james blunt
Well-Known Member
No, it is based on R³ which is real coordinate space. In simple terms that which is before your eyes.
-
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!
I challenge the world , bring it on!
- Thread starter james blunt
- Start date
No, it is based on R³ which is real coordinate space. In simple terms that which is before your eyes.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Try looking yourself ,
What existed before the big bang?
It is difficult enough to imagine a time, roughly 13.7 billion years ago, when the entire universe existed as a singularity. According to the big bang theory, one of the main contenders vying to explain how the universe came to be, all the matter in the cosmos -- all of space itself -- existed in a form smaller than a subatomic particle.
I.e there was nothing.
Srivijaya
Active Member
You are still imposing a mental construct on the indivisible. Why is coordinate space more or less "real" than space-time, when it is imputed on the same basis?
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Coordinate space has no time, time is the substance traversing through coordinate space.
To see what I see you have to observe empty space without putting yourself in the rest frame.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
You are the one who said that the theory says there was nothing. Where does it say it?
Not even close. By definition, "something smaller than a subatomic particle" is not "nothing". I'm not sure what kind of mental gymnastics you have to do to pull that one off.
Srivijaya
Active Member
How can time be a substance? You're kind of demolishing your own argument here.
I don't understand that.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
If you consider a void, do not put yourself in the void while considering the void. When you think of a void, you will ''see'' the void in front of you.
Time is substance, a period of physical existence.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
I have not got time going around the bush with you in circular argument, go on science forums and do some homework.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
It's your job to demonstrate your arguments. If you cannot substantiate something you say when you are requested to, then don't say it.
Srivijaya
Active Member
Okay, that's not what I do in any case.
But didn't you claim that time doesn't exist? Now you're saying it's a substance. What kind of substance? It must be measurable and if so, how?
james blunt
Well-Known Member
I said time does not exist of space itself, time exist of the matter/substance that exists. Anything that can age is time itself.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Oh please, it is not my job to show you what science thinks. I have spent ten years or so on science forums gaining this information. Scientists are deluded in some of the things they think.
I have been banned for saying they are incorrect in saying nothing existed before the big bang, because I would not agree with them. I am sorry I am coming across a bit blunt today, but I feel so angry today. My connection , even just typing is lagging, I have hackers in my system and thy need to go waway
Srivijaya
Active Member
Matter occupies space though and space contains substance - both help define each other.
I think what you are saying is that a void is not subject to change, as there is nothing within it which can be subject to change? Is that roughly it?
Srivijaya
Active Member
I'm sorry to hear that mate. Sounds like you're having a rough time of it. I kind of half-way like what you are saying, but I'm coming at from a Buddhist POV, rather than a scientific one. You're onto something in my opinion.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
I can't see how your theory can work given that Space/God doesn't limit man's potential to displace, expand, or destroy Space/God. You mentioned some 30 pages back that you could... if you wanted to ...use God's equation and create another big bang and destroy the entire universe. Does God control you or do you control God? If it is you that is controlling God then it seems there would be no limit to your power. Should we be concerned?
james blunt
Well-Known Member
Having a bad time all around of late, the person I was caring for kicked of benefits in affect getting my carers benefit stopped. It's irony that the pauper understands space and God , those who are rich and create the lies of society want to keep the pauper suppressed.
I might ask God if God will send a giant rock hurdling our way, because the world and everything about is , has no virtue and is more unholy than the devil .
Last edited by a moderator:
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
Hang in there dude, it will pass...
james blunt
Well-Known Member
I have to much virtue to hurt anybody, if I could re-create a big bang, it will not hurt God, it will atomise molecules I think.
james blunt
Well-Known Member
My patience is being tested today, lag making it hard work just to type a sentence. I have to keep resetting my modem etc. Grrrr, maybe my work is done.
JoshuaTree
Flowers are red?
But the power to unmake creation is a big baby-step towards Godhood, why stop there unless God limits your ability?