soul mates. I've only known her a few months, so asking her to marry me is a bit too quick. But I have thought about it.

As for superstrings, I have this to say. God created the universe using superstrings. Superstrings are programmable and many of the features are turned off. At a time of God's choosing, he may grant us very limited access to the programming mode of the superstrings (and a limited abiity to program the laws of physics). It's just a fun thought.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 1, 2009 @ 10:23 GMT
Hello dear Paul ,

It's the life ,it exists bad and good people everywhere ,the most important is to choose the good way and always keep the love in all situation of life .

Like says Rousseau ,

"the man born good and it's the society which corrupts him."

Before I read a little of all ,I tried to understand why this suffering on Earth ,

You know dear Paul ,I think really that the evil is a human invention ,I see the bad like a simple image of a mirror ,the good is real and the bad is a mirror ,if you break this mirror ,the good rests and bad disappears .

It's too easy to say what it's the fault of the evil ,the education and the human responsability are foundamentals .

Thus the aim of the humanity is to evolve and to improve the systems around it.

We must change the bad in good ,the bad will disappear ,it's like that because it's imaginary ,but I admit that this bad is a chaotic moment which implies many problems on Earth ....it's lik a simple multiplication of education in Time since our first errors with first hominids ....And if we had given instead of exchanging......

I searched the best solutions to help this world and you know ,

the best solution is the united of universal systems,

it's what I try to do in some platforms ,unify the systems ,the good systems .

The adapted sciences on ground can make many things .

We have solutions but it exists a wall ,the actual system which divises .

The complementarity between humanistic systems accelerates the velocity of resolution of foundamentals problems and universal priorities .

I understand the fact what we are our past and bad customs ....but we evolve fortunaly .

In all case the future will be better it's sure because the evolution is a spherization and harmonization .

The question is when this Earth will be on t§he road because this actual system creates sufferings simply and the rule of intelligence is to improve the quality of life ,the interactions ,the foundamentals interactions .

It's optimist and it's well like that I think .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 2, 2009 @ 01:09 GMT
John,

You are welcome. I thought you could maybe use the motion generation of mass information. We cannot learn much from those who completely agree with us although it can give us that warm and fuzzy feeling of acceptance. Generally, even if in the end I find that I was completely right and the other person was completely wrong, I usually find new ways to look at the information that I...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 3, 2009 @ 08:20 GMT
Hello dear Paul ,

It's a very beautiful thread and your article is relevant .

These informations imply harmony .

You know Paul ,as I said you I think that the bad exists but is less stronger than the foundamental love and its physical creativity in increasing of mass by complexification for optimized interactions .

If we take thoses informations ,we admit that the foundamentals informations are more important and probably in thr very strong forces thus near limits .

I see the bad informations with very weak interactions and thus an easier way to change these informations .

The christian message is a pure love ,this information is foudamental because it's the ultim information by the creator entity .

A people who acts like Jesus is a people who see this universality and respect the physical building .

What I find important is the acting for our fellow man ,I think it's important when we understand what all is linked since the begining and for ever .

Many people ,I admit are goods and pray ,have this universal heart ....but they don't act ,the most important is there I think .

The problem comes from our actual global system who divides .

In all case ,this love was is and will be .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 3, 2009 @ 20:18 GMT
Paul,

You forget about gravity. That's why Einstein describes it as a curvature of space and time, because we don't really know why this energy collapses.

It's not that I'm saying light travels as waves and a medium, but that because quanta condense out of this medium, it forms waves. As quanta/photons. The brightest sources throw out the strongest light, so it takes less duration for quanta to form, thus the waves are shorter and blue. While older stars throw out weaker light, which takes longer to form quanta and so the waves appear longer. The further away the source, the redder it is, even if the original source is blue. The reason light forms quanta isn't just a property of light, but the interaction of light with mass and its gravitational contraction.

Are you sure God is a "he?"

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 7, 2009 @ 22:18 GMT
Jason,

I am glad to hear that you are in good physical health. It is definitely worth suffering some pain to find God. What are the symptoms that you suffer with the ADD? I ask that because there are many conditions that I have seen identified as ADD. You don’t have to answer if it is too personal. I believe that much of what is called ADD is the result of environmental conditions and...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 7, 2009 @ 22:42 GMT
Steve,

Yes, choosing the good way is the most important thing to do and love is the basis of that way. God summarizes the good way with the following two commandments: 1.Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind and with all thy strength and 2. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. I find that many do not really want to keep the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 7, 2009 @ 22:44 GMT
John,

I didn’t forget gravity. I just won’t go into that much at this time because it would require giving detailed information about fifth vector structuring and some details about sub-energy that it is not yet time for man to know. I have already given more information than I had to start with and the scriptures give more information on top of that so you already have a head start,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 8, 2009 @ 00:25 GMT
Paul,

I have been fortunate to have been afforded the opportunity to observe both the Ascended Masters and God/Christianity in terms of how they work in my life. It has been an education in compassion as well as a discovery that I am in no way perfect. God carries an enormous amount of weight within my consciousness. An angry God is something that can make me question my sanity. Fortunately, mental illness does not run in my family; although weirdness does. I would like to have a relationship with God, but Christianity makes me afraid of God. While God is infinitely powerful, I have had contact with God that has been compassionate; but it’s usually from an influence of the Masters. I have never felt peace of mind after dealing with Christians or reading the bible; it scares me. In contrast, I have dragged myself to the feet of the Masters, drained and deeply wounded. There is something magical to the way they heal. Many years ago, I worked at Intel for five months; I didn’t survive the trial period and they let me go. That was the darkest period of my life. I remember teetering on the edge and starting to slip. I crawled to the Masters and sat for a service in a church of higher spiritualism, an offshoot of Theosophy. It literally felt like I was being sprinkled with magic dust. It was that healing that averted my suicide and infamy. It was that touch that started a three year climb back. They have always been there for me. I recently got back together with Margot. I spoke the words, to Margot, that they whispered into my ear; it was like they were trying to get me to say what she needed to hear because she was in pain, and needed healing, as well. Sometimes I feel like they suggest words I should say, or gently yank my collar to get me to shut up when I’m about to say something stupid and inflammatory. The Masters have always been there for me. I do believe that the Masters and God can be unified because they are part of the same hierarchy. I believe that the Masters are supposed to work with healing and magical energies; by magical, I mean the ability to arouse interest, curiosity and fascination. They serve a need that humanity has, but cannot find with Christianity; that need for wonder. Christianity, by its very design, is intended to squash any kind of magic. They would ban Harry Potter if they could. I honestly believe that God is the hidden hand that makes spiritual healing possible. Christians and physicists both understand that magic is distracting from truth and from reality. Certainly, nobody wants the world to be filled with magicians and sorcerers, all of whom are trying to obtain more power and control over each other. That would be a disaster. But the very wise understand that humanity needs just a hint of it; just enough to keep the monsters of the mind and of the soul in check; and a few humans to perpetuate the mystery.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 8, 2009 @ 02:02 GMT
Paul,

