photon propeller

You translate with haste based on your own opinion.The post is an example of synchretism, "modern intelligent systems with regard to prophesy" posted originally in religion by the author. That should make it clear. Its main focus is the logical progression towards a universal truth, the modern technology used to achieve it, the semantics and benefit of its implementation to the collective whole, the relevance to past predictions, and the validation of its future authority.

Its hard to see the association to religion with blinders on. Recursion states, " a universal covenant that is objectively true and repeatedly confirmed to be undeniable, could be understood, logically, as a covenant between God and all the worthy inhabitants of existence." The covenant is the law of physics, science, natural law , the source of that law is the creator of it, God. Undeniable logic and the basis of belief in a deity for many of the greatest minds to ever walk this planet. Children are not born in an enlightened state. They must choose their path and learn from it. Every individual has the choice of what path they take and what they glean from it. Some achieve the inner peace of heaven on earth and some live in turmoil internally conflicted by their own choices. The potential for both is constant.

After defining God as the source of creation, the creator, in a previous post the question was asked what was the benefit of labeling the source God. I thought long and hard and the answer did not come easy. I felt compelled to get it right and with some help and finesse I have made my attempt. Some time passed since the question was posed until one chilly winter day when we were using huge amounts of electricity struggling to stay warm. The roads were icy and dangerous so I decided to take the bus to work. As I entered the bus I noticed the driver smile at me in a most peculiar manner. I filed in with the rest of the drones and took my seat. When my bus stop approached I notified the driver to stop. When he passed my stop alerted him again and he ignored me and just kept on going. In fact,he started accelerating. When I demanded he stop he responded with a sinister grin and laughter. With my patience worn thin I rose from my seat to confront him. He wouldn't listen to reason so I was forced to get physical. As my hands clenched his throat I looked back at the other passengers for their approval. They all nodded their heads with consent. Apparently this driver wasn't stopping for anyone. As I squeezed tighter cursing him he just laughed louder and the bus appeared to be driving itself. I felt helpless. Soon I realized our destination was the local nuclear power plant and the hair stood up on the back of my neck. We entered the facility and were greeted by men in radiation suits carrying machine guns. They forced us inside at gunpoint locking the containment door behind us and funneled us through a maze of corridors to the reactor. When they started pushing people into the cooling reservoirs which housed the fuel rods all hell broke loose. Alarms were ringing and panic ensued as bodies were vaporized and noxious fumes filled the air. I managed to fight my way past some minions dodging bullets along the way navigating the passage towards freedom. I began to succumb to the heat and fumes when I finally reached the containment door. I rushed to open it but when I grabbed the handle I froze. Through the thick glass I saw my three year old son standing on the other side looking at me with his beautiful eyes and innocent smile. I knew what would happen to him if I opened the door. An eerie calm overcame me as I released the handle and fell to my knees surrendering to my end. When I awoke my eyes were fountains and my last cry echoed in my head, please don't kill my son, please don't kill my son. The bus ride signified the path society is on now and the reactor it's eminent doom. The answer to the benefit of labeling the source of creation God is an end to internal conflict, the dawn of a new era of enlightenment within one's self, the messianic age.

 

"We talk of world peace, yet those who are to plan the new world do not know the answer, the solution. Present knowledge of man's relation to nature and natural law which controls his human relation is, as yet, inadequate to meet the situation. Man is still too near his jungle to either know the law which inexorably governs his every action and that of everything in nature or to comprehend that he must obey nature or be self-destroyed. Still dominated by his jungle habits, he settles human relations by jungle methods. Wars and world chaos will continue until new knowledge applicable to the coming new cycle in man's evolution is acquired by him. The fulcrum from which all power springs is knowledge. When man has the omniscience which is unfolding within him, he will no longer misuse, break or disobey God's law because of being unaware of it. He will command it because he will know the law." Lao Russell

 

The universe is God's masterpiece so give credit where credit is do and discover humility in your life. Fear not the eyes of the sun for the salvation of mankind and of it's children undoubtedly lies within.

