Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 1:57 pm (This post was last modified: August 27, 2016 at 1:57 pm by RozKek.)
(August 27, 2016 at 12:38 pm)bennyboy Wrote:
(August 26, 2016 at 1:47 pm)Arkilogue Wrote:
Here's the thing, if you're not interested in anything ancient religions or sciences have to say, you'll have no past data or context to compare with a modern description of God and the process by which God pro-creates a universe.
Starting state before creation:
The Nu of the Egyptian mythos is an infinite primordial watery abyss
The Chaos of Greece is an undifferentiated watery abyss.
Tiamat of Mesopotamia was a primordial ocean goddess who was split in two to make heaven and earth
The Brahman of Hinduism is compared to an infinite ocean without beginning or end. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_materia
The concept of prima materia is sometimes attributed to Aristotle.[2] The earliest roots of the idea can be found in the philosophy of Anaxagoras,....They have compared the "prima materia" to everything, to male and female, to the hermaphroditic monster, to heaven and earth, to body and spirit, chaos, microcosm, and the confused mass; it contains in itself all colors and potentially all metals; there is nothing more wonderful in the world, for it begets itself, conceives itself, and gives birth to itself.[6]
Comparisons have been made to Hyle, the primal fire, Proteus, Light, and Mercury.[7] Martin Ruland the Younger lists more than fifty synonyms for the prima materia in his 1612 alchemical dictionary. His text includes justifications for the names and comparisons. He repeats that, the philosophers have so greatly admired the Creature of God which is called the Primal Matter, especially concerning its efficacy and mystery, that they have given to it many names, and almost every possible description, for they have not known how to sufficiently praise it.[8] Waite lists an additional eighty four names.
Of course in reality the primordial substance would be quark matter, trillions of times denser and hotter than atomic matter, an all consuming fire. The unified state of all elements and forces. It is also a Fermi Liquid and excludes magnetic fields. Obviously light cannot pass through it and no image can be made of it (try drawing absolute solidity with no external border/membrane...it's impossible). Only when you open this substance can light appear or travel.
But since we cannot work directly with quark matter, can regular water be used to model the opening of a vacuum state universe? Anything to "the spirit of god hovered over the waters" and "let there be light"? This theme is also prevalent in ancient religions prior to Christianity.
Let's go to the lab!
Acoustic cavitation of water creates a void/vacuum bubble and light.
Everything understandable so far?
You are making what is called an "intentional fallacy." This is a fallacy in which you assume the intent of ideas whose intent you cannot know. What you are doing is taking neat science stuff, and drawing lines to neat mythology stuff with some similar words or ideas, and then projecting modern knowledge onto those early story tellers. This is not a good basis for building a sensible world view.
May I ask you if you use drugs, or if you are schizophrenic? The way you associate ideas seems creative, intelligent, and a little irrational in the same way that that of LSD/mushroom users and schizophrenic people I've met in the past is.
No, he drowned then suddenly he could see the 5th dimension, spoke to a transdimensional being, now he's about to win the nobel prize because allegedly, he has done very deep, astounding research that involve lots of youtube videos and wikipedia. Truly amazing.
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 5:30 pm
(August 27, 2016 at 12:38 pm)bennyboy Wrote: You are making what is called an "intentional fallacy." This is a fallacy in which you assume the intent of ideas whose intent you cannot know. What you are doing is taking neat science stuff, and drawing lines to neat mythology stuff with some similar words or ideas, and then projecting modern knowledge onto those early story tellers. This is not a good basis for building a sensible world view.
May I ask you if you use drugs, or if you are schizophrenic? The way you associate ideas seems creative, intelligent, and a little irrational in the same way that that of LSD/mushroom users and schizophrenic people I've met in the past is.
No but I am a left handed, green eyed only child who's had a lot of time alone to contemplate things. Now as a father and adult, my profession for 16 years has been Arbory specifically climbing, rigging, and trimming. I spend a lot of time alone, in the tops of trees, contemplating things. I navigate a supra-symmetric (branches similar to roots) fractal inversion (leafs interact on the macro scale, roots tips on the micro) that combines space permeating light with mineral laden water to create living tissue and they tend towards immortality.
My job (besides not dieing) is to correctly imagine the 3d branching structure from the outside (as the client sees it) while I am confined to the inside of the structure. I also must see the simplified "final form" of the tree inside all the "noise" of branches that I'm eventually going cut off and I must do that in a cascading order of revealed space or else top branches pile on bottom branches and I build a several thousand pound bird's nest. Logistics of order is extremely important and I can easily triple the amount of time a job takes (losing money) if I get it wrong.
