Big Bang ushers in the heavens and the earth...?

Oh space time!

I think I heard something about that. I think it was that Time on Earth is behind the times compared to the rest of the Universe.

 

Time is Relative as example TIME DILATION.

The further away from and the faster any object is or travels from a Gravity Well....such as the Earth's....causes Time Dilation.

We have a number of GPS Satellites in orbit and we have to constantly update and change their internal clocks due to Time Dilation.

AboveAlpha

 

Oh, Time Dilation. And I think the velocity of the universe's expiation is slowing the passage of time down.

Is that what you see?

 

Jump to: navigation, search
Time dilation explains why two working clocks will report different times after different accelerations. For example, ISS astronauts return from missions having aged slightly less than they would have been if they had remained on Earth, and GPS satellites work because they adjust for similar bending of spacetime to coordinate with systems on Earth.[1]In the theory of relativity, time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or differently situated from gravitational masses.

An accurate clock at rest with respect to one observer may be measured to tick at a different rate when compared to a second observer's own equally accurate clocks. This effect arises neither from technical aspects of the clocks nor from the fact that signals need time to propagate, but from the nature of spacetime itself.

LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

AboveAlpha

 

Yes, I know about the Wikipedia article on Time Dilation. I just came from there. Sorry it took you almost 45 minutes to look it up.

I don't mean to be rude but how are you sleeping? I see you're doing that thing again where you post all night and day.

 

Actually that was sick of me to ask, because I'm filled in and already know the answer.

 

Oh I got some sleep and I am doing this purposely as I can't sleep on planes unless I am real tired.

Plus I am in top physical condition and I am capable of not eating or sleeping for days withut much issue.....although it sucks in my inability to get drunk.

AboveAlpha

 

Okay, I didn't know the answer...

Well, yuck on that! I'm going to bed after a nice supper.

But, I don't drink so you'll not get any pity from me on that.

 

Yes I see your point, I dont see the point of Above A and Wag (who seem to be one and the same). Its not that I seek to suppress the other ideas, its simply that I have read and dont think they are as valid as other theories and ideas. I support the right and I even urge other beliefs using science and other disciplines to support the bible and other sacred ancient texts. Because in the end we are all seeking truth and the only truth is the mind of the creator, be it an advanced race, the God we know personally, or the any number of deities born from the mind of man. Perhaps all this is feeding into the eternal circle of rebirth of the self, and the eventual birth of a new kind universe and reality.

reva

 

You might be seeking truth.

But I and the vast majority of others are seeks FACTS.

Big difference.

AboveAlpha

 

Hahhaaaaa,...
I assume you are kidding alpha.
LOL

He first insists that Multiple Universes exist in some infinite number of Universes, and that the Copenhagen Interpretation is wrong, though it is used in Quantum Physics as a basis for what happens.

The issue is about "boundeness," and concerns whether the Universe is "finite" or "infinite."

Note:

One of the presently unanswered questions about the Universe is whether it is infinite or finite in extent. Mathematically, the question of whether the Universe is infinite or finite is referred to as boundedness. An infinite universe (unbounded metric space) means that there are points arbitrarily far apart: for any distance d, there are points that are of a distance at least d apart. A finite universe is a bounded metric space, where there is some distance d such that all points are within distance d of each other. The smallest such d is called the diameter of the Universe, in which case the Universe has a well-defined "volume" or "scale."

 

Oh LOL, AboveAlpha and I appear to be the same? Well, in the last few posts, I guess that would seem to be an unnatural conversation.

Well, I'm flattered to be in any way associated with his greatness, but I'm not AboveAlpha. I woke up today after a nice rest. AboveAlpha got bupkis.

 

That was a great point and one that needs to be emphasized for the atheists and the medieval Bible believers both.

That science can support Genesis is my point.
It means that atheists, like Bill Maher, for instance, need to stop attacking religion and the Bible, and focus of supplying a better readership and correlation with Science, rather than ridicule God and the Bible.

As far as the "Above A and Wag," I don't see what you mean??

 

Facts are things we know are true, because we all see them the same way.

Science is built upon this idea, that by empirical approaches, using experiments, Facts we can all see can be found and agreed to.
Hence, only truth exists for us and we use facts as things we all recognize as a truth.

 

Oh,...

