How many pages of the paper did you read? Right.
Theory of Everything
- Thread starter sscully
- Start date
How many pages of the paper did you read? Right.
Read enough to validate what I said about it.
And as I read more, I'll make more comments.
How about you pause your certainty, read entirely, and then make said comments.
In order to understand the universe, one must first philosophically think about the universe. In each section below, I will postulate so that my thought-process can be understood for agreement or dismissal by the reader. These are not meant to be end-all, be-all questions, there are many philosophical considerations against the Big Bang, but these are the ones that I have held to the most over the years.
__________________________________________________
The above from sscully's link.
Science is what we know: Philosophy is what we dont know:
Bertrand Russell:
Points 1 and 2 contradict each other and make unsupported assumptions, point 3 derives from those unsupported assumptions, point 4 and 5 contradict one another.
The whole lot appears to be a philosophically and religiously inspired "Gospel" to promote those two disciplines.
And no, I havn't as yet read it all.
Oh, the pain of it all!
__________________________________________________
The above from sscully's link.
Science is what we know: Philosophy is what we dont know:
Bertrand Russell:
Points 1 and 2 contradict each other and make unsupported assumptions, point 3 derives from those unsupported assumptions, point 4 and 5 contradict one another.
The whole lot appears to be a philosophically and religiously inspired "Gospel" to promote those two disciplines.
And no, I havn't as yet read it all.
Oh, the pain of it all!
At no point did I claim philosophy was evidence. Do you realize how absolutely disrespectful you are? As if you have any idea what the rest of my website includes.
What's sad is you don't realize you are a troll.
Points 1 and 2 contradict each other BECAUSE THE BIG BANG IS WRONG.
Points 4 and 5 contradict each other BECAUSE THE BIG BANG IS WRONG.
Not to mention Point 3 is completely unrelated to 1, 2, 4 and 5. Well played sir. You couldn't have been more wrong if you tried.
Read with purpose of sabotage much??? Ha, what a joke.
This is not a theory of anything. It's a gross misrepresentation of what ToE means, cast instead as a litany of misunderstandings of basic science. Your principal error is that you have no actual interest in nature, or else you would be loading us down with evidence. No evidence=no science. That's all you are teaching here.
cascadinguniverse.org Read or keep your ignorant mouth shut about my theory. Thanks.
The word philosophy is mentioned many times in the opening page...
Again, the whole lot appears to be a philosophically and religiously inspired "Gospel" to promote those two disciplines, with no evidence whatsoever to support your crazy claims, and no evidence whatsoever to invalidate incumbent models.
Live with it.
Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself.
Henry Louis Mencken.
Good rebuttal. Troll less, thanks.
I didn't say philosophy wasn't important. Philosophy is of utmost import. Philosophy is simply not evidence.
You havn't actually said anything to do with science.
Anyone with alternative hypothesis they wish to discuss should follow a few simple procedures:
[1] Don't present the theory as fact...don't present it as something that is "faite accompli" It most certainly isn't:
[2] Gather all the experimental and Observational evidence to support your claims...
[3] Whatever you have at the very least, must be able to explain and predict better then the incumbent model:
[4] Your theory almost certainly is going to be challenged, and will need to run the gauntlet:
[5] You will be told you are incorrect and your theory is wrong in most cases:
[6] Throwing a tantrum will not win you any support:
[7] You’re going to be asked tough questions. When someone asks you a question answer it.
[8] When someone demonstrates a point you made is wrong, acknowledge that it is wrong and accept it:
[9] Peer review may not be perfect, but it is absolutely necessary. The participants of any forum one sets out his alternative theory on, are your peers. Accept that:
[10] If you think you have accomplished a theory over riding Evolution, SR, GR the BB QM or Newton, you most certainly have not: 100 years and more of past giants, and the 100's of books and papers since, means that you will not invalidate such overwhelmingly supported ideas in a few words or posts: Accept that from the word go:
[11] In all likelyhood you are not Einstein, Newton, Hawking Bohr or Feynman: Don't pretend to be.
[12] And finally always be prepared to modify your ideas/model/theories:
With relation to all 10 points and any alternative theories, the incumbent model, in most cases will always logically be the default position....eg:
If someone does happen to come up with a theory that matches exactly what the incumbent theory does but no more, the incumbent theory naturally holds position.
