Multiple Realities Scientifically Proven; Adam Created, without, then with, Animals, is Possible.

[StevenMerten]

In the 'Miracle of the Dancing Sun', in Fatima 1917, 60,000 people observed the reality of the sun dancing in the sky. Other people on earth, observed the reality of the sun in its usual position. Many 'Realism' scientists would see this as physically impossible. Now, with this new scientific proof of two different realities, occurring during the same period in physical time, in the lab, we see that the two different realities observed in the Fatima miracle, are scientifically proven to be capable of physically happening.

Miracle of the Sun - Wikipedia​

 

[StevenMerten]

Do We Live in a 'Peek A Boo' Universe?
Does the universe only exists when conscious man is looking at it?
The Great Einstein vs Bohr Debate

​

 

[chevyontheriver]

There is a lot of nonsense surrounding the idea of multiverses - much of it propagated by SciFi (which no longer adheres to the rules of early SciFi writers like Asimov, who was a scientist, but is more of a techy mysticism). Some scientists question whether the multiverse is legitimate science.

The conflation of scientific terms happens a lot. "Energy" is probably the biggest offender. In science, energy has a rigorously defined and very specific meaning. Therefore, when mystics talk about spiritual energy, they're spouting nonsense that has no connection to the scientific meaning of the word.

So, it doesn't mean anything you can imagine must be happening in a parallel universe. It doesn't mean your doppelganger is right next to you, but in a different dimension. It definitely doesn't mean what was proposed in the OP.

What does it mean? Think of rolling a die. It could result in any number between 1 and 6. The multiverse hypothesis states that the die gives all those answers, with each one branching off into a different universe. So, if they exist, we would never have any way of knowing it. Unless that can be overcome, the idea violates the key scientific principle of falsifiability, and is not legitimate.

I think the idea of a multiverse was invented because the one universe we know anything about appears almost to have been designed this way. That would be unpalatable for atheists so they came up with infinite universes where we just got lucky enough to live in a functional one.

Funny thing though, there is no way to prove all of these other parallel universes exist. It isn't exactly science to postulate unobservable untestable phenomena. But to an atheist it is preferable to the universe telling the glory of God.

 

[StevenMerten]

I think the idea of a multiverse was invented because the one universe we know anything about appears almost to have been designed this way. That would be unpalatable for atheists so they came up with infinite universes where we just got lucky enough to live in a functional one.

Funny thing though, there is no way to prove all of these other parallel universes exist. It isn't exactly science to postulate unobservable untestable phenomena. But to an atheist it is preferable to the universe telling the glory of God.

Hello Chevy,
I agree with you. Science cannot even prove that there was a universe before Adam opened his eyes. If there was such proof, Albert Einstein would have thought of it. Einstein had decades of sleepless nights trying to prove the universe exists without conscious man to observe it. The only thing that can be proven, is that the universe does not exist without conscious man to observe it. The universe not existing when man is not looking at it, is Creationism, minus five days. '

So do Atheist 'Realism', 13.8 billion year from creation, scientists readily accept 'Father of Quantum Theory', Neils Bohr's proof of no universe without man, as a legitimate theory? They hate it and attack it and want to destroy it. All this multiverse, strings, many worlds, goofy stuff is all readily accepted, why not Creation starting when Adam opened his eyes, as Neils Bohr's proof indicates? Because atheist 'Realism' scientists hate God.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Hello Chevy,
I agree with you. Science cannot even prove that there was a universe before Adam opened his eyes. If there was such proof, Albert Einstein would have thought of it. Einstein had decades of sleepless nights trying to prove the universe exists without conscious man to observe it. The only thing that can be proven, is that the universe does not exist without conscious man to observe it. The universe not existing when man is not looking at it, is Creationism, minus five days. '

So do Atheist 'Realism', 13.8 billion year from creation, scientists readily accept 'Father of Quantum Theory', Neils Bohr's proof of no universe without man, as a legitimate theory? They hate it and attack it and want to destroy it. All this multiverse, strings, many worlds, goofy stuff is all readily accepted, why not Creation starting when Adam opened his eyes, as Neils Bohr's proof indicates? Because atheist 'Realism' scientists hate God.

But here is what is wrong with the idea that the universe did not exist without Man to observe it, Bohr aside. God is the necessary observer. And on each day God observed what He had created and said it is good. It isn't just humans who can be the observers.

 

[StevenMerten]

But here is what is wrong with the idea that the universe did not exist without Man to observe it, Bohr aside. God is the necessary observer. And on each day God observed what He had created and said it is good. It isn't just humans who can be the observers.

Hello Chevy,
You have to watch Dr. Quantum on the double slit experiment. It is awesome! Electrons do not materialize into a physical particle state, until man looks at them. God is already observant of the electron, while scientists preform this experiment. It is only when man observes the electron, which is the moment the electron materializes into a physical state form.

