I am currently working on the idea that all the matter in the universe is "glued on" to God's body (the ether).
What work could you possibly be doing on such an antiquated idea?
By "work", I mean mulling it over in my mind, taking it with me each day and seeing if it "fits" with what I see and feel around me. Just because an idea is antiquated, there is no need to disregard it.
You only disregard an idea when it has been DISPROVED. As an example, the fax machine was designed in 1843, but not popular and accepted unti the 1980s !
They are maintained in the same way that cells are maintained in our body. By us, not consciously, but by us nevertheless.
How could we, mere statistical anomalies in one tiny little backwater of the universe possibly maintain the whole thing. How did the universe manage for the 13 billion years before we showed up?
That would be the fault of my sentence structure, not my logic. I mean that matter is akin to cells in God's body. HE maintains that in the same way that WE maintain our cells. I did not mean to imply that WE maintain the universe.
How about this for a mind bender ... The universe is not empty, but fill of "spirit", full of "ether". Some ether, is more dense that others - so we get matter.
Ether - how quaint! That might go down well with a New Age audience but for anyone who knows even elementary physics, it's embarrassing.
Embarassing to who? Not to me. I understand elementary physics - yet I do not find it embarassing ! Who can say that what we say is empty in our limited understanding is not actually brimming with activity in another "depth" or dimension ?
I wonder what would happen if you added even more energy. Would it make "ether / spirit" ?
No.
That's that then is it? How do you know? Have you tried this and disproved this also ? Being scientific, this is a hypothesis waiting to be proved or disproved. If it is disproved then I will ponder and come up with a new hypothesis based on the new knowledge that I have gained from the failure of the first hypothesis. I am not saying any of this is fact, nor am I defending it as such, it is just conjecture in my mind.
Doesn't Einstein reckon that as something breaks the speed of light, it becomes PURE ENERGY.
No.
It is my understanding of E=mc^2 that the energy required to move an object at a speed greater than light would be infinite. It can be shown from this that as you accelerate a physical object you increase its energy, therefore increasing its mass. If you try to accelerate an object to the speed of light, then unless it was pure energy to begin with (what's called zero rest mass), it would require an infinite amount of energy just to reach the speed of light, and the object would have infinite mass.
If an object has infinite mass and infinite energy, it leaves no rooom for any other mass or energy in the universe, it has "in essence" become the universe.
Maybe then it has broken free of this universe in which we live ?
What could that even mean?
Use your imagination... make a hypothesis.... test it if possible etc etc
Phew, glad to have got that off my chest. Now I am ready to be attacked
To avoid leaving yourself open to such "attacks", just crack open a physics textbook every now and then.
You sound like it is not possible to have faith AND accept science. Is that your intent ? I have several qualifications in physics, but physics will only every be able to OBSERVE and explain the methodology of creation. Some of us here want to journey a little deeper than that.
If I have misunderstood your tone, then I apologise in advance, but my ideas were just that - ideas.
