String theory, Relativity, and angels

by onacruse 133 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Robdar

  (Peace Be Unto Her) (May Her Hooves Never Be Shod)

  Sacrilege!

  Elsewhere, ya heathen, you are preaching false doctrine!

  Shoe that horsie for fear of slipper hoof:
• 

  Robdar

  One other thing:

  Great post, Ona. I want to have some discussions with you, Elsewhere Undaunted Danny and FunkyD when I take my physics class next spring semester. You boys are brilliant when it comes to this sort of thing.

  Since I am self taught, I have a question for you all (sorry if I am getting off the subject): Wouldn't the fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed lend credence to the idea of an original energy source or God? If not, where does all the energy originate?

  Robyn
• 

  myauntfanny

  Cool. I loved Flatland. It gives a great metaphor for why we might not be able to see god if there is one. Otherwise, you are way beyond me. I couldn't begin to imagine it. I have a friend who is a physicist and his field is string theory and I can't understand one word of it. But apparently it's all getting very interesting now.

  Edited to sound not quite so ignorant.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  I think the reason many physisits are leaning to the superstring theory is that it seems to answer questions mathimatically and resolve the incompatability of Quantum Mechanics and the general theory of Relativity.

  Heres a cpl:http://www.lassp.cornell.edu/GraduateAdmissions/greene/greene.html

  Superstring Theory

  Superstring theory resolves the most enigmatic problem of twentieth century theoretical physics: the mathematical incompatibility of the foundational pillars of quantum mechanics and the General Theory of Relativity. In doing so, string theory modifies our understanding of spacetime and the gravitational force. One recently discovered consequence of this modification is that spacetime can undergo remarkable rearrangements of its basic structure requiring the fabric of spacetime to tear apart and subsequently reconnect. Such processes are at best unlikely and probably impossible in pre-string theories as they would be accompanied by violent physical effects. In string theory, on the contrary, these processes are physically sensible and thoroughly common.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  About 2 years ago I started researching these subjects and came to this view of our world:

  Everything is not what it appears to be,, don't rely on your physical senses to understand how the world really is,, example:

  When on the earth as a very small man the world looks one way,,if we climb a tree or hill the world has more feature we can see,,if we are in a jet 45000 ft. in the air the world changes even more according to our sense of sight,,if we travel 300 miles up we see the world even more differently,,if we are 1,000,000 mile away from earth thing change even more and when we leave the milkyway galaxy the veiw of earth vanishes. If we could shrink to the size of an ant the world changes,,if we could shrink to the size of an electron what would the world look like then?

  So I don't doubt that there are more than 4 dimensions there could be 11 like the string theory suggest hey there could be an infinate amount.
• 

  Terry

  You asked:

  The point being: Is it unimaginable, or inconceivable, that there is hyper-dimensional life?

  I always ask myself if I am elevating a Potential to the level of an Actual and then confusing the two. For example; we know what the value of a grown woman is as a mother and family member and person of learning and experience and talent. That is an actual. But, in the abortion debate, as an example, the fetus as a Potential is elevated to the same status as the Actual status of the mother. A fetus may or may not grow up to be fully equal to the mother as she is now. Or, ti may not. The point of the analogy is this. There is not comparison between what ACTUALLY exists and what could POSSIBLY exist. Not for the purpose of valuation.

  I hope that illustrates the principle I'm referring to.

  When it comes to hyper-dimensional life or any other math construct we are dealing with a kind of exercise in developing a toolbox for understanding. By imagining what MIGHT exist and how we can set about proving/discovering/understanding the elements of it--we are flexing a muscle that isn't there yet--but, we hope to put it there for a useful purpose.

  The useful fictions we employ in everyday life are very useful indeed. Take the concept of ZERO for example It is extremely useful in hold down a place where something might appear. Zero doesn't actually EXIST in the way that things exist. It is a place holder. That is why you are not allowed to do things with zero as you would actual quantitites. You cannot, for example, divide by zero.

  Time is another useful fiction. Time is the distance between events. But, time as such, is merely a mental construct that helps us keep track of things along a progressive line of event following event.

  Space is another construct. There is no space. There is nothing. But, it is useful to regard it as something by way of contrasting what IS there and delineating it.

  Potentials can often actually exist once we are able to distinguish them by all our theorizing and hypothesizing. We build the muscles, so to speak, that enable us to lift the ideas previously too heavy to lift. For example, what is a friend if not initially a person we will grow to know who will be, by dint of experience and understaning, an important ally in life respetful of our talents and frailties and available as only another person can be for sharing and reinforcing what is good in life?

  Now let me take the above example of the POTENTIAL and put it next to an ACTUAL in a fascinating illustration of the differences.

  Sometimes married people meet another person who stimulates them and makes them feel alive to possibilities they are not currently experiencing with their own mate. At that point a weighing of the ACTUAL marriage and what it means goes up against the POTENTIAL excitements, pleasures and unexplored avenues of undiscoverd adventures.

