Hi to everybody of "Minds Eye"group, I would like to say that looking at what is being written in this thread just about everyone of us believes in his/her own God, which may well be a bit different from anybody else. At this point of time I see that there are at least three players and three different Gods or beliefs that we are trying to explain here: one is Clayton, one is Pat and one is myself, of course there are also the others, but this is what I have noted here. I have seen what Clayton is trying to explain in his theory and there are some good points to it, but I cannot accept all his God theory as it is just because I have my own theory about God of the Universe, and this theory is somewhat a bit different from his theory. I am still waiting for Pat theory to be published, so that then I can see what he has to show us. I expect Pat theory to be a very good theory and I hope he does not disappoint us. Then I have my own theory, which I am still working on and part of it can be found at these web addresses: https://sites.google.com/site/prayersofreconciliation/ http://manfracoreconciliations.blogspot.com/ This is a blog called,Religious Reconciliation Doc Please note that in this blog at the bottom of posts there is a Hub Pages link under the name of Frank Menchise this is my theory which I have already written in Hub Pages. You are all invited to check it out, if you can spare the time. All the best to you all, May God bless you! Manfraco
On Mar 2, 6:20 am, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, for reference, purposes, you may follow some of the links on > this blog for that which may be epmirically > proven.http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=62023 > > On Mar 1, 2:35 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > There is much to say about this but I will try to condense my > > commentary (as I often do)but be thorough for clarity's sake. First, > > "nothing" simply cannot exist outside of a comparative(as compared > > to"something") concept. > > Throughout the wisdom traditions there are similar stories about > > creation ie; Gen. 1; "1 In the beginning God created the heavens and > > the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over > > the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the > > waters." > > Nowhere in this passage does there say "nothing" but, rather, > > formless and empty. Now let's take into account zero point energy and > > th zero point energy feild. Also, take note of the entire second verse > > of Gen; 1. Oh yes, and lets take helium (2He) as a perfect example of > > the water and hydrogen as being a representation of God (it is the > > most abundant element in the universe after all). We will also take > > into account what we know of Pat's revolutionary theory (still not > > published). We "know" that the material or physical universe (our > > measurable one) exists only in our space time continuum. Quantum > > physics, however, allows for multiple dimensions of universe (be it 11 > > or 26) and, perhaps even a multiverse. > > Ok, let's go back to the helium and hydrogen. Let's say; God > > (hydrogen) hovered above (perhaps in Calabi-yau space) the waters > > (helium) but at ZPE and in wave form. We'll shall also consider, as > > Clayton suggests, that, at this point God has sentience. As God's > > intent is suggests, "let there be light" implies there is interation > > between said waters of the deep and God. So, at a pressure of 1 > > atmosphere nothing happens to helium at ZPE but increase the pressure > > to 25 atmospheres it freezes and solifies. That's all I have for now. > > > On Mar 1, 12:30 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mar 1, 2:46 pm, Clayton Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I wish I had a more advanced language to work with. I use words like > > > > conscience and energy but these words just don't cut it. Perhaps I > > > > should > > > > create my own words and define them. > > > > Please do so. I do. Neologisms are more and more common. > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Clayton Taylor > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > I have a hard time believing that energy cant be created. In my > > > > > theory, new > > > > > energy is always constantly created where there is nothing. > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Pat > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > >> On Mar 1, 2:00 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > Hey Pat, > > > > > >> > I did wonder when you would put in an apperance. > > > > > >> Out of the past 59 days, I've had about 42 of them with migraines. > > > > >> I've had loads of time off and, thus, haven't had access to the > > > > >> internet. > > > > > >> > Yep I had the same thought you know. When we talk of human > > > > >> > conciousness we are talking basicly an electrical impulse, can the > > > > >> > same be said of a bodyless God? What then is meant by the > > > > >> > conciousness of God? > > > > > >> A different 'form' of energy (spiritual energy). In my theory, its > > > > >> the form that appears in 3 out of the 6 Calabi-Yau dimensions. > > > > > >> > Myself I sometimes use this word (conciousness) when talking about > > > > >> > Gods 'essance' or 'spirit'. In order to show that whatever it is, > > > > >> > it > > > > >> > needs to be understood that it does not consit of matter, and when > > > > >> > I > > > > >> > say matter I also mean energy, that is nothing that was not present > > > > >> > before the creation. > > > > > >> Exactly! Whilst matter is a form of energy, so, too, is spirit. But > > > > >> it's not found in this 4-D world. Although, because the spirito- > > > > >> physical interface (our nervous system) is so good, we tend to think > > > > >> we see it whem in reality, what we are seeing is only the physical > > > > >> aspect of the interface. Remember, when