Where is Heaven?

[joshua 1 9]

Now your talking about buying a dog to try and make your argument convincing.

Inbreeding is scientific fact, it is in the dictionary. I do not need to convince anyone of anything.

 

[joshua 1 9]

? Then there are more kids per capita in say, the UK than Mexico?

I was referring to men like Solomon that have over 2,000 children. The average person could not afford to feed them.

In general you have to be able to feed people. The industrial revolution had a impact on population because of the increased ability to be able to feed people and keep them alive.

Where the Industrial Revolution was taking place, the human population started to grow really fast. The birth rate was always high. What changed was the death rate. The population grew because more people stayed alive. The death rate fell for several reasons:

1. New farm machines were invented. They increased the amount of food that could be produced. With more food, people were healthier and could live longer.
2. Steam engines and railroads were built. These machines could quickly carry food long distances. This made food shortages less likely.
3. Sanitation was improved. Sewers were dug to carry away human wastes (Figurebelow). This helped reduce the spread of disease.

 

[dad]

I was referring to men like Solomon that have over 2,000 children. The average person could not afford to feed them.

In general you have to be able to feed people. The industrial revolution had a impact on population because of the increased ability to be able to feed people and keep them alive.

Where the Industrial Revolution was taking place, the human population started to grow really fast. The birth rate was always high. What changed was the death rate. The population grew because more people stayed alive. The death rate fell for several reasons:

1. New farm machines were invented. They increased the amount of food that could be produced. With more food, people were healthier and could live longer.
2. Steam engines and railroads were built. These machines could quickly carry food long distances. This made food shortages less likely.
3. Sanitation was improved. Sewers were dug to carry away human wastes (Figurebelow). This helped reduce the spread of disease.

Many rich are too selfish to have kids these days...hence, third world countries tend to have more.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Many rich are too selfish to have kids these days...hence, third world countries tend to have more.

They are not selfish with their money, they are selfish with their time. I have known rich kids that go to boarding schools and summer camps and do not even spend that much time at home, much less with their parents. Although that is more of a custom on the East coast and less so in the Midwest. According to Trump the rich that do spend quality time with their family are more happy then the ones that do not spend time with their family.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Okay, I have to ask this. I am not asking this for any snide reason, I don't know the answer to this..

Why does energy gain mass when it passes through the higgs field? I ask because I believe the answer to be unknown, Yet I am behind in my studies.. So I really have no idea outside of possible quirks or neutrinos.. and even then. I don't really know specifically how they function.

Very crudely, the Higgs field is a quantum field that permeates all space, but unlike the other quantum fields, it has a non-zero value in 'empty' spacetime. When excitations of the other quantum fields pass through spacetime, some couple with the Higgs field and some don't. The ones that couple with the Higgs field are slowed/gain mass, the ones that don't couple travel at c. Since it only applies to fundamental particles, the mass attributable to Higgs coupling is only a tiny part of the mass of atomic matter, most of which is attributable to the binding energy of its components.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Very crudely, the Higgs field is a quantum field that permeates all space, but unlike the other quantum fields, it has a non-zero value in 'empty' spacetime. When excitations of the other quantum fields pass through spacetime, some couple with the Higgs field and some don't. The ones that couple with the Higgs field are slowed/gain mass, the ones that don't couple travel at c. Since it only applies to fundamental particles, the mass attributable to Higgs coupling is only a tiny part of the mass of atomic matter, most of which is attributable to the binding energy of its components.

Thank you for the reply,, Just for a moment. Can I get fantastical with physics? You seem to be really on the ball with this subject. I'd very much appreciate your input on this.. skipping to multiverse theory for a moment ,I don't feel I need to explain any kind of physical information to you, you would seem to already have a great deal of understanding in these matters.

On to the fantastical,, Do you believe it's possible that the Higgs field is a force of interaction between dimensions? Imagine sixth dimension, where time and space overlap each other.. Is it possible, the Higgs field that is transpiring is because our dimension overlaps with another?, and the mass does indeed form in between two dimensions,, falling out in, not just our universe, but another as well??

