Replies

We both use the term “universal vacuum field” to describe the same thing that I often call “geometry”. A field is defined as existing in all points of space/time. Thus when we say “universal” and “vacuum” it speaks to an empty “allness”, the underlying structure or geometry. By swapping terms, I may be unintentionally creating some confusion – my intent however is to ready the debate for whichever turn it might take, i.e. either to the structure of all that there is – or to the content (or lack of content) thereof.

Thank you so very much Alamo-Girl, for your kind words!

WRT the above excerpt, I thank you for clarifying the way we use these terms. Indeed, whether one speaks of the primary universal vacuum field or the underlying geometry of the Universe, one is essentially speaking of one and the same thing. I especially appreciate your term, "empty allness" (that is, one thinks, pregnant with possibilities that are yet to be manifested) to describe this concept....

You wrote: "But where the Trinitarian Truth is upheld – there is no substantive difference in that all are seeing the same diamond, the same Light." Truly I think this is the main thing. Christians are called to live in intimate communion with our Lord, in his Light, Truth, Love, and Grace. Particular doctrinal confessions are in comparison only of secondary importance. IMHO FWIW.

PatrickHenry has a great article up today on quantum field theory -- the Standard Model and the Supersymmetric Standard Models, and the quest for the Higgs boson. Find the Higgs, and you have found the Higgs field; for the Standard Model of particle physics states that every particular subatomic particle is the product of a particular field. My conjecture is that the Higgs field would not be the most "basic" field in the Universe; that would be the primary universal vacuum. But maybe it is "first-born" of the Vacuum; my conjecture is it is the Vacuum which ultimately produces all the other fields, according to a specifying geometry, or "cosmic blueprint." (Which as indicated in my previous post I associate with the Word God Spoke in the beginning, that got loaded into the singularity of the big bang....) You can read the article at this link: The Mysteries of Mass

Highly recommended "good stuff!" [Thanks again, Patrick, for posting it!!!]

Thank you so much for writing, dear sister in Christ!

We post; you decide.

Thank you so much for your encouragements!

You wrote: "But where the Trinitarian Truth is upheld – there is no substantive difference in that all are seeing the same diamond, the same Light." Truly I think this is the main thing. Christians are called to live in intimate communion with our Lord, in his Light, Truth, Love, and Grace. Particular doctrinal confessions are in comparison only of secondary importance. IMHO FWIW.

So very true. If only everyone could have this confidence then perhaps there would be fewer disputes...

And thank you so much for the endorsement of the article! It is indeed fascinating.

My conjecture is that the Higgs field would not be the most "basic" field in the Universe; that would be the primary universal vacuum. But maybe it is "first-born" of the Vacuum; my conjecture is it is the Vacuum which ultimately produces all the other fields, according to a specifying geometry, or "cosmic blueprint." (Which as indicated in my previous post I associate with the Word God Spoke in the beginning, that got loaded into the singularity of the big bang....)

Indeed. This is where it becomes impossible to decouple the concept of a universal vacuum field from the geometry of space/time (including all dimensions). As an example, the article speaks to super-symmetry and string theory as the potential explanation for the family problem in the Higgs quest. Or to put it another way, it's not what is "there" but the potential afforded by the structure - non-locality and superposition are similar concepts.