What do you mean when you say the degree to which our universe is 'fine tuned' is empirical? I understand that, say, gravity is measured to be consistent, but what is the 'fine tuned' part? That sounds like you are saying we can measure that someone tuned, or adjusted, the universe from one state to another.

Refer to the link in post 28

I have already agreed that the logical progression is into infinity, the cosmological argument is simply evidence of cause alone, the teleological argument is evidence which describes that cause as precise. It is the combination of the two which are evidence of an intelligent source, cause and precision engineering. I have drawn no lines and made no assumptions. Nor have I speculated on the cause of the cause except that for me the aphorism "God" allows me to cope with that perpetual mystery. I concede that the origin of a source of infinite nature may be impossible to define completely, describing it as intelligent however is not. When we finally have our TOE, if we live long enough to figure it out, it may give us more insight into the nature of the infinite source. The point is if we don't learn to cooperate and live in peace with a common goal we have no chance of ever figuring it out.

Ok so you are saying the intelligent source is the subjective part but then you turn around and say you have concrete evidence of an intelligent source...

 

How is an intelligent source both subjective but there is concrete evidence of the intelligent source?

It is the difference in saying something so precise had a cause or did not. Knowing the laws of nature are ruled by cause and effect, cause seems the obvious conclusion. If so, the cause must encapsulate the potential, precise, intelligent, and exquisite.

Carl believed that knowledge should be shared and was criticized by many of his colleagues for doing so. No doubt some of which were consumed by greed. At least the new cosmos attempts to honor his legacy. Sometimes standing for what you believe means standing alone.

Describe an experiment to test the hypothesis that an intelligent creator is the ultimate source of existence.

 

What is a prediction you can make based solely on the assumption that an intelligent creator is the source of existence?

I said the source, the cause, who or what, is the only subjective part, the engineering tolerance level of our universe is empirical and repeatable, proven fact, it is not subjective, for me it is concrete evidence of an intelligent source.

We live in a universe of cause and effect. The degree to which our universe is fine tuned is empirical and repeatable, who or what caused that degree of exactness is the only subjective question.

Exactly, why add the massive assumption of the infinite intelligent source. Carl Sagan had a pretty eloquent explanation of this point.

The goal is to strive to understand the universe, by the acquisition of knowledge, through scientific means, and eventually the source, all the while keeping faith in the source itself. For me fine tuning is not an assumption of evidence, it is concrete evidence with a margin of error less than one grain of sand in all the sands of the world. A margin which would free or condemn in any court. Truth is self evident. It is not prejudice. I also believe that the universe, and or God, includes all of reality, inner connected, everyone, whether they know it or not. It is awareness that we should strive to attain, and knowledge and truth are a common flag we may all fly under. It is fear which holds us back, and those hoarders of knowledge who capitalize on it instead of sharing it in order to maintain power. Some labor to acquire it, for others ignorance is bliss.

If the universe does recycle itself, possible and likely probable, under the same governing factors, the only variables that affect change are the choices made by the living. Now I have shared with you a glimpse of how precious and significant my life, yours, and everyone else truly is.

Can we now live in peace and aspire to achieve this goal?

photon propeller,

 

Read a portion of your link. I would have to say I fall in the weak Anthropic category, figuring that things are the way they are, because being this way allows them to be the way they are. If they were different, then things would not be this way.

 

As for something with explanitory power, how about considering that this universe is not one among many, but one with a large, if not infinite number of predecessors.

 

The theory has probably been floated before, but I imagine the possibility of the entire universe one day unifying to a singularity and then happening again, with some artifacts of the last universe, carried on into the next. That is, that intelligence may have begun many universes ago, and built up in steps, and the intelligentness of the last one was somehow coded into this one, as a gift or memorial from/of the last.

 

With this "theory" one can imagine life and intelligence spreading throughout the galaxy, meeting up with other evolved life, and establishing a greater consciousness that, after billions of years, with the singularity approaching, would find a way to leave some breadcrumbs behind, for the benefit of the inhabitants of the "next" iteration of the universe.

 

It requires no god, per se, just a previous consciousness, prior the big bang, that left some constants for us to utilize and love. A once alive, but now dead consciousness, that is just remembered and "felt" by the consciousness that is present on Earth today, and the possible consciousnesses that may exist on other "life giving" planets, and such.