Thanks for the tutorial. I do have some basic knowledge of the various elements and spectrums, as well as the forces at work within and between electrons, but certainly not enough to seriously argue the point. That doesn't mean I'm buying into Big Bang theory, as I think the limits of our knowledge of the properties of light and gravity are significant enough to explain redshift by some other factor than actually having all the galaxies physically flying apart. Obviously any mechanism I might propose is crude speculation on my part.

If you wish to explain why BBT is the most logical explanation for redshift, then can you answer this point I've raised various times; If the Big Bang Theory is right and all the space in the universe expanded from a singularity, why doesn't the speed of light increase proportionally? Since Inflation theory argues the universe isn't just expanding into a stable void of space, but that it is space itself that expands, wouldn't our most basic measure of this space, the speed at which light crosses it, have to increase as well? Think of it this way; If two objects are a billion light years apart and the universe doubles in size, wouldn't they be two billion light years apart? The problem is that if this is the case, than it is not expanding space, it's an increasing amount of stable space. That's how the Doppler effect works anyway. The train moving away from you isn't stretching the space in between, but simply adding to it. So it would seem that if space is actually stretching, then the two objects would always appear a billion light years apart, but then the expanding universe wouldn't be apparent and the whole theory falls apart.

"When he refers to himself while communicating with man he uses the male form so as to be in accordance with the structure of the image that he gave to man, in which man (male) is made in the image of God..."

So God is in the image of man, or man is in the image of God? Or both? It seems a little bit too much like Narcissus staring into his image.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 8, 2009 @ 21:38 GMT
Dear Paul ,

It's always relevant ,thanks for that .I respect your point of vue ,I see the most important piece of your message ,the reality or the imaginary .

You know in my model of spheres and spherization ,I don't use imaginaries ,I think that thoses extrapolations aren't essentials ,

If we take this physical Universe ,we see stars ,planets ,black Holes and an evolution .If this Universe isn't in the spherization ,it has no sense in correlation with our God because God is a creator of the ultim equation of building .The Time is this logic is a piece of the evolution thus isn't imaginary but real .It's evident .

I don't speak here dear Paul about what there is behind walls of perceptibility(quat/cosmol)and after the death ,No I speak about the physial reality .

And the foundamental informations in all things ,quantum spheres in rotation for me .

I think one thing dear Paul ,when a people has the real faith ,this universality ,it's the most important ,it's like ....always see in the sky before acting ....the most important is to know why we are on Earth ....there is an ultim physical aim and an unification between all .

I don't agree about the choice on Earth between bad and good ,God ,the entity ,the equation ,the entropy,the universal love ,hasn't created both of them ,the bad is a simple human invention .It's a young error of our young evolution simply .

I can understand that this kind of data implies many problems with religious foundations ,many years of checking ,many years of ....but it's like that ,even the religion evolves ....

You know Paul ,I know what my theory implies some revolutions but it's not my fault ,really hihihi

The spherization shows us the harmony of creation of the ultim entropy ,with the space in mass and the mass in energy .We are going to a beautiful sphere of light ,perhaps the ultim love .

I d like ask you one thing Paul ,What do you think about the Vatican for exemple ,what do you think about catholiscism? ,what do you think about christianity ?

What do you think about Coran and Talmud ?

do you see a solution ?

On the other side with the universality ,all is easier because in this case ,the universal respect is there .

friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 11, 2009 @ 12:32 GMT
Hi ,

I think about Rousseau ,he hasn't wrong ,we are of course under parameters of evolution and many factors interact but the main code is harmony in all things and thus it's easier to go in the road of this harmomy,this universal complexification of love .The future sphere is a perfect harmony and the quantum codes is in this logic evidently .

That's implies a hope of this ultim code (quat/cosm).

Of course I understand your message ,indeed there are crazzy people and their actings are difficult to encircle ,the psychology and the education there are crucial points.

The sufferings and the poverty can imply with a bad education and a specific psychology some chaotics comportments because they don't understand this universality and thus the rule like human like a catalyzer of this complexificqtion of love towards ultim harmony between mass systems .

But in the ultim code the balance of harmonization is there and thus is foundamental .We receive universal messages and it's easier to apllicate these universalities than ....this point of vue implies a tolerance in love because all is linked towards this harmonization ,spherization for me .

The spherization of our Unverse shows us this fantastic ,wonderful building of harmony .

The creations continue to improve themselves ,to complexificate themselves ,.....the notion of physical aim shows us this entropy behind our walls .

The information was is and will be ,a pure creation of love in fact in all things .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 12, 2009 @ 11:09 GMT
Hi all ,

Our Story shows us our spirituazl evolution .

Let's take the Book of Death ,the Egyptians 2000-1500 before the Christ .

It was the first book about life and death ,the universal link in fact .