When you align and pass all those points Mr sscully, then your unproven, unsupported hypothesis, may arise to the status of a theory.
I'm near certain though that won't happen.
[1] Don't present the theory as fact...don't present it as something that is "faite accompli" It most certainly isn't:
[2] Gather all the experimental and Observational evidence to support your claims...
[3] Whatever you have at the very least, must be able to explain and predict better then the incumbent model:
[4] Your theory almost certainly is going to be challenged, and will need to run the gauntlet:
[5] You will be told you are incorrect and your theory is wrong in most cases:
[6] Throwing a tantrum will not win you any support:
[7] You’re going to be asked tough questions. When someone asks you a question answer it.
[8] When someone demonstrates a point you made is wrong, acknowledge that it is wrong and accept it:
[9] Peer review may not be perfect, but it is absolutely necessary. The participants of any forum one sets out his alternative theory on, are your peers. Accept that:
[10] If you think you have accomplished a theory over riding Evolution, SR, GR the BB QM or Newton, you most certainly have not: 100 years and more of past giants, and the 100's of books and papers since, means that you will not invalidate such overwhelmingly supported ideas in a few words or posts: Accept that from the word go:
[11] In all likelyhood you are not Einstein, Newton, Hawking Bohr or Feynman: Don't pretend to be.
[12] And finally always be prepared to modify your ideas/model/theories:
With relation to all 10 points and any alternative theories, the incumbent model, in most cases will always logically be the default position....eg:
If someone does happen to come up with a theory that matches exactly what the incumbent theory does but no more, the incumbent theory naturally holds position.
Make damn sure that you understand current theory as it is presented by the "main stream" before you embark on your exploration of new frontiers. That is the starting point. Our recent troubles are caused by the fact that our would-be Hawkings don't even understand the first postulate(Relativity) and flat out deny the second postulate(constant, invariant c)yet still claim to understand the theory based only on those two postulates. This is not rationality, it is delusion.
Grumpy
When you align and pass all those points Mr sscully, then your unproven, unsupported hypothesis, may arise to the status of a theory.
I'm near certain though that won't happen.
Bye. You are lost. I am done wasting time on lost souls who need someone else to tell them to think.
No sonny, I'm not lost at all.....and I respect the lessons from reputable giants of the past and present, for bring us out of the dark ages that was at one time ruled by maniacal religious zealots such as yourself.
I was born a Catholic and raised as one, and did do what you accuse me of not doing...thinking for myself.
I am not fooled by your evangelistic crusade approach to win something I and you does not have...Souls. Can you show me one?...Evidence that they exist?..Heaven?...Hell?
You are not only wasting your time in converting me, you are wasting your time thinking by spreading your dribble on this forum, that it will make any difference at all.
The BB/Inflationary model stands as a respected well supported model, of Universal/space/time evolution.
Religion, your Philosophy, your delusions of grandeur and audacity will not change that.
Now go and adhere to those 12 essential points plus Grumpy's addition, and we'll talk science.
OK?
When I first read you question about how I avoid breaking the laws of physics if there is no space being added between galaxies, I responded by not answering the question directly, but instead, I alluded to my speculations and said that no laws were broken.
After reading your paper, I mentioned in our exchange of emails that there were some issues with the science that you refer to, but that all in all, I believe your paper takes the reader to where you wanted to go, and I suggested that the science could be straightened out without derailing the philosophy.
What you have done with the cosmology part is piece together ideas that turn the universe as we know it into an infinite and eternal steady state universe. At first I liked that about your model because that agrees with my hobby-model. But something bothered me about it. I think I have figured out what it was. Your cosmology is derived from your intended philosophy, while my philosophy was derived from my view of cosmology. To me that is what differentiates our two approaches, and it is what makes the reader think your view of cosmology is contrived instead of being the eternal fulfillment of a set of invariant natural laws.
Over the years I have addressed every aspect of a complete cosmology that I have thought of, as I see it, and for me the "thing" was to get the cosmology as satisfying to me, a layman science enthusiast, as I could get it. It was from my evolving and continually updated cosmological model that I began to develop my personal philosophy, which I have named Eternal Intent. I still occasionally update it just like I update the hobby-model.