I know that is taking a fantastic leap in imagination,, But hypothesis is built on imagination.

 

[dad]

They are not selfish with their money, they are selfish with their time.

They say time is money. Also when one is selfish, it permeates all. Cars, stuff, money, time..etc.

I have known rich kids that go to boarding schools and summer camps and do not even spend that much time at home, much less with their parents. Although that is more of a custom on the East coast and less so in the Midwest. According to Trump the rich that do spend quality time with their family are more happy then the ones that do not spend time with their family.

Money aside..naturally people that don't abandon their kids to babysitters are happier.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...Do you believe it's possible that the Higgs field is a force of interaction between dimensions? Imagine sixth dimension, where time and space overlap each other.. Is it possible, the Higgs field that is transpiring is because our dimension overlaps with another?, and the mass does indeed form in between two dimensions,, falling out in, not just our universe, but another as well??

No; as you suggest, it sounds like fantasy.

Einstinian spacetime is four dimensional non-Euclidean Minkowski continuum. If space and time can be said to 'overlap', they do so in 4D spacetime (time becomes a spatial direction inside the event horizon of a black hole, so I guess there's a sense in which they overlap there).

Speculation is best based on some coherent physical theory; for example, there is a suggestion in M-theory (non-perturbative string theory), that the extreme weakness of gravity relative to the other forces might be due to it 'drifting' between multidimensional 'branes' (higher dimensional surfaces), but this is a complex and speculative idea based on a mathematical model, and really bears no relation to the 'parallel universe' science fiction MacGuffin.

 

[Shadowprophet]

No; as you suggest, it sounds like fantasy.

Einstinian spacetime is four dimensional non-Euclidean Minkowski continuum. If space and time can be said to 'overlap', they do so in 4D spacetime (time becomes a spatial direction inside the event horizon of a black hole, so I guess there's a sense in which they overlap there).

Speculation is best based on some coherent physical theory; for example, there is a suggestion in M-theory (non-perturbative string theory), that the extreme weakness of gravity relative to the other forces might be due to it 'drifting' between multidimensional 'branes' (higher dimensional surfaces), but this is a complex and speculative idea, and really bears little relation to the 'parallel universe' science fiction MacGuffin.

Thank you for the reply.

Well as I've stated i'm not a physicist. But I enjoy the subject very much. I'm trying very hard to wrap my head around it. i'd be happy to just be considered above average in my understanding. I'm not a proud man.

 

[dad]

Einstinian spacetime is four dimensional non-Euclidean Minkowski continuum. If space and time can be said to 'overlap', they do so in 4D spacetime

Ha. Nice story. Unless time existed in all space used in the math, we need to take the 'time' out of spacetime.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Ha. Nice story. Unless time existed in all space used in the math, we need to take the 'time' out of spacetime.

I don't see your point there; the spacetime of Einstinian relativity is a mathematical model that describes and predicts our observations of the universe, within certain known boundaries. It's been tested many times, and it works; it's a useful tool.

 

[dad]

I don't see your point there; the spacetime of Einstinian relativity is a mathematical model that describes and predicts our observations of the universe, within certain known boundaries. It's been tested many times, and it works; it's a useful tool.

My point is this, that we cannot stack up a few boxes on earth and talk about the space in them as representing space in the far universe. Space and time are woven together here a certain way, we know and experience time a certain way. The space in deep space may be woven another way altogether with time. A year here might be a millisecond or whatever there we do not know. We can't do math on assumptions with no basis. If you want to relegate that math to earth and area, fine.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

My point is this, that we cannot stack up a few boxes on earth and talk about the space in them as representing space in the far universe. Space and time are woven together here a certain way, we know and experience time a certain way. The space in deep space may be woven another way altogether with time. A year here might be a millisecond or whatever there we do not know. We can't do math on assumptions with no basis. If you want to relegate that math to earth and area, fine.