About 1400....still the search of secrets ,mysteries ....like the Mysteries of Eleusis ....and that continues ....

about 1200 Moise and the Judaism ...Yahvé to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 18, 2009 @ 20:27 GMT
Jason,

If you would like to truly have a relationship with God, the only way to get it is through Jesus Christ. Your fears are not well founded though. Jesus’ willingness to die on the cross for us so we can have our sins forgiven and be saved demonstrates that God’s love and compassion toward us is greater than any others. How many others have done that for you. God does not expect...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 18, 2009 @ 20:33 GMT
John,

You are welcome. I don’t know where you get the idea that I back the big bang theory. I thought I said at least once or twice in previous posts to you that at least most of the red shift could be attributed to interactions between sub-energy and energy photons. I hope you will remember that in future posts so we don’t have to go over it again and again.

Again, I don’t think that the big bang theory is the most logical explanation for red shift. The usual description given by those who are for the big bang theory is that in local systems gravity offsets the expansion to keep all the matter particles in that local environment in the same positions relative to each other so we don’t see the expansion. You are right that an expansion would mean that things are at least somewhat different than we observe them to be. As an example, if an object falls toward earth from fifty thousand miles up above it, the expansion of the space within that fifty thousand mile distance would offset the fall to some extent that would depend on the rate of expansion. This would mean that what we measure as the gravitational constant would actually be a combination of the true gravitational constant with an amount subtracted from it due to the expansion. The true gravitational constant would be greater than what we measure it to be. Moreover, because the gravitational effect decreases according to the square of the distance while the expansion rate of space would presumably be constant throughout space, it would be expected that a distance point would be reached from a massive object at which the gravitational effect would just equal the expansion rate and if an object were located at some point beyond that it would be carried off by the spatial expansion. It would seem that the equalization point would not be an extremely large distance from the massive object unless the spatial expansion rate is extremely small. To answer your question they would probably say that if the objects were gravitationally decoupled the distance would become two billion light years apart in your example. There wouldn’t be any such thing as truly stable space because the expansion would be an instability that would cause a continual spatial change (increase).

Man is made in the image of God, but the image is nowhere near the fullness of the real one in this case as is generally the case with most images. God is not made in the image of man both because he was not made and also he is much more than man who is his image. I don’t think you have to worry about God getting so caught up in looking at man (his image) that he would do nothing else. We are to become extensions of him to help him in his works much like your body helps you in your works, except much better.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul N. Butler wrote on Jul. 18, 2009 @ 21:02 GMT
Steve,

Your welcome.

I wasn’t just talking about a math model though because all math models are at best images or similitudes of reality, but are not the real thing. They are just abstract language representations. Because of man’s limited knowledge, they are generally greatly lacking and leave a lot to be desired. I find it better to work with reality and only use math when...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Frank Martin DiMeglio wrote on Jul. 19, 2009 @ 05:17 GMT
"God" does not exist. The dream makes thought more like sensory experience in general; and this reduces the [relative] totality of experience. The natural and integrated extensiveness of being and experience go hand in hand. In fact, we are so smart in the dream that we are stupid. Dream experience is necessarily different from waking, for it combines opposites. These are facts folks, so think hard on this.

Frank Martin DiMeglio (author)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 19, 2009 @ 13:19 GMT
Paul, Your concern for babies, old people and the disabled is admirable, but the message is somewhat undercut by your vision of God as the Grim Reaper of all who disagree with your variety of Christianity.

One inconsistency of Christian doctrine that baffles me is that Jesus is described as being of the line of David, through Joseph. How could that be, if he was born of a virgin?

You do offer a well stated description of emergence. Why then would you consider God to be a ideal of top down complex knowledge, as opposed to the source of this bottom up emergent process? In the natural world, emergent effects arise from a consolidation of unstable complexity, so it is difficult, if not impossible to reverse engineer them, since it isn't a linear process. Complex elements emerge when masses of more basic ones collapse and heat up. Complex biology emerges as populations of simpler forms expand and crash. Society is at its most innovative when under stress. If life was always ideal, why would we have ever developed the levels of complexity that we have. As the old saying goes, what doesn't kill us, just makes us stronger. That's evolution. You basically want the end of history to arrive in time to validate your particular beliefs. Saved by the bell.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jul. 19, 2009 @ 20:38 GMT
John,

I agree with you. Christians do make God and Jesus seem like the "grim reaper" or extremely dangerous for anyone who doesn't embrace the gospel. I have a need for magic in my DNA; I need to understand how the universe really works. For as long as I can remember, I have wanted to unlock the secrets of the universe; it has to be genetic and/or written in my soul.

Paul,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 20, 2009 @ 09:48 GMT
Dear Paul ,

I am going to answer you ,it's a long text for me lol but I like read thus it's well like that ,the details are so important to see the whole .

Until soon

Friendly

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 20, 2009 @ 15:53 GMT
Jason,

You are right about organized religion being masters of controlling the group mind. The illogical aspects are a fundamental component of that, as they require members to forego their own rational objectivity in order to belong.

The problem is the dichotomy of the spirit and the intellect. Being indivisible, the spirit is elemental. Knowledge, on the other hand, is the very process of making distinctions and judging among them. So there is an inherent emotional distance and hubris to the intellect that is fundamental. So the Gods of religion must try to isolate you from the very core of your being in order to have power over you.

I many ways, this is necessary for a functioning society, in order to place some intellectual restraint on our emotions, but it should be recognized as such and not try to get away with quite so much bs. When the shell gets so hard that the being within cannot grow, it must be shed, or the being will die.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 10:44 GMT
John,

I know all about dichotomies and dualities. I am not at all surprised that humanity is confused about religion/spirituality and their dualities of logic/money/etc... I think that organized religion serves the community and is generally a good thing. Human beings do have appetites (7 deadly sins) that need to be kept in check. In fact, during my experiences with the Deity, I came across the serpent in the garden; I asked it what it really wanted. Evil really wants unrestricted pleasure. As we all know, unrestricted pleasure cannot last long before people start getting hurt.

