What is God?

It must be an open system. There are several examples I could give to back up my statement but I want to use the easiest one.

Hydrogen is one of the most stable elements in the universe and also one of the most plentiful molecules. We know that hydrogen clumps together to form stars because of gravity. Through the process of fusion hydrogen atoms combine to form heavier elements, such as helium, lithium, beryllium, and so on. These stars explode extruding these heavier elements out into space where they coalesce into either more stars or planets. If they produce new stars sometimes they end up larger than those first generation stars because of the heavier elements. Through the process of fusion again these heavier elements are made into even heavier elements. These stars explode and the process repeats creating the heaviest known natural occurring elements like uranium.

We know that elements also break down over time, basically reverting back to more stable elements. Uranium is a great example of this process, which we have named radioactivity. All elements do this except for hydrogen, so in theory, if given enough time and as long as no new stars are formed, all elements will eventually return to hydrogen atoms. This of course would never happen unless gravity stopped happening, but instead the process repeats. These elements break down and will eventually coalesce into new stars.

This is why I do not buy the theory that our universe will end in a cold chill. The reason being gravity and the process of radioactivity prevents loss of energy. What happens is those elements will eventually clump back together and the whole chain of events repeats. I believe this has been happening and instead of one big bang, I believe there are pockets of bangs that happen when a critical amount of mass is gathered. Probably through the process of super massive black holes uniting. There probably is a threshold when they actually explode. Just my theory though.

So to finish this off, I believe space/time is infinite in all directions however the matter in the universe is NOT infinite. It is basically a reoccurring process of building up and tearing down with some energy given off but gravity is the key to where energy re-enters the equation. Without gravity we would lose all energy eventually.

---------- Post added 02-06-2010 at 08:27 AM ----------



You must never read my posts. So I'll repeat this here again, and I apologize to those who have read my response to this before.

You can't have a big bang if there was no time to start with. You can't have a happening without time. You can't even produce time without time. It is impossible. If you run the math, it becomes infinite, meaning you can never get the step you require for the event to trigger. To put it in another term, it would be like expecting to wake up from a dream but only if your alarm clock goes off. Your alarm is set to 6am however it is currently 5:59am, you can never get that last minute because it requires time to give it to you. Not even inventing time can give you that minute you need. Because an event "the giving" would have to occur, so you get stuck in an endless loop of needing something to happen to give you that minute you need. Those who say it is, haven't done the math.

I have trouble with Big Bounce (nice name) and a universe that has always existed in time, because it leads to infinite regress which I don't think is a tenable conclusion. I believe there must be an initial condition beyond which space-time does not continue, hence a beginning.

Samm

I have trouble with Big Bounce (nice name) and a universe that has always existed in time, because it leads to infinite regress which I don't think is a tenable conclusion. I believe there must be an initial condition beyond which space-time does not continue, hence a beginning.

Samm

Alright samm I will accept this if you can tell me how the time event can happen without time. If you can provide me that then I can test it to see if it is possible. Without this ability you can't have an event without time.

Alright samm I will accept this if you can tell me how the time event can happen without time. If you can provide me that then I can test it to see if it is possible. Without this ability you can't have an event without time.

If you reverse the universe into this singularity by the big bounce, or not, it still represents the same problem. You have this , what do I call no time?, when the mass of the universe is so compact that nothing can escape and, it ,for all our knowledge will tells us it has disappeared from view. Now can we say a singularity that is not apparent, is there or not there? If it was possible to be able to observe this singularity , you could not see it even though all the potential of the universe was tied up in this singularity. So what is something what is nothing , what is everything?

We have a singularity that is not creating time but is enclosed by time, what we must ask is what insignificant or enormous event made it expand and become everything. A thought might just be enough for it to be seen, or even a word. I think you need to contemplate this, it has been many years in the thinking.

But its not really a singularity, you see. A singularity is a point of diameter = 0 (or so near zero that we can't write it out). A singularity, however, does have an outside, does it not? Therefore it can only exist in space. Singularity is the wrong image. Mind is a better image. It is said to exist outside of space, neither here nor there since objects outside of space can have neither location nor size nor shape.

Now the seed of the universe, the source condition from which it originated, is more like mind than a singularity. Of course I don't know if you believe in mind or consciousness or self or soul or spirit or any of those etherial things.

