Seems to me that what is beneficial toward man (human) is going to be > for the glory of God. So be encouraged, Pat, and the best of wishes to > you on the project Edward
On Dec 4, 2:26 pm, edward mason <[email protected]> wrote: >! > Seems to me that what is beneficial toward man (human) is going to be > for the glory of God. So be encouraged, Pat, and the best of wishes to > you on the project > > > On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Dec 3, 12:09 am, edward mason <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Pat, you just filled the void between religion and science!!! > >> Congratulations! Amazing! > > > Well, the whole idea of the book I'm working on is to present a model > > of physics in which God falls out of the equations. Originally, I was > > looking for a way to solve the EPR effect's inconsistency with the > > Standard Model and thought that String Theory might hold the answer. > > It was then I discovered that one particular configuration of String > > Theory's 'Calabi-Yau' space offered the answer. If only one of those > > 6 dimensions is EXACTLY the Planck-length in length, that forces all > > the strings of the universe to join at that point, as the Planck- > > length is the 'effective' point size in out universe. With only one > > point avaliable in that dimension, it offers an anchoring point for > > all strings. That configuration implies that the entire universe is > > one single object of stringy energy joined at that point, which is, of > > course, outside our line of sight. It's always just around a > > dimensional corner that we can NEVER see around. But, if the universe > > is comprised of a single entity (that is comprised of stringy energy): > > 1) that entity is everywhere where energy is, throughout all space- > > time, thus omnipresent > > 2) as there is only one actor in the system, responsible for > > performing every act, that entity is, for all intents and purposes, > > omnipotent > > 3) irrespective of HOW consciousness works (Although I have more > > detail on that, in THIS regard it doesn't really matter), as there is > > only one actor in the system, all consciousness is of that entity, > > thus the entity is omniscient. > > > So, with one single (perfectly allowable!!) geometric tweak, String > > Theory offers an argument that the universe could well be God, as it > > describes an entity which is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient-- > > the classical definition of deity. > > > That's the 'essence' of the theory, but, of course, there are many > > more details that I haven't even mentioned. At present, I'm working > > towards having it published near the end of 2012. Granted, it's part > > of a marketing ploy playing on the hopes that the end of the Mayan > > Calendar will bring a 'new understanding' of the universe to > > mankind...and I want that to be my book. Not, as some might think, > > for my glory, but for God's. That is, to help push those who may be > > in doubt to have a firmer foundation upon which to rest their > > thoughts. > > > Cheers, > > > Pat > > >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On Dec 2, 2:54 am, edward mason <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Yes, Pat, I have thought along these lines. But not to the extent that > >> >> you have so clearly laid out. Extraordinary, to say the least. And to > >> >> the extent that I have contemplated these ideas, it has been my > >> >> experiences that even in the use of the elements, the signature of God > >> >> is there. Thank you, Pat, for sharing that! > >> >> Edward > > >> > No worries!! I just thought it sounded like the kind of thing you > >> > might appreciate. Glad you did!! > > >> > God's signature...Hmmm. As there's no other Creator, it would have to > >> > be, in some sense (like a copyright), stamped on everything, including > >> > things as small as photons (I can't think of 'observable entities' > >> > that are smaller). And, as we know from studying the shape, the only > >> > thing that gives them shape, per se, is their frequency. The reult, > >> > though, is that every frequency is, by definition, a signature of > >> > God. Every variance in Hertz is a subtle shake of 'The Old Man's > >> > Hand', as it were. As there is only one signatory, all signatures are > >> > His. Even if they look so different as to, in effect, cancel one > >> > another out!! ;-) > > >> >> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Pat <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> > On Nov 30, 4:02 am, edward mason <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> "When people find it more interesting to study prophecy it is much > >> >> >> easier> than studying how to live life on a day to day basis after > >> >> >> all it is easier > >> >> >> > to distort and shape into what you want it to say." > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > What I find very interesting in this regard is the fact that the > >> >> >> > "coded language" of the prophets is so closely related to the > >> >> >> > language of dreams, it's hard to find a line that seperates the > >> >> >> > two, if