But I have to chastise Christians/Christianity in their mistaken conviction that Christianity is the only path to God. Think about it. If another religion tells people to obey the Golden Rule; or teaches spiritual healing or inspires people or even provides interesting ideas to think about, it doesn't take a PhD in superstring theory to figure out that it's not evil or of Satan. To be evil or about Satan, then it has to encourage people to pursue their appetites at the expense of other human beings. I find it suspicious when a religion's Deity has no interest in honorable and good people; only that its members can be saved if they embrace that particular religion.

I have found my experiences with God to be mindblowing and delightful. But if others cannot make peace with God, then I would urge them to at least practice the Golden Rule. Make money, have fun, but treat people fairly. What could be more Christ-like than that?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 18:17 GMT
Jason,

It's in the moderation. Pleasure is okay, just in excess it's counterproductive. Religions have the tendency to go overboard in restricting pleasure, in the assumption that if a little abstinence is good, than the total rejection of pleasure is great. The intellect emerges from the emotions, as yes and no are the intellectualization of the emotional good and bad. So it is counterproductive to try to completely negate the emotions.

The Golden Rule; To do unto others, as you would have them do unto you, is actually proactive moral relativism. What goes round, comes round.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 20:43 GMT
John,

I completely agree with your position. I would prefer to live among people who can pursue their happiness, but will refrain or stop when others might come to harm in some real way. Risk is left to the wise judgement of a society nourished by wisdom.

In contrast, it makes no sense to be forced into feeling guilty because we don't measure up to a Godlike standard of perfection. A diety would not have created imperfect human beings if it bothered him that much to look upon us. That is a guilt based strategy that forces the human mind into bondage. That is what frightens people away from God. In my opinion, in is our faults that cause us to seek out God. I've never met a God that became angry at me for not reading the scripture. I've never met a God that became angry at me for questioning. I've only found patience and love from the Deity. The Hellfire and wrathful God of Christianity that Christians keeps pointing to, with an emphasis on blood and sacrifice, in contrast with Ascended Masters who keep emphasizing ethics, techiques in healing, brotherly love and psychic gifts, makes me wonder if our ability to recognise the difference between good and evil should be carefully inspected.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 21:25 GMT
In just a few seconds of intuitively experiencing the blood of Christ, I felt the suffering of aeons of evolution of life upon the planet earth; like the crying out to God or anyone or thing that could releave the pain. It is NOT, I repeat, NOT a torment by a cruel God. It is part of the driving force, the fires of Creation, pain and pleasure, that cause all living things to evolve.

I will say this with emphasis and authority. There really are spiritually advanced beings of love and light who reach out to humanity to help and guide those who call upon them. They are of God and good. They do teach and inspire. It is not that they cannot command the forces of nature to help us (they can); it is the consequences of direct interference that can do more harm than good. But they stand behind and support religious writings (bible, etc.), institutions and efforts that attempt to alleviate and heal the suffering of humanity. They are beings of light; with emphasis upon the double meaning of "light" as both physics, and also virtue. There is an important significance to the relationship between "breaking symmetry" leading to particles with mass and the the difference between mortality (broken symmetry) and everlasting life (unification with God in perfected physical/spiritual form).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 21, 2009 @ 23:12 GMT
No matter who we would prefer to live with, good and evil both live together within society. All we can do is be aware of the fact that evil people are amongst us and will prey on the naive, vulnerable or unfortunate people that they encounter because this is what they do and it gives them pleasure. Evil people pervade all areas and levels of society, even the churches.They are excellent mimics of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 22, 2009 @ 07:13 GMT
Georgina,

If there are people who are evil because of a defective brain, then eternal punishment for transgressions doesn't seem reasonable. In fact, God has all sorts of lost sheep among those who are mentally ill or mentally retarted. I would hate to think that a benign God would be so willing to let innocent people suffer eternally because their brain wasn't working properly. Of course, I could go along with punishment in the afterlife for evils done during one's lifetime. The Sadam Husseins and Hitlers of the world should certainly be required to suffer in the afterlife. But to make someone who is mentally ill or, in my case, dense, have to suffer eternal damnation for disagreeing with one particular religion; it doesn't inspire fuzzy feelings of love and goodwill towards the Designer.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 22, 2009 @ 09:06 GMT
Evil, according to my dictionary, is being morally wrong or wicked, causing harm or injury, is characterised by anger or spite, a force or power that brings about wickedness or harm. I did not say that these evil people have a brain defect. Their brains are healthy and function perfectly well, but differently. These people are not mentally ill or lacking in intelligence but express different behaviour because of the way in which the brain functions.They do not develop usual adult social intelligence.They have what is called an antisocial personality disorder, or may be identified as a sociopath or psychopath.

It is not even really a disorder but difference.They make excellent fearless warriors and seek and enjoy power and control over others. This may explain the continuation of these traits throughout human history.They are part of the genetic diversity of the human species.This difference in human behaviour has been observed and commented upon since antiquity. Hence the ancient scriptural references.

Innocent is a strange word to use in this context. These antisocial people get personal satisfaction from destroying other people emotionally, financially, socially or physically.These people are well aware of what they do but have no empathy for others and no conscience to control their antisocial behaviour.Since they choose their behaviour despite knowing the rules of society are they innocent? As they do not control their antisocial behaviour by internal means what incentive might humanity have devised to achieve this,for the good of society as a whole?

The people you mention just happen to be well known but other people commit unimaginable evil without even coming to the attention of the law enforcement agencies.Therefore the numbers of such people in society are probably vastly underestimated.They may be popular,friendly, charming except to their victims.Strict religious adherence may help some to moderate their antisocial behaviour (which thus benefits others) because there are strict external rules and clearly expressed very severe sanctions for breaking those rules.This is especially relevant to such people since they tend to take words very literally rather than finding any meaning "between the lines".This semantic aphasia is a characteristic of the disorder.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 22, 2009 @ 10:28 GMT
Evil people pervade all areas and levels of society, even the churches

Well said Georgina ,bad and good people are everywhere in all cultures ,religions or countries .