There are no hard numbers to calculate, there are few measurements that can be made or are even practical to make. (Perhaps heights and width of tree vs houses in the drop zone if felled from base). All of it is a honed intuitive calculation, a projection of my body as the mass of the entire tree/limb, then cutting off part of myself that weighs hundreds to thousands of pounds at a fixed length, at a fixed rotational speed in relation to the distance to the ground. Depending where I cut, a 30ft spar could land perfectly flat, or land on end either replanting itself in the ground or falling in an uncontrolled direction. Sometimes peoples houses and property depend on me getting that exactly right.
Now for the "not dieing" part. In order to climb safely I have to correctly intuitively equate a number variables, mainly: The strength/integrity/balance of my body, the constant of gravity, the decreasing integrity of the wood as I climb higher and the increasing influence of the variable wind. Where-ever I go in the tree, I am creating tetrahedrons with my body; 3 points of lower contact supporting a 4 balanced point above them, even if 2 points are controlled by one foot. I do this as a simultaneous moment to moment calculation. Everything is curved in a tree and I am the only thing making straight lines, with my equipment and my mind making many imaginary cut/equations in rapid fire until I feel the correct one, given all the other forces in action I am paying direct and full attention to.
I preform physics, lots and lots of physics, daily...for hours at a time.
They say to a carpenter, ever problem looks like a nail. To me, everything "looks" like a tree. I see people as trees walking with roots of influences hidden under the surface of the past and branches of potential reaching forwards in time. I see current cultures/religions as trees in an orchard gone feral, trees with crossing branches, fighting for space and light, bearing all manner of hybrid fruit some good some bad and some thorny trees with poisonous fruit have been intentionally planted. I see the universe like a tree with all phenomena linked and stacked in order and co-operative process, the macro is not separate from the micro.
The tree is a ubiquitous ancient cultural symbol of Life, Knowledge, and the Universe. Odin hung upon Yggdrasil, the cosmic tree to gain the knowledge of the runes. Buddha sat under a tree to gain enlightenment. Jesus was "hung across a tree". The tree symbolized the link between our world and the spirit world, as a bridge or ladder.
I have climbed them since a boy, and I have spent many thousands of hours professionally working in them and with them. So if a surfer can offer science some insight on string theory http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cros...-academia/ , perhaps an arborist can offer some insight on on the branching structure of the universe, hidden above and below the human level of experience.
I don't need drugs to think/see/understand these things. I have practice, lots and lots of practice.
Cosmic tree
In the beginning, it shows strands of mysterious material which cosmologists call "dark matter" sprawling across the emptiness of space like branches of a cosmic tree. As millions of years pass by, the dark matter clumps and concentrates to form seeds for the first galaxies. Then emerges the non-dark matter, the stuff that will in time go on to make stars, planets and life emerge.
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 6:34 pm
(August 27, 2016 at 5:36 pm)robvalue Wrote: Where is the falsifiability in all this?
What is a non-designed reality like, and how do you know this?
If you've read any of the model I present in other threads, you'd know it is very specifically geometrically designed and is a deterministic metaversal model. Every universe is the same quantum expression (spatial waveform) of the same original ( solid particle) unity. The are created in different spaces at different times in regular pattern (ABC sphere stack that is infinite horizontally and finite vertically as a traveling wave form creating planes of universes behind it) and they develop "as they will".
No appeal to random universe creation out of a magical quantum bulk needed. No special pleading to magical "God made it that way just because" needed. In fact it blows both the Many Worlds theory and intelligent design argument completely out of the water.
The falsifiability comes in where it makes very specific geometric predictions on the structure of internal universal phenomenon and metaversal constants that are the same for all universes in the model. In an ABC sphere pack (and other maximum density arrangements) the spheres take up ~74.05% of the space vs the space between the sphere (see the Kepler conjecture). This predicts a maximum expansive constant (dark energy) of on each of these universes of ~74%
We do know this: Since space is everywhere, this dark energy force is everywhere, and its effects increase as space expands. In contrast, gravity's force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart. Because gravity is weakening with the expansion of space, dark energy now makes up over 2/3 of all the energy in the universe.
It sounds rather strange that we have no firm idea about what makes up 74% of the universe. It's as though we had explored all the land on the planet Earth and never in all our travels encountered an ocean. But now that we've caught sight of the waves, we want to know what this huge, strange, powerful entity really is.
