Scientific Reasons for God

Ghost....you talk about balance. ie., hot---cold, wet----dry, he-----? so what's missin?
you harp on about a 'his' universe. is that so? that idea Is the problem and thats why your interpretation of balance is UN-balanced
this is evidenced in where you silp into your faulty logics 'heaven' and 'hell'. Now, if you are the commited christian you think you are, you surely MUSt believe in everLASTING reward and, everlasting punishment, no? but ...wiat, how can that be. that added idea doesn't fit in with your Taoist-like understanding of balance at all. for when one does understand DYNAMIC balance one groks that heat can beCOMe cold, and good bad, and down up. you have seen the Taoist yin/yang symbol i take it?
we have a symbol that is two 'snake' shapes going rund each other. look closely and you see a speck of the others colur in each head. that means that when one complimentary opposite goes to its extreme in truns into the other.....so example, the goody woody christian trying to save the world from evil can become that very evil!

so, ghost, therer cant be such a reality of an everlsting ANYthing. lest of all the pernicious Orphic-Christian idea of everlasting reward or punishment. as it would go against natrual dynamic balance
 
One of the principles of God, that can be plainly seen in His universe which He created is balance. Heat is balanced against cold, summer balanced against winter, breathing out balanced against breathing in and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Eternal punishment is balanced against eternal reward. etc.

Hmm.. how does the reality of entropy fit into that "balance"?
 
Godless said:
Theres no order in the universe; hence this is a common flaw of theists thinking that everything has order. Fact is the Universe is chaotic.

Buy the book; have a nice read: http://www.worldscibooks.com/physics/4374.html

Nuf Said!.
Godless.

The world seemed chaotic to those with out the understanding of how the chaos is needed for the order in which the world works. The Universe, in the same manner, is ultimately bound by gravitational forces that work in such a percise order that Stephen Hawkings believes that if the forces were just a little to strong or weak that our planet and solar system would have never existed.

buy the book; have a nice read.
 
thelight said:
The world seemed chaotic to those with out the understanding of how the chaos is needed for the order in which the world works. The Universe, in the same manner, is ultimately bound by gravitational forces that work in such a percise order that Stephen Hawkings believes that if the forces were just a little to strong or weak that our planet and solar system would have never existed.

buy the book; have a nice read.

chaos HAS BEEN SUPRESSED FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS BY THE RULE OF THE FATHERS..oppps soory about caps. Chaos isn't only in the universe ...we Are Nature and universe, so suppression includes us too. Chaos is deeply connected to order, but it is the creatrix. all of this is in pre-patriarchal myth, as the Dark Goddess etc, the Womb of creation. what we seen in patriarchal myth is male solar heroes fighting, subjugating, and killing Chaos/Dragon

an example how it is suppressed for us? the e suppression of ecstasy (not MDMA)
 
wesmorris said:
Hmm.. how does the reality of entropy fit into that "balance"?
I actually thought about the same thing...... :eek:

But isn't entropy just balance? When the water moves through the membrane, isn't it just balancing out the quantity of water in both sides of the membrane?
 
Entropy is the death of energy. 'heat death'. As such, energy itself is not balanced. It's constantly diminishing. Order->Disorder.

I have a personal theory that "the life force" is actually the balance of this, but don't need a god concept to help explain it. (not that "I don't need god", but that since god - if it exists, is unknowable to humans, utilizing it as a concept to explain something has no value).
 
wesmorris said:
Entropy is the death of energy.
Huummm.... A complete state of balance might be the death of energy.... but what about the process of making the balance? Won't that process produce energy?

'heat death'. As such, energy itself is not balanced. It's constantly diminishing. Order->Disorder.
Is it? Or this is just one perspective that we can look at? For example, in the same way we see it as order->disorder, we can also see it as unbalance->balance.

I have a personal theory that "the life force" is actually the balance of this, but don't need a god concept to help explain it. (not that "I don't need god", but that since god - if it exists, is unknowable to humans, utilizing it as a concept to explain something has no value).
And what is this theory?
 
TruthSeeker said:
Huummm.... A complete state of balance might be the death of energy.... but what about the process of making the balance? Won't that process produce energy?