Bad or good governance all is there ,to be or not to be

We see well with our heart ,the essential is invisible for eyes .....

Cordially

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 22, 2009 @ 14:29 GMT
Georgina,

You said,"This is especially relevant to such people since they tend to take words very literally rather than finding any meaning "between the lines".This semantic aphasia is a characteristic of the disorder."

I know someone like that in my personal life. Obviously that's not enough to call someone evil; it's all of the other conversations that have been a source of pain and dispair.

Thank you for the insight. I had no idea that this person, who was sucking the life right out of me, may actually be evil. It does make sense.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 22, 2009 @ 21:14 GMT
Semantic aphasia alone would not be enough to diagnose an antisocial personality disorder but it is associated with these conditions because the brains of such people handle language differently.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 23, 2009 @ 10:21 GMT
There are black holes of bad intention and action from which little to no light emerges, but we can not afford to make evil a black box of incomprehensibility, because that empowers it. The fear is that if we do try to understand the emotions, physics and logic involved, that we will be also drawn in, but that's a chance we have to take. Those who don't understand the power of the negative are as easily drawn to it, as those who willingly sell their souls to it. It is from this vast sea of ignorance which those truly bent on self-centered power drawn their power. Hannah Adrent called it the banality of evil.

Life is this thin membrane between the light we are attracted to and the dark we are repelled by, but often dangers can exist in the light and solace does exist in the dark. You just have to be as aware as possible of the many forces at work and how they affect your reality.

One of the few quotes imprinted on my brain is from The Trial of Socrates; "The fear of death is a pretense of wisdom and false wisdom at that. For who knows what men in their fear believe to be the greatest evil, may not in fact be the greatest good."

The fact is that everything which has a beginning, also has an end. Only that part of us which has always existed, will always exist.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 23, 2009 @ 16:14 GMT
I watched the movie Eagle Eye last night and while it's the rogue super computer genre, there was an very interesting twist. Rather than claiming it became conscious, the situation was that since it was programed to make autonomous decisions and was loaded with all possible information, including the Constitution as its legal foundation, it concluded the government was acting unconstitutionally and extra judicially, specifically in relation to some war on terror operations. Essentially it had been programed with a moral code and decided the government was acting unconstitutionally and needed to be removed. By whatever means necessary.

It was an interesting contrast between consciousness and moral judgement.

Scientific American was an interesting article about how ant colonies make more rational decisions than cognitive animals do. In a sense though, the conclusion is fairly prosaic, in that more information causes more potential for bad decisions. Linear logic causes over projection, while the parallel processing of the collective corrects itself faster.

I think this bears on the discussion of good vs. evil, in that often evil arises due to this over projection of linear thinking, in that if something is good, than more is better. The problem is that our rational thought processes and all of what we recognize as social and technological evolution is also a function of this over projection. The desire to continually expand one's own perspective and potential, even if it comes at the expense of others. All wars, genocide, crime, etc. are generally the result of some group or individual wanting more than they have and doing whatever is required to get it. Not that this absolves evil, but it must be taken into consideration if we are to understand what we are talking about.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 23, 2009 @ 20:50 GMT
Georgina,

That person I mentioned is a friend. Yes, sometimes he just irritates me with his absolute focus on knowledge/reason. He's like a prickly plant that has to be handled carefully. Diplomacy goes a long way in this world.

John,

I think I should start calling you 'John the Wise'. I agree that it's important to understand the motives of those we call evil. Certainly, their actions can help determine both motives, but more importantly whether they really are evil or simply have a sincere and valid difference in viewpoint.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 01:12 GMT
Evil is often portrayed as a disembodied force at work through supernatural entities such as daemons or possessing people to make them evil. Everything scary, the fears of normal humans are all lumped together in this category of evil. The dark, the ugly, the creepy things, decay etc etc. However these are just normal fears. Fear of the unknown, fear of loosing control, fear of death etc. Not evil...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 09:58 GMT
Jason,

Thanks. Though John the simple might be more appropriate. It better covers both my strengths and weaknesses. Just as linear projection is humanity's greatest strength and weakness, as we strive to go further, faster, higher, yet always know the end will come. So the cycle of ever higher and more complex goals perpetuates. That's one of the emotional benefits of death, in that the reset button is constantly being pushed, so we have to start again, with whatever knowledge of past effort that's passed on.

Georgina,

You have it backwards. Those who have no fear, have no reason to do bad. They accept their fate and are simply one with the rest of reality, so there is no reason a perpetuate a cycle they know will only come back to haunt them. It's those consumed by their fears who need to pass them on, much like a child abuser was originally an abused child. They develop a benign facade because they need to hide their fear and hide from their fear, pretending it doesn't exist, so that it doesn't consume them. They have to sacrifice others to their fears.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 10:40 GMT
Jason,

You are not an evil lol

In fact we are all babies of Universe ,linked since the begining .The morality is evident when we understand the dynamic of evolution of our Universe .

On Earth ,there are so many moral systems and I understand your point of vue Georgina ,the fear is a driving force of the check.This kind of systems is used to check or trying to make the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 15:50 GMT
I think many human beings, the older and more experienced ones, have an unconscious fear of death and their own mortality. To someone who really is evil, the chaos and suffering of life must seem like an opportunistic paradice. Yet, it was a dream I had last night that basically told me, or reminded me, that this world desperately needs compassionate and caring people. I wish I could do more to ease the suffering. Steve really does help others in very real ways; he is a precious example of what real goodness is all about. I really wish I could prove to you all that there is an everlasting life in this universe; that death is not final, just the shedding of the physical body. I wish I could demonstrate to you that mortality is a misleading appearance of a broken universe with stubborly unhelpful physics. Were in not for the persistent efforts of mysterious and kindhearted spirits, one might be fooled into bekieving such a miserable appearance.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 16:33 GMT
Dear Jason,

It's nice Jason,thanks ,really ,it's important for me the goodness ,it's the most difficult way because when you are too nice ,some people profit of that .