Later on in the model, the internal geometry divides for 6 individual space-time regions of which our region (which patterns for the lightest type of quarks) is only one. This affects the original 74%. 74.05 divided by 6 equals ~ 12.34. That takes out the influence of our region which leaves 61.71 influence from the other 5 regions, a lower DE constant. The creation of matter in this model is a quantum tunneling "white hole" like event that erupts across the space of all 6 regions simultaneously and these are the cores of galaxies. This is also like a pressure equalization event and settles out near the mean between the upper and lower DE limits. It would settle somewhere just above the mean as the fabric of space-time closes back together behind the white hole event.
The mean between 74.05 and 61.71 is 67.88....less that .5% below modern/revised estimates of 68.3% DE expansive constant.
The arrangement of the 6 spaces geometrically predict 3 density levels of quarks and their anti-quarks. As in the standard model of particle generation.
The first internal simultaneous geometry of space-time in a universe is derived from the spatial relationships an extant infinite has with itself. No matter if it's hyper dense quark matter, or limitless Limburger cheese, or an undefined quantum nothing the same relationships exist: All around itself equally in all directions, at the center of itself everywhere, and equally distributed as a field.
This quantizes into a sphere around a point (much smaller solid sphere) with a tensor field in equilibrium between them.
If this is the vibrational "macro-container" that is the universe, it predicts the behavior and micro-structure of the atom. They are the internal waves this shape container of the universe predicts. Here's how: The quantum tunneling event referred to above is the inversion point of the universal waveform into micro particle expression. Inverting the universal sphere/field/point "holon" yields a larger spherical component at the center with a much smaller point like particle flying around in a probability field creating a discrete border condition. Atoms are stable and ordered because the universe is stable and ordered.
The shape of our region of space time unfolded by this model is a rings torus and predicts a negative or saddle shaped curvature of space-time.
The geometry of the universe is "open" or negatively curved like a saddle, according to a new model proposed by researchers in Europe who have studied anomalies in the cosmic microwave background radiation. The anomalies were first detected by NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) in 2004 and were confirmed earlier this year by the European Space Agency's Planck space mission.
A torus in motion around our bubble of observability (observable universe) would cause a hemispherical divide of the CMB as on side is traveling towards you giving stronger readings and one side is traveling away giving weaker readings. If there is also six fold internal division of universe spaces, there might be remnants on the CMB of both these features.
Physics of the early Universe is at the boundary of astronomy and philosophy since we do not currently have a complete theory that unifies all the fundamental forces of Nature at the moment of Creation. In addition, there is no possibility of linking observation or experimentation of early Universe physics to our theories (i.e. it's not possible to `build' another Universe). Our theories are rejected or accepted based on simplicity and aesthetic grounds, plus their power of prediction to later times, rather than an appeal to empirical results. This is a very difference way of doing science from previous centuries of research.
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 6:42 pm
Your language betrays you...
(August 27, 2016 at 6:34 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: If you've read any of the model I present in other threads, you'd know it is very specifically geometrically designed and is a deterministic metaversal model.
Every universe is the same quantum expression (spatial waveform) of the same original ( solid particle) unity. The are created in different spaces at different times in regular pattern (ABC sphere stack that is infinite horizontally and finite vertically as a traveling wave form creating planes of universes behind it) and they develop "as they will".
No appeal to random universe creation out of a magical quantum bulk needed. No special pleading to magical "God made it that way just because" needed. In fact it blows both the Many Worlds theory and intelligent design argument completely out of the water.
The falsifiability comes in where it makes very specific geometric predictions on the structure of internal universal phenomenon and metaversal constants that are the same for all universes in the model. In an ABC sphere pack (and other maximum density arrangements) the spheres take up ~74.05% of the space vs the space between the sphere (see the Kepler conjecture). This predicts a maximum expansive constant (dark energy) of on each of these universes of ~74%
We do know this: Since space is everywhere, this dark energy force is everywhere, and its effects increase as space expands. In contrast, gravity's force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart. Because gravity is weakening with the expansion of space, dark energy now makes up over 2/3 of all the energy in the universe.
It sounds rather strange that we have no firm idea about what makes up 74% of the universe. It's as though we had explored all the land on the planet Earth and never in all our travels encountered an ocean. But now that we've caught sight of the waves, we want to know what this huge, strange, powerful entity really is.
Later on in the model, the internal geometry divides for 6 individual space-time regions of which our region (which patterns for the lightest type of quarks) is only one. This affects the original 74%. 74.05 divided by 6 equals ~ 12.34. That takes out the influence of our region which leaves 61.71 influence from the other 5 regions, a lower DE constant. The creation of matter in this model is a quantum tunneling "white hole" like event that erupts across the space of all 6 regions simultaneously and these are the cores of galaxies. This is also like a pressure equalization event and settles out near the mean between the upper and lower DE limits. It would settle somewhere just above the mean as the fabric of space-time closes back together behind the white hole event.
