Did you know that according to quantum physics, the chair you're sitting on could suddenly, spontaneously change into a golden elephant with wings? Right now. It's very, very unlikey, but it's possible.
Upvote
0
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.
In fiction, anything is possible.
... Having said that, yes I believe it's possible for *beings* to do such things...
No I don't believe quantum mechanics suggests anything like this. Can you explain how aspects within quantum mechanics suggests this ?Did you know that according to quantum physics, the chair you're sitting on could suddenly, spontaneously change into a golden elephant with wings? Right now. It's very, very unlikey, but it's possible.
You are using the term "angel", I'm being generic as that implies a lot in this generic format. I try to often speak the language of the audience, and this forum has a varied audience.Ok this is what I wanted you know. This being the case do you believe that while these Angels are in the form of which you are not experiencing them according to the methods you may detect thgem, that they're still in existence ?
Did you know that according to quantum physics, the chair you're sitting on could suddenly, spontaneously change into a golden elephant with wings? Right now. It's very, very unlikey, but it's possible.
You are using the term "angel", I'm being generic as that implies a lot in this generic format. I try to often speak the language of the audience, and this forum has a varied audience.
Having said that, if such a being were to vanish before me, along with aspects of the environment, etc ... and this really happened in reality and wasn't an illusion or delusion ... I don't see how I could say they weren't still "in existence". So yes I believe they could possibly still be in existence, especially if you saw them again at some later date to confirm they still were in existence. When I close my laptop up, I assume you are still in existence and don't disappear into another reality simply because I'm no longer communicating with you, etc.
"Dematerial" is a purely sci-fi term, AFAIK. So I'll skip that term ...Sure you may be generic, if you like. So now we have these beings who can be detected, while you're experiencing them, but still exist when they vanish. Do you believe you will have a method of detecting these beings while they're not visible/interacting ( while they're in the state of dematerial ) ?
ETA. if you do think they may detected while not visible/interacting, by what method do you think they may be detected ? ( maybe you suggest they're light or some other form we can measure ? )
It's mentioned in a few posts in this thread by the well-respected Wiccan Child:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7388371-13/
The page and the posts are long but you can just search for the word "gold". I think in college classes the more common example for discussion, is that a sun could spontaneously appear in your pocket. I went with the gold elephant just 'cause, what's the difference? Besides, I recently saw you give approval to the idea of our universe being created uncaused from a quantum fluctuation, so who are you to suggest that truth can't be as strange as fiction?
Pop quiz: What was the time frame involved in that example?It's mentioned in a few posts in this thread by the well-respected Wiccan Child:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7388371-13/
The page and the posts are long but you can just search for the word "gold". I think in college classes the more common example for discussion, is that a sun could spontaneously appear in your pocket.
Where did I make this alleged approval?I went with the gold elephant just 'cause, what's the difference? Besides, I recently saw you give approval to the idea of our universe being created uncaused from a quantum fluctuation, so who are you to suggest that truth can't be as strange as fiction?
..."I would assume it may be possible to detect them in some fashion while they were present, whether they were visible or not. How ? I have no ideaAttempts to find methods to detect such things are frequently in the realm of the paranormal, fringe science, and pseudoscience, yes ?
...
To take this idea to a simple application: suppose we are able to identify one day, the presence (and thus the absence of) something akin to this "stuff". Take any person who claims to have the "Holy Spirit" or be "Spirit filled" or "spiritual". All one would need to do, is test for the presence of said "stuff". If it's there, such a claim could be corroborated. If not, oh well.
No more need for a myriad of claims, labels, etc by billions of people. You either "have" it, or you don't, etc and so forth.
Every model of the universe has a hard swallow. What I mean by a hard swallow is a place where the argument cannot hide the fact that there’s something slightly fishy about it. The hard swallow built into science is this business about the Big Bang. Now, let’s give this a little attention here. This is the notion that the universe, for no reason, sprang from nothing in a single instant.
Well, now before we dissect this, notice that this is the limit test for credulity. Whether you believe this or not, notice that it is not possible to conceive of something more unlikely or less likely to be believed! I mean, I defy anyone – it’s just the limit case for unlikelihood, that the universe would spring from nothing in a single instant, for no reason?! – I mean, if you believe that, my family has a bridge across the Hudson River that we’ll give you a lease option for five dollars! It makes no sense. It is in fact no different than saying, “And God said, let there be light”.
And what these philosophers of science are saying is, give us one free miracle, and we will roll from that point forward – from the birth of time to the crack of doom! – just one free miracle, and then it will all unravel according to natural law, and these bizarre equations which nobody can understand but which are so holy in this enterprise. -- Terence McKenna
Pop quiz: What was the time frame involved in that example?