The following is the Feb. 15, 2013 version which I posted in my "Issues" thread in post #389 on 6/13/14. You can see that the philosophy is consistent with my cosmology, where in your paper, the cosmology seems to be strained and forced in order to reinvent the existing consensus cosmology to a point that is consistent with your Philosophy, infinite and eternal, like the concept of God that most religions invoke. I hope my perspective on that can be taken as a positive contribution, since you have many years ahead of you to get it right.
I'm posting my essay on Eternal Intent so that maybe you can see the difference between a derived philosophy, vs. a derived cosmology:
Eternal Intent
The Universe, Infinity, Life, and God
The Cosmology and Philosophy of the Infinite Spongy Universe
The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) is all inclusive, all there is, all matter, energy, everything in one infinite and eternal, life and consciousness producing sea of dynamic wave energy that does nothing but carry out its own Eternal Intent.
Thresholds and limits of energy density govern natural processes that produce matter and gravity from nothing but wave energy in environments characterized by the opposing forces of expansion and contraction, a spongy energy-to-matter-to-energy dynamic where arenas are continually forming, expanding, overlapping and collapsing as they play out across the infinite arena landscape of the greater universe.
The ISU is governed by Natural Law which is described in three categories, Quantum Wave Cosmology to host life throughout the ISU, the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life to populate the ISU, and the Concept of Eternal Intent which is there for intelligent beings of the ISU to discover and use.
Overview of Natural Law
In regard to Natural Law, we have an advancing boundary between what has been achieved by science, and what is yet to be achieved. What has been achieved is the quantification of the known physical sciences, and in the realm of the “yet to be achieved” is the discovery and quantification of the unexplained and/or unknown natural laws, including the Eternal Intent of the ISU. It is the role of science to confront the problems it faces and to advance the boundary into the realm of the as yet unknown.
Science is advanced using the scientific method and when addressing the advancement of science it is axiomatic that the laws of nature are invariant. It follows that anything that is as yet unknown or unexplained has natural causes that we don’t yet understand.
The physical aspects of the ISU are described by Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) which envisions the universe as it would be if all of the as yet unknown physical laws of nature were known. It is the life hosting feature of the ISU where the generative and evolvative forces of life flourish on a grand scale, undaunted by the inevitable local cataclysms that characterize the eternal QWC process of arena action.
The infinite arena landscape hosts a potentially infinite number of conscious, self aware, intelligent, highly evolved life forms whose individuals contemplate the universe, infinity, life and God, and act and interact with freewill, moderated by their individually developed consciences.
That is the Eternal Intent.
Overview of Quantum Wave Cosmology
Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) is characterized by two processes, quantum action at the micro level and arena action at the macro level. These two processes are strikingly similar in mechanics but the vast difference in scale makes quantum action look toward the infinitesimal and arena action look toward the infinite.
Quantum action works on the infinitesimal scale to quantize the tiniest meaningful waves into inflowing and out flowing standing wave energy that establishes the presence of matter. The key to quantum action is that the universe is composed of nothing but wave energy, thus matter is composed of standing wave energy in quantum increments, and gravity results from a directional imbalance of inflowing quantum wave energy which causes objects to move in the direction of the highest energy density source.
Arena action works on the infinite scale of the landscape of the greater universe. The key to arena action is the existence of the opposing forces of expansion and contraction that play out in the great waves of energy that traverse the arena landscape. The existence of our Big Bang arena where galaxies and galaxy groups all move away from each other is evidence of arena action. It is the multiple arena landscape that prevents the eternal inflation of the universe and avoids General Relativity’s ultimate Heat Death.
As galaxy filled arena waves expand and overlap, their converging galaxies set off cataclysmic events leading to the collapse of galactic material around the center of gravity in the overlap space. Big crunches that form in such overlapping spaces grow to reach a finite maximum limit of energy density and then collapse and bounce into newly expanding arenas of wave energy thus perpetuating the arena landscape. It is the natural law of Critical Capacity that makes crunches collapse and bounce into expansion, avoiding General Relativity’s final Big Crunch outcome.
