The gulf between us

[Akivah]

No one can know with absolute certainty if God exists or not.

True. G-d did this as a gift for us.

Logically founded on the apparent fact that there is no scientific evidence of any kind to support the God hypothesis.

Logically, there is no physical tangible evidence to prove G-d. G-d is not a tangible being with a physical form.

Whatever label suits this viewpoint best I don't know. I grokk therefore I am.

I'd label you as an atheist that is almost certain that G-d does not exist.

 

[DavidFirth]

There is no verifiable evidence of a God creator. So it is entirely logical to assign a low probability if not zero probability of a God creator. Given the existence of alternative explanations for the universe and living things which do have some evidences that are least more descriptive and logically consistent.

Hmm. I would say the same for existence with no creator.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Love is attachment, a manifestation of neurological and hormonal interaction. Evolved in humans to permit socialization and extended parental care. Energy = MC2 and light is electromagnetic radiation in the visible spectrum.

You look at Love from one point of view.

Greater Love is the opposite of attachment it is Detachment. Love also contains pain and suffering.

Energy is more than a formula as it is also found with motivation, Light is as beautiful as the eye that beholds it and the mind that process it.

May you always be well and happy.

Regards Tony

 

[Corvus]

Hmm. I would say the same for existence with no creator.

You might.

 

[Corvus]

This is the bias that you have trapped yourself in. Consider time. Time is not physical, so are you claiming that it doesn't "exist". Or consider this question: does the nothingness that the universe is presumably expanding onto "exist"? Also, what "exists" before a person dies that does not "exist" after?

Time is physical. It is one of four dimensions of spacetime that forms the matrix of our frame of reference. It exists. It is a property of the universe that is an integral part of the laws physics. I do not mean something has to have mass or matter, to be real.

 

[Corvus]

One could easily argue, and logically assert that what we call "energy" IS divine will. And that the ways in which energy can and cannot behave are the direct intent of that will.

I believe the universe is one great computational machine. That everything is ultimately rendered into information. Particle spin and mass and position and momentum etc, all integers in self emergent algorithms.

 

[Corvus]

So you're an adherent of Scientism, then? I see.

I guess that would be an appropriate label. However and this is an important caveat I think, I only so do because it is logical. However logic can be perfectly and flawlessly applied to a faulty premise too. If I personally witness God materializing before me and explaining briefly but extremely convincingly that things are not quite how I think they are, along with some other witnesses, so I can rule out an episode of psychosis of some sort, then I would have to seriously re evaluate my position. To cling to the notion that God doesn't exist after meeting God in person, would on the face of it, be illogical.

 

[Corvus]

Greater Love is the opposite of attachment it is Detachment. Love also contains pain and suffering.

Well I am all Greater Love then, you don't get much more detached than me, detached is great.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Well I am all Greater Love then, you don't get much more detached than me, detached is great.

Ha ha I see your thoughts like to stay grounded and within your own self.

There is the answer to your post.

One day I hope you get to explore all that is not of the physical senses.

Regards Tony

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Time is not physical

How is time not physical?

 

[LukeS]

I was atheist for a day or two some years ago, and instantly started harping on about how illogical religion was, and how rational atheism was. Either its culture, or a in-wired part of the atheist mind set.

 

[PureX]

How is time not physical?

It has no weight. It has no mass. It has no volume and it has no energy. In fact, it has no identity at all except through the relationship between space and motion.

 

[Corvus]

It has no weight. It has no mass. It has no volume and it has no energy. In fact, it has no identity at all except through the relationship between space and motion.

If the three dimensions of space are real and physically quantifiable, then so is that of time. The singularity in a black hole does not have a volume, photons have no mass or weight and in fact an atom itself is 99.999% empty space. Your definition of what is physical or not is not based on any scientific qualification. Spacetime is the physical firmament of our existence. That which all matter and energy is embedded in. It is real enough.

In addition, at relativistic energies and speeds, time starts to behave mathematically, like a spatial dimension.

Time is integral and part of the fabric of reality. The universe and all it's parts may only move in one direction, forwards, in the time dimension, but move they do.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Time is integral and part of the fabric of reality. The universe and all it's parts may only move in one direction, forwards, in the time dimension, but move they do.

There will be a time not too far away when we can "Traverse time and space easily and swiftly" and it will be with Magnetism in some way that will be achieved.

It is an interesting thought that the only direction we may be able to go is forward.

This is the quote my ideas stem from; Bahá'í Reference Library - Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Pages 197-198

You may be interested in this view as to how creation came into being, this is only a provisional translation into English, so it may well take on greater detail when it is officially translated. "Tablet of the Universe" (Lawh-i-Aflákiyyih) - Tablet of the Universe

I think the Future is most great when Science and Religion find their common purpose.