You also seem to be bothered by our inability to observe (at least with our imagination) this initial state beyond space and time. But surely you realize that sensation is a physical property and we must go beyond our reliance on observables to "see" beyond the space-time matrix. We must rely on reason and deduction, which I know can be very faulty, but they are all we have here. Mathematics is also useless since there is no measure or number outside of space-time.

I would not describe the source state of the universe as being "enclosed by time," but when you suggest that a thought or a word might have triggered the Big Bang I believe you have a point. Physical objects, you see, exist in both space and time, but the mind and other nonphysical entities may exist only in time. Thought is a process or event that can only occur in time. Now words of course would play no part in creation (except in Bible stories) since, even if God does exist, its native "tongue" is not words of any sort we would recognize. But thought could occur as a preliminary process prior to the birth of space with the Big Bang, and the nonphysical could therefore conceivably precede the physical.

Samm

---------- Post added 02-06-2010 at 02:29 PM ----------


Sorry, Fil. I should have been more specific. I was referring to Krumple's quoted post.

Samm

The singularity is the observable event, you must ask before that event, when it was not visible, did it exist? If it was so compact when it was invisible, did it exist ? I dont think, excuse my rudeness, you have considered what Ive attempted at explaining to you.

Imagine just before the visible singularity , it must have existed but not visible, so it did and it did not exist.

I try not to assume anything that cant be verified by logic or observation. i have experiences that defy my logic , so I have every reason to believe our soul lives after our earthy body dies, but like all experiences they can be deceptive.

What if the entire universe did nothing, not a single event or activity or motion either physical or non-physical for 27 hours and 33 minutes (and two seconds)?

There.

Just like that.

Did you notice it? No, you didn't, because you were not moving, breathing, thinking, or active in any way at any level. Your blood wasn't flowing, your cells weren't dividing, your molecules were not moving or bonding, your atoms with their electrons were frozen.

Now tell me, did the imaginary time exist? Or was it a fanciful pretense?

I say this. Time is only a measure of events. If there are no events, there is no time.

Now, a condition or state of being is not an event.

So the source of the universe, whatever it may be, is not an event but an initial condition. Whatever first event occurred at T=1 (the Big Bang), it represents a change from that initial condition to a subsequent condition.

I hope this clearly and adequately responds to your post, but I am certainly willing to discuss it further.

I'm sorry if I'm not responsive to you, xris. For all the world, it seems to me like you're saying the singularity didn't exist because it had no dimension.

Once again, though. There was no singularity. The little tiny thing was not infinitely dense matter surrounded by empty space, which is what a singularity (more or less) is. The little tiny thing in the instance of the Big Bang is space itself beginning the expansion that it continues to this day. Little tiny space was filled with energy of infinite (?) density and temperature. All of this would have been hidden in blackness because (a) there were no eyes to see it , and (b) the energy levels far, far exceeded the range of visible light.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next thing is that even when that little tiny thing that was the beginning of the Big Bang had absolutely no size at all, before it became a measurable quantity, before you could hope to see it at all, no matter the abilities of your microscope, it still existed. There was never a time when something did not exist. Never.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand that space becomes very "fuzzy" at quantum scales. I suspect that by the time space clearly became space it already had notable size and momentum.

Now tell me how I am not answering you. Ask me a more direct question or something if I'm still misunderstanding your point of view. I'm sincerely trying.

Samm

A singularity, however, does have an outside, does it not? Therefore it can only exist in space. Singularity is the wrong image. Mind is a better image. It is said to exist outside of space, neither here nor there since objects outside of space can have neither location nor size nor shape.

Now the seed of the universe, the source condition from which it originated, is more like mind than a singularity.

...surely you realize that sensation is a physical property and we must go beyond our reliance on observables to "see" beyond the space-time matrix.

We must rely on reason and deduction, which I know can be very faulty, but they are all we have here.

I would not describe the source state of the universe as being "enclosed by time," but when you suggest that a thought or a word might have triggered the Big Bang I believe you have a point.

Physical objects, you see, exist in both space and time, but the mind and other nonphysical entities may exist only in time. Thought is a process or event that can only occur in time.

Why cannot you assume that Information is Order in this Universe and for this Universe alone witch is God like...