Miraculous! Right!

 

[chevyontheriver]

Hello Chevy,
You have to watch Dr. Quantum on the double slit experiment. It is awesome! Electrons do not materialize into a physical particle state, until man looks at them. God is already observant of the electron, while scientists preform this experiment. It is only when man observes the electron, which is the moment the electron materializes into a physical state form.

Miraculous! Right!

It is not that MAN is necessary, but that an observer is necessary. A Klingon would suffice. And God would suffice as well. Which means that the universe could exist without humans as observers. That's my point.

 

[StevenMerten]

It is not that MAN is necessary, but that an observer is necessary. A Klingon would suffice. And God would suffice as well. Which means that the universe could exist without humans as observers. That's my point.

The Strange Link between the Human Mind and Quantum Physics​

Quantum mechanics is the best theory we have for describing the world at the nuts-and-bolts level of atoms and subatomic particles. Perhaps the most renowned of its mysteries is the fact that the outcome of a quantum experiment can change depending on whether or not we choose to measure some property of the particles involved.

When this "observer effect" was first noticed by the early pioneers of quantum theory, they were deeply troubled. It seemed to undermine the basic assumption behind all science: that there is an objective world out there, irrespective of us. If the way the world behaves depends on how – or if – we look at it, what can "reality" really mean?

The most famous intrusion of the mind into quantum mechanics comes in the "double-slit experiment"

Some of those researchers felt forced to conclude that objectivity was an illusion, and that consciousness has to be allowed an active role in quantum theory. To others, that did not make sense. Surely, Albert Einstein once complained, the Moon does not exist only when we look at it!

The strange link between the human mind and quantum physics​

Hello Chevy,
I do not think you realize the Awesome ramifications of scientific proof showing that man's consciousness, and the universe, are tied together. The universe is not matter, energy and empty space coming into existence 13.8 billion years ago; Rather the universe more resembles an illusion of what ever God wants us visualize as reality, at any given time.

An obvious ramification is that Creation could have come into existence, thousands of years ago, when Adam first opened his eyes.

The big break through, is in the understanding of miracles from God. When an electron is in wave form, (when man is not looking at it), it is not in any one given form or given place. In wave form, subatomic particles are in a state of all possibilities. It is only at the moment that man sees subatomic particles, that a specific reality is chosen. Each, of all possibilities, comes with its own past. Thus we can switch from a past without animals, to a past with animals, even after Adam was already walking the earth.

So basically, what we see as reality, is only what God wants us to see as reality. Was it water, or was it wine, in those jars at the Wedding of Cana? In the Miracle of the Dancing Sun, God can give 60,000 observers a dancing sun, while the rest of the world observers, see the sun in its usual position.

Can you see how the scientifically proven way in which subatomic particles act, opens the a window for the world to understand how God works miracles?

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Strange Link between the Human Mind and Quantum Physics​

Quantum mechanics is the best theory we have for describing the world at the nuts-and-bolts level of atoms and subatomic particles. Perhaps the most renowned of its mysteries is the fact that the outcome of a quantum experiment can change depending on whether or not we choose to measure some property of the particles involved.

When this "observer effect" was first noticed by the early pioneers of quantum theory, they were deeply troubled. It seemed to undermine the basic assumption behind all science: that there is an objective world out there, irrespective of us. If the way the world behaves depends on how – or if – we look at it, what can "reality" really mean?

The most famous intrusion of the mind into quantum mechanics comes in the "double-slit experiment"

Some of those researchers felt forced to conclude that objectivity was an illusion, and that consciousness has to be allowed an active role in quantum theory. To others, that did not make sense. Surely, Albert Einstein once complained, the Moon does not exist only when we look at it!

The strange link between the human mind and quantum physics​

Hello Chevy,
I do not think you realize the Awesome ramifications of scientific proof showing that man's consciousness, and the universe, are tied together. The universe is not matter, energy and empty space coming into existence 13.8 billion years ago; Rather the universe more resembles an illusion of what ever God wants us visualize as reality, at any given time.

An obvious ramification is that Creation could have come into existence, thousands of years ago, when Adam first opened his eyes.

The big break through, is in the understanding of miracles from God. When an electron is in wave form, (when man is not looking at it), it is not in any one given form or given place. In wave form, subatomic particles are in a state of all possibilities. It is only at the moment that man sees subatomic particles, that a specific reality is chosen. Each, of all possibilities, comes with its own past. Thus we can switch from a past without animals, to a past with animals, even after Adam was already walking the earth.

So basically, what we see as reality, is only what God wants us to see as reality. Was it water, or was it wine, in those jars at the Wedding of Cana? In the Miracle of the Dancing Sun, God can give 60,000 observers a dancing sun, while the rest of the world observers, see the sun in its usual position.