 

Bear in mind that life does not have to be carbon based, and like us. Witness the sulfur tube life at the vents at the bottom of the sea.

 

It does not have to be, and probably is not, a humanlike consciousness, that left its code and clues in the singularity that burst into our current universe. But I would imagine it is a "common" consciousness, that would provide the "source" you speak of. That is, that in the same way that we are all decendents of Lucy, we are all, every planet, star, quark, bird and bee, decendents of the big bang. There is no other source from which to sprout.

 

Regards, TAR

I have often speculated and would agree with you that the universe will also undergo an expansion and contraction period. A universal oscillation so to speak just as the energy it is comprised of does. What I disagree with you on is the fact that it does not require an architect. No matter how many times it recycles itself the controlling factors, the potential, which govern that cycle must precede it. If you have a dice with only ones on every side no matter how many times you roll it you will always get a one. The multitude of numbers must preexist in the potential of the dice itself. An architect must design the archetype.

I would also agree with the "common conscious" from the stand point that we are all manifestations of the universe connected and comprised of energy. However I believe what makes life special is the individual part, the power to choose, to affect change. Otherwise the universe would be nothing more than probability. Imagine if we are all vessels of God, and/or of the universe, knowledge will allow us all to close our eyes and sit in the throne of our kingdom. If I were God, I wouldn't listen to the same single song all the time, I would divide myself, and revel in the symphony of all the melodies of my potential.

Ideas built upon strong reproduceable evidence is what I find meaningful.

 

I've always believed that what makes an idea strong and worthwhile isn't how impossible it is to test but how much scrutiny it has withstood. Therefore, I find little use for deism, pantheism or any other flavor of personal definition of god. They are nothing more than a small subset of the nearly infinite number of untestable, inscrutable concepts based purely on assumption.

You are backtracking. Have we not just revealed the evidence for an intelligent source? The only assumption is what now lies beyond that, if anything.

Personally, I look for how much evidence is available to support any explanation. I trust that methodology not to lead me to hasty conclusions.

 

If you had evidence that evolution adds to a species without ever taking anything away, you could change my mind about how evolution really works. But you'd have to have a bigger mountain of evidence than I have that says otherwise.

I was referring to the evolution of your mind. The evolution of energy is from simple to complex and back again, and again..............Oscillation is an essential part of the dynamic universe, just like the harmonic beating of your heart or the harmonic pulse of the sun. Energy resonates.

Do you see that the idea that a creating intelligence is required due to perceived fine tuning only begs the question of what fine tuned the fine tuner?

Yes, I do. That's where infinity comes into play. That's also why I kneel humbly before the source. Beyond that is where God exists for me. Looking further would most likely burn your eyes out or drive you to insanity but I invite it. So now will all join us at this frontier? Our discussion has fostered an infinite conclusion. For me there is only one solution that allows me to sleep at night, God.

Citation please? Where are you getting these figures for "the potential of the fundamental forces"?

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/#CosFinTun

 

Have a look for yourself

So you are invoking the Teleological argument in your defense?

correct, based on cosmic fine tuning

You want me to agree that it's a scientific fact that all life is created the same way? I couldn't.

 

 

So you're a Deist. There's no evidence to support what you suggest.

I am a pantheist. As far as evidence of intelligence behind the potential, if the potential of the fundamental forces differed by a margin of one quintillionth, we wouldn't be here. That's 1 with 18 zeros. I'll put faith on those odds any day. The fundamental forces govern the dynamics of energy. They were in place from the beginning. That level of accuracy proves an archetype and an architect.

Part of the problem here is that you seem to have reached a conclusion about a subjective issue before you started discussing it with us. You claim that reality is the same for everyone no matter what the perspective is, and there is a very narrow definition of reality where you're right, but it seems pointless to discuss it with someone who has already made up their mind. And that's really the reason we don't like soapboxing; discussions go nowhere if all minds involved aren't open to change.

 

Discussion fosters insight; conclusions are optional.

What change is your mind open to? We have to be convinced to change. Is it really change or evolution, adding to but not taking away.