Overview of the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life
Arena action of QWC produces galaxy filled expanding arenas where it is natural for stars with solar systems to host habitable planets and where the conditions are conducive to the generation of life.
Given the right mix of chemistry and environment, QWC assures that physical iterations of all the finite possible combinations occur and the combinations for reproductive life inevitably arise. Life is adaptive and evolvative, and as early life takes hold, and as evolution occurs, life forms take full advantage of the hospitable environments across the host planet.
As evolution proceeds, natural characteristics that are the mark of advanced life forms develop, bringing them consciousness, self awareness, and individually developed consciences.
All highly evolved contemplative life forms across the ISU, given sufficient duration to experience it, will share an inevitable course from their origin of natural generation to the culmination of high evolution, and with that comes the realization that all life is causally connected by the same Eternal Intent.
Overview of Eternal Intent
The existence of Eternal Intent does not require any violation of the invariance axiom or of the natural laws. All of the natural laws of the ISU are invariant, and in an eternal and infinite universe, that means that the natural laws that are in effect now are the same laws that were in effect before, at all times in the infinite past; at no time were the laws different.
Logic and right reason of the highly evolved life forms is sound. When those individuals contemplate the universe, infinity, life, and God, it is from the soundest possible reason and logic that the concept of Eternal Intent is derived. It emerges as the most reasonable and responsible common ground between all contemplative individuals and is the highest standard for setting the correct rules of free and conscientious interaction.
A non religious, scientifically compatible definition postulates that Eternal Intent is a characteristic of the universe, and the natural laws and Eternal Intent are completely compatible. It is the ultimate universal common denominator, not just among peoples here on Earth, but among contemplative and conscientious life forms at the height of the evolvative process across the infinite and eternal sea of wave energy.
Therefore Eternal Intent would be the quintessential feature of a natural invariant universe and the view that God and the Universe are one and the same is fully compatible with the ISU.
In Conclusion
Many aspects of the universe that are attributed to the invariant natural laws point to the Eternal Intent of the natural laws:
The perpetual existence of hospitable and habitable environments
The generative and evolvative forces of life
The existence of consciousness and self awareness
The existence of intelligence
The existence of free willed beings that interact with each other
The existence of our own consciences to moderate our interactions
Within those few aspects of the ISU there is room for hope and faith that the future can unfold as we would have it. Beyond the boundary of scientific knowledge, in the realm of the unknown laws of nature, all things seem possible. It is that realization that makes room for eternal hope for those who care to call upon it in their daily lives.
As a corollary to that, there is no clear right and wrong at every turn of life, and where there is room for eternal hope for well intended outcomes, there is also room to seek council from beyond the boundary if we can see a benefit in that natural source of council. We are free to consciously seek acknowledgments from beyond the boundary of known science and to receive personal, individual, unexplainable guidance from the unknown in accord with invariant natural laws that we don’t yet understand.
It is the Eternal Intent of the ISU that highly evolved life forms learn to do so even though science cannot offer equations for how it works.
In order for something to be science it has to be quantified or quantifiable under the procedures recognized as the scientific method. Scientific knowledge is subject to mathematical equations that are compatible with all aspects of known science, or at least that cannot be shown to be inconsistent with scientific observations and data. So when we don't yet understand, it is a reference to as yet unquantified science from the perspective of the scientific community; theories that are not tested and repeatable but that are suspected by some of us because of the way outcomes from our hopes, our needs, and our desires often seem to be favorable responses to those things we seek.
Nevertheless, there are prerequisites before Eternal Intent can be considered to be a characteristic of the universe:
The universe has to be infinite and must have always existed, i.e. the ISU didn’t come from nothing or from the Supernatural.
The universe must be governed by invariant natural laws that are in effect in all places at all times.
There can be no violations of natural law, i.e. apparent violations are caused by as yet unknown invariant natural laws.
There must be conscious, self aware, intelligent, contemplative individuals, i.e. us, and other intelligent life forms across the ISU.
There must be as yet unknown natural laws associated with consciousness that trigger some equation; a combination of conscience, intent, emotion, and expectation or hope or faith that in accord with the unknown natural laws there is an equation that yields an invariant response guided by our well intended seeking of acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science.