The singularity is the observable event, you must ask before that event, when it was not visible, did it exist?

If it was so compact when it was invisible, did it exist?

Nice try, but nope, sitting doing nothing IS an event. Because it separates between activity of doing something. Therefore doing nothing is an event.

Yes a moment is a single frame, I understand that, but to move to the next frame you require time. Time is the movement, and you can't ever get that movement from no time. Time is the requirement of time.

How many times can you cut off time from another piece of time? For example you start with one second. You reduce that one second to milliseconds. If you reduce that further and further how many times can you reduce it?

If before the singularity became visible and nothing was evident, could you tell me what is different between an observable nothing and an actual nothing. Is there difference?

Its a matter of understanding what actually nothing is that confuses human logic.

If you can say there is no difference then everything and nothing can be as one. In fact I dont think I can even convey my views on nothing in human terms.

Big bounce has been soundly defeated by Guth and Sher The Impossibility of a bouncing universe
The impossibility of a bouncing universe

Entropy is strong in the Universe measuring 1,000,000,000, translating into a mechanical efficiency of 1/100,000,000 of a percent. An engine will not oscillate below 1% efficiency. The Universe is exponentially less efficient than that. It's not even close to being possible.



Excellent Samm.



Precisely what I've been leading to as well. Even the term "Singularity" is a cheat. It's the cosmological equivalent to biological "Random Mutation" (which has been soundly defeated as well). Those terms are placeholders for Science. They mean "we don't have a freaking' clue but can't let anyone know that because our funding might dry up". Let's just coin a new word, make people think we understand, and see how many grants we can get.



Excellent.




But we do have more to go on. Our knowledge of Information and Mind. Our knowledge that Information is a property of Mind and both are Immaterial Agents. Our knowledge that Code is our only physical tool that allows us to be made aware of those Immaterial Agents. Our knowledge that Information is not dependent upon the Chaotic Realm of energy/matter cause/reaction. Our knowledge that Cause/Reaction is not the same as Thought/Action.

Information is PROOF of an Immaterial Realm. We must acknowledge this. As Weiner says: "Any materialism that does not allow for this cannot survive in the present".

Language is a physical tool. It is a bridge connecting the Material Realm to the Immaterial Realm. Code is a physical lens that allows us to view the non physical realm of Information and Mind. The Immaterial Realm is real. It's just not physically real.



Yes, thought triggered the Big Bang. And I know you consider Thought as an event, thus it must be confined by time as well. But consider another option. If time is a measure of motion through space, and thought is not in space, then how may thought be confined by time?

We currently reside in a three dimensional universe. I've posted an earlier thread that discusses the possibilities of a 4th dimension, beyond space and time.
http://www.philosophyforum.com/philosophy-forums/branches-philosophy/epistemology/7409-4th-dimension-realm-pure-thought-very-realm-middle-knowledge.html

We can only illustrate shadows of the 4th dimension in our 3 dimensional realm. But those shadows are illustrative of all possible states being present at once, without the need for time to play them out.

4D primer
YouTube - Fourth Spatial Dimension 101


All possible states of a cube are represented by the animated hypercube.
YouTube - 4D cubeYouTube - Turning Globe

Not "nothing" Xris... you're not listening. The "nothing" you refer to is "no"+"physical"+"thing". Why can't you get that? You're talking about "physical" things when you speak of "no"+"thing".

I'm not speaking of "physical" things. There are other "things" besides "physical".

There was and is a non physical thing (if you call it a thing) that exists independently from the physical realm. I call it God, Truth, Information... all of which are non physical. Why can't you comprehend this?

Before? How can you say "I never claimed a before" and then say "I claimed before the singularity..."

You're chasing your tail.

Not "nothing" Xris... you're not listening. The "nothing" you refer to is "no"+"physical"+"thing". Why can't you get that? You're talking about "physical" things when you speak of "no"+"thing".

I'm not speaking of "physical" things. There are other "things" besides "physical".

There was and is a non physical thing (if you call it a thing) that exists independently from the physical realm. I call it God, Truth, Information... all of which are non physical. Why can't you comprehend this?

Before? How can you say "I never claimed a before" and then say "I claimed before the singularity..."

You're chasing your tail.