PDA

View Full Version : 15 billion years or 6 days?



wingrider
06-15-2012, 06:02 PM
The billions of years that the cosmologists say have followed the big bang and those events of the first six days of Genesis are in fact one and the same. They are identical realities that have been described in vastly different terms.
God's day wasn't made up of 24 hours. The Bible never once says that a day consisted of 24 hours. In fact the sun and the moon, which would have been required to make up a 24 hour day, were not completely formed and visible from the earth until the 4th day of creation. So God looked upon each day as a work day, and that his work day would only be finished when a certain task or job was completed. So each of God's days consisted of an epoch, a flow from disorder towards increasing order in the creation of the universe. In Genesis, at the end of each day God says there is an evening and a morning. In Hebrew the definitions for evening and morning are:

EVENING MEANS DISORDER
MORNING MEANS ORDER
"And there was evening and there was morning" is telling us that in each "daily" episode, at a specific location within the universe, order was imposed by God on the disorder that existed there.



http://robertwells.tripod.com/creation.html

fascinating study, I found it informative and a really cool concept... quite long but well worth the read

JohnAdams
06-15-2012, 06:08 PM
The billions of years that the cosmologists say have followed the big bang and those events of the first six days of Genesis are in fact one and the same. They are identical realities that have been described in vastly different terms.
God's day wasn't made up of 24 hours. The Bible never once says that a day consisted of 24 hours. In fact the sun and the moon, which would have been required to make up a 24 hour day, were not completely formed and visible from the earth until the 4th day of creation. So God looked upon each day as a work day, and that his work day would only be finished when a certain task or job was completed. So each of God's days consisted of an epoch, a flow from disorder towards increasing order in the creation of the universe. In Genesis, at the end of each day God says there is an evening and a morning. In Hebrew the definitions for evening and morning are:

EVENING MEANS DISORDER
MORNING MEANS ORDER
"And there was evening and there was morning" is telling us that in each "daily" episode, at a specific location within the universe, order was imposed by God on the disorder that existed there.



http://robertwells.tripod.com/creation.html

fascinating study, I found it informative and a really cool concept... quite long but well worth the read

Um I guess all one can really say is AMEN! :pope:

We are whether liberales like it or not, created beings. Endowed by our Creator with certain rights. Which stem from that Creator, not government. Oh and no that creator was not E.T. either but rather our God.

Thanks for posting this. Wing in a day and age wherein such a belief in a creator is constantly under attack it is quite refreshing to see the truth being put forward so boldly. :applause:

Fwiw as a person who does believe science can further mankinds knowledge of the Universe around him. I have long said there was a big bang. And God moved upon the darkness and said, "let there be light" and bang, there was light, and God saw the light and that it was good". :)

Calypso Jones
06-15-2012, 06:08 PM
well. that's possible but I also think that 'in the beginning God created heaven and earth....when was the beginning...15 million or more years ago...and it sat and it sat until He decided to get on with it.

Chris
06-15-2012, 06:27 PM
Except Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe.

wingrider
06-15-2012, 06:37 PM
well. that's possible but I also think that 'in the beginning God created heaven and earth....when was the beginning...15 million or more years ago...and it sat and it sat until He decided to get on with it. I suggest you read the link.. it really is an impressive analogy.

Calypso Jones
06-15-2012, 07:11 PM
I did. It is. Especially the image/likeness part.

JohnAdams
06-15-2012, 10:58 PM
well. that's possible but I also think that 'in the beginning God created heaven and earth....when was the beginning...15 million or more years ago...and it sat and it sat until He decided to get on with it.

No about fourteen to fifteen billion years back was the "beginning"

JohnAdams
06-15-2012, 10:59 PM
Except Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe.

Yes it was, before that there was only darkness, until God began what we as human beings reside in and know as the universe. ;)

"1 (http://bible.cc/genesis/1-1.htm)In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 (http://bible.cc/genesis/1-2.htm)And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 (http://bible.cc/genesis/1-3.htm)And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 (http://bible.cc/genesis/1-4.htm)And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 (http://bible.cc/genesis/1-5.htm)And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."

