Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jstan
climber
|
|
The very first time I logged onto ST I saw Roger Breedlove trying to lead people away from personalizing everything and to start thinking in terms of hypotheses.
This thing he started--- has legs.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Jstan writes
"Karl:
The argument about escape actually goes deeper. All information expressed in the incoming matter is completely lost in the black hole. So even if the crunch model does prove to be correct no one is getting reborn anyway. Everything is lost in the singularity. "
Actually in the Indian cosmology (one iteration of it anyway) at the end of the cosmic cycle, all of creation returns to absolute form within the supreme being. All physical information being lost in the singularity wouldn't be an issue or conflict with that model
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Ed wrote
"you're copping out, Karl... you aren't defining any of these things "they just are" and that's the point, maybe they actually do come from something else... but you won't bite."
We are looking at it from different perspectives and attitudes Ed. From the standpoint of mysticism, time, space, and everything else are the manifestation of concepts in the divine mind. The human mind can't rationally encompass the big picture, different levels of reality have different situations of time. Like in science, it depends on the observer in some ways.
And you ask for a definition of time but such would require a circular definition, (you have to already know about it to understand the definition)
Let's face it, like gravity, science doesn't have time "down" yet such that you can be sure what will be discovered about it. I can shine photons around if I'm benighted on a climb but can't do crap about gravitons, if they even exist.
peace
karl
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
don't tell that to your GPS, it's making general relativistic corrections to the satellite clocks so you know where you are.... we know a lot about gravity, enough to get the big picture... there's more to learn
so if we have some definition of the "state" of a thing we move it to another state by some "operation" on it
imagine a universe where there are states and operators
one of those operators may change the energy of the state, and the operation may be constrained, for instance, the total energy has to be conserved, etc...
those symmetries that define the constraints on the operation, the energy operator in this case, creates the change of one state into another into another... the energy operator we associate with time translation in quantum mechanics
so from a universe of infinite dimension, once the symmetries of the operators manifest themselves, we have time... similarly with space an the momentum operator...
But there may be places in the universe where different operator symmetries exist, say in a black hole, etc... and the "dimension" of space could be different there, as well as the nature of time...
the dimensions we are familiar with in the universe aren't absolute, they depend on the local operator symmetries for moving things from one state to another.
You can look at this as an affirmation of you mystical ideas, but these ideas are based on a rigorous physical argument, and they make definite predictions about the nature of our universe we can go out and look for...
...the very dimension of the universe could be a very indefinite thing to experience, totally understandable and logical, but very different than the model evolved into our brains.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
As I understand it, the mystics of all traditions say that our microcosmic brains reflect the macrocosmic universe, at least from the point of view of our current universe. Thus they agree on methodologies and insights at a level much deeper than the differing historical religions. At the least, mystical religion demonstrates the similar hardware (the brain) and similar consciousness of human beings who use their hardware in a certain way. That in itself is beyond the understanding of most humans on this planet at this time since they are still looking at only their own ethnic and cultural structures.
The current great religions of this planet originated as early agricultural religions. At least most people are no longer worshipping animal spirits or fertility goddesses. I think the future evolutionary steps will be:
-a gradual recognition that almost all of these teach similar ethical precepts and are aiming for the same goal and need not conflict with each other
-an eventual realization that the mystics of all these traditions went way beyond this perception to understandings and perhaps actual dimensions, that the previous levels can only imagine
-a reconcilation of these mystical ideas with some kind of scientific model
The interesting thing will be whether the scientists will agree to the scientific model that the new mystical belief systems settle on and also, whether the mystical models will be able to adapt as science discovers new things, or will in turn become as frozen as the current early agricultural relgions.
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
"Religion is so puzzling. Which one is right?
Hum, Lord Almighty Jesus, let me think about this one...
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
Agree with you 100% skipt. Love can and will cause anything
to happen. All we need is love!
For example:
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
locker -- "POP"em' while they're HOT"...
You knucklehead, that's lust not love ....
Love has nothing to do with sex.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
I have made a minor modification to Skip's post.
What strikes me most as I continue to read through these posts is how utterly devoid of life people can be when they refuse to see the world except through a framework of WHAT THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO BELIEVE.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Well Skip, the thread OP is about creationism. Traditional religion could do very well if it stayed devoted to Love and it's ability to unite us and connect us to God. Instead, many have tried to make it an exact science and impose it on society and that brings out the "Lifeless" side of the argument. It goes both ways as fundamentalists can be quite lifeless in putting dogma over Love.
Ed wrote
"You can look at this as an affirmation of you mystical ideas, but these ideas are based on a rigorous physical argument, and they make definite predictions about the nature of our universe we can go out and look for..."
Mysticism makes definite repeatable predictions as well Ed, and other mystics can go out and look.
"so from a universe of infinite dimension, once the symmetries of the operators manifest themselves, we have time... similarly with space an the momentum operator...
But there may be places in the universe where different operator symmetries exist, say in a black hole, etc... and the "dimension" of space could be different there, as well as the nature of time.."