The mean between 74.05 and 61.71 is 67.88....less that .5% below modern/revised estimates of 68.3% DE expansive constant.
The arrangement of the 6 spaces geometrically predict 3 density levels of quarks and their anti-quarks. As in the standard model of particle generation.
The first internal simultaneous geometry of space-time in a universe is derived from the spatial relationships an extant infinite has with itself. No matter if it's hyper dense quark matter, or limitless Limburger cheese, or an undefined quantum nothing the same relationships exist: All around itself equally in all directions, at the center of itself everywhere, and equally distributed as a field.
This quantizes into a sphere around a point (much smaller solid sphere) with a tensor field in equilibrium between them.
If this is the vibrational "macro-container" that is the universe, it predicts the behavior and micro-structure of the atom. They are the internal waves this shape container of the universe predicts. Here's how: The quantum tunneling event referred to above is the inversion point of the universal waveform into micro particle expression. Inverting the universal sphere/field/point "holon" yields a larger spherical component at the center with a much smaller point like particle flying around in a probability field creating a discrete border condition. Atoms are stable and ordered because the universe is stable and ordered.
The shape of our region of space time unfolded by this model is a rings torus and predicts a negative or saddle shaped curvature of space-time.
The geometry of the universe is "open" or negatively curved like a saddle, according to a new model proposed by researchers in Europe who have studied anomalies in the cosmic microwave background radiation. The anomalies were first detected by NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) in 2004 and were confirmed earlier this year by the European Space Agency's Planck space mission.
A torus in motion around our bubble of observability (observable universe) would cause a hemispherical divide of the CMB as on side is traveling towards you giving stronger readings and one side is traveling away giving weaker readings. If there is also six fold internal division of universe spaces, there might be remnants on the CMB of both these features.
Physics of the early Universe is at the boundary of astronomy and philosophy since we do not currently have a complete theory that unifies all the fundamental forces of Nature at the moment of Creation.
In addition, there is no possibility of linking observation or experimentation of early Universe physics to our theories (i.e. it's not possible to `build' another Universe). Our theories are rejected or accepted based on simplicity and aesthetic grounds, plus their power of prediction to later times, rather than an appeal to empirical results. This is a very difference way of doing science from previous centuries of research.
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 6:46 pm
@Whaterverist – believers should “settle in a secular society”? Secularism, properly understood, means willfully ignoring doctrinal differences between various religious and philosophical approaches to life to find the lowest common denominator. It is a tool to identify commonalities for the peaceful interaction of various perspectives for the purpose of politically unifying a nation.
Hopefully, I am not reading too much into a single phrase, but I got the sense that you meant something more. Hopefully you did not mean that a secular society is one that requires its citizens to justify their ethical systems without reference to the Divine or avoid groundings their theories of human rights in any transcendent values. It seems a bit authoritarian to privilege a materialist worldview and expect others to submit to its presuppositions. That would be like me suggesting that materialists will be tolerated so long as they do not question Christian doctrines. Again, hopefully, I am taking an innocent phrase wrongly.
@Those Who Kudo Rythym – Personally, I find it very closed-minded to think that the only two options that explain someone rejecting atheism are dishonesty or mental illness. Again this goes back to the pretense that atheists have a monopoly on logic and reason. I find it hard to believe that some of the AF members I respect would applaud this kind of intolerance.
@Thump – Perhaps I was not clear and if so that is my fault. When I write about my belief that atheism leads to nihilism, I am writing about the philosophical implications, like an absurd reality, and not the emotions associated with being an atheist. I did not mean to imply that despair is the only valid emotional response to a world without God. I hoped that relating my personal experience of atheism as often pleasantly romantic suggested as much. I meant that equating the human condition with the playing out of a complex electro-chemical reaction is a bleak intellectual position. Personally, I find such belief depressing. Apparently you find it a hopeful and empowering one. Even though that is an attitude I cannot conceive, I had no intention of invalidating your feelings or those of anyone else.
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 6:52 pm
(August 27, 2016 at 6:42 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Your language betrays you...
(August 27, 2016 at 6:34 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: If you've read any of the model I present in other threads, you'd know it is very specifically geometrically designed and is a deterministic metaversal model.
Every universe is the same quantum expression (spatial waveform) of the same original ( solid particle) unity. The are created in different spaces at different times in regular pattern (ABC sphere stack that is infinite horizontally and finite vertically as a traveling wave form creating planes of universes behind it) and they develop "as they will".
No appeal to random universe creation out of a magical quantum bulk needed. No special pleading to magical "God made it that way just because" needed. In fact it blows both the Many Worlds theory and intelligent design argument completely out of the water.