JohnAdams
06-15-2012, 11:02 PM
Oh There are however parts of the heavens which did exist outside of, and beyond, what we would call the "universe". But I wont go into that, as that gets into quantum physics and the multiverse, and "brane" theory as what we know as the universe sits on a membrane every now and then colliding with another "membrane" which most laypeople I find can't grasp.

Trinnity
06-15-2012, 11:36 PM
I do. I watch the science shows...love 'em.

I don't worry about these things. I figure God created everything and so physics is just part of his "tool box".

And I do recall something in the Bible about "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day".

JohnAdams
06-16-2012, 12:10 AM
I do. I watch the science shows...love 'em.

I don't worry about these things. I figure God created everything and so physics is just part of his "tool box".

And I do recall something in the Bible about "a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a day".

Yep Trinn, the scriptures are chock full of the "evidence" that we know today as "science" which point to a creator.

For example at one time science thought the Earth was flat.

Yet the scripture said this: Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the Earth"...
But the scripture you refer to is in 2 Peter 3 Verse 8

"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

I do worry about these things to a certain extent Trinn, while yes I know that our God is in control, and will only allow um lets just say things to go to a certain extent.

Such a topic concerns me when it comes up, because the liberal leftists like to attempt to use science to attack the fact that we have a creator as somehow contrary to what mankind knows as "science" today.

Because it is based upon the fact that we have a creator, which is where our rights as human beings, and as American Citizens stem from.

So then if the leftists can somehow use "science" to state that there is no creator, then there cannot be any rights which stem from that creator, and thus our rights must stem from some place else, namely libs like to claim government.

And since then those rights stem from the power and authority of government, then government can at it's discretion hand out, and strip away those rights.

I hope that makes sense and you follow me there peeps. ;)

Chris
06-16-2012, 12:14 AM
Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8, Trinnity.


The many uses of Hebrew yom throughout Genesis tends to mean 24 hours.

1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:8 ...And the evening and the morning were the second day.

1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

1:16-19 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

1:31 ...And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.


The analogy is likely a product of the 20th century.

JohnAdams
06-16-2012, 12:21 AM
Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8, Trinnity.


The many uses of Hebrew yom throughout Genesis tends to mean 24 hours.

1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:8 ...And the evening and the morning were the second day.

1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

1:16-19 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

1:31 ...And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.


The analogy is likely a product of the 20th century.

Only it was not the scripture you quote which tells us God created the universe.

The scripture in question (in this discussion so far that was pointed out by Trin and which can account for the billions of years we know it took to create the universe as it exists for us today) is Second Peter which states a day is AS a thousand years to God and a thousand years AS a day.

In other words, to clarify for those who lack discernment of Gods word.

Your God is outside of, and not confined by or to, the linear timeline we exist in.

When your God involves himself in our Universe, fifteen billion years is nothing, and likewise a day is nothing, I know a hard concept to grasp for some there ;)

God has the ability to see all of our linear timeline existence at once...which Einstein proved can be mathematically done, and our science is just now telling us may in fact one day be a possibility for we ourselves to technologically do the very same thing...ut oh.

http://www.humansfuture.org/time_travel_scientific_explanations.php.htm

There's some more proof our God exists....sorry I know I wasn't supposed to post any of that.

MMC
06-16-2012, 10:37 AM
Oh There are however parts of the heavens which did exist outside of, and beyond, what we would call the "universe". But I wont go into that, as that gets into quantum physics and the multiverse, and "brane" theory as what we know as the universe sits on a membrane every now and then colliding with another "membrane" which most laypeople I find can't grasp.


Do you think that most Hindus and Buddhists can grasp the correlation of time within Yugas? Manvantara.....is the cycle of cosmic history, or a day of the GOD, which embraces the Sat Yuga, the Golden Age, 1,728,000 years of four-tenths of the Cycle; the Tretya Yuga, the Silver Age, 1,296,000 years or three-tenths of the cycle; Dwapara Yuga, the Copper Age,864,000 years or two-tenths of the Cycle; and the Kali Yuga, the Iron of Dark Age (present age), 432,000 years or one-tenth of the cycle.