Deepak?

 

 

But seriously, you appear to present the concept of god as just the beauty, symmtery and totallity of existence in one instance but then use the word creator. Are you suggesting intelligence behind the creation?

I'm suggesting an intelligent source which creates potential, once the universe begins, it is a game of chance and probability.

 

Probability is the constant, chance is the variable.

Define "creation", please. Are you talking about how individual humans are created, or how our species evolved, or about the first life we're all descendant from, or are you talking about something else? To which "scientific fact" do you refer?

All of them. The evolution of energy.

Not really, different Universes could simply have different physical constants. Some combinations permitting life and others not.

multiverses are pure speculation and based on flawed logic. The outer boundry of the cmb is not the edge of the universe.

When you say god you are referring to a Spinoza god... merely the appreciation of the beauty of the universe or do you mean to use the capitalized god which suggests theism.

 

If the later than no, there is no evidence, unless you've found some you would like to present.

I am referring to the one word which summarizes the complete original model of which our universe is based upon, and which we are all manifestations of, the source potential. If any word deserves to be capitalized, shouldn't it be this one.

Do discussions not foster conclusions? Isn't that the root of the problem? Figuring out what we all can agree on is the tough part. Is reality not the same for everyone no matter what our perspective? If I assert that it is am I preaching or has our conversation simply fostered a conclusion?

You are claiming to know something that is in reality unknowable and you are making the claims in the complete absence of evidence, which is a dangerous behavior and detriment to humanity.

Is it really unknowable? Isn't the periodic and harmonic symmetry of energy and the beautiful architecture of the natural constants enough evidence to contrive an archetype?

Is God not simply an aphorism for the archetype?

This is preaching, btw. Not because you invoke a god or because you believe in a certain religion. Preaching/soapboxing is where you apply your opinion as an assertion, be it about religion, politics, or any other subjective assessment. Asserting that "God is the same for everyone, no matter what our perspective" is patently false. It may be your opinion, but you haven't shown that this God is the same for me as it is for you.

So lets leave my definition of the source, "God", completely out of it. Do you agree that scientific fact, "creation", is the same for everyone?

Lately I've been focused on the objectives of religious groups. I see plenty of churches organizing to help the needy, or even just help their own congregations in various positive ways. I have absolutely no problem with these folks; they seem to be what's best about organized religions.

 

Some religious groups have decided that they know what's best for everyone. They've decided that their beliefs should be applied as legislation applicable to the whole population. They're out there lobbying against gay rights, evolution taught in schools, abortion, and other issues where they feel their beliefs are superior. These groups are the very reason and spirit behind separation of church and state, imo.

I agree. We don't decide what the truth is. It was forged in the very essence of creation. We can only strive to discover it.

photon propeller,

 

I'm not sure I follow the point you are trying to make; is it that religion(s) is a source of detriment to humanity?

 

Or are you saying we all need to believe in the "right" god?

Religious differences exist because they are a product of environment and tradition. The one true reality is the same for everyone. I believe the source of creation is God, most religions would agree. I would also assert God is the same for everyone, no matter what our perspective.

Pulled from http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/85392-the-message/ with a preachectomy

So let us clarify your viewpoint Swansont. The dream itself and my philosophical interpretation you label "preaching" because I include a creator? I wonder if the philosophers of the past were condemned as preachers when they pondered the source? I think not. I speak clearly on the grounds of a unified civilization under the flag of universal truth and reason. What is true for one is true for all, scientific fact. Look around you. The wars of the world are fought for two main reasons, religious differences and greed. None of our words change natural reality. It existed before us, now, and will continue long after we self destruct. Being a parent I must believe that our species can change that gloomy future. We don't know it all but all that exists can be known with enough time, cooperation, and the scientific method. Explain to me why you think my viewpoint is vacillating trumpery when the only unproven fact is the definition of the source. It is as steady as the natural constants which rule this realm, and form the foundation of my perspective. You disregard any value of my story because you are biased towards me.

!

Moderator Note

Is there a point of discussion you tried to raise here, or is this just (more) preaching?