If those prerequisites are in place then Eternal Intent is there for intelligent beings to discover and use. It is derived from the soundest possible reason and logic. It is the natural common ground between all contemplative individuals. It is the highest standard for setting the correct rules of free and conscientious interaction. It is a characteristic of the universe, compatible with the natural laws of the ISU and with the concept that God and the universe are one and the same. It is there for all of us as a source of hope and council throughout our lives, and for faith that the future can unfold as we would have it. It is there for us for free if we choose to use it.
The concept of Eternal Intent is the stimulus for highly evolved beings seeking acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science and expecting a favorable response in accord with as yet unknown invariant natural laws.
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
After reading your paper, I mentioned in our exchange of emails that there were some issues with the science that you refer to, but that all in all, I believe your paper takes the reader to where you wanted to go, and I suggested that the science could be straightened out without derailing the philosophy.
What you have done with the cosmology part is piece together ideas that turn the universe as we know it into an infinite and eternal steady state universe. At first I liked that about your model because that agrees with my hobby-model. But something bothered me about it. I think I have figured out what it was. Your cosmology is derived from your intended philosophy, while my philosophy was derived from my view of cosmology. To me that is what differentiates our two approaches, and it is what makes the reader think your view of cosmology is contrived instead of being the eternal fulfillment of a set of invariant natural laws.
Over the years I have addressed every aspect of a complete cosmology that I have thought of, as I see it, and for me the "thing" was to get the cosmology as satisfying to me, a layman science enthusiast, as I could get it. It was from my evolving and continually updated cosmological model that I began to develop my personal philosophy, which I have named Eternal Intent. I still occasionally update it just like I update the hobby-model.
The following is the Feb. 15, 2013 version which I posted in my "Issues" thread in post #389 on 6/13/14. You can see that the philosophy is consistent with my cosmology, where in your paper, the cosmology seems to be strained and forced in order to reinvent the existing consensus cosmology to a point that is consistent with your Philosophy, infinite and eternal, like the concept of God that most religions invoke. I hope my perspective on that can be taken as a positive contribution, since you have many years ahead of you to get it right
.I'm posting my essay on Eternal Intent so that maybe you can see the difference between a derived philosophy, vs. a derived cosmology:
Eternal Intent
The Universe, Infinity, Life, and God
The Cosmology and Philosophy of the Infinite Spongy Universe
The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) is all inclusive, all there is, all matter, energy, everything in one infinite and eternal, life and consciousness producing sea of dynamic wave energy that does nothing but carry out its own Eternal Intent.
Thresholds and limits of energy density govern natural processes that produce matter and gravity from nothing but wave energy in environments characterized by the opposing forces of expansion and contraction, a spongy energy-to-matter-to-energy dynamic where arenas are continually forming, expanding, overlapping and collapsing as they play out across the infinite arena landscape of the greater universe.
The ISU is governed by Natural Law which is described in three categories, Quantum Wave Cosmology to host life throughout the ISU, the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life to populate the ISU, and the Concept of Eternal Intent which is there for intelligent beings of the ISU to discover and use.
Overview of Natural Law
In regard to Natural Law, we have an advancing boundary between what has been achieved by science, and what is yet to be achieved. What has been achieved is the quantification of the known physical sciences, and in the realm of the “yet to be achieved” is the discovery and quantification of the unexplained and/or unknown natural laws, including the Eternal Intent of the ISU. It is the role of science to confront the problems it faces and to advance the boundary into the realm of the as yet unknown.
Science is advanced using the scientific method and when addressing the advancement of science it is axiomatic that the laws of nature are invariant. It follows that anything that is as yet unknown or unexplained has natural causes that we don’t yet understand.
The physical aspects of the ISU are described by Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) which envisions the universe as it would be if all of the as yet unknown physical laws of nature were known. It is the life hosting feature of the ISU where the generative and evolvative forces of life flourish on a grand scale, undaunted by the inevitable local cataclysms that characterize the eternal QWC process of arena action.
The infinite arena landscape hosts a potentially infinite number of conscious, self aware, intelligent, highly evolved life forms whose individuals contemplate the universe, infinity, life and God, and act and interact with freewill, moderated by their individually developed consciences.
That is the Eternal Intent.