He meant you too guys.
Yeah.
You start off laughing at what medieval people thought the Bible was saying and you argue against medieval ideas like you think it makes you look smart.

 

I seriously don't know what you're talking about. What medieval ideas are you referring to? You know in the middle ages they had chamber pots. Great invention! LOL.

 

Hahaaaaa...

I meant that medieval Bible interpretations did not know that Evolution Theory was going to show people that we all came from 22 now extinct humans, so they NEVER even thought for a second that the 22 names if the Genesis genealogy could be referring to that line of ascent for Modern Homo sapiens.

The people who learned that old interpretation still use it today and argue with you as if it makes sense still.

 

Oh that! I don't believe your gallery of men is representative of reality.

The Bible is NOT referring to evolution. That Genealogy in the Bible is all the members of a family of Homo Sapiens, living in the Middle East, several thousand years ago.

There were Egyptians, also modern humans, living along the Nile river thousands of years before Adam and Eve ever left their garden.

The real story is that thousands(I'm not doing the math?) of forgotten generations passed on by. Each with their own religion and traditions that pre-date anything in the Bible. No one ever thinks about their story, but their migrations helped modern humans span the globe.

 

You think like a Medieval person and did not read with comprehension that the story says the first man to ever appear had 22 future kinds of people contribute as they died out.
The story is a tale of ALL mankind appearing and it details a Table of the Nations which we can trace back today, too.

It seems the story is about the progression of mankind from the first man through a list of all others to follow.

 

Oh, believe me I'm not thinking like a medieval person. I'm thinking like a modern person. But some say that people don't change that much, the times change.

The real story of mankind involves a small ape-like creature coming down from that tree and not getting eaten by a predator.

 

Oh, and by the way, that tree wasn't the Tree of Life!!! It was the tree of ennui. LOL.

 

No.... I was quite serious and already sent a link to that discussion to my friend. I am glad that I did because in a search about a year ago I got the impression somehow that Dan had written about eight or nine titles already. I was wrong..... but he is working on book number two........ .and I really did think that AboveAlpha's explanation........... (partly because AA is an agnostic).... might just get him started in an interesting line of research.


http://www.amazon.com/God-Evolution-Implications-Darwins-Fundamentalism/dp/0977604446

God and Evolution? - The Implications of Darwin's Theory for Fundamentalism, the Bible and the Meaning of Life by Daniel J Samson.....

(That initial J. can be rather important)… in searching for books by Dan!

 

Dave.....I have tried to explain to you that OBSERVATION OF QUANTA simply locks in VALUE AND FUNCTION.

QUANTUM PARTICLE/WAVE FORMS MUST FIRST EXIST BEFORE OBSERVATION CAN OCCUR!!!

Thus you ideology that a GOD had to exist to first make an OBSERVATION in order to create the Universe is FLAWED LOGIC as the QUANTA HAD TO FIRST EXISTS BEFORE THEY COULD BE OBSERVED!!!

OBSERVATION DOES NOT CREATE QUANTA!!!!

OBSERVATION OF QUANTA LOCKS THEM INTO ONE SPECIFIC UNIVERSAL REALITY OUT OF THE INFINITE IN NUMBER DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL STATES OF REALITY EXISTING IN A MULTIVERSAL SYSTEM!!!

The behavior of QUANTUM MECHANICS BACKS THIS!!!

The Universe is FINITE.....as there cannot exists SPACE-TIME without Matter and Energy...5% of the Universe and Dark Matter and Dark Energy.....being a part of it......95% a part of it.

As well Dark Energy EXPANDING IT!!

AboveAlpha

 

I don't doubt that the Wave Functions existed before the materialization into Reality occurred.
I just say that Science actual supports a Pre-Big Bang observer had to exist which de facto describes a "creator."

 

I like Bohms ideas, of which he wrote a book, involving the Implicate Order. And explicate order. If true, this would change things, and get rid of the parts of quantum mechanics that doesn't make much sense. The implicate order is a much simpler, more organic, more realistic idea as to reality. And one could then understand, make coherent models of the quantum level of reality. And Feynman would have been wrong, in that the human brain can understand the quantum level. And physics would then be applicable to biology, there would be a consistency from the smallest level to the largest. Evolution then would be dependent upon the Implicate Order, and self organizing systems would all come from this Order.