Mahayuga the cycle for cosmic history of a day of GOD, or 4,320,000 years, which consist of four ages or yugas.

Yet even with quantaum physics and a multiverse. Such would still be considered the Lower Regions, which would be planes below that of Soul. The Worlds of Energy, Time, Matter, and Space. That which is held by the Laws of the Physical Universe. :wink:

Chris
06-16-2012, 11:23 AM
Only it was not the scripture you quote which tells us God created the universe.

The scripture in question (in this discussion so far that was pointed out by Trin and which can account for the billions of years we know it took to create the universe as it exists for us today) is Second Peter which states a day is AS a thousand years to God and a thousand years AS a day.

In other words, to clarify for those who lack discernment of Gods word.

Your God is outside of, and not confined by or to, the linear timeline we exist in.

When your God involves himself in our Universe, fifteen billion years is nothing, and likewise a day is nothing, I know a hard concept to grasp for some there ;)

God has the ability to see all of our linear timeline existence at once...which Einstein proved can be mathematically done, and our science is just now telling us may in fact one day be a possibility for we ourselves to technologically do the very same thing...ut oh.

http://www.humansfuture.org/time_travel_scientific_explanations.php.htm

There's some more proof our God exists....sorry I know I wasn't supposed to post any of that.

Your Second Peter is an imposition of Christian meaning on Judaic text. As I've shown, it simply doesn't fit Genesis.


"to clarify for those who lack discernment of Gods word."

So you know God?

"There's some more proof our God exists"

Time travel? Eistein proved no such thing. In fact your source says just that: "...whether its Einstein, Hawkings, Gott, Thorne or a host of other top scientific minds, the word is that nothing in Newtonian physics, Einstein's Theory of Relativity, or the laws of quantum mechanics is sufficient to prove time travel is impossible."

MMC
06-16-2012, 04:01 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X02WMNoHSm8

Here is what Michio Kaku has to say about Time Travel. As he notes Einstein did believe in time Travel.

Chris
06-16-2012, 05:52 PM
Here is what Michio Kaku has to say about Time Travel. As he notes Einstein did believe in time Travel.

Not really. Right from that start he states the same things as JohnAdams source: "...whether its Einstein, Hawkings, Gott, Thorne or a host of other top scientific minds, the word is that nothing in Newtonian physics, Einstein's Theory of Relativity, or the laws of quantum mechanics is sufficient to prove time travel is impossible." No one, he says, believes it possible, but, he adds, no law of physics says so. What he explores is an alternative physics, one in which rather than an expanding universe, we had a rotating one, and in this model time travel would be theoretically possible but not practical. It's the same sort of theoretical postulating as non-euclidian geometry, which makes no sense in the real world, but is logically sound.

In IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE? (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/mysteries/html/kaku1-1.html), Michio Kaku explains perhaps the same thing as the video:
However, before Einstein died, he was faced with an embarrassing problem. Einstein’s neighbor at Princeton, Kurt Gödel, perhaps the greatest mathematical logician of the past 500 years, found a new solution to Einstein’s own equations which allowed for time travel!

The “river of time” now had whirlpools in which time could wrap itself into a circle. Gödel’s solution was quite ingenious: It postulated a universe filled with time that flowed like a rotating fluid. Anyone walking along the direction of rotation would find oneself back at the starting point, but backwards in time!

In his memoirs, Einstein wrote that he was disturbed that his equations contained solutions that allowed for time travel. But he finally concluded that the universe does not rotate, it expands (as in the Big Bang theory) and hence Gödel’s solution could be thrown out for “physical reasons.”
So, no, Einstein rejected the idea.