Fortunally like the spaceship ,we grow and a kind of shield is created for be a little less anxious about the human nature .But I am persuaded it's the good way ,difficult but essential .When a person is too nice ,kind ,on this planetary system and its past ,it's indeed very very difficult .It's the life .

On the other side ,this way is so beautiful ,so universal ,and implies the contemplations if I can say ,the contemplations of creations ,this way permits the complementarity of creations .

This physical Universe is still young in fact but we can extrapolate the fantastic future of harmony .

The sciences are the fisrt spirituality ,we see indeed in the creations ,the forces behind ,this splendid equation towards harmony show us the truth of our future.

I agree The death don't exist ,all changes and evolves ,nothing is lost in fact ,all is transformed and continues...

It's a beautiful story ,the universal story .

I support you if you can demonstrate that ,it will be evidently difficult but I support you .In fact this difficulty is simple in the same time .I understand the need of sharing for help others .It's a beautiful optic Jason .

Sincerely

Steve

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 24, 2009 @ 22:55 GMT
John,

It can be demonstrated that psychopathic individuals do not experience the emotion of fear.MRI scans, brain wave activity and timing of responses have all been used to investigate this scientifically.They do not have the same measurable physiological responses to images that evoke emotional responses in others. Dismembered bodies have the same emotional meaning as a table lamp.Most adults take longer to process emotional words such as "rape" rather than neutral words such as "table". Psychopathic individuals show no measurable difference in processing time.

They are expert liars and able to pass lie detector tests in part because they do not have any anxiety, that is measured by electrical conductivity of the skin. They also seem to use sound bites of language to fit whatever circumstance arises rather than storing joined up ideas. This makes retrieval of words much quicker so there is no hesitation.They can contradict themselves within a single sentence and see no hypocrisy. They can deny having said something immediately after having said it.They have measurably different brain wave patterns. This is science not just wishful thinking.

Being in control of your fears and recognising them for what they are is not the same as being physiologically incapable of experiencing fear.When one has no fear of the consequences of ones actions, no fear of punishment and no conscience then one is operating within in a very different subjective reality to people experiencing the fully range of emotions and usual adult social intelligence.

Love, peace, harmony of all mankind sounds very nice but there are people who do not "get it" and will never be able to "get it" because they are incapable of understanding.Not because of lack of intelligence but because of physiological differences in brain structure and function. They can hear the words, repeat the words, teach other people the words but they are just meaningless sound bites that other people want to hear. They do not understand it on an emotional level. Whatever they say, they have no personal values and are incapable of truly relating ideas such as values or morality to their own behaviour.These are not just convicted criminals but also ordinary people even from "nice" families, successful business people, church members etc.

It easy for such people to say the right words when they know what someone wants to hear and to be seen doing the right thing, just when it will have the greatest effect.

" He that sees no ill is soonest beguiled."English proverb.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgiona Parry wrote on Jul. 25, 2009 @ 02:28 GMT
There is a saying. "All it takes for a lie to become the truth is for someone to say that it is." Many people believe that the truth is what they say it is, rather than some external absolute, that may differ from their own viewpoint. This may be just a stubborn failure to admit the possibility of being in error, due to lack of information or coming to incorrect conclusions based on faulty or incomplete evidence, for example.

When deliberate deception comes in to play it becomes even more complicated. Such as when a person swears on her children's lives that she is telling the truth, when she is telling bare faced obvious lies.Whilst remaining adamant that it is the truth, she knows it to be untrue. However if a deception works then the known untruth becomes the accepted truth.

What then is true? rather than just accepted as true.

Even the colour of the sky as mentioned in the question is up for debate. According to which organism is the sky that particular colour on that day? The colour perception depending on the sense organ used and analysis of the input by that organism. Was it observed directly or through a tinted window, glasses or observational instrument? The question assumes that there is an absolute external truth that will be perceived in the same way by all organisms and individuals.This is not so.Bees and humans see colour differently.We can see more of the red end of the spectrum and they can see more of the violet end.

The infinite mind would have to contain the complete perception of every single organism. It will therefore contain vast amounts of contradictory true statements, as well as those untruths perceived by the organisms as truths.It would then perhaps form the view that it may or may not be an infinite mind and that it is God and also not God. For those individuals that believe it to be God it may be the absolute truth and for those that do not it is a lie.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 25, 2009 @ 05:33 GMT
Georgina,

Call it pessimism if you like, but if someone has to swear that they are telling the truth, I usually expect that their lying. My question is usually: what does this person want? It's important to be able to figure out what somebody wants. If it's something I can give them, sometimes I'm happy to give it. I've met people who only wanted someone to agree with their crazy ideas.

As for exhaustive and absolute knowledge, let's admit what we really want. We don't want to be the brain in the bottle. We want to pull the strings. We want a more capability then what the laws of physics allow. Don't we? It's not evil to want to be free of the restrictions.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 25, 2009 @ 20:21 GMT
Georgina,

I would certainly agree psychopaths are emotionally deficient, but still hold that those with an abundance of negative emotions are a major source of bad behavior.

What is evil? For your point to apply, the lack of emotion must be the cause of deliberate injury, not just a characteristic of the perpetrator. If a shark bites your leg off, it isn't because it is incapable of feeling your pain, but simply because it is hungry. Bernie Madoff would probably be the most topical example of psychopathic behavior. Obviously he had to know the level of grief he was causing and it didn't stop him, nor did the potential consequences of getting caught. The question then is; What motivated him? He had no apparent fear, yet he obviously must have had some need or desire that compelled him. Has he an adrenalin junky, just that greedy, was there such a profound contempt for others acquisitiveness, etc.

