• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

An Empirical Theory Of God (2)

mzungu

INVICTUS
Dec 17, 2010
7,162
250
Earth!
✟32,475.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Note that the article's author represents... the Institute for Creation Research.

Reference fail.


eudaimonia,

Mark
They never cease trying to use cartoon physics in order to prove their point! Ah the path to erudition is truly an arduous one :angel:
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Sorry to necro this thread but I figured Michael would appreciate this article:
"X-Points" --Hidden Portals Found Linking Earth to Sun's Magnetic Field

Cool! Thanks you very much for the link. It's always somewhat discouraging and annoying that the mainstream always "dumbs down" an electromagnetic process to 'magnetism' alone. They also consistently put the magnetic cart in front of the electric horse. Nevermind the fact the whole sun is a giant cathode in space that discharges itself to all sorts of objects in space, including the Earth, they still claim it's a "magnetic field" connection. :(

Well, at least they MENTIONED the movement of electrons, even if they failed to mention the fact that those electrons are actually the SOURCE of that ELECTROMAGNETIC field connection pattern that they keep observing.

Birkeland understood the value and power of empirical experimentation in the lab. Because of that appreciation for empirical physics, he was AT LEAST 100 years ahead of the mainstream, and at the rate they're going, maybe 200 years ahead.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Dark matter is the thread connecting galaxy clusters | Ars Technica

Simulations of the Universe on the largest scales show an unexpected resemblance to nerve cells in the human brain, with galaxy clusters playing the role of the cell body and thinner filaments of matter linking them like axons.

Keep in mind that the mainstream community pretty much ignores the role of currents in space, so IMO it's most likely that the "dark matter' they describe is actually ordinary current flowing through ordinary plasma filaments. Even still I thought this article was interesting because it does show similarities between a human brain and the layout of matter in the universe. That observation isn't the least bit "surprising" IMO. :)
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Keep in mind that the mainstream community pretty much ignores the role of currents in space, so IMO it's most likely that the "dark matter' they describe is actually ordinary current flowing through ordinary plasma filaments.

So how do you explain the lack of emitted light? A plasma carrying charge should radiate some heat, should it not?
 
Upvote 0

mzungu

INVICTUS
Dec 17, 2010
7,162
250
Earth!
✟32,475.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Dark matter is the thread connecting galaxy clusters | Ars Technica



Keep in mind that the mainstream community pretty much ignores the role of currents in space, so IMO it's most likely that the "dark matter' they describe is actually ordinary current flowing through ordinary plasma filaments. Even still I thought this article was interesting because it does show similarities between a human brain and the layout of matter in the universe. That observation isn't the least bit "surprising" IMO. :)
The reason why the mainstream community ignores the role of currents in space is because it is Pseudo-science!
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
The reason why the mainstream community ignores the role of currents in space is because it is Pseudo-science!

No, it's not pseudoscience like inflation and dark energy, it's empirical physics. Currents flow through plasma all the time in the lab and they flow through the plasmas of spacetime as well.

FYI, you might take a gander at the electric sun thread today. Mainstream solar theory was just falsified by new SDO measurements, along with all their "explanations" for corona temperatures and their claims about heavy and light elements staying "mixed" together. Solar physics is about to change dramatically.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
So how do you explain the lack of emitted light? A plasma carrying charge should radiate some heat, should it not?

I don't have any evidence that there is actually any lack of emitted light. We can't even observe whole small stars in distant galaxies only light from the biggest ones, so why would I expect them to be able to clearly observe diffuse light from distant plasma threads in space? If they can't see whole suns the size of our sun from that distance, how in the world would they be able to see diffuse light from distant current carrying threads in space? We do observe the magnetic field effects from Birkeland currents in space.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Paul Becke posted these quotes in another thread and I couldn't resist adding them to this thread because they so eloquently explain my position on awareness and consciousness as fundamental properties of this universe. Thanks Paul.