 

Unlike most modnotes, here a response is compulsory

 

Since you feel I'm obliged, the discussion is about the detrimental effects caused by religious prejudice. If we fail to unite under the flag of universal truth, the human race is doomed.

It was a dream and not a real church.

Bravo! some may interpret it as a spiritual experience

Post #1 is obviously computer-generated. You can tell easily.

This reply is so preposterous that it doesn't deserve a response.

I was on hiatus with some close friends and we were living out our dreams. We would summit great heights, overcome imposing obstacles, and endure the ominous storm. At the end of our journey one friend asked me to join him at the mainstream church which he attended. I reluctantly agreed knowing that although I had always believed there was a creator, I did not believe in idolizing those profits whom supposedly delivered God's message. I believed nature exposed God's secrets. Accompanying me were my five year old son Maximilian, my newborn baby boy, my friend and his father, another best friend, and some acquaintances who were fellow church members. I was stunned to see a limousine awaiting which delivered us and even more astounded when we arrived at the vast complex and everyone had been brought by limo. It was extremely busy and I immediately became separated from my friends as my focus was on my two sons. The church bell rang and I rushed to find a seat among the endless pews. All were quiet as the preacher began his sermon. My newborn was fast asleep tucked under the flowered Hawaiian button up I was wearing. I also began to periodically nod off as I was exhausted and the slow, warm, breathing of my newborn began to resonate with my lungs. My eyes were closed but I heard the preacher begin to speak of danger and the presence of God. He spoke of overcoming the fear of the unknown and the resulting closeness with the creator. This made sense to me and soon the alter boys were passing around a picture of the priest himself dangling precariously from some giant cliff side wearing a grand smile and giving the cameraman the thumbs up. Along with the picture there were holographic cards that when peered into would reveal each individual's own idea of fun with danger. When I looked at them at first I saw nothing then suddenly a hot rod appeared. I was flabbergasted because part of our trip included racing some cars at the drag strip. I began to wonder if this was some kind of magic trick or surveillance tactic. I nodded off again and heard a woman's voice a few rows back obstreperously exclaiming to the church that a man in a flowered Hawaiian shirt was disrespecting the church by sleeping during the sermon. I opened my eyes only to see everyone glaring at me in judgement and disgust. I stood my ground and asked the woman if she was referring to me and if she, and everyone else, wanted me to leave. I explained my newborn was sleeping and that I was exhausted and apologized but meant no disrespect. They all pointed their fingers and degraded me as an unworthy father. As I stood to exit I expected to finally see my friends rise and defend me but no one else stood. I pulled my sons close and lowered my head in betrayal as I walked out chided by the priest. I went to the front where we had been dropped only to find there were no limos awaiting to service me. realized there was only one way in and one way out. I noticed a small coffee shop across the intersection and thought I might find a sympathetic ear that would rescue us. The officer directing traffic acted like he didn't even see us as if he knew what had transpired so I scurried across as soon as there was an opening. During the melee Max fell behind and cars were honking and cursing at him as I pleaded for him to cross. When he finally made it I found myself even more frazzled and embarrassed as many were smoking cigarettes and drinking coffee gazing at me like I was some precocious adolescent. I began to feel ill and rushed to the nearest trash can to vomit. Even the janitor lady now looked upon me with malice as she had to switch out the trash. I almost started to sob when a nice old man noticed me and offered his assistance. As we exited the complex I explained what had occurred. I asserted that if I treated my children with such presumption and judgement that they would not love and respect me as they do. There was a silent pause and tears of sympathy poured down the man's face. Overcome with emotion I closed my eyes and when they opened, I was lying next to my loving wife, my children fast asleep in their beds and the tears were pouring down my face. I thought what a vivid, dreadful nightmare it was then I immediately had an epiphany. It was no dream, it was a message.

 

Any religion which presumes to know God fully and judges those in contrast, denies themselves the God given right to follow the continuous scientific path which predicates the one ultimate reality of creation. They are unaware of the fragile balance between beauty and horror within the complex nature of God's work and within themselves. They will never know the essence of God's love for creation.

 

JDE

Probability is the constant, choice is the variable, chance is the combination of both.