The falsifiability comes in where it makes very specific geometric predictions on the structure of internal universal phenomenon and metaversal constants that are the same for all universes in the model. In an ABC sphere pack (and other maximum density arrangements) the spheres take up ~74.05% of the space vs the space between the sphere (see the Kepler conjecture). This predicts a maximum expansive constant (dark energy) of on each of these universes of ~74%
We do know this: Since space is everywhere, this dark energy force is everywhere, and its effects increase as space expands. In contrast, gravity's force is stronger when things are close together and weaker when they are far apart. Because gravity is weakening with the expansion of space, dark energy now makes up over 2/3 of all the energy in the universe.
It sounds rather strange that we have no firm idea about what makes up 74% of the universe. It's as though we had explored all the land on the planet Earth and never in all our travels encountered an ocean. But now that we've caught sight of the waves, we want to know what this huge, strange, powerful entity really is.
Later on in the model, the internal geometry divides for 6 individual space-time regions of which our region (which patterns for the lightest type of quarks) is only one. This affects the original 74%. 74.05 divided by 6 equals ~ 12.34. That takes out the influence of our region which leaves 61.71 influence from the other 5 regions, a lower DE constant. The creation of matter in this model is a quantum tunneling "white hole" like event that erupts across the space of all 6 regions simultaneously and these are the cores of galaxies. This is also like a pressure equalization event and settles out near the mean between the upper and lower DE limits. It would settle somewhere just above the mean as the fabric of space-time closes back together behind the white hole event.
The mean between 74.05 and 61.71 is 67.88....less that .5% below modern/revised estimates of 68.3% DE expansive constant.
The arrangement of the 6 spaces geometrically predict 3 density levels of quarks and their anti-quarks. As in the standard model of particle generation.
The first internal simultaneous geometry of space-time in a universe is derived from the spatial relationships an extant infinite has with itself. No matter if it's hyper dense quark matter, or limitless Limburger cheese, or an undefined quantum nothing the same relationships exist: All around itself equally in all directions, at the center of itself everywhere, and equally distributed as a field.
This quantizes into a sphere around a point (much smaller solid sphere) with a tensor field in equilibrium between them.
If this is the vibrational "macro-container" that is the universe, it predicts the behavior and micro-structure of the atom. They are the internal waves this shape container of the universe predicts. Here's how: The quantum tunneling event referred to above is the inversion point of the universal waveform into micro particle expression. Inverting the universal sphere/field/point "holon" yields a larger spherical component at the center with a much smaller point like particle flying around in a probability field creating a discrete border condition. Atoms are stable and ordered because the universe is stable and ordered.
The shape of our region of space time unfolded by this model is a rings torus and predicts a negative or saddle shaped curvature of space-time.
The geometry of the universe is "open" or negatively curved like a saddle, according to a new model proposed by researchers in Europe who have studied anomalies in the cosmic microwave background radiation. The anomalies were first detected by NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) in 2004 and were confirmed earlier this year by the European Space Agency's Planck space mission.
A torus in motion around our bubble of observability (observable universe) would cause a hemispherical divide of the CMB as on side is traveling towards you giving stronger readings and one side is traveling away giving weaker readings. If there is also six fold internal division of universe spaces, there might be remnants on the CMB of both these features.
Physics of the early Universe is at the boundary of astronomy and philosophy since we do not currently have a complete theory that unifies all the fundamental forces of Nature at the moment of Creation.
In addition, there is no possibility of linking observation or experimentation of early Universe physics to our theories (i.e. it's not possible to `build' another Universe). Our theories are rejected or accepted based on simplicity and aesthetic grounds, plus their power of prediction to later times, rather than an appeal to empirical results. This is a very difference way of doing science from previous centuries of research.
(bold and hide tabs by me)
The later quote is from the University of Oregon physics department, not me.
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
RE: How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)
August 27, 2016 at 7:09 pm
(August 27, 2016 at 6:46 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: @Thump – Perhaps I was not clear and if so that is my fault. When I write about my belief that atheism leads to nihilism, I am writing about the philosophical implications, like an absurd reality, and not the emotions associated with being an atheist. I did not mean to imply that despair is the only valid emotional response to a world without God.
So you better explain your definition of nihilism.
![[Image: CMB_quadrupole_octopole.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.arstechnica.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F02%2FCMB_quadrupole_octopole.png)
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
![[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-d-3rfdI7nG0%2FTerwtFyFXoI%2FAAAAAAAACak%2F7kFSmHeVrng%2Fs320%2FBumper%2BSticker%2B-%2BAsheville%2B-%2BPraise%2BDog3.JPG)