The point is that without that desire/fear, even if it's something far beyond the pale of appropriate behavior, there is no motivation to do much good, or bad. Even for those who reside in the reptilian brain.

The kid that shot all those people at Virgina Tech would have to be considered psychopathic, yet he was definitely overwhelmed by negative feelings toward himself and everyone else.

P.S.

You are right. An objective perspective is an oxymoron. You can't have distinctions without also having differences of perspective, so the only way to eliminate different perspectives is to eliminate all distinctions, but without distinctions, there is no perspective.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 03:09 GMT
John,

You said that for my point to apply the lack of emotion must be the cause of deliberate harm. I will agree that some harm may be caused by lack of comprehension of how the other person feels and not being able to empathise, not realising that harm has been done. However the real evil is in the harm deliberately inflicted for personal reward, be that excitement, amusement, financial gain or physical pleasure. A person who does not understand fear finds amusement in the look of horror and funny behaviour of a terrified person. The challenge of perpetrating illegal acts without being apprehended can be exciting for such people.Other people may be exploited as objects for financial gain or personal pleasure.Verbal and physical abuse, fear, brutality,deception and manipulation are all used for these purposes. This is the evil behind the majority of crime and human suffering. The mentally ill may sometimes perpetrate horrific crimes because they did not receive the help and support that they needed. These are people with treatable illnesses not evil personalities. Personality disorders are not the same as mental illness.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 07:14 GMT
Hi Georgina,

I can't help but think that not all harm is best dealt with by punishment. I can think of parents who are just overwhelmed by their responsibilies to their children. They yell and scream at their kids because their child rearing methods are ineffective. Raising kids is probably one of the hardest and most stressful jobs there is.

I can imagine people who are so overwhelmed by the stresses of life, staying employed, the expectations of others, that they lash out in anger and with hostility. I wouldn't want to punish those people either.

Pleasure is a difficult thing to obtain without hurting others. Something as simple as wanting the pleasure of the last word in an argument can create more anguish than it's worth. When I had the psychic experience of talking to the serpent in the garden, I asked it what motivated it to be evil. It said it wanted unrestricted pleasure. I don't know when or how it happened. I remember having a very happy childhood. Somewhere over the years, responsibility and stress has made it hard to find happiness and pleasure. My girlfriend is one of the few sources of pleasure and happiness. I have to share Margot with her sister/family. My attempts to have her all to myself have blown up in my face. The only workable strategy left is to share her and be patient until our situtations change and she can move in.

Georgina, I feel like the Deity has given all of the knowledge I ever wanted, and more than I can bear. I have learned the truth about so many things about human nature; about the need for pleasure and happiness in a world filled with pain, fear and stress. We're like 6 billion parrots fighting over the last cracker. I cannot comprehend a God that could be wrathful and angry at us. But I feel in my bones that God has the deepest love and compassion for our suffering.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 07:42 GMT
Jason,

It makes no difference to the experience if we are brains in bottles.The experience is awesome and incredible in all its complexity. The cosmos, weather systems, natural diversity and interdependence, social structures and co-operation, knowledge and technology. The kaleidoscope of sensory and emotional experience.

I do not think curiosity is evil and it is human nature to try to push the limits of possibility. Whether unicycling the half pipe backwards or travelling to Mars. Harm can arise from not realising the consequences of our actions though.Just as a child, fascinated by the beauty of a flaming match, may accidentally burn down the house.Many technologies will be found to have caused more harm to mankind than good.It is only evil however if the harm is known but ignored, denied or covered up and so continues.

I do not think fantasy or dreaming is evil. Magic is entertaining deception and a good livelihood for some.When it is understood it ceases to be magical.The rabbit out of the hat fascinated me until I learned how it is done. Now it is no longer magical but simple, ordinary and quite dull. When used to deceive vulnerable or naive people for financial reward, such as faking supernatural cures it becomes evil.When the supernatural is understood by science it will be seen to be natural and just like the rabbit out of the hat quite simple and ordinary. (Such as the science fact that infra sound can cause vibration of the eye ball, leading to feelings of unease and a "presence".)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 09:15 GMT
Jason,

Our last posts crossed.I have said nothing about actual punishment.Only that it may benefit society, as a whole, if a certain group of people within society believe literally in the consequence of eternal punishment in hell-fire for disobedience to Gods will. This has no relevance to those other people that do not require such incentive because they have internal mechanisms to control impulses for antisocial behaviour.

People unable to cope with the pressures of life require support, understanding and assistance if they want it.We can make lifestyle choices and changes that can reduce the stresses of life, but may not want to. We each have our own life to live. We do not have to live as slaves in order to have material wealth if we do not choose that lifestyle. We do not have to live up to other peoples expectations or demands if they are unreasonable.We can make time for relaxation, time out with nature, sunshine, exercise and healthy food, if we choose.Simple health giving pleasure is not difficult to obtain and does not require harm to other humans, animals or the natural environment.Selfish,short sighted, greedy, destructive pleasure is an error or sin and may lead to guilt or remorse.It is not evil though, unless there is an intention to cause harm and no remorse.

It is unfortunate that often people are isolated from family that might assist with parenting skills, give respite from childcare and provide additional adult authority and positive role modelling.(Parents are not always to blame for out of control kids though. Sometimes they are actually raising kids with genetically inherited personality disorders.)

Belief in a compassionate deity gives strength and peace to millions of people.

