First! + Topic: Universe Creation

[HEBGB]

NOTHING is mathematically impossible. However, you are correct about time as we percieve it. It is a chaotic variable depending on where your location in "known space" and what distance you are from the star we call sun.... (Our math is flawed) by our own arrogance and human perception.

TIME does exist, however we have to discover the center of the begiining and end of all things within all dimensions.Ie, the center of the beginning, and the edge of everything to determine "true time". Would you not agree?

 We are so arrogant that we believe "our universe" was the beginning of all things. Like we once believed that the planet we live on that WE NAMED Earth was the center of all things and everything revolved around us. (Laughable)

I challenge it all. I have no answers for anyone, I only share thoughts and opinions (mine are just as flawed as everyone else's) I think that arrogance and religion (the bassis for most of it) are our absolute largest weaknesses. We still fight over shiny rocks and rotten dinosaurs.... think about that for a moment.

We are petty disgusting little meaningless creatures with no understanding of anything.

[Kilgore Trout]

The universe does not exist. What we have is a perpetuation , a habit based upon collective consciousness. I may elaborate. As someone else in this thread suggests , the infinity of the mind is like that of the entire cosmos. Everything that is conceivable is possible. with the right nurturing , the patterns are nurtured and then strengthened and then reinforced , and finally established , concrete LAW. of nature , of gravity , of time . Still only habits. not actually relevant to what is possible.

[Neco]

TIME does exist, however we have to discover the center of the begiining and end of all things within all dimensions.Ie, the center of the beginning, and the edge of everything to determine "true time". Would you not agree?

Well... as I understand it, "true time" really does not exist.  It is relative to how fast you are traveling through space. 

The faster you travel, the slower "time" is. 

So if we both had a watch with the same time and I traveled around the earth at light speed and you traveled around the earth in a plane, more time would have been spent on your watch then mine.  I would be "younger" then you are because I traveled faster.

So two people are now existing in the same space and time together but for a time were not.

I don't know if that is what you mean by measuring all dimensions but I don't see how this comes into play when we are dealing with creation.

[Neco]

The universe does not exist. What we have is a perpetuation , a habit based upon collective consciousness. I may elaborate. As someone else in this thread suggests , the infinity of the mind is like that of the entire cosmos. Everything that is conceivable is possible. with the right nurturing , the patterns are nurtured and then strengthened and then reinforced , and finally established , concrete LAW. of nature , of gravity , of time . Still only habits. not actually relevant to what is possible.

Interesting...

But in my opinion, your original assertion that the universe doesn't exist is one that you cannot logically prove.

You or I cannot prove that the universe doesn't exist or does exist.

The only thing we can prove is that "I" exist.

This line of thinking does open the door for trains of thought that could lead you down the road of "anything is possible" but it doesn't necessarily mean that or not mean that.

[Kilgore Trout]

Interesting...

But in my opinion, your original assertion that the universe doesn't exist is one that you cannot logically prove.

You or I cannot prove that the universe doesn't exist or does exist.

The only thing we can prove is that "I" exist.

This line of thinking does open the door for trains of thought that could lead you down the road of "anything is possible" but it doesn't necessarily mean that or not mean that.

The concept of "I" is also just a habit. The mind perpetuates the myth of self. Take amnesia for example. once your mind's pattern is interupted you essentialy forget who "you" are.

[Neco]

The concept of "I" is also just a habit. The mind perpetuates the myth of self. Take amnesia for example. once your mind's pattern is interupted you essentialy forget who "you" are.

Yes, this is true but even if you loose all of your memories, you still realize that you exist.

[Kilgore Trout]

Yes, this is true but even if you loose all of your memories, you still realize that you exist.

Yes but at that point you are able to create anew , you can become anything at that point. An entire new CREATION

[Kinpa]

has anybody ever considered that there may be existence and consciousness beyond matter, energy,space and time? 

[Kilgore Trout]

I have. even levitation is on par with another level of consciousness which is tangible and possible through the nurturing of certain principals which as I said earlier become reinforced and then established and then LAW

[Shroom!]

