Where we come from...

[Gauge]

and then at that point, there would have been a "particle" around before god was? that would mean god wasn't the "beginning"...

not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand and come to terms with your thoughts...  =)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thats what i was getting at as well

[torn asunder]

Are you confusing the heisenberg uncertainty principle in here somewhere, or is there some widely inaccurate and mis-interpretable rule of physics that I've forgotten? I don't ever remember hearing that "nothing exists unless it is observed/observable."

as i recall (and it's been a while) the uncertainty principle states that one can knwo either the location, or direction of an object, but not both, is that correct? or is it the "schroedinger's cat" mental experiment? it's my understanding that the world is full of "probabilities" which only solidify into a particular reality upon being observed - until that point, it isn't defineable. that leads me into another topic, which i won't go into now, but relates to my whole "you create what you believe" issue...

[Fierce Critter]

Waaaah glurbh!

[Msterbeau]

and then your all going to think I am Crazy.

That's a surprise? :laughing

*Runs*

[Gauge]

Waaaah glurbh!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

HAHAHAHAHAHA :woot:

[torn asunder]

Waaaah glurbh!

:whistling

[Msterbeau]

BTW. I'm totally way over my head here... but quite fascinating.

Nice topic Mark.

[BrassFusion]

as i recall (and it's been a while) the uncertainty principle states that one can knwo either the location, or direction of an object, but not both, is that correct? or is it the "schroedinger's cat" mental experiment? it's my understanding that the world is full of "probabilities" which only solidify into a particular reality upon  being observed - until that point, it isn't defineable. that leads me into another topic, which i won't go into now, but relates to my whole "you create what you believe" issue...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, paraphrased cuz I'm lazy:

"By observing something, you change it, so you can't ever really know what was going on with something before you observed it."

Shroedinger's Cat:

"Before you open the box to observe it, the cat is both alive and dead at the same time."

They kinda tie in, I guess.

But yeah, that thing about "nothing exists unless someone is there to observe it" is bollocks. If a tree falls in a part of the woods that has never been visited by man nor animal, the tree still exists and always has. Does that make me a realist? Maybe I shouldn't participate in metaphysics.

[Steven]

Only God can answer that. but in his words "I am the Alpha and the Omega"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

and here we are left to try to condense the "Divine" into that which we can grasp at. Yet we're still left with the stumbling block of the beginning, and possibly more so - of the sense of deliberate order even in the chaos that could have birthed all things. How we wish to be indipendent of this.....

I personally, love the fact that we will forever be on this course to understand...simply because we are finite beings in a temporal state of being. We are not Gods. We are less than gods, with unbalanced checkbooks and rebellious children who have lost heart with the generation that came before it. This too is measurable.

There are some incredible minds in this community.

who have likewise studied the works of other incredible minds.

You all have my respect, honestly.

And yet I'm thankful to live and operate from this faith based place that I do.

It's not as easy as many people might think.

[Gauge]

We are not Gods.  We are less than gods, with unbalanced checkbooks and rebellious children who have lost heart with the generation that came before it.  This too is measurable. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i am my own god

[BrassFusion]

and here we are left to try to condense the "Divine" into that which we can grasp at.  Yet we're still left with the stumbling block of the beginning, and possibly more so - of the sense of deliberate order even in the chaos that could have birthed all things.  How we wish to be indipendent of this.....

I personally, love the fact that we will forever be on this course to understand...simply because we are finite beings in a temporal state of being.  We are not Gods.  We are less than gods, with unbalanced checkbooks and rebellious children who have lost heart with the generation that came before it.  This too is measurable. 

There are some incredible minds in this community.

who have likewise studied the works of other incredible minds.

You all have my respect, honestly.

And yet I'm thankful to live and operate from this faith based place that I do.

It's not as easy as many people might think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How do you know you're not a god-in-training?

[Msterbeau]

How do you know you're not a god-in-training?

He doesn't. But he's humble like dat, yo.

[phee]

I jumped in way too late here

[Steven]

How do you know you're not a god-in-training?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

because my checkbook does not balance.

and because no Gods come out of the neighborhood I grew up in, trust me.

(besides babe, you really DONT want me running things....)

[The_Dark]

It's never too late...

[The_Dark]

BrassFusion...

have you heard of AntiRealism? Most physists are Anti-Realists.

here is some reading...

http://www.eequalsmcsquared.auckland.ac.nz...osophy/moon.cfm

Look, don't tell me that what I am talking about is bollocks until you read something actually proves that. I don't pull scientific data out of my ass. I read.. I do research...

[The_Dark]

Torn... in answer...

The "particle" wasn't a particle until it was observed. It was a super complex probability wave... one of those probabilities was that it would spawn another probability wave. Which interacted with the first... at which point they both collapsed into "being". One was a super particle... one was God

[Fierce Critter]

Splunge!

[torn asunder]

Torn... in answer...

The "particle" wasn't a particle until it was observed. It was a super complex probability wave... one of those probabilities was that it would spawn another probability wave. Which interacted with the first... at which point they both collapsed into "being". One was a super particle... one was God

but if the particle became "defined" upon observation, then "god" would have as well. the particle, having been defined, would no longer be omnipresent, and therefore, neither would god, right? (just theorizing, and asking...) =)

[The_Dark]

well... as soon as the waves collapse.. both the particle and God became. What they became would depend entirly on what the other "observed".

In that instant.. God would observe a Super particle that was unstable. It had lost it's balance when it spawned the probability wave that became God. Without balance it did the only thing it could. It came apart... really really fast and with much energy. BOOM

To the particle.. God would be EVERYTHING ELSE.

[torn asunder]

To the particle.. God would be EVERYTHING ELSE.

but at that point, to god, the particle would have "exploded" and become everything else in the universe as well, right!?

(edited to add...)

and at that point, both "god" and the "particle" would see each other as everything else, which would make both god, and the particle which exploded into the rest of our known universe, essentially equal/the same, which would mean that everything that exists is god, yes!?

[The_Dark]

YDING DING DING

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!

[Fierce Critter]

<--- builds a nice 4-walled Lego house while brain melts

[torn asunder]

and that would mean that i would not be being blasphemous by saying that i am god...

(edited to add...)

if this is your belief, how can you follow a religion that promotes the thought that god is external, you are born a sinner, and anyone who believes other than we do is going to hell!? (not necessarily you personally, mark, although i'd love to hear your reply, but anyone... if everything is god, including each one of us, how can we say anyone else is wrong? i don't get it...)

[BrassFusion]

BrassFusion...

have you heard of AntiRealism? Most physists are Anti-Realists.

here is some reading...

http://www.eequalsmcsquared.auckland.ac.nz...osophy/moon.cfm

Look, don't tell me that what I am talking about is bollocks until you read something actually proves that. I don't pull scientific data out of my ass. I read.. I do research...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Anti-realism is bollocks.