The unmoved mover

[Angrboda]

Because "god" explains nothing.  It is a completely adhoc conjecture that does not even rise to the level of being a scientific hypothesis as it makes no testable predictions of any kind.

Everything depends on how you define The God. I imagine most people make the cardinal mistake of projecting a personality on God.

It is a mistake according to you, not to them. If I'm going to bet on a horse, it isn't going to be you. The essence of God according to most traditions is that of personhood.

You play with your erector set theology all you like, it does not convince.

[Arkilogue]

What kind of logical predictions does that make on the nature of the universe?

"Logical predictions" may have had their day in Aristotle's time (who rejected the heliocentrism of Aristarchus, by the way), but modern science, physics in particular, has moved beyond that.  Science is about building models, which are then tested against observation and experiment.

So their plausibility is based on what? Predictive power? Simplicity? Elegance? Least amount of special pleading?

[Arkilogue]

So much for 99% of the scientifically minded people on the planet that believe the Big Bang story.

Would you say they are misled?

The Big Bang does not demand an absolute beginning of space/time to our Universe.  Are you saying that these cosmologists are being misled:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301042

No, they are working with alternate beginning states and conditions to see if it better explains what we currently observe...

...did I do that right?

[Arkilogue]

Everything depends on how you define The God. I imagine most people make the cardinal mistake of projecting a personality on God.

It is a mistake according to you, not to them.  If I'm going to bet on a horse, it isn't going to be you.  The essence of God according to most traditions is that of personhood.  

You play with your erector set theology all you like, it does not convince.

To whom? From what culture and in what time period?

The point is, I could say with 99% accuracy what you physical anatomy is, how you objectively exist. I could never get remotely close to describing your subjective existence even after being around you for a long time, you have to describe that to me...and even then, you could change.

I give God the same respect. I don't assert there isn't one, I just don't project one then try and relate to my own super-ego projection.

[Jehanne]

Everything depends on how you define The God. I imagine most people make the cardinal mistake of projecting a personality on God.

It is a mistake according to you, not to them.  If I'm going to bet on a horse, it isn't going to be you.  The essence of God according to most traditions is that of personhood.  

You play with your erector set theology all you like, it does not convince.

I just got an email from Credit Sesame saying that my borrowing potential has increased!  Perhaps "God" is real?!  Not sure what they use in Japan, and so, I apologize for being ethnocentric.

[Jehanne]

The Big Bang does not demand an absolute beginning of space/time to our Universe.  Are you saying that these cosmologists are being misled:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301042

No, they are working with alternate beginning states and conditions to see if it better explains what we currently observe...

...did I do that right?

No, General Relativity is a 4-diminsional theory worked out by Albert Einstein with the input from many other very brilliant individuals whom one hardly hears about, ever.  And, so, x0 is the time axis (at least in some GR texts), followed by x1, x2 and x3.  In eternal Universes, the time axis runs from minus infinity to plus infinity, and so, those models are eternal without a beginning and without an end.

[Arkilogue]

No, they are working with alternate beginning states and conditions to see if it better explains what we currently observe...

...did I do that right?

No, General Relativity is a 4-diminsional theory worked out by Albert Einstein with the input from many other very brilliant individuals whom one hardly hears about, ever.  And, so, x0 is the time axis (at least in some GR texts), followed by x1, x2 and x3.  In eternal Universes, the time axis runs from minus infinity to plus infinity, and so, those models are eternal without a beginning and without an end.

So it explains the existence of the universe by the existence of the universe? That's convenient!

So there's no big bounce in such a model?

[chimp3]

Both directions? There are two? And the Unmoved Mover I take it is located where? Where does this force "stay in place"? This is gibberish.

Radially, inwards and outwards......in more than one location. We are in a bubble in the midst of the Unmoved Mover. Where this counter balance of movement "stay's in place" is the void space of the universe.

Think of a spinning disk of material that spins up so fast it rips apart in the center and becomes a torus.  The new void space in the center is still while the material moves in place around it. if you couldn't see it spinning, you would think the torus is still as well, because it moves in place and doesn't go anywhere.

You certainly make this up in your mind. 
Radially , inward and outward...
Is that more than two directions? Three? We live in a 3 dimensional universe.
Where can we detect this spinning torus? Where have you detected this torus? What instruments are required to detect this torus?

[Arkilogue]

Radially, inwards and outwards......in more than one location. We are in a bubble in the midst of the Unmoved Mover. Where this counter balance of movement "stay's in place" is the void space of the universe.

Think of a spinning disk of material that spins up so fast it rips apart in the center and becomes a torus.  The new void space in the center is still while the material moves in place around it. if you couldn't see it spinning, you would think the torus is still as well, because it moves in place and doesn't go anywhere.

You certainly make this up in your mind. 
Radially , inward and outward...
Is that more than two directions? Three? We live in a 3 dimensional universe.
Where can we detect this spinning torus? Where have you detected this torus? What instruments are required to detect this torus?

Yes, 2 directions in 3d space, an outward contracting sphere and an inward contracting sphere. In the space created between is a 3rd "downward" contraction to a floor field nature which would correspond to the Higgs field "frozen" into place at the end of the inflationary period which permeates all void space-time. The prior two might be called "curvatons".

The torus in that post was used analogously but I have deduced the overall shape of our specific section of the universe to be toroidal and it is in motion like a wheel. This would show up as a slight negative curvature of space type and a hemisphericaly asymmetric CMB as there would be an incoming side of space time and an outgoing side flowing over everything it contains....like a serpent biting it's tail, having "eaten" the dust of poly-galactic filaments, sheet walls and superclusters. It would also show up as an irreversible arrow of time.

[Arkilogue]

I'm prone to put our section of the universe inside the space of the torus due to my 3d spatial bias, but it could also be limited to the membrane surface of the torus.

I don't like the idea, but I don't have to like it to consider it.