MMC
06-16-2012, 06:03 PM
Not really. Right from that start he states the same things as JohnAdams source: "...whether its Einstein, Hawkings, Gott, Thorne or a host of other top scientific minds, the word is that nothing in Newtonian physics, Einstein's Theory of Relativity, or the laws of quantum mechanics is sufficient to prove time travel is impossible." No one, he says, believes it possible, but, he adds, no law of physics says so. What he explores is an alternative physics, one in which rather than an expanding universe, we had a rotating one, and in this model time travel would be theoretically possible but not practical. It's the same sort of theoretical postulating as non-euclidian geometry, which makes no sense in the real world, but is logically sound.

In IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE? (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/mysteries/html/kaku1-1.html), Michio Kaku explains perhaps the same thing as the video:
So, no, Einstein rejected the idea.


He said he had doubts but they weren't written in stone. He also states at the 1:20 mark that since Einstein they have discovered hundreds of other equations which allows for time travel.

Einstein also said time is like a river. Branching off into two rivers. While Kaku says they now consider the aspect of whirlpools. He also stated that the river could be folded like a pretzel. Which is not the exploration of other alternative physics. But that of the same one with Einsteins Theory. As Einstein to believed the river could be folded.

wingrider
06-16-2012, 06:34 PM
Not really. Right from that start he states the same things as JohnAdams source: "...whether its Einstein, Hawkings, Gott, Thorne or a host of other top scientific minds, the word is that nothing in Newtonian physics, Einstein's Theory of Relativity, or the laws of quantum mechanics is sufficient to prove time travel is impossible." No one, he says, believes it possible, but, he adds, no law of physics says so. What he explores is an alternative physics, one in which rather than an expanding universe, we had a rotating one, and in this model time travel would be theoretically possible but not practical. It's the same sort of theoretical postulating as non-euclidian geometry, which makes no sense in the real world, but is logically sound.

In IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE? (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/mysteries/html/kaku1-1.html), Michio Kaku explains perhaps the same thing as the video:
So, no, Einstein rejected the idea.
wait .. if the universe only expands outward , then why do we have a galactic alignment every 26,000 years.?

MMC
06-16-2012, 06:38 PM
wait .. if the universe only expands outward , then why do we have a galactic alignment every 26,000 years.?

How would the expansion affect an alignment of stars and or galaxies?

wingrider
06-16-2012, 06:43 PM
How would the expansion affect an alignment of stars and or galaxies? because if we are only expanding outwards, there won't a turning also. yet the planets reach an alignment with the center of the milky way galaxy every 26000 years.. I am no astrophisist but this is doesn't quite make sense to me..

Deadwood
06-16-2012, 06:47 PM
One question:

How long is God's day?

MMC
06-16-2012, 06:47 PM
because if we are only expanding outwards, there won't a turning also. yet the planets reach an alignment with the center of the milky way galaxy every 26000 years.. I am no astrophisist but this is doesn't quite make sense to me..

Which is a rotation of stars in a galaxy. I fail to see how it would affect the expansion of that alignment as the galaxy can rotate within the universe.

MMC
06-16-2012, 06:49 PM
One question:

How long is God's day?

Manvantara.....is the cycle of cosmic history, or a day of the GOD, which embraces the Sat Yuga, the Golden Age, 1,728,000 years of four-tenths of the Cycle; the Tretya Yuga, the Silver Age, 1,296,000 years or three-tenths of the cycle; Dwapara Yuga, the Copper Age,864,000 years or two-tenths of the Cycle; and the Kali Yuga, the Iron of Dark Age (present age), 432,000 years or one-tenth of the cycle.

Mahayuga the cycle for cosmic history of a day of GOD, or 4,320,000 years, which consist of four ages or yugas.

Deadwood
06-16-2012, 06:58 PM
Such a topic concerns me when it comes up, because the liberal leftists like to attempt to use science to attack the fact that we have a creator as somehow contrary to what mankind knows as "science" today.

Because it is based upon the fact that we have a creator, which is where our rights as human beings, and as American Citizens stem from.

So then if the leftists can somehow use "science" to state that there is no creator, then there cannot be any rights which stem from that creator, and thus our rights must stem from some place else, namely libs like to claim government.