Overview of Quantum Wave Cosmology
Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) is characterized by two processes, quantum action at the micro level and arena action at the macro level. These two processes are strikingly similar in mechanics but the vast difference in scale makes quantum action look toward the infinitesimal and arena action look toward the infinite.
Quantum action works on the infinitesimal scale to quantize the tiniest meaningful waves into inflowing and out flowing standing wave energy that establishes the presence of matter. The key to quantum action is that the universe is composed of nothing but wave energy, thus matter is composed of standing wave energy in quantum increments, and gravity results from a directional imbalance of inflowing quantum wave energy which causes objects to move in the direction of the highest energy density source.
Arena action works on the infinite scale of the landscape of the greater universe. The key to arena action is the existence of the opposing forces of expansion and contraction that play out in the great waves of energy that traverse the arena landscape. The existence of our Big Bang arena where galaxies and galaxy groups all move away from each other is evidence of arena action. It is the multiple arena landscape that prevents the eternal inflation of the universe and avoids General Relativity’s ultimate Heat Death.
As galaxy filled arena waves expand and overlap, their converging galaxies set off cataclysmic events leading to the collapse of galactic material around the center of gravity in the overlap space. Big crunches that form in such overlapping spaces grow to reach a finite maximum limit of energy density and then collapse and bounce into newly expanding arenas of wave energy thus perpetuating the arena landscape. It is the natural law of Critical Capacity that makes crunches collapse and bounce into expansion, avoiding General Relativity’s final Big Crunch outcome.
Overview of the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life
Arena action of QWC produces galaxy filled expanding arenas where it is natural for stars with solar systems to host habitable planets and where the conditions are conducive to the generation of life.
Given the right mix of chemistry and environment, QWC assures that physical iterations of all the finite possible combinations occur and the combinations for reproductive life inevitably arise. Life is adaptive and evolvative, and as early life takes hold, and as evolution occurs, life forms take full advantage of the hospitable environments across the host planet.
As evolution proceeds, natural characteristics that are the mark of advanced life forms develop, bringing them consciousness, self awareness, and individually developed consciences.
All highly evolved contemplative life forms across the ISU, given sufficient duration to experience it, will share an inevitable course from their origin of natural generation to the culmination of high evolution, and with that comes the realization that all life is causally connected by the same Eternal Intent.
Overview of Eternal Intent
The existence of Eternal Intent does not require any violation of the invariance axiom or of the natural laws. All of the natural laws of the ISU are invariant, and in an eternal and infinite universe, that means that the natural laws that are in effect now are the same laws that were in effect before, at all times in the infinite past; at no time were the laws different.
Logic and right reason of the highly evolved life forms is sound. When those individuals contemplate the universe, infinity, life, and God, it is from the soundest possible reason and logic that the concept of Eternal Intent is derived. It emerges as the most reasonable and responsible common ground between all contemplative individuals and is the highest standard for setting the correct rules of free and conscientious interaction.
A non religious, scientifically compatible definition postulates that Eternal Intent is a characteristic of the universe, and the natural laws and Eternal Intent are completely compatible. It is the ultimate universal common denominator, not just among peoples here on Earth, but among contemplative and conscientious life forms at the height of the evolvative process across the infinite and eternal sea of wave energy.
Therefore Eternal Intent would be the quintessential feature of a natural invariant universe and the view that God and the Universe are one and the same is fully compatible with the ISU.
In Conclusion
Many aspects of the universe that are attributed to the invariant natural laws point to the Eternal Intent of the natural laws:
The perpetual existence of hospitable and habitable environments
The generative and evolvative forces of life
The existence of consciousness and self awareness
The existence of intelligence
The existence of free willed beings that interact with each other
The existence of our own consciences to moderate our interactions
Within those few aspects of the ISU there is room for hope and faith that the future can unfold as we would have it. Beyond the boundary of scientific knowledge, in the realm of the unknown laws of nature, all things seem possible. It is that realization that makes room for eternal hope for those who care to call upon it in their daily lives.
As a corollary to that, there is no clear right and wrong at every turn of life, and where there is room for eternal hope for well intended outcomes, there is also room to seek council from beyond the boundary if we can see a benefit in that natural source of council. We are free to consciously seek acknowledgments from beyond the boundary of known science and to receive personal, individual, unexplainable guidance from the unknown in accord with invariant natural laws that we don’t yet understand.