Max Planck said:
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter - Max Planck, father of quantum physics

"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." - Max Planck

Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve. - Max Planck
 
Upvote 0

sandwiches

Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.
Jun 16, 2009
6,104
124
46
Dallas, Texas
✟29,530.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Paul Becke posted these quotes in another thread and I couldn't resist adding them to this thread because they so eloquently explain my position on awareness and consciousness as fundamental properties of this universe. Thanks Paul.

I disagree with Planck.
We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind.
Why must we assume that?

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness.
I regard consciousness as made of magic chocolate and I regard matter as magic vanilla. So? However we "regard" things is irrelevant and doesn't necessarily bring us closer to reality.

Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature.
What is this ultimate mystery?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
I don't have any evidence that there is actually any lack of emitted light. We can't even observe whole small stars in distant galaxies only light from the biggest ones, so why would I expect them to be able to clearly observe diffuse light from distant plasma threads in space? If they can't see whole suns the size of our sun from that distance, how in the world would they be able to see diffuse light from distant current carrying threads in space? We do observe the magnetic field effects from Birkeland currents in space.

First, you need a lot of mass to produce the observed gravitational lensing and the gravitational effects on galaxy rotation. This would need to be more than just some ephemeral plasma. There would need to be a great deal of it. So I see two problems with your proposal: a lack of absorption as light passes through the plasma, and a lack of light produced as current moves through the plasma. There is a reason they call it dark matter, after all.

And of course we can resolve single stars in other galaxies:
UC Davis News & Information :: Hubble Pictures Show Single Stars in Distant Galaxy
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
First, you need a lot of mass to produce the observed gravitational lensing.....

True. Then again, there have been several 'revelations' related to mass underestimation problems in standard galaxy mass estimation techniques:

Astronomers find that Universe shines twice as bright | SpaceRef - Your Space Reference
Galaxies Demand a Stellar Recount - NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Monster Black Holes Are Most Massive Ever Discovered | Supermassive Black Holes | Biggest Black Holes in the Universe | Space.com

I don't have a lot of confidence in current mass estimation techniques. They clearly stink to high heaven in fact.

and the gravitational effects on galaxy rotation.
Actually, that's not a given. Peratt's PIC simulations produced galaxies with the correct layouts based on EM field influences. I still think there is plenty of "normal" mass that simply isn't accounted for yet.

This would need to be more than just some ephemeral plasma.
[1205.5037] A huge reservoir of ionized gas around the Milky Way: Accounting for the Missing Mass?

Not necessarily. There would simply need to be a lot of it. Like I said however, I'm quite confident that we simply underestimate a lot of the normal mass in any given galaxy. Too many studies in recent years have shown that we're still discovering a lot of "normal' matter in and around our galaxy.

There would need to be a great deal of it. So I see two problems with your proposal: a lack of absorption as light passes through the plasma, and a lack of light produced as current moves through the plasma. There is a reason they call it dark matter, after all.

And of course we can resolve single stars in other galaxies:
UC Davis News & Information :: Hubble Pictures Show Single Stars in Distant Galaxy

From your own article:

The high-resolution images also show that NGC 3379 contains variable stars, which change in brightness over time. Some stars clearly seen on one date image were no longer visible three months later.

Sure, we can observe a few LARGE stars that are extremely bright, but we have to "estimate" the small ones we can't see directly. Apparently we grossly underestimate the amount of smaller stars we can't observe directly. It's therefore not the least bit surprising to me that a diffuse current carrying plasma wouldn't necessarily be shining brightly on Earth. Astronomers have even been surprised in recent years about the amount of light that is absorbed.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
I disagree with Planck.

Why am I not surprised? :)

Why must we assume that?
"We" (including you) don't necessarily have to do that, but Max and I do. ;) Keep in mind that many theories and authors have suggested that consciousness itself could be a 'quantum' process.

Quantum Consciousness

In other words the energy flowing between particles and EM field influences play a role in the formation of consciousness and awareness. It's more of an 'energy exchange' process not simply a function of matter. Some folks take the idea a bit further, suggesting that consciousness is an intrinsic feature in nature. From that link on quantum consciousness:

Conscious matter


The American physicist Nick Herbert has been even more specific on the similarities between Quantum Theory and consciousness. Herbert thinks that consciousness is a pervasive process in nature. Mind is as fundamental a component of the universe as elementary particles and forces. Mind can be detected by three features of quantum theory: randomness, thinglessness (objects acquire attributes only once they are observed) and interconnectedness (John Bell's discovery that once two particles have interacted they remain connected). Herbert thinks that these three features of inert matter can account for three basic features of mind: free will, essential ambiguity, and deep psychic connectedness. Scientists may be vastly underestimating the quantity of consciousness in the universe.