It's true that we're limited to the extent of our observational capability - the visible universe. What we observe within those constraints is entirely consistent with the predictions of General Relativity and quantum mechanics (and has provided a number of good tests of these models), so we have good reason to think that our models are correct within those bounds.

We can infer that the universe is larger than the observable portion because the evidence indicates the universe has been expanding long enough and fast enough that a proportion of it will have exceeded our light cone of observation, and there are galaxies at the edge of visibility that, due to the expansion of space, are retreating from us at a significant fraction of the speed of light; and, given 13+ billion light years distance, they will by 'now' (i.e. 13+ billion years later), be well outside the boundary of observable universe.

Beyond this, we have only the projections and predictions of our models (that hold good to the limits of what we can observe); if the observable universe is a negligible portion of the whole, or the whole is infinitely large, there is the potential for two types of spatial 'multiverse'. One consists simply of multiple volumes of space isolated from interaction with each other by the expansion of space; these volumes will have varying distributions of matter, but the same, or very similar, physical properties; their effective isolation makes them conceptually separate universes. The other type of multiverse depends on the concept of the rapid inflation hypothesized to have produced our own universe (in the 'big bang'). This model predicts that the ongoing inflation will produce other 'bubble' universes via the same process, though with different physical characteristics.

 

[dad]

It's true that we're limited to the extent of our observational capability - the visible universe. What we observe within those constraints is entirely consistent with the predictions of General Relativity and quantum mechanics (and has provided a number of good tests of these models), so we have good reason to think that our models are correct within those bounds.

It has to be consistent with what we have here since we experience and see it here. The few things like gravitational lensing and etc that have been interpreted as having a cause such as we are familiar with here, cannot stand on their own. You first assume space and time exists the same and then interpret. Without time, for example all waves lose meaning in time, because the light wave or whatever is only felt and seen here in our space..where time is what it is. No distances and sizes of far objects are known, except in relation to earth time and space.

The way they do the math is based only on realities here...example

"Pythagorean theorem
The sum of the areas of the two squares on the legs (a and b) equals the area of the square on the hypotenuse (c)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem


The area in deep space cannot be equal if time does not exist in it the same way.

We can infer that the universe is larger than the observable portion because the evidence indicates the universe has been expanding long enough and fast enough that a proportion of it will have exceeded our light cone of observation, and there are galaxies at the edge of visibility that, due to the expansion of space, are retreating from us at a significant fraction of the speed of light; and, given 13+ billion light years distance, they will by 'now' (i.e. 13+ billion years later), be well outside the boundary of observable universe.

The evidence indicates nothing of the sort, your interpretation and belief set and methodologies do. Redshift loses meaning if a star was placed in already stretched out time and space! How long something was moving away from us cannot be known in that case. Nor can the distance of whatever is red shifted, nor size! The distances therefore of how fast or far something moves are not known, and the icing on the cake here is that even if they could be known, that would not help you! You see, time must exist for a light year to be a year or take a year etc. In all ways science is a belief set.

Beyond this, we have only the projections and predictions of our models (that hold good to the limits of what we can observe); if the observable universe is a negligible portion of the whole, or the whole is infinitely large, there is the potential for two types of spatial 'multiverse'.

Meaningless since that is based on projecting earth time and space and laws in the unknown, by math or otherwise. In reality, the whole universe was a week's work for Jesus. Sure there may be a lot, lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot more. But God is moving right here, so we are the planet that matters!

One consists simply of multiple volumes of space isolated from interaction with each other by the expansion of space;

Space may have been expanded before the stuff was put in, and any subsequent expansion cannot be measured in any detail...for reasons I set out earlier in the post.

these volumes will have varying distributions of matter, but the same, or very similar, physical properties;

No. There is likely more than the physical involved! You not only do not know sizes or distances, or expansion, or origins, but you have no clue by science that there is spiritual elements also in this here universe of ours. Just because you see just a bit of what there is does not mean you see all!

their effective isolation makes them conceptually separate universes.