No, that is the process of energy being used up. The process of making the balance is energy dying. You can't unburn the gas in the tank of your car. It came to balance in the chemical reaction in your engine, and cannot be recovered. It's gone. Sure you can get more gas, but the gas you burnt is gone forever, as it's energy met its death in the cylinders in your car.

Is it? Or this is just one perspective that we can look at? For example, in the same way we see it as order->disorder, we can also see it as unbalance->balance.

That wouldn't be balance. Unbalance - balance? Notice the contradiction there, please.

And what is this theory?

I've gone over it a number of times. Basically, "the life force" is the phenomenon opposite of entropy bleeding through from other spatial dimensions. It's the driving force behind evolution, and it's roots are perpendicular to normal time.

I don't really see "the life force" as a force in terms of physics, but I mean "force" in the general sense - a source of energy maybe. Some cause of molecular organization pushing matter in the particular manner that yeilds life. Not that it necessarily "pushes it" but rather, it's intrinsic to space-time just as entropy or gravity is.
 
wesmorris said:
No, that is the process of energy being used up.
Just to be picky the energy never gets used up, it is never "gone". It simply gets diffused. The energy from the gasoline is converted into the movement on the car, the heat of the engine, wind movement (as the car pushing the air), and heating up the tires and the road. Energy never goes away... it's like, eternal man.

I don't really see "the life force" as a force in terms of physics, but I mean "force" in the general sense - a source of energy maybe. Some cause of molecular organization pushing matter in the particular manner that yeilds life. Not that it necessarily "pushes it" but rather, it's intrinsic to space-time just as entropy or gravity is.
The forces that cause life to occur are the same as those that cause all chemical reactions to occur, they are simply the fundamental forces of physics. There's no need to run off haphazardly positing a special, unknown, "life force".

~Raithere
 
ghost7584: Newton was never a member of the knights templar. The knights templar was a roman catholic organization. Newton was a protestant that believed that the pope is an antichrist. Newton could never have been a member of any roman catholic organization like the knights templar.
*************
M*W: I've cut-n-pasted this article that may be of interest.

The End of the World is Nigh - according to Newton

I recently watched The Dark Heretic a documentary about Sir Isaac Newton which was first broadcast on BBC2 on 1st March. This excellent production showed another side of the brilliant man's life, a hidden occult aspect which dominated his life.

Newton, who gave us laws of motion and gravity, calculus and many other scientific advances, was driven by a search for truth. Newton appears to have been largely a recluse, locked away in his lodgings at Cambridge studying 18 hours a day. He was an intensely religious man, wholly dedicated to God but not in a conventional sense. He was puritanical in outlook and vigorously opposed to Catholicism.

His secret interest was alchemy. Newton believed that it could help him discover God's secret. He also believed that secrets had been handed down through sacred writings, not just the biblical writings but through myths and poetry too. These writings were codes and when deciphered gave recipes which could be 'worked through alchemy. In Ovid, for example, he found a recipe for something called 'the net' which resulted in a purple alloy. Just as the mythic codes gave the recipes the alchemical recipes were given strange colourful language to conceal the ingredients used.

The ultimate purpose behind all this was to find the philosopher's stone - God's secret. Newton believed that he himself had been chosen and equipped to do this work. He translated his name into Latin, played around with anagrams of this and discovered that he was a chosen, an adept.

He worked tirelessly on scientific experiments to the extent of endangering himself and after work on the true nature of colour made the discovery that white light was not 'pure' as previously thought but consisted of all the colours of the rainbow. He was offered a chair at Trinity Cambridge but this was awkward for him as to accept meant taking holy orders which he didn't want to do.

Newton had also researched the history of Christianity and believed it to have rested on a mistake or many. He, like many before and after him, read himself into heresy. He denied both the trinity and the divinity of Jesus. He thought the fault mainly lay with the early church fathers in 4th century who were villains and had distorted true Christianity. This, however, was all part of his dark secret and would have been very dangerous to divulge at that time.

Newton hated the Catholic Church with a vengeance and among his favourite texts were the prophetic books of Daniel and Revelation. He identified the scarlet woman as the Catholic Church - a harlot who had corrupted Christianity with non-biblical teaching.