Extract from the Tablet of the Universe;

"...These are spiritual truths relating to the spiritual world. In like manner, from these spiritual realities infer truths about the material world. For physical things are signs and imprints of spiritual things; every lower thing is an image and counterpart of a higher thing. Nay, earthly and heavenly, material and spiritual, accidental and essential, particular and universal, structure and foundation, appearance and reality and the essence of all things, both inward and outward -- all of these are connected one with another and are interrelated in such a manner that you will find that drops are patterned after seas, and that atoms are structured after suns in proportion to their capacities and potentialities. For particulars in relation to what is below them are universals, and what are great universals in the sight of those whose eyes are veiled are in fact particulars in relation to the realities and beings which are superior to them. Universal and particular are in reality incidental and relative considerations...."

Regards Tony

 

[Corvus]

For physical things are signs and imprints of spiritual things; every lower thing is an image and counterpart of a higher thing.

You might be interested in the holographic universe hypothesis, it states something roughly analogous. That all we call 4 dimensional (D3+1 time) reality is really just an illusory side effect of unknown interactions occurring on a 2 dimensional surface, that we cannot observe directly, can only infer. Its a strange one. However truth is often stranger than fiction.

''Professor Kostas Skenderis of Mathematical Sciences at the University of Southampton explains: "Imagine that everything you see, feel and hear in three dimensions (and your perception of time) in fact emanates from a flat two-dimensional field. The idea is similar to that of ordinary holograms where a three-dimensional image is encoded in a two-dimensional surface, such as in the hologram on a credit card. However, this time, the entire universe is encoded."

Although not an example with holographic properties, it could be thought of as rather like watching a 3-D film in a cinema. We see the pictures as having height, width and crucially, depth—when in fact it all originates from a flat 2-D screen. The difference, in our 3-D universe, is that we can touch objects and the 'projection' is 'real' from our perspective.

In recent decades, advances in telescopes and sensing equipment have allowed scientists to detect a vast amount of data hidden in the 'white noise' or microwaves (partly responsible for the random black and white dots you see on an un-tuned TV) left over from the moment the universe was created. Using this information, the team were able to make complex comparisons between networks of features in the data and quantum field theory. They found that some of the simplest quantum field theories could explain nearly all cosmological observations of the early universe.

Professor Skenderis comments: "Holography is a huge leap forward in the way we think about the structure and creation of the universe. Einstein's theory of general relativity explains almost everything large scale in the universe very well, but starts to unravel when examining its origins and mechanisms at quantum level. Scientists have been working for decades to combine Einstein's theory of gravity and quantum theory. Some believe the concept of a holographic universe has the potential to reconcile the two. I hope our research takes us another step towards this."

The scientists now hope their study will open the door to further our understanding of the early universe and explain how space and time emerged.''



Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-01-reveals-substantial-evidence-holographic-universe.html#jCp

 

[Corvus]

You may be interested in this view as to how creation came into being, this is only a provisional translation into English, so it may well take on greater detail when it is officially translated. "Tablet of the Universe" (Lawh-i-Aflákiyyih) - Tablet of the Universe

I shall take a look.

 

[Desert Snake]

Shouldn't be that much of a gulf lol. Is this atheism etc, or something else

 

[Prestor John]

I made no such claim. The rest of your post is scarcely concealed hostility. Which I choose not to respond to.

You most certainly did.

In the OP you stated that you were unable to communicate with theists because they were different from you. You claimed that one of these differences was that,

Logic does not move these people, I have no other way of thinking.

How is claiming that an entire group of people cannot be moved by logic or that their thinking is devoid of logic not you claiming that they lack whatever it is you need in order to communicate with them?

How is your claiming that theists are unable to think logically while you can not blaming theists?

How are you not blaming theists for your "impasse"?

 

[PureX]

If the three dimensions of space are real and physically quantifiable, then so is that of time.

Why, because you say so?

If I say the third dimension is beautiful, would that make beauty "real and physically quantifiable"? Because all time is, is our perception of the relationship between space and motion.

The singularity in a black hole does not have a volume, photons have no mass or weight and in fact an atom itself is 99.999% empty space. Your definition of what is physical or not is not based on any scientific qualification.

Black holes have no "quantification". Nor do singularities (if such a thing even exists). You are allowing science fiction to pass as "scientific quantification" because it suits your fantasies about matter = existence.

Spacetime is the physical firmament of our existence. That which all matter and energy is embedded in. It is real enough.

Sure, like the "aether".