And since then those rights stem from the power and authority of government, then government can at it's discretion hand out, and strip away those rights.

I hope that makes sense and you follow me there peeps. ;)



Ah, yes, the either/or argument.

If there is a God then there can't be evolution, as if God were so rigid as to not allow for adaptation.

But then, the debate got hijacked way, way back by the atheists when a semi-itinerant, part time teacher proclaimed that he had taught evolution. John Scopes, though, had never taught anything but math and English, and after his infamous trial retired to a life of luxury.

And now, it is forbidden to even reference "intelligent design" even though many atheists believe life on this planet was "seeded" here by a more intelligent race.......

wingrider
06-16-2012, 07:02 PM
One question:

How long is God's day? read the OP// it could have been anywhre from 2 billion years to 1000 years. our time

Deadwood
06-16-2012, 07:05 PM
Manvantara.....is the cycle of cosmic history, or a day of the GOD, which embraces the Sat Yuga, the Golden Age, 1,728,000 years of four-tenths of the Cycle; the Tretya Yuga, the Silver Age, 1,296,000 years or three-tenths of the cycle; Dwapara Yuga, the Copper Age,864,000 years or two-tenths of the Cycle; and the Kali Yuga, the Iron of Dark Age (present age), 432,000 years or one-tenth of the cycle.

Mahayuga the cycle for cosmic history of a day of GOD, or 4,320,000 years, which consist of four ages or yugas.


Phew! I'm a better man knowing that.

However, if you think about it, it is still placing a human measurement on what only God can conceivably measure.

But even with that measurement, God had a whole lot of time in one day for the creatin' .

So, everybody sit back, relax and accept all that. Than we can get on with talking about His son...the Jewish Carpenter. Now there is an interesting fellow. He only had three years to make a difference, and no mass media, no cell phones, no internet, not even 'wireless' radio......and look what He accomplished!

...[that should liven up the debate some....Sultan?]

wingrider
06-16-2012, 07:11 PM
excellent Fand L

take these verses from the bible for instance

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) , and the Word was God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) .
2 The same was in the beginning with God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) .
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

wingrider
06-16-2012, 07:12 PM
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

wingrider
06-16-2012, 07:14 PM
From the book of John we know that Jesus existed with the father and that it was through him and by him that all things were made, in essence then it was Jesus who was responsible for the creation of everything ,

MMC
06-16-2012, 07:57 PM
Phew! I'm a better man knowing that.

However, if you think about it, it is still placing a human measurement on what only God can conceivably measure.

But even with that measurement, God had a whole lot of time in one day for the creatin' .

So, everybody sit back, relax and accept all that. Than we can get on with talking about His son...the Jewish Carpenter. Now there is an interesting fellow. He only had three years to make a difference, and no mass media, no cell phones, no internet, not even 'wireless' radio......and look what He accomplished!

...[that should liven up the debate some....Sultan?]

Correct....in the way that we could understand it through the physical of in relation of time, energy, matter, and space.

Chris
06-17-2012, 10:08 AM
wait .. if the universe only expands outward , then why do we have a galactic alignment every 26,000 years.?

The alignment is expanding as well. The expansion is not outward from a single point but from every point in the universe.

Chris
06-17-2012, 10:09 AM
because if we are only expanding outwards, there won't a turning also. yet the planets reach an alignment with the center of the milky way galaxy every 26000 years.. I am no astrophisist but this is doesn't quite make sense to me..

Why wouldn't there be?

Chris
06-17-2012, 10:11 AM
Ah, yes, the either/or argument.

If there is a God then there can't be evolution, as if God were so rigid as to not allow for adaptation.

But then, the debate got hijacked way, way back by the atheists when a semi-itinerant, part time teacher proclaimed that he had taught evolution. John Scopes, though, had never taught anything but math and English, and after his infamous trial retired to a life of luxury.

And now, it is forbidden to even reference "intelligent design" even though many atheists believe life on this planet was "seeded" here by a more intelligent race.......