Speculation. We do not even know the time and space for this universe far away, forget preaching on other universes!

The other type of multiverse depends on the concept of the rapid inflation hypothesized to have produced our own universe (in the 'big bang'). This model predicts that the ongoing inflation will produce other 'bubble' universes via the same process, though with different physical characteristics.

Total fearmongering fairy tale. The big bang is religion. The origin and future of the created universe is way way way out of the league of present science on earth. So they tell strange stories.

 

[Shadowprophet]

It has to be consistent with what we have here since we experience and see it here. The few things like gravitational lensing and etc that have been interpreted as having a cause such as we are familiar with here, cannot stand on their own. You first assume space and time exists the same and then interpret. Without time, for example all waves lose meaning in time, because the light wave or whatever is only felt and seen here in our space..where time is what it is. No distances and sizes of far objects are known, except in relation to earth time and space.

The way they do the math is based only on realities here...example

"Pythagorean theorem
The sum of the areas of the two squares on the legs (a and b) equals the area of the square on the hypotenuse (c)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem


The area in deep space cannot be equal if time does not exist in it the same way.

The evidence indicates nothing of the sort, your interpretation and belief set and methodologies do. Redshift loses meaning if a star was placed in already stretched out time and space! How long something was moving away from us cannot be known in that case. Nor can the distance of whatever is red shifted, nor size! The distances therefore of how fast or far something moves are not known, and the icing on the cake here is that even if they could be known, that would not help you! You see, time must exist for a light year to be a year or take a year etc. In all ways science is a belief set.
Meaningless since that is based on projecting earth time and space and laws in the unknown, by math or otherwise. In reality, the whole universe was a week's work for Jesus. Sure there may be a lot, lot lot lot lot lot lot lot lot more. But God is moving right here, so we are the planet that matters!

Space may have been expanded before the stuff was put in, and any subsequent expansion cannot be measured in any detail...for reasons I set out earlier in the post.

No. There is likely more than the physical involved! You not only do not know sizes or distances, or expansion, or origins, but you have no clue by science that there is spiritual elements also in this here universe of ours. Just because you see just a bit of what there is does not mean you see all!
Speculation. We do not even know the time and space for this universe far away, forget preaching on other universes!

Total fearmongering fairy tale. The big bang is religion. The origin and future of the created universe is way way way out of the league of present science on earth. So they tell strange stories.

I would like to add to this, you do realize gravitational waves are a proven thing now thus making space time rippled and not flat as M theory suggests. Time is in fact relative, localized in fact.. it is proven not to be static everywhere.

 

[Michael]

It's true that we're limited to the extent of our observational capability - the visible universe. What we observe within those constraints is entirely consistent with the predictions of General Relativity and quantum mechanics (and has provided a number of good tests of these models), so we have good reason to think that our models are correct within those bounds.

We can infer that the universe is larger than the observable portion because the evidence indicates the universe has been expanding long enough and fast enough that a proportion of it will have exceeded our light cone of observation, and there are galaxies at the edge of visibility that, due to the expansion of space, are retreating from us at a significant fraction of the speed of light; and, given 13+ billion light years distance, they will by 'now' (i.e. 13+ billion years later), be well outside the boundary of observable universe.

Beyond this, we have only the projections and predictions of our models (that hold good to the limits of what we can observe); if the observable universe is a negligible portion of the whole, or the whole is infinitely large, there is the potential for two types of spatial 'multiverse'. One consists simply of multiple volumes of space isolated from interaction with each other by the expansion of space; these volumes will have varying distributions of matter, but the same, or very similar, physical properties; their effective isolation makes them conceptually separate universes. The other type of multiverse depends on the concept of the rapid inflation hypothesized to have produced our own universe (in the 'big bang'). This model predicts that the ongoing inflation will produce other 'bubble' universes via the same process, though with different physical characteristics.

