Posted on 02/18/2015 7:39:18 AM PST by Gamecock
Next to last word in third paragraph should be linear, not libear. Small keyboard tiny screen. UGH!
We have indeed seen many changes over the years. I do miss quite a few of those who ended up at Darwin Central, the ones who raised interesting points, kept us sharp and were respectful. A few of course were simply cheerleaders for their side, didn't have anything substantive to add to the debate. And some were just plain rude or difficult.
I suspect most of the reaction to Timothy from "over there" came from the latter group because I doubt many of the heavier thinkers would have anything to do in an echo chamber.
It has been an honor and privilege to exchange thoughts with you all these years and to work together on several book projects!!!
And thanks for the memories on the physical cosmologies research!
They seemed to flood the marketplace after the 1960's when it was confirmed that the universe was expanding (the CMB measurements) which meant it had a beginning of real space and real time.
A real beginning was a poison pill for methodological naturalism and the atheist worldview, indeed it has been called the most theological statement ever to come out of modern science. The presumed steady state universe cosmology was no threat to either the scientist wanting the theologians to stay away or to the avowed atheists who deplored the very idea of God.
So I suspect that was the primary motivation for a rash of new physical cosmology theories, hypotheses and even speculation.
Everett's multi-world theory might be relabeled as the latter, hypothesis or speculation, since, as you say, it cannot be falsified (Popper et al.)
So would Max Tegmark's Level IV Parallel Universe - which is the only closed physical cosmology known to me. He posits that 4D physical reality is a manifestation of mathematical structures which actually do exist outside of space and time.
None of the other physical cosmologies are closed since they all require a beginning of real space and real time (and physical causality I might add.)
It is humorous to me that the appeals to prior universes simply move the goal post while all the time assuming that a prior universe would have to abide with the physical laws of this one - when many, if not all, physicists would agree that physical laws break down in a singularity.
Everett's Multi-World theory is surely rooted in the Schrödinger's Cat paradox. And I confess that quantum field theory is more sensible to me than particle physics - indeed I think of particles as placemarkers in waves rather than "thingly." For instance, my dislike for tachyon particle theory (faster than light particles) may be akin to yours concerning Everett's Multi-World.
Thank you so much for all of your insights and encouragements, dearest sister in Christ!
While I do favor the exploding planet scenario, since I do believe Mars was once a moon of a larger planet in that same general orbital region, I do not agree with the LaSage 'push' notion for gravity. I have my own very different conceptualization for the force called gravity.
The math for general relativity is well established, to the point that something of the nature that Einstein (and Newton) conceptualized is at work, rather than a fairytale push concept using such tachyon ghosts. Though there are 'other' ways to calculate out the equations of general relativity, if the quaternian calculations of Maxwell (not Heavyside's twisted misapplications) are aligned in some fashion to those of Einstein's calculations to achieve general relativity, an interesting possibility arises, namely that gravity is a temporal phenomenon related to the nature of how time is 'running' in our Universe.
As opposite poles of a magnet attract their opposites so gravity is an attraction phenomenon, but in a primarily monopole fashion, since the opposite 'pole' is the soliton at the edge of our expanding spacetime volume, thus the force of gravity is actually a temporal phenomenon. Well, such an outlandish notion requires a very different conceptualization of dimension Time, and I have developed such.
Time and space both came into being at the 'bang' event of God Creating what we call 'the Universe'. And God has also created other dimensions as real as space and time. A thing existing in a dimension not intertwined with space and time is beyond out ability to 'sense' it. Indeed, with your two brilliant axioms of the Universe, dear Sandi --that without time events do not occur and without space a thing does not exist-- well those axioms apply to things which we can 'sense' so long as we exist in the Universe defined by space and time and all the permutations therein. And it is in those 'permutations' where we must look for the true nature of time.
That said, to see dimension Time differently than just some background state in which things and events occur our minds must try to conceptualize the beginning of the expression of space and time, and go from there.
To do that conjecturing requires word forms which describe 'things', and unfortunately there are no words in existence which refer specifically to variable expressions which have not been described previously by the minds of men and women. So, the use of terms to follow is a loose communication at best.
As the first manifestation of spacetime came to be, it existed as point/moment, or moment/point if you prefer. In some way which we may never comprehend, God's creative doing caused point/moment to come into existence rapidly and repeatedly, such that a 'place/time' developed and I believe continues to develop even to this moment. That point/moment is what Physicists are calling the zero point energy field. This place/time I have called the volume/future expanding as the Universe of our perceptions. The 'future' is the soliton edge of the expanding spacetime.
To be sure, there are expansion expressions which are more complex than our sensory mechanisms can yet detect, but they are as real as the room and accouterments which surround me at this moment. After all, a hand reached from some other where/when into the where/when of the King of Babylon, as revealed in Daniel Chapter five, and Jesus left our where/when and went into a different where/when as He exited the tomb, etc.
In what way may realities be existing and contiguous yet beyond our senses? Well, since we have three variable expressions of dimension space which yield a volume, is it not logical to presume that we have at least three variable expressions of dimension time mingles in/with this volume? I believe it is rational and this led me to ponder how this volume of spacetime came into being in the state we sense it, from a beginning of point/moment. By taking this approach I discovered that there are ways that space and time can be woven such that whole realities may exist which are sequestered from other expressions that are just as real in our Universe, not outside of it.
One final quirkiness: because I write fiction pieces, it happened a while back that one of my characters made the following statement, which I though quite profound and probably not of my own creation: 'Angels use technology; miracles are in God's purview.'
I've been thinking about your posts for days and the only comment I can offer is two fold:
2. That some people believe energy causes dimensionality whereas others believe that dimensionality causes energy (mostly string theorists of course.) For someone who cannot or will not recognize God as the Creator it amounts to a chicken/egg dilemma.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.