And that is about the time the OP analogy was created.

ID is an interesting scientific question without an answer.

Chris
06-17-2012, 10:19 AM
excellent Fand L

take these verses from the bible for instance

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) , and the Word was God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) .
2 The same was in the beginning with God (http://thepoliticalforums.com/dictionary/god.html) .
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Or take the Judaic version found in Genesis.

John 1:1-4 could be read as an expression of the Hellenistic influence on Judaism, as adoption of that as Christianity began to spread.

MMC
06-17-2012, 11:14 AM
The alignment is expanding as well. The expansion is not outward from a single point but from every point in the universe.

I agree with you there Chris. Expanding out like from 360 degrees. Moreover the intergalatic alignment alleges that it is the center of the Universe. Evn tho it aligns with whatever star that is to appear within the time and on the other side of the Milky Way Galaxy. I don't believe there is any scientific proof that the alignment is in fact the Centering Thru the Universe.

Not that there couldn't be one. But I don't think the one they are talking about is.

MMC
06-17-2012, 01:19 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHHz4mB9GKY&feature=related

Here is kaku explaining the Fundalmental flaw in Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Which he says is the Monster in the room for Physicists.

It's the Collapse of Physics as we know it.

Chris
06-17-2012, 01:59 PM
When Einstein had published his theory, improving on Newtonian physics, he said someone will improve upon his.

All science is tentative, tentative, incomplete and probabilistic.

MMC
06-17-2012, 10:28 PM
When Einstein had published his theory, improving on Newtonian physics, he said someone will improve upon his.

All science is tentative, tentative, incomplete and probabilistic.


Law of Fascimiles.....all effects in life are brought about by the thoughts and pictures in the mind of the individual.

Do you think Atoms are intelligent?

Chris
06-18-2012, 05:54 AM
But the individual acts within society. Nani gigantum humeris insidentes (Dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants) -- Newton.

MMC
06-18-2012, 03:07 PM
But the individual acts within society. Nani gigantum humeris insidentes (Dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants) -- Newton.

And on the Question of Atoms?

Chris
06-18-2012, 07:08 PM
"Do you think Atoms are intelligent?"

No. They are governd by the laws of physics.

MMC
06-18-2012, 11:56 PM
"Do you think Atoms are intelligent?"

No. They are governd by the laws of physics.

Okay.....But do Atoms strive to create other atoms.

wingrider
06-19-2012, 12:00 AM
here is one.... how does an atom know if the material it is making up is solid or gas,, ?

Chris
06-19-2012, 08:41 AM
Okay.....But do Atoms strive to create other atoms.

Not sure I understand. You mean as in have a goal, decide to do? No.

Chris
06-19-2012, 08:42 AM
here is one.... how does an atom know if the material it is making up is solid or gas,, ?

Why would it care? ;-)

MMC
06-19-2012, 09:06 AM
"Do you think Atoms are intelligent?"

No. They are governd by the laws of physics.


Yes they are governed by the laws of physics, and atoms are made out of what? If we have human life then we have atoms of intelligence. Or really the same for any other living matter. Yet we have all that makes up Atoms. Proton, Neutron, Electron.

Here is a basic description of atoms....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom

How do Atoms multiply? Change form? Some of todays scientists believe atoms do have intelligence and not just for those things of living matter. Note some of what is known. It's wiki-pedia but it is referenced. Which I can throw up Britannica's to if you like.

Chris
06-19-2012, 09:52 AM
If we have human life then we have atoms of intelligence.

Why would that be? Not real sure I understand the questions.

MMC
06-19-2012, 05:11 PM
Why would that be? Not real sure I understand the questions.

Well that was a couple of the questions as to there being intelligence with those that are made up of living matter. Such as how do they multiply and change form? Knowing which structure or substance to bond to.

Chris
06-19-2012, 05:20 PM
The whole is not the sum of its parts. Consider the free market that emerges out of the simple exchanges of people. The US is not just its states.

