• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can religion reject this science ?

james blunt

Well-Known Member
The Universe Inside and Out !


Introduction.


The Universe inside and out is a journey of discovery that considers past science and present science . A journey of discover that will advance present science thoughts and theory , opening up a whole new era of science in regards to physics and physical process .
The Universe inside and out makes reference to Dirac , Newton , Higg's , Tesla and Einstein , concluding an united field theory namely the N-field theory , an united field theory that explains the beginning of the visual universe , unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space.
Additionally the Universe inside and out explains the gravity mechanism , the nature of light and the nature of time .


Chapter One - Absolute Newtonian Space .

For purposeful and meaningful discussion I feel it is of utmost importance that we all agree upon definition and semantics . Firstly I would like to draw our attention to the definition of space

1. A continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics are important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition of space and not of fact .

In consideration of what is space ?

I propose that space is the single property of an infinite void , agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and immovable . In regards to space there is no evidence that suggests anything other than these provided seven postulates :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space is immovable

3)
Space is timeless and has no mechanism to age or decay

4) Space is the unique property of a void

5) Space has no mechanism to be visibly light or visibly dark

6) Space is transparent

7) Space has no physicality

There's no reason or reasons why these postulates are not of axiom value and true to observation , it would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates . Objectively , the seven postulates hold true and are unarguable without evidence to the contrary !



(To be continued , comments thus far ? )

Last edited: 3 minutes ago
 
Last edited:

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
No need for Religion to reject science. Yes they see things differently now, but in some thousand years more science will discover that religion was right, because right now science can not messure God or spiritulity. But they will in future
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Not understanding why religion would want to even reject this??? Or why we are even talking about religion and the OP content?

Space is God in my objective opinion , that's why I am asking religion on science opinion .

Do you see any falsity in my post ?
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

But it can expand, contract, and curve.

2) Space is immovable

See avove.

3) Space is timeless and has no mechanism to age or decay

Space is not separate from time - they are one manifold.

7) Space has no physicality

Nonsense. It has physical properties: dimensionality, geometry, and topology.

There's no reason or reasons why these postulates are not of axiom value and true to observation , it would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates .

Evidence: Tests of general relativity
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
I see a number of issues with your postulates, but I'm not sure it's really worth going into it. I'm pretty sure the response will be "that's not the kind of space I'm talking about" even though it matches the definition provided. For example, a blank sheet of paper is a space. That space on that sheet of paper can certainly be destroyed, moved, decay, is not void, can be illuminated or darkened, is opaque, and has physicality.
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
But it can expand, contract, and curve.



See avove.



Space is not separate from time - they are one manifold.



Nonsense. It has physical properties: dimensionality, geometry, and topology.



Evidence: Tests of general relativity
For purposeful and meaningful discussion I feel it is of utmost importance that we all agree upon definition and semantics . Firstly I would like to draw our attention to the definition of space

1. A continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

Please try again and try reading this time !

It would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates .

Added - Evidence: Tests of general relativity


Does not test the seven postulates .

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

Can you provide any shred of evidence to show falsity of postulate one ?

I already know you can't !
 
Last edited:

james blunt

Well-Known Member
I see a number of issues with your postulates, but I'm not sure it's really worth going into it. I'm pretty sure the response will be "that's not the kind of space I'm talking about" even though it matches the definition provided. For example, a blank sheet of paper is a space. That space on that sheet of paper can certainly be destroyed, moved, decay, is not void, can be illuminated or darkened, is opaque, and has physicality.

A blank sheet of paper is not a space , how absurd ! The blank piece of paper occupies space . The blank piece of paper has an area of atomic matter we can overlay with ink / print .


Objective facts !
 

Woberts

The Perfumed Seneschal
No need for Religion to reject science. Yes they see things differently now, but in some thousand years more science will discover that religion was right, because right now science can not messure God or spiritulity. But they will in future
Nope, that's not going to happen.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
But it can expand, contract, and curve.



See avove.



Space is not separate from time - they are one manifold.



Nonsense. It has physical properties: dimensionality, geometry, and topology.



Evidence: Tests of general relativity
Space can be created, it is linked with space/time, created by the BB.

Space was created at the BB, along with everything that exists in the universe
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Space was created at the BB, along with everything that exists in the universe

The Big Bang is a useless theory that doesn't work !

Space was not created at the BB unless the universe started within a solid , but that is room rather than space that always exists. Any event needs a space to happen in , simple logic and science .
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
The Universe Inside and Out !


Introduction.


The Universe inside and out is a journey of discovery that considers past science and present science . A journey of discover that will advance present science thoughts and theory , opening up a whole new era of science in regards to physics and physical process .
The Universe inside and out makes reference to Dirac , Newton , Higg's , Tesla and Einstein , concluding an united field theory namely the N-field theory , an united field theory that explains the beginning of the visual universe , unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space.
Additionally the Universe inside and out explains the gravity mechanism , the nature of light and the nature of time .


Chapter One - Absolute Newtonian Space .

For purposeful and meaningful discussion I feel it is of utmost importance that we all agree upon definition and semantics . Firstly I would like to draw our attention to the definition of space

1. A continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics are important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition of space and not of fact .

In consideration of what is space ?

I propose that space is the single property of an infinite void , agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and immovable . In regards to space there is no evidence that suggests anything other than these provided seven postulates :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space is immovable

3)
Space is timeless and has no mechanism to age or decay

4) Space is the unique property of a void

5) Space has no mechanism to be visibly light or visibly dark

6) Space is transparent

7) Space has no physicality

There's no reason or reasons why these postulates are not of axiom value and true to observation , it would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates . Objectively , the seven postulates hold true and are unarguable without evidence to the contrary !



(To be continued , comments thus far ? )

Last edited: 3 minutes ago

Newton was wrong. Space is nothing of the sort. We cannot agree on something that is so macroscopically wrong.

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Space can be created, it is linked with space/time, created by the BB.

Space was created at the BB, along with everything that exists in the universe

You seem to know when that happened. Can you also say where that happened?

If not, why not?

Ciao

- viole
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
The Big Bang is a useless theory that doesn't work !

Space was not created at the BB unless the universe started within a solid , but that is room rather than space that always exists. Any event needs a space to happen in , simple logic and science .

Oh dear. This is so 17th century like. Do you also wear a wig?

Ciao

- viole
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Oh dear. This is so 17th century like. Do you also wear a wig?

Ciao

- viole

Actually , the completed ''book'' is so the future . Do you have any objection to the seven postulates or do you intend on just posting unrelated comments ?
 
Top