Can you see how the scientifically proven way in which subatomic particles act, opens the a window for the world to understand how God works miracles?

I'm with Einstein.

 

[StevenMerten]

I'm with Einstein.

Albert Einstein (Determinism) says,​

"God does not throw dice!"
​

Neils Bohr (Chance) replies,​

"Nor is it our business to prescribe to God how He should run the world."
​

Hello Chevy,
At the macro level, the world (universe) seems to perfectly fit the mold of 13.8 billion years from creation. However, at the Quantum (subatomic particle) level, it is obvious that God is continually making 'chance' decisions all over the place. Atheist scientists say, 'the universe' chooses. Ya, right! (roll my eyes). In wave form, subatomic particles are in a nonphysical state, in all possible locations. Who do you think chooses the location, and form, subatomic particles take, when man looks at them? God or 'the universe'?

Neils Bohr
"It is meaningless to assign Reality to the universe in the absence of observation; in the intervals between measurement, quantum systems truly exist as a fuzzy mixture of all possible properties​

Electrons, protons and neutrons are the building blocks of everything in the universe. If you have a soup of 'all possible properties', existing in all possible places, until man observes it, and only then do electrons, protons and neutrons materialize into physical form, how does this give us a highly precise universe, when man is not looking at it? It does not. We have soup, that God turns into our reality, when we look, touch, smell, hear, experience our reality, which God Created for us.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Albert Einstein (Determinism) says,​

"God does not throw dice!"
​

Neils Bohr (Chance) replies,​

"Nor is it our business to prescribe to God how He should run the world."
​

Hello Chevy,
At the macro level, the world (universe) seems to perfectly fit the mold of 13.8 billion years from creation. However, at the Quantum (subatomic particle) level, it is obvious that God is continually making 'chance' decisions all over the place. Atheist scientists say, 'the universe' chooses. Ya, right! (roll my eyes). In wave form, subatomic particles are in a nonphysical state, in all possible locations. Who do you think chooses the location, and form, subatomic particles take, when man looks at them? God or 'the universe'?

Neils Bohr
"It is meaningless to assign Reality to the universe in the absence of observation; in the intervals between measurement, quantum systems truly exist as a fuzzy mixture of all possible properties​

Electrons, protons and neutrons are the building blocks of everything in the universe. If you have a soup of 'all possible properties', existing in all possible places, until man observes it, and only then do electrons, protons and neutrons materialize into physical form, how does this give us a highly precise universe, when man is not looking at it? It does not. We have soup, that God turns into our reality, when we look, touch, smell, hear, experience our reality, which God Created for us.

And again, Man is not the essential observer. God is, and he says that what He created is good. Which is why we can trust that the sun will rise in the morning, because God made it so, observed it, and said it is good.

 

[StevenMerten]

And again, Man is not the essential observer. God is, and he says that what He created is good. Which is why we can trust that the sun will rise in the morning, because God made it so, observed it, and said it is good.

Hello Chevy,
And God did this, thousands of years ago, on the week Adam was made, right?

 

[jerry kelso]

I don't pretend to understand the science behind this. But I've been reading comic books my entire life so the idea of a multiverse isn't a new thing for me. It's surprising how fresh an idea it is for some people though, even in a fictional story.

So I'm not prepared to support or oppose the idea of a multiverse.

Anyway. From a theological standpoint, I think it could make sense. If God wants to maximize probabilities and literally watch them unfold in real time, a multiverse is definitely on the table. Partly, I can accept the idea of a multiverse because God is a creative God. I think this could line up with His revealed character. But mostly, I want to believe that a better world than this one could exist.

the colors blend,

1. There is a better world than this one that exists and that is Heaven where Go d dwells and where Christ is building us mansions John 14:1-6.

2. Colossians 1:16 shows there are principalities and thrones other than earth in the universe.
This planet as the physical Kingdom of Heaven is out of harmony stemming from Adam’s sin in the garden of Eden.
1 Corinthians 15:28 God will become all in all once the son gives the Kingdom back. Revelation 21 shows the New Heaven and the New Earth. Earth will be completely free of sin and death etc.
So if God will become all in all in earth’s restoration physically and spiritually it may be considered as an implication that the rest of the universe concerning sin is perfect. The Bible doesn’t express details about this. Jerry Kelso

 

[jerry kelso]

Creationism = Quantum Mechanics = Neils Bohr VS. Albert Einstein = Realism = Atheism
​

This is my CF thread over in the Creationist Forum, if anyone is interested in watching some videos on the greatest scientific debate of all time, between Neils Bohr and Albert Einstein. Neils Bohr is the scientist who discovered the electron rings on the atom. Neils Bohr is considered to be, "The Father of Quantum Mechanics". Quantum Mechanics is the study of the actions of subatomic particles. Neils Bohr had to 'save Quantum Theory', from Albert Einstein who was drastically out to discredit it. Einstein and Bohr were good friends and colleges. Still this huge argument over whether or not the universe exists, when man is not looking at it, raged on, throughout their lives.

