• 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!

Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?

Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
I'll stick with my view. The universe is not conscious, it is interactive. Everything is interactive and everchanging. Always has been, always will. As for now, it cannot be demonstrated or proven false.
 
godnotgod

godnotgod

Thou art That
Runewolf1973 said:
I'll stick with my view. The universe is not conscious, it is interactive. Everything is interactive and everchanging. Always has been, always will. As for now, it cannot be demonstrated or proven false.
Click to expand...

If that is true, then you are also interactive. But where do 'you' leave off and the universe begins? It is not as if you are something in the universe; you, amongst all else, are what makes up what the universe is.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
godnotgod said:
If that is true, then you are also interactive. But where do 'you' leave off and the universe begins? It is not as if you are something in the universe; you, amongst all else, are what makes up what the universe is.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that though we are indeed a universe unto ourselves we should never assume that we are The Universe (or the totality of all probabilities)...
 
Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
godnotgod said:
If that is true, then you are also interactive. But where do 'you' leave off and the universe begins? It is not as if you are something in the universe; you, amongst all else, are what makes up what the universe is.
Click to expand...


It is a continuation from one interactive form to another.
 
godnotgod

godnotgod

Thou art That
YmirGF said:
I would suggest that though we are indeed a universe unto ourselves we should never assume that we are The Universe (or the totality of all probabilities)...
Click to expand...

We are exactly the quintessence of That, just as the nature of both the wave and the ocean is water.

Q: This 'universe unto ourselves': exactly where does it leave off and the universe at large begin?
 
`mud

`mud

Just old
Premium Member
Ahhhhh the momentum obtained from the inertia gained from one source !
The fundamental force.
Big Bang......anyone ?
Where was that beginning ?
What was that original force ?
Around and around and go again !
~
'mud
 
Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
'mud said:
Ahhhhh the momentum obtained from the inertia gained from one source !
The fundamental force.
Big Bang......anyone ?
Where was that beginning ?
What was that original force ?
Around and around and go again !
~
'mud
Click to expand...


I don't envision the Big Bang as a beginning. It was a continuation from one form to another. So yes...around and around is the way she goes.
 
U

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
'mud said:
Ahhhhh the momentum obtained from the inertia gained from one source !
The fundamental force.
Big Bang......anyone ?
Where was that beginning ?
What was that original force ?
Around and around and go again !
'mud
Click to expand...

That ' original force ' is found at Psalms 104:30 because God supplied the abundantly needed dynamic energy ( power/ strength ) to create the material realm - Isaiah 40:26
 
gnostic

gnostic

The Lost One
Runewolf1973 said:
I don't envision the Big Bang as a beginning. It was a continuation from one form to another. So yes...around and around is the way she goes.
Click to expand...
The Big Bang is only really about the beginning of the observable universe.

We don't know what was before BB, and there have been a number of proposed hypotheses or proposed theoretical theories, but that just what they all are right now - hypotheses.

No one know what, how or why before the BB.

But I agree that the Big Bang is only just one beginning, but not necessarily THE BEGINNING.
 
godnotgod

godnotgod

Thou art That
gnostic said:
The Big Bang is only really about the beginning of the observable universe.

We don't know what was before BB, and there have been a number of proposed hypotheses or proposed theoretical theories, but that just what they all are right now - hypotheses.

No one know what, how or why before the BB.

But I agree that the Big Bang is only just one beginning, but not necessarily THE BEGINNING.
Click to expand...

Sir Roger Penrose is offering leftover background microwave radiation fingerprints as evidence of past universes.

The problem with any concept of a 'before' the BB is that it is proposed that Space-Time began at the moment of the BB, so there was no 'before' as that would require Time to have existed then. So if the theory is correct, then the BB must have occurred in not-Space-Time. In fact, I would say that not-Space-Time is where we have always been, even now. It's just that we see reality as being in Space-Time, which is conceptual. IOW, we have mistaken the measuring instrument for what we only think is Space-Time 'reality'.

Other than consciousness itself, what else does not exist in Space-Time? I suggest that the BB was an event in CONSCIOUSNESS! It cannot have been an event is Space-Time for reasons already mentioned, and it cannot have been a material event, as material requires Space-Time to already be in place within which to be created. Science and Theology have trouble explaining the origin of the original 'material' from which the universe emerged. But that is only a problem if such 'material' is real. If an illusion, there is no problem, and now science is telling us that such material is not real after all: it is virtual in nature.
 
Last edited:
godnotgod

godnotgod

Thou art That
Runewolf1973 said:
I don't envision the Big Bang as a beginning. It was a continuation from one form to another. So yes...around and around is the way she goes.
Click to expand...

I'm getting dizzy from this endless materialist, unconscious, sterile, senseless, futile, interactive Gyrating Stupidity. Any idea what it's all about?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top