Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Problems with an Infinite Universe
Hydarnes
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 95 (132734)
08-11-2004 10:22 AM


Just my quick 2cents, although I haven't read through the thread yet.
There are no problems with an infinite universe. The infinite universe hypothesis died years ago in light of entropy.

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by RingoKid, posted 08-11-2004 6:20 PM Hydarnes has not replied
 Message 90 by Brad McFall, posted 08-14-2004 12:44 PM Hydarnes has not replied

  
RingoKid
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 95 (132943)
08-11-2004 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Hydarnes
08-11-2004 10:22 AM


quote:
There are no problems with an infinite universe. The infinite universe hypothesis died years ago in light of entropy.
huh...death = no problems ???
I been reading how BB theory is wraught with flaws and "new" postulates to keep propping it up...true or false ???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Hydarnes, posted 08-11-2004 10:22 AM Hydarnes has not replied

  
usncahill
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 95 (133044)
08-11-2004 10:02 PM


died...problems
why has entropy killed the idea of an infinite universe?

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Brad McFall, posted 08-14-2004 12:42 PM usncahill has not replied

  
nipok
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 95 (133064)
08-11-2004 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by RingoKid
08-10-2004 10:35 PM


Re: multi-dimensional string theory
I like the idea of extra dimensions wrapped in between spacetime fabric as it allows for the existence of the repository of consciousness, souls, and God in heaven, even life.

Eventually either people will get tired of my 2 cents and tell me to go away or some people may see the merit in my banter and give cause to sit back and rethink their stance on what they accept as most likely and what they are willing to at a minimum accept as possibly feasible. We don't need an extra dimension to store life. Life is everywhere. Life is energy. Your body contains energy trapped inside of cells and interacting with neurons in your brain. A plant takes the suns energy and captures it. All life sustains itself by digesting energy be it through photosynthesis or the eating of plants or animals. When the life energy is all gone from a plant or animal its not very palatable any more so I submit that the more life energy left in a plant or animal no longer actively growing or alive the more palatable it is to the species that consumes it. But I digress.
We are one planet. Including the energy that exists in our neural pathways let’s also for a moment take all the life energy that exists inside every cell on our planet, every cell from every plant, animal, bacterium, etc. Add to that the energy trapped in the core of our planet and we can come up with the total amount of energy that is contained within our one planet.
With estimates between 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 and 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe it is not a far stretch to lowball an estimate of 1 trillion planets in our known universe that are able to support habitable life. I don't want to argue because that is not the point I am making so if it is easier to digest then lets say there may be 1 billion planets with life on them. Add up all the energy from every cell on these 1 billion planets and you have a significant amount of contained energy but this pales in comparison to the amount of energy contained in the estimated 70 some odd sextillion stars in our known universe. Then there is also the total core energy from all the other cosmic objects that don't have habitable life on them which could easily surpass a quadrillion planets, moons, and comets.
Lets say for a moment that another universe much likes ours comes speeding at us 41407371740736000000000000000000 miles per hour. That is c^4. We don't know that our entire universe is not moving through the void of space as an entity at c^2 or faster compared to a central frame of reference that we will never know. Nor do we know that there are not other universes like ours traveling in their own frame of references at c^2 or c^3. That means that if at some point in our future we did encounter a universe like this our entire existence could be obliterated in the fraction of a second or the fraction of a minute. I’ve never seen a planet smash another planet at this rate of speed or two suns collide but my instincts tell me this would release a lot of energy. It would also take a whole lot of very large pieces of matter and make a whole bunch of much smaller pieces of matter and over time the resulting mess would reform galaxies and stars and planets by the same physical laws that govern how our galaxies interact now. BUT energy would be released on a scale that defies imagination.
That MAY be what happens when the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up an Electron bumps into the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up the subparticle (if it exists) that makes up an Electron from another atom that bounces into atom #1. Two atoms bounce away from each other, energy and mass are maintained because at the scale we can measure what happens we don’t see the release in energy and the recapture of the energy by the mass around it.
NOW, the example above is more likely to occur when a single electron is thrown at a nucleus at a speed close to the speed of light. For our frame of reference we see the electron approach the speed of light in a particle accelerator but IF subparticles smaller then electrons exists in an infinite chain then as you go smaller and smaller, the actual speed of the subparticles making the initial contact increase and increase with each smaller level of subparticle that you go into. AND this collision to us happens in a fraction of a second but it causes an infinite chain of collisions of smaller and smaller subatomic particles. Nipoks Paradox number 1. If there are an infinite number of smaller particles that make up matter then when 2 particles of matter bump into each other because the chain of collisions itself if infinite the 2 particles never really touch other.
As far as God existing in one of these made up dimensions I think of God more like a calculus equation. Calculus is great at taking infinity and making something you can fathom by equation. I submit that the Sum of the limit of all energy is God. God is everywhere, inside of all us keeping us alive, radiating from the Sun, and holding our solar system, our galaxy, and every atom together.
I can’t put my finger on telekinesis or supposed ESP but if the mind is able to tap into the electrical energy that exists everywhere then whose to say that the sum or limit of all energy that exists everywhere may not have its own consciousness.
If so, our planet again becomes a point in time and space and The God with a capital G does not know of our existence where the god with a lowercase g may or may not have interacted with our species with a goal of setting up a moral structure.
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-11-2004 10:53 PM
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-11-2004 10:56 PM
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-12-2004 12:38 AM
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-12-2004 12:52 AM
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-12-2004 01:01 AM
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-12-2004 01:06 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by RingoKid, posted 08-10-2004 10:35 PM RingoKid has not replied

  
RingoKid
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 95 (133137)
08-12-2004 8:34 AM


deism
"One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason."
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.deism.com/deism_defined.htm
deism, Newton and classical mechanics
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/DEISM.HTM
classical mechanics and hermetic vibration
No webpage found at provided URL: http://kybalion.home.att.net/kybalion.html#IX
Nature is aught but the will of God

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by nipok, posted 08-12-2004 9:46 AM RingoKid has not replied

  
nipok
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 95 (133152)
08-12-2004 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by RingoKid
08-12-2004 8:34 AM


Re: deism
25,000 years from now if by some slim chance our planet is still habitable and we figure out a way to work together for the benefit of every species on this planet it is not all that unrealistic to beleive that desim would not eventually become the prevalent religion.
This message has been edited by nipok, 08-12-2004 08:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by RingoKid, posted 08-12-2004 8:34 AM RingoKid has not replied

  
RingoKid
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 95 (133368)
08-12-2004 6:54 PM


25 000 years ???
I'd give it 10 -25...
and have you checked out PROUT as a means of harmonious co existence in a possible future ???...coming to a planet near you soon
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.proutworld.org/

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by nipok, posted 08-12-2004 10:15 PM RingoKid has replied

  
nipok
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 95 (133418)
08-12-2004 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by RingoKid
08-12-2004 6:54 PM


Re: 25 000 years ???
I agree. It could happen in 2,000 years or less, I was highballing the estimate because it’s a subject that those on the other side of the fence have difficulty admitting. Prout seems right on target. Remove political borders dividing the continents and aim for a single world government able to truly represent the best interests of the people by removing monetary gain from the political arena and we might just stand a chance. But I don’t want to digress too far from the original thread (yeah I’d hate to do that

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by RingoKid, posted 08-12-2004 6:54 PM RingoKid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by RingoKid, posted 08-12-2004 10:25 PM nipok has replied

  
RingoKid
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 95 (133424)
08-12-2004 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by nipok
08-12-2004 10:15 PM


Re: 25 000 years ???
2000 years ???
I'm talking 10 - 25 years.
those on the other side of the fence just have to admit God as a first cause and final result instead of trying to exclude an intelligent designer/creator from the equations and prop it up with even more fanciful speculation...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by nipok, posted 08-12-2004 10:15 PM nipok has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by nipok, posted 08-13-2004 1:07 AM RingoKid has not replied

  
nipok
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 95 (133458)
08-13-2004 1:07 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by RingoKid
08-12-2004 10:25 PM


Re: 25 000 years ???
I'd love for it to happen as soon as possible but 10-25 years is too optimistic. To obtain a global predominance of general agreement in a single religion based on logic and cold hard proof is not going to happen over night. Every generation is more enlightened than the previous and knowledge is almost growing exponentially but it is going to take a long time to get the vast majority to come around to realize that science and religion do not need to be opposites.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by RingoKid, posted 08-12-2004 10:25 PM RingoKid has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by NosyNed, posted 08-13-2004 1:35 AM nipok has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 86 of 95 (133461)
08-13-2004 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by nipok
08-13-2004 1:07 AM


Re: 25 000 years ???
Various religions will continue just as they have. There will be ongoing splits forming as different sects find something to fight over. New guru's will pop up and gain a following. Other sects will die away. There will not be a lot of change in the next few decades.
There will certianly not be a general agreement in this century.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by nipok, posted 08-13-2004 1:07 AM nipok has not replied

  
RingoKid
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 95 (133741)
08-13-2004 8:56 PM


but what...
would happen in a situation where up to 80-90% of the current population dies within one generation ???
It's a scenario that is not outside the realm of possibility. I think we will reach a global consensus maybe not within 25 years but definitely within 50.

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by nipok, posted 08-14-2004 12:13 AM RingoKid has replied

  
nipok
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 95 (133771)
08-14-2004 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by RingoKid
08-13-2004 8:56 PM


Re: but what...
We are straying far from topic. Religion is too deep rooted and intertwined into the daily and weekly and annual practices of the majority of the worlds population to change in 3 or 4 generations on a global scale. There is so much knowledge and understanding that is limited in comprehension or desire to comprehend to such a small percentage of the global population that it could take 30 or 300 generations (if we let ourselves survive that long) to become a predominantly science driven morality. But again, we are way off topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by RingoKid, posted 08-13-2004 8:56 PM RingoKid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by RingoKid, posted 08-14-2004 5:36 PM nipok has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 89 of 95 (133824)
08-14-2004 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by usncahill
08-11-2004 10:02 PM


Re: died...problems
yeah why?
did H mean a particular defintion of entropy then??
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 08-14-2004 11:43 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by usncahill, posted 08-11-2004 10:02 PM usncahill has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 90 of 95 (133825)
08-14-2004 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Hydarnes
08-11-2004 10:22 AM


DID I miss some defintion you might have given?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Hydarnes, posted 08-11-2004 10:22 AM Hydarnes has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024