How do you deal with life now that you are an atheist? (With a little of my life)

[bennyboy]

---

I've got $10 and a phone number that says a couple hits of LSD can achieve results much like yours.  But tell us about this in-depth research you've done, this "data" you've collected and applied to "such a vast question and depth of process."  You know, I've been riding you pretty hard these days, but if you can support your gobbledygook with anything other than more gobbledygook, I will be the first to eat my words and give you the credit you deserve.

I'm guessing most of your knowledge involves misapplications of physics and philosophy, combined with neat geometrical patterns.  Amirite or amirite?

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.