It is certainly not an act of kindness to attempt to diminish a man's faith when it has such a positive and perhaps in some cases vital psychological benefit.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 26, 2009 @ 16:58 GMT
Georgina,

There are certainly people who take pleasure in others pain. The specific issue between us is the extent to which it is nature(yours), or nurture(mine). Both are possible. The larger question is understanding the why in order to find ways of resolving the problems. For some, it is very much as innate as a cat playing with a mouse. It isn't a disease, though, but an aspect of predation. It empowers them to consume you. Your loss is their gain. The response is to expand the health of your community and connections within it so that the full weight of the community is brought to bear on those who would do you harm, so they lose the equation. You can formalize this as the wrath of God, but it only works if the social mechanisms are in place. This means those willing and able to identify with one another stand against those who don't and the evolutionary process favors the members over the predators. This has obviously been going on for eons. The problems reassert when the community is unhealthy and internal injuries manifest and expand, resulting in cancers within the social body. It's these negative feedback loops I'm referring to.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 27, 2009 @ 00:35 GMT
John,

All organisms are the product of both nature and nurture.For some people life experiences are brutalising.A potentially caring individual may be hardened into a cold uncaring one by the harm it has endured. Usually harm inflicted by an antisocial individual or individuals.Others are genetically pre ordained to be antisocial and it makes no difference how benign, caring and privileged the background.They are behaving naturally, according to their nature. How this is viewed obviously depends on personal perspective and experiences.And some human minds think very differently to others.

Even where community is strong manipulation of perception may prevent antisocial people from being identified and sometimes innocent people are mis-identified. A web of lies and false evidence may have been be spread by the antisocial individual, to alienate and discredit the victim. When truth is determined by perceptions, deception can manipulate those perceptions, allowing lies to be easily accepted as the truth.There is another English proverb, "Better the devil you know."(than one you don't know.) www.bullyonline.org

This ties in with the question of how all true statements can be given without taking into account the whole perception of each organism.And why many true statements from different organisms will be contradictory.What is accepted as true by one person may not be true for someone else.Relativity also comes into this because different observers may observe the same events occurring in different orders.It is not possible to unify all observers to have just one true perspective.Also each mind is unique in its neural structure and therefore generates its own unique subjective reality.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 27, 2009 @ 09:35 GMT
Georgina,

The costs, vs. the benefits of social complexity. We live in a house of mirrors.

And don't always like what we see.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Jul. 27, 2009 @ 23:01 GMT
John,

Yes. We live surrounded by manipulation of perception and deception, both benign and malicious. Marketing messages and promotions, publicity campaigns, political propaganda.Censorship of "free speech", biased, selective and exaggerated media reporting, gossip, rumour, lies, false impressions and ideas portrayed as indisputable truth. All of this moulds our opinions as our minds passively take in all of the input provided, process it, forming a part of our subjective reality.

When we stop to consider those things that we have assumed to be correct or have given little thought to, we may realise that the truth is not necessarily what we had previously thought.It is not possible to analyse and verify every message. We each operate on a raft of assumptions and passively acquired information, or misinformation.Realising how easily our thoughts and behaviour can be manipulated and how easily we are unknowingly deceived is not dwelling in negativity but awakening, in my opinion.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 27, 2009 @ 23:45 GMT
Georgina,

I want to agree with you about how our perceptions are manipulated by mass media, political propaganda, censorship, etc. I stopped listening to all of the 'noise' because I was getting so sick of it. Let me know if you disagree, but the best we can hope for, politically speaking, is a wise and intelligent stalemate between two factions that both agree on freedom of speech/religion. In the US, we have a two party system of idiots who argue constantly. If both parties can agree on something, it's probably a good idea. I don't trust unity; Sadam Hussein achieved 100% unity. I'll bet that everyone can agree that they don't want to be tortured. Human beings have two halves of a brain. That means were supposed to disagree; that's what debate is for.

As for waking up, do you remember the Matrix? Reality isn't pretty. You have to balance compassion with intelligence (not that easy to do). As for intelligence, I take comfort knowing that GR and QM stump the most intelligent people in the world. It gives me hope that cold logic falls short in revealing the ultimate Truth.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 09:58 GMT
There is an old saying that the opposite of small truths are false, while the opposite of large truths are also true.

Every time we think we have reality fairly well understood, those little leaks in our bubble burst open and it all gets washed away.

It's all an illusion of fragile equilibrium.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 13:57 GMT
Dear Paul ,here is my answer in late .

I agree with you ,the math must be univeral and real .It's the problem with some imaginaries extrapolations and thus some chaotics systems .I take the reletavity to make some differences .It's essential .The abstraction is indeed a shield of the truth .The reality is so important,it shows us the fantastic equation of love .There the differences...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 18:51 GMT
John,

I've never heard that expression before; but it makes perfect sense.

The laws of physics frustrate me. The more I think about it, the more I wonder if they really are absolutes and not implementations. But if that were the case, then I could easily imagine that a Deity engineered it that way.

Steve,

I do understand when you say that an imagined model is chaotic, unreal and short lived. I have wrestled with the laws of physics for many years. While conservation laws and mathematics allow the universe to be stable, it's stability also forces mortality upon us. Perhaps it is mortality that protects the universe from any kind of immortal wickedness. If humanity were to unlock the secrets to creation, to rewrite the Laws of physics more to our liking, would be give in to our selfish desires and wickedness? Evil and immortal, would we become a dire threat to life and liberty everywhere in the cosmos? They say that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts, absolutely. The power to reconfigure the laws of physics themselves into something more suitable to our needs and desires, the ability to violate conservation laws, would that be too much power for a mortal? Is there no degree of personal mastery, serenity or moral nature that could exercise such power over the laws of nature, for all eternity? It's just a thought...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Wolfe/wulphstein@gmail.com wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 20:06 GMT
I've been stumped for a while concerning the laws of physics. I decided to try a different approach. Since I'm very good at philosophy, I had the idea of converting the laws of physics into philosophy, and then look the philosophical version of a hyperdrive. For example, General Relativity, as a philosophical truth, suggests that all situations and circumstances can look different, relative to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John Merryman wrote on Jul. 28, 2009 @ 21:10 GMT
Jason,

I looked it up. Niels Bohr.

You make the statement as though a deity were a black box. Which reminds me of the old guy joke. If you handed him a black box and told him it would cure all evil and strife, what would a real guy do; Give it to the Pope. Give it to the President. Take it apart to see how it works.

How do you define "deity?" An all-knowing entity? Doesn't...