The universe not existing without Adam-kind, conscious observers, in it, is a very Creationist position.​

stevenmerten,

1. Heaven’s not in view but the Bible says it exists John 14:6; Revelation 21 and many others. Jerry kelso

 

[thecolorsblend]

the colors blend,

1. There is a better world than this one that exists and that is Heaven where Go d dwells and where Christ is building us mansions John 14:1-6.

2. Colossians 1:16 shows there are principalities and thrones other than earth in the universe.
This planet as the physical Kingdom of Heaven is out of harmony stemming from Adam’s sin in the garden of Eden.
1 Corinthians 15:28 God will become all in all once the son gives the Kingdom back. Revelation 21 shows the New Heaven and the New Earth. Earth will be completely free of sin and death etc.
So if God will become all in all in earth’s restoration physically and spiritually it may be considered as an implication that the rest of the universe concerning sin is perfect. The Bible doesn’t express details about this. Jerry Kelso

Do you know what “non-sequitur” means?

LMGTFY

 

[StevenMerten]

Do subatomic particles, 13 billion light years from earth, know when man is looking at them, and thus switch from nonphysical wave form, into a physical particle, to make up a star, for man to see? Amazingly, using Einstein's experiment (designed to prove this is not the case), science has proven that, Yes They Do! Wow! Right!

Albert Einstein hated Neil's Bohr's Quantum Theory which indicates the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it. Einstein could not come up with an experiment to prove his 'Realism', philosophy, which states that the universe probably does still exist when man is not looking at it. Albert Einstein could not believe that subatomic particles, 13 billion light years away from earth, could know when man on earth is looking at them, and thus transform into a physical star. Albert Einstein came up with the EPR experiment to, at least disprove, Bohr's Quantum Theory, that the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it.

Albert Einstein died in 1955 without the technology to preform his EPR experiment. Of course every physicist in the world has been working on trying to preform Einsteins experiment, in order to see who was right, Einstein or Bohr. In 1964 the Bell experiment was successfully preformed on one part of Einstein's EPR experiment, and then in 1997 a different part of Einstein's EPR experiment was successfully preformed. The results were two wins for Neil's Bohr and his, Quantum Theory that the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it. Still 0 wins for Albert Einstein and his, now on life support, 'Realism' philosophy.

What does this all mean for Creationists? Entangled particles, even 13 billion light years apart, and separated in physical time by 13 billion years, will both instantaneously switch from nonphysical wave form, to a matching position and form, when man looks at either one of the entangled pair. When a subatomic particle is in its wave form (when man is not looking at it) it is in a state of all possible realities. When man looks at it, God (or as Atheist scientists say, 'The Universe') has to select which reality will be chosen, and the proper form and position of both the entangled particles materialize, even if they are separated by 13 billion light years, and 13 billion years into the past. Now that is a pretty Powerful, and very flexible, tool for our Omni-Potent Creator and miracle worker God, to possess.

 

[jerry kelso]

Do you know what “non-sequitur” means?

LMGTFY

the colors blend,

1. Have you read all our posts? Do you understand biblical hermeneutics?
You are trying to say I am saying something that has nothing to do with his position.
He won’t try to refute any scripture I have given or give a scripture with a strong implication.
The perception he reflects is that the scripture should agree with science and that is not true.
Now I have just finished posting him to explain by scripture that his position harmonizes with it in case I missed something.
Feel free if you can explain his position better and how it harmonizes with creation and why you think I am out of touch according to your accusation of being non-sequitor. Thank you Jerry Kelso

 

[StevenMerten]

So how many people knew that the biggest argument in all of sciences history, was the Neils Bohr vs. Albert Einstien's, discussion on whether or not the universe exists when man is not looking at it?

 

[jerry kelso]

So how many people knew that the biggest argument in all of sciences history, was the Neils Bohr vs. Albert Einstien's, discussion on whether or not the universe exists when man is not looking at it?

stevenmerten,

1. Did you know that Einstein believed in God creating but couldn’t believe in him for salvation because he couldn’t understand human suffering?

2. If you can’t defend your position by the scriptures it’s just a theory.
You have shown it works with your context but not the biblical context.
So why do you think the biggest argument between Bohr and Einstein is relevant? Jerry Kelso

 

[StevenMerten]

stevenmerten,

1. Did you know that Einstein believed in God creating but couldn’t believe in him for salvation because he couldn’t understand human suffering?

2. If you can’t defend your position by the scriptures it’s just a theory.
You have shown it works with your context but not the biblical context.
So why do you think the biggest argument between Bohr and Einstein is relevant? Jerry Kelso

Ok, Jerry, please explain miracles, at the subatomic level.