It is the Eternal Intent of the ISU that highly evolved life forms learn to do so even though science cannot offer equations for how it works.
In order for something to be science it has to be quantified or quantifiable under the procedures recognized as the scientific method. Scientific knowledge is subject to mathematical equations that are compatible with all aspects of known science, or at least that cannot be shown to be inconsistent with scientific observations and data. So when we don't yet understand, it is a reference to as yet unquantified science from the perspective of the scientific community; theories that are not tested and repeatable but that are suspected by some of us because of the way outcomes from our hopes, our needs, and our desires often seem to be favorable responses to those things we seek.
Nevertheless, there are prerequisites before Eternal Intent can be considered to be a characteristic of the universe:
The universe has to be infinite and must have always existed, i.e. the ISU didn’t come from nothing or from the Supernatural.
The universe must be governed by invariant natural laws that are in effect in all places at all times.
There can be no violations of natural law, i.e. apparent violations are caused by as yet unknown invariant natural laws.
There must be conscious, self aware, intelligent, contemplative individuals, i.e. us, and other intelligent life forms across the ISU.
There must be as yet unknown natural laws associated with consciousness that trigger some equation; a combination of conscience, intent, emotion, and expectation or hope or faith that in accord with the unknown natural laws there is an equation that yields an invariant response guided by our well intended seeking of acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science.
If those prerequisites are in place then Eternal Intent is there for intelligent beings to discover and use. It is derived from the soundest possible reason and logic. It is the natural common ground between all contemplative individuals. It is the highest standard for setting the correct rules of free and conscientious interaction. It is a characteristic of the universe, compatible with the natural laws of the ISU and with the concept that God and the universe are one and the same. It is there for all of us as a source of hope and council throughout our lives, and for faith that the future can unfold as we would have it. It is there for us for free if we choose to use it.
The concept of Eternal Intent is the stimulus for highly evolved beings seeking acknowledgements from beyond the boundary of known science and expecting a favorable response in accord with as yet unknown invariant natural laws.
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
Last edited:
When I first read you question about how I avoid breaking the laws of physics if there is no space being added between galaxies, I responded by not answering the question directly, but instead, I alluded to my speculations and said that no laws were broken.
After reading your paper, I mentioned in our exchange of emails that there were some issues with the science that you refer to, but that all in all, I believe your paper takes the reader to where you wanted to go, and I suggested that the science could be straightened out without derailing the philosophy.
What you have done with the cosmology part is piece together ideas that turn the universe as we know it into an infinite and eternal steady state universe. At first I liked that about your model because that agrees with my hobby-model. But something bothered me about it. I think I have figured out what it was. Your cosmology is derived from your intended philosophy, while my philosophy was derived from my view of cosmology. To me that is what differentiates our two approaches, and it is what makes the reader think your view of cosmology is contrived instead of being the eternal fulfillment of a set of invariant natural laws.
Over the years I have addressed every aspect of a complete cosmology that I have thought of, as I see it, and for me the "thing" was to get the cosmology as satisfying to me, a layman science enthusiast, as I could get it. It was from my evolving and continually updated cosmological model that I began to develop my personal philosophy, which I have named Eternal Intent. I still occasionally update it just like I update the hobby-model.
The following is the Feb. 15, 2013 version which I posted in my "Issues" thread in post #389 on 6/13/14. You can see that the philosophy is consistent with my cosmology, where in your paper, the cosmology seems to be strained and forced in order to reinvent the existing consensus cosmology to a point that is consistent with your Philosophy, infinite and eternal, like the concept of God that most religions invoke. I hope my perspective on that can be taken as a positive contribution, since you have many years ahead of you to bet it right
I'm posting my essay on Eternal Intent so that maybe you can see the difference between a derived philosophy, vs. a derived cosmology:
After reading your Eternal Intent essay, I think we have very similar ideas. I think we can look at the universe as EITHER exclusively "waves" OR exclusively "particles", they are precisely the same idea though. I say particles in my paper because we SEE particles (planets, stars, black holes, etc.). But the infinitely small particles become observed as waves. So then they functionally are waves interacting with gravity, which I think is a more accurate definition of mass because mass is really just a measure of the amount of energy held together by gravity. But when you "zoom in" on a wave, it will look like our cosmos. So I use particles to distinguish that it all has the same exact appearance of particles and planets "above" and waves "below". But, my theory shows "as above, so below" they are one and the same.