Part of Newton's worldview came from alchemy and hermetic ideas contained therein. He believed in something called salnitrum - a substance or energy that made the earth a living being. This was a sort of magical ingredient which enabled metals to grow like plants - the vegetation of metals. The earth itself was a great animal or more correctly an animate vegetable. Through ideas like this he explained the law of gravity. This imperceptible material was in effect the very hand of God that influenced all things and this proved to Newton that Descartes theory of Deus ex machina was wrong.

Newton joined the Royal Society and amazed them with his treatise on the properties of light. Here again he expounded the theory that nature was circular alchemy had given him many new insights

Another interest of Newton was sacred architecture. Newton believed that ancient temples held secrets and most especially Solomon's temple. He spent years attempting to break the code was held in that temple. He was also concerned with the heavenly temple of Revelation and speculated what it looked like. He believed that the temple would one day be rebuilt in Jerusalem and that it was a blueprint for creation.

Another temple he was interested in was Stonehenge. He did not go there but visited it only in his imagination. He believed, however, that it was in many respects like other ancient temples which revealed that ancient peoples had been given important knowledge concerning the universe. Amongst other things the layout of temples demonstrated that the ancients knew that the sun was the centre of the universe.

In 1684 Halley asked him a question regarding the movement of planets which led to the discovery of the law of gravity. Soon afterwards Newton produced his most famous work the Principia Mathematica which explained the laws of motion and the universal law of gravity. Here too was alchemical magical stuff in action. Something on one side of the universe exerts a force which has an effect on the other side.

Newton also had an alchemical explanation for comets. Comets were instruments of God's wrath and would bring about the apocalypse. In another sense however they also contributed to sustain the universe because the tails of comets sink down to the world and feed back into the sun so fuelling it. The end of the world, the final apocalypse would bring in the 1000 years of pure Christianity. In manuscripts by Newton found in Jerusalem it was discovered that Newton predicted that this would occur in 2060.

But don't worry too much. In an article I found on the internet Matthew Goff* suggests that from Newton's book on the Revelation it is likely that it was the institution of the Holy Roman Empire that Newton was principally concerned with. Instituted in 800 and lasting for 1260 years (from the prophetic books) Newton predicted its end in 2060. But Newton was wrong about this. Napoleon 1 formally dissolved the Holy Roman Empire in 1806.

1693 He carried out what may have been his final alchemical experiment which he thought would reveal God's ultimate secret. Mixing gold and special mercury the stuff swelled before his eyes. But it was a failure. Newton who had had success in every other area felt that he had failed at alchemy. Soon after this he had a nervous breakdown.

This time marked a complete change in his life and instead of being a reclusive academic he sought and gained power and money. 1696 Newton became warden of the royal mint and in 1703 president of the royal Society. When he died he refused the sacraments and revealed his heretical interests but said that the time was not right to tell about it. Two close friends helped the cover up. It only came to light in 1936 when journals and personal work of Newton were auctioned. John Maynard Keynes, the economist bought them and later made the announcement that "Newton was not the first of the age of reason, he was the last of the magicians."

I found the documentary quite fascinating and wonderfully climactic with the disclosure of the apocalyptic date at the very end. It amused me to discover that Newton so often hailed as the first modern scientist and invariably considered to be a thoroughgoing rationalist turns out to have been a hermeticist. This of course could make him an even more modern scientist.

Newton's name has been linked with occult secrets in other ways. In the Holy Blood, Holy Grail the authors maintain that Newton, and many other members of the Royal Society, were involved in a secret society linked to the Templars and Masons. But having seen the documentary I wondered if this was really that likely.

For one thing, Newton was portrayed largely as a recluse and while he was definitely interested in Temples, the models he constructed were based on Ezekiel's 'heavenly' temple not on any secret knowledge he had obtained by virtue of a secret society.

On balance I think that Newton was a religious man, a heretic yes, but deeply religious nevertheless who pursued truth and knowledge and found it.