I regard consciousness as made of magic chocolate and I regard matter as magic vanilla. So? However we "regard" things is irrelevant and doesn't necessarily bring us closer to reality.
In Planck's case, it might. We really don't know "exactly" what consciousness is, although I would argue that we've learned to "control" or at least influence it with external EM fields and such. Whether or not it's intrinsic to the universe itself seems to be the question.

What is this ultimate mystery?
I think in Max Planck's case the mystery is the 'force' that is responsible for 'creating' atoms. He believes it to be "consciousness". Paul had a link from an author that suggests that the atom itself has the earmarks of an intelligently designed machine.

Does the atom have a designer? When science and spirituality meet

Here is a link to Paul's whole post by the way. It contains lot's of good stuff IMO.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7658994-81/#post60924692
 
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Perhaps my eyes are going, but at no point in the article does it say that the filament carries current, or that it is even specifically a "plasma filament".


eudaimonia,

Mark

That particular connection was made *this* year:

Milky Way is Surrounded by Hot Gas, Says NASA | WebProNews

A team of 5 astronomers using data from the Chandra, the European Space Agency’s XMM-Newton space observatory, and Japan’s Suzaku satellite have determined that the temperature of the halo is between 1 million and 2.3 million kelvins.
The easiest and simplest way to explain such high sustained temperatures in plasma is with "current". Furthermore it's the current that generates the magnetic fields that act to "pinch" the plasma into a "filament" in the first place.
 
Upvote 0

mzungu

INVICTUS
Dec 17, 2010
7,162
250
Earth!
✟32,475.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Goddard Multimedia Item 11108 - X-Ray Nova Reveals a New Black Hole in Our Galaxy

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a011100/a011108/G2012-103_Flaring_BH__FINAL_ipod_sm.mp4

The video link above is about a 12MB download, but it's worth the time to download it IMO. There's a point in the video where they show actual time lapsed images of the galaxy in x-ray Swift images. The various areas of current carrying plasma threads 'light up" in x-ray, much the way areas of a human brain 'light up" in PET scan images. We can actually see the physical effect of the currents as they pass through the plasmas of spacetime, lighting up and heating up the plasma as they pass through.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Upvote 0

DennisTate

Newbie
Site Supporter
Mar 31, 2012
10,742
1,665
Nova Scotia, Canada
Visit site
✟424,894.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "An Empirical Theory Of God"

If God has existed for infinite time in the past and actually choreographed an infinite number of Big Bang events over infinite time in the past....then I suppose that investing all that effort into the creation would tend to make the Creator highly emotionally attached to this creation?????


Could God the Father be the most emotional being in the universe?

https://www.facebook.com/notes/fans...otional-being-in-the-universe/379956208748564

“Many times, the broken notes from earth caused all of heaven to weep with joy as they beheld My Father being touched. A few holy ones struggling to express their adoration for Him has many times caused Him to weep. Every time I see My brethren touch Him with true worship, it makes the pain and grief I knew on the cross seem like a small price to pay. Nothing brings Me more joy than when you worship My Father. I went to the cross so that you could worship Him through Me. It is in this worship that you, the Father and I are all one.
(Pastor Rick Joyner, Chapter 15, The Vision)


John 5:17
But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
If God has existed for infinite time in the past and actually choreographed an infinite number of Big Bang events over infinite time in the past....then I suppose that investing all that effort into the creation would tend to make the Creator highly emotionally attached to this creation?????


Could God the Father be the most emotional being in the universe?

While I have no certainty of any number of "bangs" ever occurring in a distant past, I have absolutely no doubt of the power of God's unconditional love for his creation.

Welcome to the conversation by the way.
 
Upvote 0