there is, indeed, a point of seperation between them. One > >> >> >> > thing that I know as a fact, is that during the course of dreams, > >> >> >> > one may received more than simply instructions for living. At that > >> >> >> > rate, there are directions, standards (moral and legal), warnings, > >> >> >> > and so on for daily living found in the prophecies. I also see > >> >> >> > that the different prophecies say a lot of the same things, > >> >> >> > particuliarly, regarding the destruction and the end, but in > >> >> >> > different ways; much like re- phrasing a sentence. This is where > >> >> >> > the Words of God come alive, and live; they sound the same no > >> >> >> > matter where they are written. As we learn, we learn that the > >> >> >> > Words of God may not even be in words, but in feeling, still sound > >> >> >> > the same as the WORDS. The recognition is always there, as far as > >> >> >> > I can Tell. > > >> >> >> Edward > > >> >> > Edward, have you considered that the elements themselves might be the > >> >> > 'Words of God'? There was a piece I'd written, here, a few months > >> >> > back that outlines a synchronicity between the parts of speech and the > >> >> > periods of the periodic table of elements. I reckon that, when God > >> >> > speaks, things actually happen, that is, elements interact as God's > >> >> > sentences are voiced (for lack of a better term or analogy) and > >> >> > continually create the unfolding world around us. Here's that piece, > >> >> > again, so you can read it. Let me know what you think!! > > >> >> > This was spawned by a discussion of 'the Pen' and, as I knew how that > >> >> > concept related to the very first revelation of the Qur'an, I started > >> >> > my response by outlining that; but, then, I got into the actual link > >> >> > between the parts of speech and the periodic table. > > >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> > I thought that, since the concept of ‘The Pen’ had been discussed, > >> >> > that I might take this opportunity to mention a couple of things. > >> >> > Firstly, the concept of ‘The Pen’ and how it relates to ‘The Word of > >> >> > God’ might be obvious to some but not others. It was a concept that > >> >> > was revealed in the very first Revelation to the Prophet Mohammed > >> >> > (pbuh). > >> >> > The first 5 lines of Surah 96 (Al Alaq [the Clot]) were the very > >> >> > first lines revealed and here they are: > > >> >> > 96:1 Read! In the name of your Lord and Cherisher, who created > >> >> > Iqra! Bismi rabbika-lladhi khalaq > > >> >> > 96:2 Created man from a clot of congealed blood. > >> >> > Khalaq-al-insana min alaq > > >> >> > 96:3 Read! And your Lord is Most Bountiful > >> >> > Iqra! Wa Rabbuka-al-Akram > > >> >> > 96:4 He who taught by the Pen > >> >> > Alladhi allama bil-qalam > > >> >> > 96:5 Taught man that which he knew not. > >> >> > Allam al insana ma lam ya lam. > > >> >> > If you read the transliterated Arabic above, you can get a feel > >> >> > for the rhythm and the rhyme that simply doesn’t come across in the > >> >> > translation. The entire Qur’an of 6,616 verses is like that. That’s > >> >> > why it was easy to learn for native Arabic speakers, who were used to > >> >> > oral traditions and story-telling. Also, the word Qur’an means > >> >> > ‘recital’, as it was intended to be spoken, as it was, originally, > >> >> > revealed to a man, The Prophet Mohammed (pbuh), who was illiterate. > >> >> > And no one has been able since, to create any poetry like it—not in > >> >> > rhythm, rhyme and depth of meaning. > >> >> > It dawned on me, over the weekend, that there is another analogy > >> >> > between ‘The Pen’, ‘The Word of God’, language and matter itself. It > >> >> > has been a part of Jewish, Christian and Islamic doctrine that God > >> >> > created the universe via His ‘Word’. But what, exactly, IS His Word? > >> >> > Let’s look at language and see how it relates to matter. I think > >> >> > sentences act like molecules. Each one has a particular purpose, > >> >> > structure and quality. Yet they are made of words. That makes words > >> >> > akin to atoms. But atoms are further divided into the sub-atomic > >> >> > particles of hadrons and leptons like words are comprised of letters > >> >> > which are either consonants or vowels. Yet even letters can be viewed > >> >> > as being made of lines, either straight or curved. Here is an > >> >> > allusion to String Theory and the concept of closed and open strings. > >> >> > Also, atoms (words) fall into 8 periods in the Periodic Table of > >> >> > Elements. These are, in a way, akin to the 8 parts of speech: nouns, > >> >> > verbs, pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions and > >> >> > interjections. Yet some elements fall into transitional groups. > >> >> > Theses would be akin to the concepts of participles and gerunds. A > >> >> > participle is a verb-like word that acts like an adjective, e.g., the > >> >> > word ‘sinking’ in the sentence: “Every time I see the film ‘Titanic’, > >> >> > I get a certain sinking feeling. The word > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