What if there was no beginning? What if time does not flow as we are conditioned to believe? What if everything is happening at the same time? Just throwing it out there.

[Kinpa]

I have. even levitation is on par with another level of consciousness which is tangible and possible through the nurturing of certain principals which as I said earlier become reinforced and then established and then LAW

yes indeed~!

[Kilgore Trout]

I am convinced that the reason we are alive in a world that demands our concerns for basic survival , ie , we must toil for our food and shelter and be preoccupied with the "tangible physical" world in that we are constantly forced to rule out the potential we might have within us to trade it for the limited picture of the world we are presented with by the establishment gatekeepers , is because we really are capable of all kinds of "suprantural" feats which would be normal and commonplace if these things were not beaten out of us from early on.

[Kinpa]

I am convinced that the reason we are alive in a world that demands our concerns for basic survival , ie , we must toil for our food and shelter and be preoccupied with the "tangible physical" world in that we are constantly forced to rule out the potential we might have within us to trade it for the limited picture of the world we are presented with by the establishment gatekeepers , is because we really are capable of all kinds of "suprantural" feats which would be normal and commonplace if these things were not beaten out of us from early on.

i agree, it is also my opinion, that these things serve a purpose, they test us in different ways, strengthening us and teaching us spiritual lessons by the very act of living, of surviving in this world with it's various challenges...

[Kilgore Trout]

Well , that is a good way to look at those chalenges.

[agentbluescreen]

Maybe the universe originating from a single point is a subject where "the science is settled". The only question is how fast, how long ago, what was the early universe like, is it accelerating, will the universe collapse, expand forever, rip apart etc?

I tend to look upon this "expanding" hypothesis as the "square universe" theory.

This hypothesis looks only upon a fluidic syncro-sequential box-like four dimensional view of the universe, disregarding the uppermost, transcendent dimension of gravitation, which forms the rest of at least those (lower four dimensionalities) that we observe within Their singularity. This twin-coned Minkowski box followed out of Einstein and Lorentz's 4D math that leads to the Eddington view that "equates" gravitation with spacetime geometry. The problem with that is that equation's entangled functions remain outside the current (Lorentz transforms) 4 component-assumption model.

Neither Milne nor Einstein himself were satisfied with this conjecture, nor should we be. Milne's "Kinematic" universe is the overlooked alternative.

An interesting insight into the discarded EPR paradox illustrates how such "discardable" kinematic "entanglements" contradict the logic of the quantum-box assertions that essentially tend to change the universe by the mere (stop action) acts of observing it. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/5503/1/Little_boxes.pdf

Either every "boxed"-point in the universe is here or each is surrounded by 26 others outside of it.

Another way of looking at it is asking wether we (sort of like stars) might just be getting ever-smaller, the longer we hang around "absorbing by observing" it.

If fish could talk and you asked a fish what is the most obtrusive thing that permeates his world his answer would most unlikely be "water".

[SongBird]

A Treatise on the Account of the Creation of the World, as Given by Moses
Philo (20 BC – 50 AD), known also as Philo of Alexandria
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book1.html

Excerpt :
III. (13) And he says that the world was made in six days, not because the Creator stood in need of a length of time (for it is natural that God should do everything at once, not merely by uttering a command, but by even thinking of it); but because the things created required arrangement; and number is akin to arrangement; and, of all numbers, six is, by the laws of nature, the most productive: for of all the numbers, from the unit upwards, it is the first perfect one, being made equal to its parts, and being made complete by them; the number three being half of it, and the number two a third of it, and the unit a sixth of it, and, so to say, it is formed so as to be both male and female, and is made up of the power of both natures; for in existing things the odd number is the male, and the even number is the female; accordingly, of odd numbers the first is the number three, and of even numbers the first is two, and the two numbers multiplied together make six. (14) It was fitting therefore, that the world, being the most perfect of created things, should be made according to the perfect number, namely, six ...

[Kilgore Trout]

666 = thrice great..?

[SongBird]

666 = thrice great..?

No, we're talking above about the number six, not 111 x 6.