Although Newton would certainly be classed as an occultist I find in him an interesting contrast to latter day occultists. Newton worked hard in his quest for truth and although it was a quest for God's truth he uncovered a great deal of use in this world. Modern 19th century occultists, on the other hand, searched for hidden secrets and codes and found them but these on the whole do not seem to have generated anything useful to the world in the same way.

The overriding impetus behind Newton's great work was a search for the truth of God. Perhaps in his times the search for scientific knowledge could not be truly separated from theology but nevertheless what he discovered and how was astounding.
*************
ghost: Jesus was never married to Mary Magdalene, and Newton was a bible scholar that never would have believed a lie like that.
*************
M*W: I'm afraid you're going to have to show me some proof that Jesus and MM were not married as biblical scholars for the past 20 or so years have provided the proof that they were married and sired children.
 
Raithere said:
Just to be picky the energy never gets used up, it is never "gone". It simply gets diffused. The energy from the gasoline is converted into the movement on the car, the heat of the engine, wind movement (as the car pushing the air), and heating up the tires and the road. Energy never goes away... it's like, eternal man.

I'm with you. I'm not so good with the explanations of it. Thanks for the clarification. I say that wrong shit almost every time I talk about it. Bah. It's the availability to do work that goes away.

The forces that cause life to occur are the same as those that cause all chemical reactions to occur, they are simply the fundamental forces of physics. There's no need to run off haphazardly positing a special, unknown, "life force".

Sure, but rocks and stars don't ask questions. Seems to me there's a little something extra there. In my weird scheme of things, there is dimensional bleed-thru that gives rise to life rather than just a bunch of rocks and gas and stuff.

Life seems like anti-entropy to me, since it seems like order from disorder.
 
wesmorris said:
It's the availability to do work that goes away.
Bingo.

Sure, but rocks and stars don't ask questions. Seems to me there's a little something extra there. In my weird scheme of things, there is dimensional bleed-thru that gives rise to life rather than just a bunch of rocks and gas and stuff.

Life seems like anti-entropy to me, since it seems like order from disorder.
Order from disorder isn't against the rules, in fact it's an expected consequence of entropy as ordered movement is more efficient at dispersing energy. Remember, a local increase in energy is allowed as long as it's balanced by a decrease elsewhere, until the whole thing reaches stasis there will be order and complexity and patterns. Happily resulting in us. ;) As of yet, there is nothing to indicate that life operates under anything but the same laws that apply to the rest of the Universe.

~Raithere
 
itopal said:
Eternal? Like what - protons(?); but then again they're not actually.
(10^36 year half-life)
Nope, eternal like forever (or at least the life of the Universe). When a proton decays it releases energy, it doesn't just disappear (E=mc2, don't you know). Otherwise it would be all but impossible to detect proton decay (you'd have to monitor individual protons for 10^36 years waiting for them to disappear). That energy never goes away; it just continues to travel along its merry way until it interacts with something else.

There is no reason why energy cannot simply cease to exist; in the very distant future.
One can imagine anything, but thus far everything we observe is merely the shuffling around of energy, there is no evidence to support the idea that it will cease to exist. It just changes form (part of my personal version of unity). Light into chemical energy into kinetic energy into heat (sun - plants - animals). All the energy is still there, it's just moved around a bit. The problem is how much is available to do work because since there is no mechanism that is 100% efficient we can never harness all the available energy.

~Raithere
 
TruthSeeker said:
So... why there is entropy, why it behaves that way?
Why not?

No one knows really. I've read the hypothesis that it's sort of a relaxation from a point of zero entropy (singularity, big bang) although this is in contention.

http://www.rps.psu.edu/time/arrow.html

Interestingly, entropy is why time appears to have a direction. Think about it this way, if entropy reversed the broken glass would come together and form into a wine glass and jump back up on the table. The sun would leech energy from life and suck it back in, converting heavier elements into hydrogyn and eventually disapating into a cloud of gas. You would remember what you hadn't yet done and forget it once it happened.

Hawking at one time posited that entropy might reverse if the Universe went into collapse but he has since changed his mind.

Cool stuff though.

~Raithere
 
Raithere said:
Why not?

