Scientific Proof that God Exists

Holographic Universe or Computer Simulation? Big Bang or God?

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Postby wetsystems » Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:30 pm

Dan, whoops... sorry for that embarrassing post - I wrote it after sitting at a bar having an intimate tete a tete with a certain Mister Jack Daniel. Hey- it happens, no?

Best,
cs
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain


Re: Scientific Proof that God Exists

Postby Nemo » Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:58 pm

ryguy wrote:
I've always liked the "Anthropic Principle" argument - that the degree of how fine-tuned our world is for the delicate balance required to generate life represents a degree of evidence for a guiding force. It's much more involved than the simple statement I present here, but it's a powerful argument, in my mind. I find it really funny when I'm talking over religion with someone who is what you would normally call a "non-believer"....yet they recognize particular statistically signficant patterns in their life, but they struggle to explain it away as coincidence...
-Ry


Any universe we could exist in and ask questions about would seem as if it were designed but that may just be because it's the only one possible for us to be asking the questions in.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re:

Postby Nemo » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:01 pm

You Can Call Me Ray wrote:With regard to the Hebrew letters, I am certain Caryn is aware of the "coincidence" (not) that there are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet and there are also 22 pairs of asexual (i.e. shared by both sexes) chromosomes in the human DNA structure. The 23rd pair determines sexuality. Could it be that someone (?) designated the Hebrews as the "Chosen People" for no other reason than the science of our human structure is encoded within the letters of their language?Ray


But between "coded" by something that may not exist for some elaborate historical purpose which may not exist, and simply meaningless "coincidence", simple coincidence wins out.
Last edited by Nemo on Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Re:

Postby Nemo » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:19 pm

caryn wrote:I’d like to offer something too, the reason why I find Ray’s theory of particular interest. This is taken from an email I sent to Ray during some of our discussions.

A brief outline: In 1978 in my late teens I had a profound experience, which eventually sparked my interest in Qabalah. This is a very basic synopsis of that experience. There was an interesting manifest component to this experience – witnessed by my mother. The 'sound' element is important, but a little long and complicated for a forum post.

Synopsis: "I went to bed and fell asleep. I became conscious and found myself in ‘outer’ space. In the far distance I could see a vast brightly illuminated area. An entity to my right speaks - “Be calm, all is well - this is I Am”. We arrive at the periphery of the illuminated area. We wait for a while, and then the Light absorbs me. I lose self-awareness.

I became self-aware again and found myself back at the periphery, the entity still at my right-hand side. Words are shared. I turn and we (the entity and I) begin to move. I became acutely aware of movement – the motion of the Cosmos, and sound.

This is part of what I heard:

‘I’ = the first point of Self-realisation. Mind.

‘Am’= the physical representation of the ‘I’.

‘I Am’ the complete living organism – Mind and Matter. Self-awareness (Matter in Motion)."

There can be no experience of ‘Being’ without both components – Mind and Matter – Matter in Motion.


"I", the essence of existence rather than nothingness can only exist if space exists or has been created. Motion, change, the very act of creation I would say, energy, etc. cannot exist if only space exists. Time must exist before any of these things can even be. I tend to see time as another indispensible dimension of space. It is also completely necessary for anything to exist and for all motion, change and energy. I assume that for the Universe to have started it's creation (the beginning of space) at least an instant of time was required in order for even that change to take place. From the initial point of creation onwards, time is necessary. If time did not also exist as a fundamental dimension of the universe then it would have been arrested as an infinitesimally small point and that is where the development of space would have stopped too.

This is probably an untenable situation and once started (initially created) the sudden and continued expansion of the universe, existence of time, and the subsequent "crystallization" out of matter, energy, the unifying forces and "laws" of the Universe were all probably inevitable once creation started.

But what started creation? A random quantum fluctuation or something else?

To me, just based on the meanings of the words and not the personal meanings experienced by Caryn "I Am" would represent "I", a fundamental and initial sense of self realization and "Am", a confirmation that this self does truly exist, within space-time say.......Or maybe the mystical I Am is spacetime itself and does not exist within it.
Nemo
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:16 pm

Previous

Google

Return to Reality

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron