0
   

Why things are the way they are

 
 
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 11:30 am
…and what’s the nature of God

I think that I can offer some guidance to the former if not the latter. So why is there a Universe, in fact why is there anything at all; why does it contain matter and why is there gravity, why does it assume the value that it does; why does there have to be an electromagnetic field and why does it expand at velocity c; why are there humanoids and in fact any life at all

I think I can offer a preliminary answer

After recent news about the Einstein manuscripts going online I recall my own observations concerning relativity many years ago when I understood it better and now I realize that I might have had a handle on things that not even Einstein had come to realize. Of course I‘m no physicist and if I’m wrong about that my belated apologies to the man’s soul

In short things are the way they are because that’s the only way they can be. Specifically I had noted facets of relativity that challenged common sense: In the case of gravity one might conclude, well, that matter pushes space out of the way so the crowding in its immediate vicinity exerts what we perceive as attraction. But what about the limitation of velocity c

Hmmm, all right, space somehow puts up a certain resistance to motion, and that at c it meets a kind of limit where resistance is infinite. Granted my speculations were purely intuitive and wild at best, explaining virtually nothing

But at least they made more common sense than the effect of motion: the compression and slowing of a moving clock. However I noted at the time, at least with respect to the latter phenom that the damn thing had to slow because if it didn’t contradictions entailed with other such effects. That is, if relativity were valid, which later proved to be the case when we could actually measure the changes in a moving object, then the clock has to slow and by the value that it does. So what if all of reality likewise comports

In other words, a change in any phenom or its value will a contradiction making at least a few if not all the rest impossible. In other words, things are the way they are because that’s the way they have to be. But why does there have to be anything at all

Becsuse, as I’m sure it will eventually be discovered, the idea of nothingness itself entails contradictions and paradoxes. There just has to be space, time, matter, field, etc etc. So does this make God unnecessary

Yes and no, depending of course on what you mean by God. As an apodictical existential pantheist, I note intuitively that (a) the Universe wouldn’t seem to make much sense without the humanoid while (b) the physical constants seem to have been adjusted, in some cases within a fraction of one percent, specifically to accommodate life
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,071 • Replies: 19
No top replies

 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 11:50 am
@dalehileman,
These ideas are mostly covered already by the Strong and Weak Anthropic principles. Are you familiar with those?
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:03 pm
@dalehileman,
Forgive me the interruption as again I’m a victim of the egregious 10-minute rule

…….so do my assertions in any way contradict Christianity? Hardly at all. We pantheists just maintain that there’s something more to the Universe that the simple meaningless random bouncing of particles off one another, and it is She. Though we have slight differences. For instance did She create the Universe

Yes and no. Certainly the Universe is undergoing creation yet at present and if She is It certainly it’s Her doing. To skirt certain contradictions however we have to assume that She and It have existed forever. Then how about the Big Bang, etc

….the entire Megillah, says Science, will continue to expand presumably forever, uncounted freezing objects mutually flying away from one another. But this congtradicts pantheistic intuition, requiring them eventually to slow down and come back together for the next Big Bang
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:07 pm
Why things are the way they are

mostly because they aren't the way they aren't
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:08 pm
@rosborne979,
No but thank you Ros and I will Google it, observing that it’s very difficult if not impossible to come up with an entirely new idea though I’m hoping that my exposition might promote further inquiry

As hinted in the OP, I’d not be surprised if Albert himself might not have come to pretty much the same conclusion, it seems almost obvious, tho don’t think he called himself pantheist

There’s a better term than “inquiry” but notwithstanding speed of access to Thesaurus.com as a victim of the 10-minute rule doubt if I could find it in time
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:11 pm
@dalehileman,
Again a victim of that fool cruel rule, Steve, I wish to edit my OP to include this opening:

"Original Einstein manuscripts to go on line", Victorville, Ca Daily Press March 20

But Steve, Sara, I should explain about all the “editing.” Here we have a 10-minute rule which means we can be cut off presumably in the middle of a sentence if not word, much like the Press’ editing program continuing a front-page story

Sorry just couldn’t resist

I’d like to thank the a2k guys however at least when the 10 min elapses for not cutting me off in the middle of a word
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:26 pm
@djjd62,
Quote:
mostly because they aren't the way they aren't
…but that’s because they can’t be
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:39 pm
@dalehileman,
…….continuing my OP after still another 10-min cutoff,

But finally, getting back to the Christian: Does my “theory”, I’m advised by another name "Anthropic principles”, contradict Intelligent Design or Creationism

No, not in the least. As hinted above, She is It, and so are we. The process of Her thought is the ongoing development of the Universe, evolution if you will. Just as we are part of Her so our brains are part of hers
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 12:48 pm
@dalehileman,
Sara, if Steve and Don like it (I know it’s pretty lengthy) and you would like to use it, please let me know as [email protected] and I will consolidate all the interruptions cased by that a2k 10-minute rule
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2012 02:12 pm
@dalehileman,
At about the fifth—or is it seventh time I’ve been cut off buy the 10-min rule, please add to my OP reference to

mailto:[email protected]

discussing in a recent post evolution of the human brain
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Wed 21 Mar, 2012 04:29 am
@dalehileman,
Dale, if you can't figure out how to get around the A2K time limit on posts (Hint: Write it in a text editor first and then cut/paste it into A2K), then you may not be qualified to try to figure out the deeper mysteries of the Universe Wink

Also, when I said your post had some similarities to the Anthropic Principles, I didn't mean ALL of your ideas had any similarities. I referenced those Anthropic Principles for you so that you could look them up and read about them and possibly fine tune your thoughts, not so you could just reference your ideas as "anthropic principles".

And as far as "Christianity" relates to Cosmology... it doesn't. Christianity is just another human mythology, no different from any other in its relationship to nature. Just because a particular understanding of Cosmology doesn't rule out the possibility of a "God", doesn't mean that it improves the probability of any "God" either.
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Wed 21 Mar, 2012 10:18 am
@rosborne979,
Ros thanks again, I Google-Wiki’d it and sure enough there’s a very strong correlation. However they (the Anthromorphs if you like) are far beyond me; though not even they can explain the machinery that made the Universe (or at least our tiny environments) so friendly to the evolution of the life form, without which the entire Megillah would be totally worthless and pointless

It’s almost enough to make you believe in God
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Wed 21 Mar, 2012 10:32 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Dale, if you can't figure out how to get around the A2K time limit on posts ….text editor first and then cut/paste…….
Thanks Ros, that approach has been suggested many times by many others but with my habits of afterthought it has proven tedious

Quote:
I didn't mean ALL of your ideas had any similarities
Not a bit offended. Indeed the similarities are striking

Quote:
Just because a particular understanding of Cosmology doesn't rule out the possibility of a "God", doesn't mean that it improves the probability of any "God" either.
You’re absolutely right about that Ros but I didn’t make such an assertion, or at least I didn’t mean to
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Mar, 2012 01:13 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:

It’s almost enough to make you believe in God
Uh, no. It's not.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Mar, 2012 01:35 pm
@rosborne979,
Just an expression Ros
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Apr, 2012 10:54 am
@dalehileman,
Returning however to the topic at hand can anyone suggest why must there be anything at all
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Apr, 2012 01:28 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Returning however to the topic at hand can anyone suggest why must there be anything at all

Why, because Brahma, emerging from Vishnu's navel seated on a lotus flower, created the universe, of course.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Apr, 2012 01:34 pm
@InfraBlue,
Of course
0 Replies
 
DavJohanis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 06:57 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Yes and no, depending of course on what you mean by God. As an apodictical existential pantheist, I note intuitively that (a) the Universe wouldn’t seem to make much sense without the humanoid while (b) the physical constants seem to have been adjusted, in some cases within a fraction of one percent, specifically to accommodate life


IMO, your approach is fascinating to those who ponder purpose of man, though not so, for those who ponder the nature of the universe as a separate variable to the nature of life forms... Either way, conclusion at life's ultimate destiny will be identical..

You mentioned earlier in another topic that you were specifically deliberating opinions around time dilation.. It has come to my attention that time dilation is only truly possible at the endpoint of material and existential forms of witness-able reality, that endpoint is the zero point field at which all existence breaks down into absolute lack of friction, lack of friction against everything except time itself, then time is in fact existence. To navigate or prove this possibility is not possible as a being here.. I presume perhaps you know this and prefer to keep it to yourself, given the hostilities it causes, but the world will learn to cease attacks about it eventually.

The question becomes, what is the knowledge worth.. Then why keep it?
We have to in one way or another.

I have written documentation in detail which has been deleted and moved in all manor of ways over the years, but this kind of thing is all we can reach at the end of the trails.

Propaganda, ignore my babble:
Excepting multiversal possibilities, which intertwine beautifully, in all respects when written correctly.. The forces which attack and question, claiming to be separate from temporal semi stasis, are witness to what they choose to witness and as such, knowing what they know, they are of zero threat unless provoked... Case closed on my line of thought.


Time dilation is limited to specific points in space/matter/time in small part and not in the universe majorly.

Whether this makes sense to you as why I would say it, I will never truly know.

But at any rate.. There it is.

Peace be with you.

D.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 09:49 pm
@DavJohanis,
Quote:
IMO, your approach is fascinating to those who ponder purpose of man,
I'm flattered Dav

Quote:
though not so, for those who ponder the nature of the universe as a separate variable to the nature of life forms...
Oh I disagree; many will come to conclude Her existence as an abstract, but it will all come together in the Big Picture

They will come to admit, "Dale was right

….or at least he was going in the right direction"

Quote:
Either way, conclusion at life's ultimate destiny will be identical..
Forgive me Dav but whose conclusion about which will be identical to what

Quote:
You mentioned earlier in another topic that you were specifically deliberating opinions around time dilation..
Yes, one of the intuitionally puzzling facets of relativity

Quote:
…. time dilation is only truly possible at the endpoint of material and existential forms of witness-able reality…….breaks down into absolute lack of friction…….then time is in fact existence.
Sorry Dav but if you really hope me to address this assertion you'll have to first get it translated

Quote:
To navigate or prove this possibility is not possible as a being here..
Certainly not to this being

Quote:
I presume perhaps you know this and prefer to keep it to yourself,
Not at all, I freely concede mysteries about the Great Megillah that totally baffle me

Quote:
given the hostilities it causes,
I don't see how it can, I'm just speculating. However I'll agree that some of my speculation has engendered rejection that borders on hostility

Quote:
but the world will learn to cease attacks about it eventually.
They will come to see I was right

Quote:
The question becomes, what is the knowledge worth.. Then why keep it?
Who me

I'm not keeping any secrets if that's what you mean Dav


Quote:
We have to in one way or another.
Sorry Dave but have to what exactly

Quote:
I have written documentation in detail which has been deleted and moved in all manor of ways over the years,
If you mean your writings have been altered, what writings and who did it, and why

Quote:
but this kind of thing is all we can reach at the end of the trails.
If you mean there's little hope for anyone to seriously listen maybe you're right

Quote:
Propaganda, ignore my babble:
I can't, I'm compelled, I'm addicted


Quote:
Excepting multiversal possibilities, which intertwine beautifully, in all respects when written correctly..
Multiverses unlikely, according to the general principle that the simpler prop almost always proves more likely. However how does this bear on my suppositions

Quote:
The forces which attack and question, ……. are of zero threat unless provoked...
If you mean our opponents in this semi-philosophical speculation then yes I don't see how they constitute a threat

…though I'm guessing at what you do mean


Quote:
Case closed on my line of thought.
Don't give up, Dav. However as I had suggested, before posting you might find peers willing to translate

Quote:
Time dilation is limited to specific points in space/matter/time in small part and not in the universe majorly.
Time dilation occurs wherever there's motion

Quote:
Whether this makes sense to you as why I would say it, I will never truly know.
Forgive me again Dav but much of it doesn't. But then I suppose much of mine doesn't either

Quote:
But at any rate.. There it is.

Peace be with you.


Pax vobiscum

D.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Why things are the way they are
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/24/2020 at 09:07:59