No one knows really. I've read the hypothesis that it's sort of a relaxation from a point of zero entropy (singularity, big bang) although this is in contention.

http://www.rps.psu.edu/time/arrow.html

Interestingly, entropy is why time appears to have a direction. Think about it this way, if entropy reversed the broken glass would come together and form into a wine glass and jump back up on the table. The sun would leech energy from life and suck it back in, converting heavier elements into hydrogyn and eventually disapating into a cloud of gas. You would remember what you hadn't yet done and forget it once it happened.

Hawking at one time posited that entropy might reverse if the Universe went into collapse but he has since changed his mind.

Cool stuff though.

~Raithere
Now that is interesting.... :) :cool:
Altough that is only a consequence of it? I don't know. Does entropy creates time or entropy is just an aspect of a larger thing? :confused:
 
itopal said:
E=mc2; is a mathematical abstraction of predictable reality; it is not in fact reality.
All language consists of abstraction. E=mc2 simply describes what happens. I'm not sure what your point is here.

Of course I doubt (that I) will be around to witness proton decay
Since there is a release of energy it's easier to monitor large numbers of protons by careful experiment, increasing the odds. Who knows, it could happen. These people are hopeful:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jcv/imb/imb.html

I never said their energy would disappear; based upon; the half-life decay (10^36 years); I was just indicating that reality as we need it to exist; will certainly not exist; in the very distant universe
Likely? Yes. Certainly? No.

As far as reality (energy) ceasing to exist; it is still a possibility; no theory is ever complete over an infinite-like amount of time.
What a bold assertion. How do you know? ;)

IF you can explain (understand) how energy came into existence (without coping out with a its always been there [like god] statement); then you can explain (understand) energy can cease to exist.
There are a number of explanations some theoretical other purely hypothetical or speculative. The question is, which is correct? Suffice it to say that there is presently no evidence that energy ever ceases to exist. Every experiment and observation to date supports the law of conservation.

~Raithere
 
itopal said:
As far as energy ceasing to exist (I continue that it is [only] a possibility; of which there are 2; it remains; or it doesn’t); I cannot comprehend a reality without energy; because reality is dependant upon it. And I cannot comprehend energy not always existing (in some form or other); but pre-existing (always existing) energy does not make sense either. I entertain the idea (the converse; the energy-pops-out-of-existence idea); because I entertain the other oddity (abstraction); that energy would be infinitely always existing prior to this incursion of reality.


Energy caught in a black hole. Does it cease to exist or not?
[By cease to exist I mean cease to exist in the physical world perhaps spilling into another space-time dimension different from the physical world.]
Just speculating. No experiments to test this theory or the others you are talking about. Science without experimental tests is bordering on philosophy.
 
Ghost:
One of the principles of God, that can be plainly seen in His universe which He created is balance. Heat is balanced against cold, summer balanced against winter, breathing out balanced against breathing in and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Eternal punishment is
balanced against eternal reward. etc.

What I want you to understand ghost is that things have a way of balancing themselves. Forexample when too much charge builds up on the earth or clouds, then lightning occurs. These kinds of things are common. So do not mistake them for "mystical" acts
 
itopal said:
Abstractions are mental abstractions, but you already know that; just a comment; that's all - no biggie.

Point: it (all) abstractions describe reality (many very well - indeed); but those mental abstractions are not reality. Conservation; etc; whatever physical law (mental abstraction); is shown to be predictable over near-term time-frames (even if you think 10^100 years; or 10^100000000 years; is a long time; it is still finite-time), the ultimate end is still not known.

As far as certainty; that was overstated (true; bad choice of a word); one “likely” (universal) death to reality as we know seems plausible and the other as “likely” too (frozen; or crunch; how would you like your universal end served up).

As far as energy ceasing to exist (I continue that it is [only] a possibility; of which there are 2; it remains; or it doesn’t); I cannot comprehend a reality without energy; because reality is dependant upon it. And I cannot comprehend energy not always existing (in some form or other); but pre-existing (always existing) energy does not make sense either. I entertain the idea (the converse; the energy-pops-out-of-existence idea); because I entertain the other oddity (abstraction); that energy would be infinitely always existing prior to this incursion of reality.
Agreed.

:)

~Raithere
 
Back
Top