  What often results from such a comparison of Actual vs Potential is that the actual is destroyed and the Potential is an illusive wishful-thinking.

  All of this may seem far from the point of your question. But, I thought it might have merit.

  As long as we keep track of what we are doing when we embark on our adventures in the mind and comprehend all along the way that we are pitting actual against potential; then we can relax and enjoy the ride and take whatever conclusions we reach in the spirit of useful explorations.

  All progress stems from somebody with a curious mind asking "What if....?"

  Terry
• 

  frankiespeakin

  This veiw also makes me wounder about our mind are we really just flesh and bones or is there more to us in other dimensions?

  Is our physical brain our mind of is it just a tiny apendage to something far greater in other dimensions?

  Are we all just one,, joined together in some other dimension where our thoughts connect from a central existence or are we nothing but just a very complex imagination that appears to be solid and very real??
• 

  Elsewhere

  Wouldn't the fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed lend credence to the idea of an original energy source or God? If not, where does all the energy originate?

  This is not entirely true... according to a popular theory, matter and energy are constantly being created in the universe.

  Here is the basic idea that Einstein first proposed: Matter and energy are measured with a positive value and gravity is measured with a negative value.

  To help you understand this, here is a thought experiment for you: When you lift an object, you have to exert yourself and impart energy into the mass that you are lifting. When you allow the object to fall, the energy you imparted into it is expended by gravity causing it to accelerate back down.

  What this means is that when objects move apart, their net energy (and mass) increase and when gravity pulls the objects back together their net energy (and mass) decreases.

  Therefore, gravity has a negative value of energy and matter has a positive value of energy.

  Now, according to the theory I mentioned before, if all matter was to collapse back together due to gravity all of the energy in the matter would be depleted until it reached a value of zero. Basically what this means is that the universe is using gravity's negative energy to balance out the matter's positive energy and if you add up all of the energy resulting from gravity (a negative value) and add it to the energy in all of the matter (a positive value) you will end up with a value of zero. -1 + 1 = 0

  Basically the universe, as a whole, is a whole lot of nothing. What we see around us (all of the "stuff" that is in the universe) are all of the opposing components that are balancing each other into a value of zero.

  So long as the universe expands, there will be more energy and matter that will emerge in order to balance out the negative energy caused by gravity and the expansion of the universe. If the universe were to start to collapse, the matter and energy in the universe will start to atrophy out of existence.

  Now, the next question of course is, how did the Nothing break into it's two components of Positive and Negative energies. No one really knows for sure, but the laws of quantum mechanics do allow for the spontaneous emergence of matter or energy. All that would be needed would be for a single piece of matter to spontaneously emerge and that would create a condition where gravity would need to emerge and balance out the matter of the single particle... and this one event would be enough to kick-start the universe and cause it to start expanding and in turn cause all of the matter to start emerging into existence to balance out the negative energy of the gravity that would emerge from the expansion of the universe.
• 

  Terry

  The question was asked:

  "Since I am self taught, I have a question for you all (sorry if I am getting off the subject): Wouldn't the fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed lend credence to the idea of an original energy source or God? If not, where does all the energy originate?

  Robyn"

  Einstein gave us that famous equation E=MC2 which shows that energy and matter are pretty much the same thing in different forms.

  The idea of creating the Universe out of Nothing would then, be out of the question, would it not? If energy (matter) can neither BE created nor destroyed that pretty much eliminates what the agency of God adds to the equation. Am I missing something?

  Or, to look at it another way for a moment.............

  People who INSIST that things must come from somewhere and postulate God as the source of that somewhere, then turn right around and cease to insist that God must come from somewhere. I don't get it! What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

  Let us cut to the chase and cut out the middle man. How about "The Universe has always existed" replacing "God has always existed." ?

  Which is less mysterious? Weigh this out on the scales of probability:

  1.A supremely intelligent personality with powers and abilities beyond comprehension who just simply has eternally been there?

  OR

  2.Energy and matter changing and reshaping from time immemorial colliding and rebounding and coalescing ultimately into one cell, then many and gradual changes into what we are?

  You and I started out as one cell: a sperm. It is the smallest cell in a man's body. Out of that tiny cell we sit here and type information, speculations, vast hypothesis across distances at the speed of light using machines that are more complex than our own minds! How can one boggle the mind and not the other?

  We are the source of God. So is Captain Ahab, Pinocchio and Tarzan of the Apes. The spine-tingling complexity of Lord of the Rings with all its lands, peoples, languages and conflicts came out of the imagination of J.R.R. Tolkein. The imagination is quite amazing. We can tie knots we are unable to untie. We can project a being who then, in turn, creates us and controls us and we surrender to the mystery!! Ahhhh, humans----wacky creatures!!

  Terry
• 

  JamesThomas

  Those interested in this subject, may like to go see this: http://www.whatthebleep.com/
  
  Have not seen it, but plan to very soon.
  
  (sorry, I no-longer have an edit bar so as to add hyperlinks and stuff)
  
  
  j