Eastern thought, for a few thousand years, has recognized that different "dimensions" or densities of reality experience time and space differently. It could be reckoned in other religions as well to some degree. Some of it is a bit specific and other times it's along the lines of "one day in heaven is like a thousand years on earth"
An interesting definition for the smallest unit of time in Hinduism bears mentioning. It is defined as the time it takes for light to traverse an Anu, (atom) the smallest unit of matter. Pretty interesting that well over a thousand or two years ago Light was both regarded as a constant on the physical level and the fastest speed.
"...the very dimension of the universe could be a very indefinite thing to experience, totally understandable and logical, but very different than the model evolved into our brains."
Totally agree on that one
Wanted repost the link that somebody posted higher.
http://revver.com/video/99898/imagining-the-tenth-dimension/
That's a good mind warper and that's medicine for getting outside our assumptions about wassup
Peace
Karl
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
What strikes me most as I continue to read through these posts is how utterly devoid of life people can be when they refuse to see the world except through a framework of science.
I always suspected it but man......
WTF are you babbling about?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
So let me apologize to the SuperTopo Forum for apparently putting some people down and distracting them from what really is important.
And apologize especially too the STForum members who believe that my posts have some sort of social agenda which offends them.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
So let me apologize to the SuperTopo Forum for apparently putting some people down and distracting them from what really is important.
And apologize especially true to the STForum members who believe that my posts have some sort of social agenda which offends them.
"apologize . . . to . . . members who believe . . .
They believe in fairy tales too.
Why should you apologize for something that some people with persecution complexes are imagining and taking offense at?
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Skip-
I agree that love is most important. However, there are many kinds of love, which suit different personalities. For example:
eros - romantic and sensual love
philos - love of knowledge
agape - selfless universal love
All spiritual traditions say that universal love for strangers in need, for the welfare of humanity in general, and even those who dislike you, is a higher form than love for one's own family as you are advocating.
Sometimes that love is expressed in what seem like dry ways, yet has a greater universal impact than emotional love of any kind. The discoverers of penicillin and the polio vaccine for example, were motivated by a great dal of impersonal curiosity yet their discoveries resulted in great human welfare - practical universal love.
In an age when alternatives to fossil fuels must be found, those who do basic research into the nature of the universe are demonstrating a universal love for this planet and its inhabitants. Their path is just not your path, that's all.
|
|
Gobee
Trad climber
Los Angeles
|
|
God is sooo wonderful, awesome, loving, kind, merciful, forgiving, and we have only scratched the surface of what we see and know, and what He let us know in the Bible! Triple bump to God...!!!
“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
nor the heart of man imagined,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—
TO GOD BE ALL THE GLORY!
|
|
cintune
climber
the Moon and Antarctica
|
|
So, Gobee, how you say "nyeah nyeah nyeah" in Aramaic?
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
Holy Smoke!
Physicists provide a well-founded story of how the entire universe unfolded, and people still say, "Well, yes, of course, that's very nice, but what came before that?"
Please, people, they need to rest up before the next miracle.
Me, I will just take the question as unanswered and not well defined.
This thread began with Ardi and Creationism but keeps going because of religion and science.
On the religion side:
I was baptized in the Fourth Congregational Church, Austin, Texas. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Pretty sure what baptism is, not so sure about belief.
I've been exposed to religion and am particularly impressed with the Society of Friends silent meetings, where the goal is for everyone to center down, to avoid directed thought, to empty the mind far as possible. When the mind is calm and quiet and still, that which is most important to a person can rise to the surface. In a silent meeting, anyone who feels the need to stand up and say something to the group is welcome to do so.
On the science side:
Science is about questions that can be answered. First you come up with a question, then you ask if it can be answered, then you ask if you are the person to answer it.
Science never asks what a thing "is". Science asks; What happens if you poke it with a stick? Or whatever gets a response.
Upthread there is a reference to the mystery of what is between our ears. I once was a student in neurophysiology. My advisor J. Goldberg got into the field partly because he was profoundly moved by the experience of listening to classical music and wondered if there was something in the brain that could explain that.
At the time it seemed reasonable to start at the periphery, the ear in this case, and follow the signal into the brain. The great Nelson Kiang had pioneered micro-electrode recordings from fibers of the 8th nerve while presenting the ear with sounds of different frequency and volume. Once you know what the signal is in the auditory nerve, you could see what happens to that signal in the brainstem nuclei supplied by that nerve, long since described by anatomists.
One of the first structures to get information from the auditory nerve is the dorsal cochlear nucleus. J. Goldberg said, "I couldn't understand what the dorsal cochlear nucleus was doing." He made important contributions to how the brainstem brings together information from both ears and uses it to estimate the direction a sound came from. He did a lot of other great work, too.
The point is, it isn't easy to study why the brain likes music.
When studying the brain it is best to start with some job you know it does, like figuring out where a noise came from, and then asking how it does that. The job itself should be well understood before asking how the brain does it.
And although when deciding what to study and how to study it, one tries to be systematic, there is still room for the unexpected, the idea that comes out of the blue, the result you weren't looking for.
And I am only talking about correlative neurophysiology, where you have control over the stimulus, or good measurement of the inputs, and record some sort of output.
If we had the hypothetical device that could record from all the neurons of Karl's brain during his experience of the spiritual, how would we use the opportunity? What, if anything, could we learn? Could we match up his objectively measured mental activity with his report of his experience?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!