MMC
06-19-2012, 05:41 PM
The whole is not the sum of its parts. Consider the free market that emerges out of the simple exchanges of people. The US is not just its states.


Different concept don't you think? I mean the difference with atoms being intelligent as they are what makes up living matter and inanimate matter.

Chris
06-19-2012, 09:07 PM
Atoms are not intelligent. And yet there is life and there is intelligent life.

This video explains somewhat what I mean about how properties emerge from mere particles and their interactions:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V0KjXsGRvoA

MMC
06-19-2012, 09:37 PM
On the other hand, they absolutely "communicate" to "make decisions" in that compressed world they exist in inside a nucleus. A prime example would be the absorption of a neutron by a nuclide. Recall that in any atomic nucleus, when the nucleus was formed, a special agreement had to be made between all the participants. They all went to Jenny Craig and lost a bit of weight (mass) that was converted into binding energy (or nuclear glue, if you prefer) to hold the whole thing together. (Protons don't like each other, remember?) When an errant neutron comes along and gets absorbed by the nucleus, the previous agreement that permitted everyone to get along inside the nucleus is suddenly null and void. Presto! Nuclear decay (or fission in a fissionable material).


Make no mistake about it, subatomic particles don't have intelligence. They obey natural law. It is that law that drives them to do the things they do. Whether we understand it or not. The architecture of natural law is what science is all about discovering (and applying). As to the architect? Science answers questions about the architecture, not the architect.


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_subatomic_particles_in_the_nucleus_of_atoms_hav e_intelligence_where_they_are_able_to_think_move_c ommunicate_and_make_decisions#ixzz1yIUBssXL


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_subatomic_particles_in_the_nucleus_of_atoms_hav e_intelligence_where_they_are_able_to_think_move_c ommunicate_and_make_decisions#ixzz1yITu8ZMq

Chris
06-19-2012, 10:12 PM
On the other hand, they absolutely "communicate" to "make decisions" in that compressed world they exist in inside a nucleus...

If you want to speak of such things in terms of metaphors, OK, just don't forget they're metaphors.



It is that law that drives them to do the things they do.

I prefer to phrase it as the law describes their actions and interactions. As such we are the architects discovering and describing those laws. That is the main point of Hawking's The Grand Design.

MMC
06-20-2012, 03:54 AM
If you want to speak of such things in terms of metaphors, OK, just don't forget they're metaphors.




I prefer to phrase it as the law describes their actions and interactions. As such we are the architects discovering and describing those laws. That is the main point of Hawking's The Grand Design.


Yeah.....I just punched up asking the question. Thats what they showed. I am pretty much in agreement with you. Althought I was noting that how an Atom creates sound and light. From the very first one every created.

Trinnity
06-20-2012, 08:35 AM
But the universe IS self-aware, and that part of it that is, is us. As sentient beings, we're not separate from the universe (multiverse) and it's physics. We're made of it.

Chris
06-20-2012, 03:04 PM
We have the von Economo neurons (VEN) specialized for self-awareness and empathy. They've also been discovered in monkeys. It's fairly unique I think.

KSigMason
06-21-2012, 05:07 AM
The Hindus talk about the difference between time as we see and what the Divine would see it. Maybe to him it was 6 days, but to the mortal realm it was much longer. There was a rabbi who did a lecture on this and I found it fascinating. I'll have to dig it up.

wingrider
06-21-2012, 11:49 PM
The Hindus talk about the difference between time as we see and what the Divine would see it. Maybe to him it was 6 days, but to the mortal realm it was much longer. There was a rabbi who did a lecture on this and I found it fascinating. I'll have to dig it up.
please do .. I would like to read it.

MMC
06-22-2012, 01:02 AM
please do .. I would like to read it.

Check out D-Swami's Thread on Astrology. As we have some of it going on in there.

Carygrant
06-26-2012, 07:13 PM
There was a rabbi who did a lecture on this and I found it fascinating. I'll have to dig it up.


A bit gruesome and the smell will be awful .
And believe me , he won't say a word .