I don't think I'll ever get used to atheists promoting multiverse theories, and "bang" theories that require "blind faith" in four supernatural (human imagination) constructs.

 

[Shadowprophet]

I don't think I'll ever get used to atheists promoting multiverse theories, and "bang" theories that require "blind faith" in four supernatural (human imagination) constructs.

I realized this a long time ago, those labels that we put on ourselves have little bearing,, just as we could fall from grace, A person labeled atheist could stumble into it.

 

[dad]

I would like to add to this, you do realize gravitational waves are a proven thing now thus making space time rippled and not flat as M theory suggests.

I see a problem with that is far space. If there is no time as we know it in the space there, then we can't know how big or far away anything is. In addition, when we see light bent, how would we know what can bend light out there? Why assume it is gravity as we know it, and that this gravity alone does it to the stars which we know not the size of or distance to?

As for waves of gravity, if a different space and time mix in the far universe produced a ripple, how would we know here the why and how? The basis for claiming a flat universe simply cannot stand. What if the stars were created inside a stretched out space and time? Would that affect how they calculate ripples or a flat universe etc? Look at the basis.

Time is in fact relative, localized in fact.. it is proven not to be static everywhere.

I think the ability to define time, prove time, and detect time in space and etc is very limited when we are talking the far universe. Even here to some extent, as I cannot even find anyone who knows what time is! Most definitions I heard from science so far involve clocks, not time itself.

 

[Michael]

Okay first let's establish some physics, There is Dimensional theory, And multiverse theory. This is legitimate theoretical physics and it is accurate.

Dimensional theory.

1-3 The first through the third dimensions are the dimensions we are already aware of, Height, Width, and Depth. We know these dimensions we live in them and use in our daily lives,

4th and 5th The fourth and fifth dimensions are Time and Space, and that is why you hear those two terms together so often, there is even a physical phenomenon known as space time, And it's really neat, I'd like to tell you all about it, But they are related, one is really the opposite of the other, or like the other side of a flipped coin, To explain, in math, We have terms, a very intermediate equation would be E=mc2 It basically means Energy is equal to mass, times the speed of light. Anyway, In math, one could say S=Ic2 Because Space s, And Time I are related in this same way. If you could travel back in time to yesterday, that is using the 4th dimension, Time,, But lets say you could travel back in time to any location you wanted, Like say, you could travel back in time to witness Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.. This would be Space and Time, Both S and I. Fifth dimension..There is a point to this. I need to work my way up to multiverse theory, but to get there I need to explain dimensional theory..Ultimately, once you get to the sixth dimension.. Which occurs inside an event horizon, Like a black hole. Space and time are so distorted that all events in all times overlap one another, This is known as the sixth dimension. A dimension, That exists outside of this universe. for the record.. A dimension that exits in another realm.. If you are following the progression of dimensional theory. I applaud you. This is all incredibly difficult stuff to grasp, But it is believed, that within a black hole, space time becomes so distorted that it actually does tear open a hole to another universe.
This is when multiverse theory comes into play. Another universe? If there is one other universe, there must be other universes in other dimensions we have yet to discover, Does this not make sense? Multiverse theory, in a nut shell. If this information, (Which will check out against texts books and wikipedia, I know my physics,,) Helps anyone grasp what I'm getting at here, Then this was all worth it, On to my post,, Could heaven be in another dimension/ Universe? It seems like this physical universe we live in, is not the same realm as what God lives in,, no matter how far or how hard we look with telescopes we do not physically see God.. I Determine, Heaven is in another universe, And when we pass on,, We pass away from this universe, and into another one.

What do you guys think? Is Heaven in another Universe?

FYI, you might enjoy this article:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/

 

[Shadowprophet]

FYI, you might enjoy this article:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/

Thank you, I do enjoy that article very much, I had always pondered if quantum gravity was even a possibility.. This article was very cool, Thank you.