Where did I make this alleged approval?
lol. Look it up.I don't think one was given.
Don't mistake that for an endorsement, approval, or belief.In some thread in this forum within the last few weeks or so you posted a link to an article about it.
lol. Look it up.
Don't mistake that for an endorsement, approval, or belief.
How long to wait for those things to happen. Do your homework.What are you talking about? A time frame for what?
I believe it is very interesting.Sorry, I should have known that about you by now. So what do you believe about cosmology then?
Every model of the universe has a hard swallow. What I mean by a hard swallow is a place where the argument cannot hide the fact that theres something slightly fishy about it. The hard swallow built into science is this business about the Big Bang. Now, lets give this a little attention here. This is the notion that the universe, for no reason, sprang from nothing in a single instant. Well, now before we dissect this, notice that this is the limit test for credulity. Whether you believe this or not, notice that it is not possible to conceive of something more unlikely or less likely to be believed! I mean, I defy anyone its just the limit case for unlikelihood, that the universe would spring from nothing in a single instant, for no reason?! I mean, if you believe that, my family has a bridge across the Hudson River that well give you a lease option for five dollars! It makes no sense. It is in fact no different than saying, And God said, let there be light. And what these philosophers of science are saying is, give us one free miracle, and we will roll from that point forward from the birth of time to the crack of doom! just one free miracle, and then it will all unravel according to natural law, and these bizarre equations which nobody can understand but which are so holy in this enterprise. -- Terence McKenna
How long to wait for those things to happen. Do your homework.
I believe it is very interesting.
Were we working towards a point here, or are you just being argumentative?
Some of the time frames far exceed the estimated time for the heat death of the universe. I won't be here to care about it.I don't see how a time frame is important, but whatever.
I would not have guessed, hence my query.I'm being Socratic.
Indeed. Look at all of the things that have been attributed to deities.The original point was that creatures in universes likely can't be aware of what's outside their universes without outside assistance, because from the creature's point of view, universe means everything there is. And you said something like "anything's possible in fiction".
The general consensus, from what I gather from the comic book community, is that, given time to prepare, Batman will always win. And, <spoilers> that is how the stories play out.More importantly, Superman obviously would win, conditioned upon there being no kryptonite on Earth, because Batman's very rich, and if the fight was pre-arranged for some time in the future Batman could possibly hire geologists or detectives or someone to find it.
I would not have guessed, hence my query.
I know this is directed elsewhere, but still answers some of my own post.It's mentioned in a few posts in this thread by the well-respected Wiccan Child:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7388371-13/
The page and the posts are long but you can just search for the word "gold". I think in college classes the more common example for discussion, is that a sun could spontaneously appear in your pocket. I went with the gold elephant just 'cause, what's the difference? Besides, I recently saw you give approval to the idea of our universe being created uncaused from a quantum fluctuation, so who are you to suggest that truth can't be as strange as fiction?
I didn't say it would be simple. If we had the ability to detect it in such a manner (say, with tech) then using the tech would be "all one would need to do." I didn't say it would be simple. I don't know how to make an iPod, yet all I have to do to turn it on is .... etc and so forth.Ok cool. You suggest you have no idea how you may test for the presence of this invisible being/stuff, and yet suggest it would be a simple test ( "all one would need to do" ) to identify this being/stuff.
I wasn't saying anything about tangibility or anything of the sort. You keep going in these directions I haven't gone lol. I'm stating something much more elementary ... you keep adding things to it. I'm not adding to it, such as dematerializing, other dimensions, other realities, etc. I understand considering possibilities and whatnot to try and explain phenomena ... I get that. I get that we latch onto some ideas where crazy stuff is happening recognizably (QM, for example, which seems to be a go-to for many believers nowadays) ... and try to conceptualize theories to explain what we believe, etc and so forth. However I'm keeping it simple: if it's happening in reality, as an event, then it can arguably be observed/detected/measured/etc in some capacity. With what tool or tech, I have no idea. If it will ever be possible, I have no idea. But I'm not jumping to leaps necessarily of other realities and outside our realities, etc and so forth. The way many believers present such concepts, is that they HAVE to be that way. It's the only possible explanation. And then some special pleading, circular arguments, etc ... and ouila. I don't get that jump.Does this imply that you believe such a test is possible, and if the being/stuff is no longer part of our dimension ( we acknowledge other dimensions ), that scientists should be able to make tangible, something that's intangible ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?