In terms of my paper, let me ask you a question.
Do you think the Milky Way orbits something? If not, why not? Strictly philosophically speaking, ignoring observations. I like to focus on this: moon, planet, star, black hole, ??????? Why does the pattern have to end there? Remember the power of pattern recognition in science.
If you can see that it is absolutely logical for the Great Attractor to be the center of mass of our "galaxy of galaxies", I think you will find they are less "strained and forced" than they just are.
Yes, it does "orbit" the galactic black hole, and on a larger scale, the concept of our "galaxy of galaxies" as you call it, revolving around some great attractor is not entirely inconsistent with my hobby-model. The whole arena could be rotating relative to the arena landscape of the greater universe. I have considered that possibility but haven't yet included it in my model. Maybe I should do so.
I do address what I call the "turtles all the way down" view of cosmology, and have limited the levels (turtles
) to just the two levels that we can observe and that are just beyond our ability to fully observe. Infinite regression of scale is avoided in my model, but only because it isn't satisfying to my sensitivities, lol.
I see your point, and don't disagree with it conceptually, though I haven't considered the evidence for it fully yet. That will be something interesting for me to look at in more detail.
The science issues didn't include the GA as much as your expression of more generally accepted science, like the meaning of "flat" in the context of General Relativity. Look at the things that the members here have taken exception to where they have mentioned specifics. You can easily fix the science errors.
Yes, it does "orbit" the galactic black hole, and on a larger scale, the concept of our "galaxy of galaxies" as you call it, revolving around some great attractor is not entirely inconsistent with my hobby-model. The whole arena could be rotating relative to the arena landscape of the greater universe. I have considered that possibility but haven't yet included it in my model. Maybe I should do so.I do address what I call the "turtles all the way down" view of cosmology, and have limited the levels (turtles
The science issues didn't include the GA as much as your expression of more generally accepted science, like the meaning of "flat" in the context of General Relativity. Look at the things that the members here have taken exception to where they have mentioned specifics. You can easily fix the science errors.
Definitely should consider the center of mass! Though as the object gets bigger, the more spread apart its particles are (atoms on Earth are alike to galaxies on the Great Attractor) so its tougher for us to see structure, on top of the gravitational lensing effects that cause the observation of black holes, so we can't really see the objects anyway.
Yeah, unfortunately I'm not the best at articulating my thoughts and tend to ignore nomenclature (why I was HORRID at biology) and only retain conceptual ideas, so when I write my thoughts out people can get stuck on the nomenclature I use. "Semantics", I say. ;-D But definitely would love to fix anything you might find in need of fixing/clarifying!
zgmc
Registered Senior Member
What is the Great Attractor?
"While the Norma Cluster is massive, and local galaxies are moving toward it, it doesn’t explain the full motion of local galaxies. The mass of the Great Attractor isn’t large enough to account for the pull. When we look at an even larger region of galaxies, we find that the local galaxies and the Great Attractor are moving toward something even larger. It’s known as the Shapley Supercluster. It contains more than 8000 galaxies and has a mass of more than ten million billion Suns. The Shapley Supercluster is, in fact, the most massive galaxy cluster within a billion light years, and we and every galaxy in our corner of the Universe are moving toward it."
http://www.universetoday.com/113150/what-is-the-great-attractor/
"While the Norma Cluster is massive, and local galaxies are moving toward it, it doesn’t explain the full motion of local galaxies. The mass of the Great Attractor isn’t large enough to account for the pull. When we look at an even larger region of galaxies, we find that the local galaxies and the Great Attractor are moving toward something even larger. It’s known as the Shapley Supercluster. It contains more than 8000 galaxies and has a mass of more than ten million billion Suns. The Shapley Supercluster is, in fact, the most massive galaxy cluster within a billion light years, and we and every galaxy in our corner of the Universe are moving toward it."
http://www.universetoday.com/113150/what-is-the-great-attractor/