it comes to energy, > > > > >> 'potential energy' has no appearance whatsoever. It doesn't look > > > > >> like > > > > >> anything, yet it has complete potential FOR everything. And THAT is > > > > >> the key to solving the conundrum. All energy was, at some point, > > > > >> purely potential. At that point, the only thing it COULD do was to > > > > >> try to reach that potential and the show began. > > > > > >> > Again personaly speaking I have no problems seeing God as the > > > > >> > original > > > > >> > cause. To ask what then caused God is meaningless, to my mind. > > > > > >> Especially when science is clearly happy that energy is neither > > > > >> created nor destroyed!! > > > > > >> > On Mar 1, 1:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > > On Mar 1, 11:27 am, "[email protected]" > > > > >> > > <[email protected] > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > Have you ever read the 'Conversations with God' Books? > > > > > >> > > > It's auother suggests much the same and gives a reason fro the > > > > >> > > > creation. Thusly: > > > > > >> > > > Gods knowledge is perfect but what is knowledge without > > > > >> > > > experiance, > > > > >> > > > and so 'let there be light' and the creation was created. For > > > > >> > > > God > > > > >> to > > > > >> > > > experiance. > > > > > >> > > While, in principle, I agree, the proposition states no > > > > >> > > methodology-- > > > > >> > > no mechanism--for getting from point A (nothing) to point B > > > > >> > > (something). There needs to be a mechanism, even for a God, to > > > > >> > > get > > > > >> > > something from nothing. Alternatively, Clayton's proposition is > > > > >> > > slightly better in that it doesn't propose that there WAS a > > > > >> > > nothing, > > > > >> > > per se, rather , that the nothing was, in fact, a something. > > > > >> > > Nevertheless, what is lacking THERE is what IS this something > > > > >> > > that was > > > > >> > > nothing? I already know the answer myself, but I thought I'd > > > > >> > > throw > > > > >> > > out the questions to help eke it out of Clayton. Consciousness > > > > >> > > is a > > > > >> > > great fall back, but of what does it consist? What is the > > > > >> > > underlying > > > > >> > > 'substance'? Again, I already know the answer, but would like > > > > >> > > Clayton > > > > >> > > to give it some thought. > > > > > >> > > > On Feb 27, 9:51 pm, Clayton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > Before there was anything in our universe there was nothing, > > > > >> > > > > but > > > > >> how > > > > >> > > > > could something come to exist from nothing. Nothing must be > > > > >> something > > > > >> > > > > right? > > > > > >> > > > > Not in my theory. > > > > > >> > > > > My theory is that there is always an infinite amount of > > > > >> > > > > nothing > > > > >> > > > > outside of something and that something is continually > > > > >> > > > > produced > > > > >> > > > > wherever there is nothing. What that something is, is the > > > > >> conscience > > > > >> > > > > of an unborn universe, and these consciences are also > > > > >> > > > > continually > > > > >> > > > > being produced. Our universe was at one time one of those > > > > >> > > > > unborn > > > > >> > > > > universes, but something happened. Just as it does for all > > > > >> > > > > unborn > > > > >> > > > > universes. It’s conscience began to think, but what would the > > > > >> > > > > conscience of nothing think about? It would think about what > > > > >> > > > > it > > > > >> is, > > > > >> > > > > because it wouldn't know, and this thought would continually > > > > >> > > > > build > > > > >> up > > > > >> > > > > in the conscience until it was so compressed that the > > > > >> > > > > pressure > > > > >> would > > > > >> > > > > cause the conscience to explode into a big bang. What I am > > > > >> > > > > saying > > > > >> is > > > > >> > > > > that thought is the first form of energy that has ever > > > > >> > > > > existed, > > > > >> and > > > > >> > > > > that everything in our universe is just another form of this > > > > >> energy. > > > > > >> > > > > I believe that the energy, that is everything in our > > > > >> > > > > Universe is > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > God of our universe, and that God has always known everything > > > > >> there is > > > > >> > > > > to know about the universe. In the beginning God’s knowledge > > > > >> > > > > was > > > > >> very > > > > >> > > > > limited, but now it is very complex because everything that > > > > >> > > > > has > > > > >> been > > > > >> > > > > created from that original thought energy is an extension of > > > > >> > > > > Gods > > > > >> > > > > consciousness, even ourselves. However, I believe that all > > > > >> > > > > things > > > > >> that > > > > >> > > > > exists also have their own conscience. Everything, from the > > > > >> smallest > > > > >> > > > > particle on up to the entire universe. It’s just a matter of > > > > >> > > > > how > > > > >> > > > > closely you look. I’ll use a rock as an example, because I > > > > >> > > > > came up > > > > >> > > > > with my theory while I was in the woods on my land enjoying > > > > >> > > > > nature > > > > >> and > > > > >> > > > > there was this huge beautiful rock, and it was almost as if I > > > > >> could > > > > >> > > > > see into it and see its conscience. It was like me and the > > > > >> > > > > rock > > > > >> were > > > > >> > > > > interacting. Now, when I stepped away from the rock and went > > > > >> > > > > up to > > > > >> my > > > > >> > > > > car that was parked at the top of my land I could see my > > > > >> > > > > entire > > > > >> piece > > > > >> > > > > of land and I could see that it was all working together as > > > > >> > > > > one > > > > >> > > > > conscience. I see it on an even larger scale when I look at > > > > >> > > > > the > > > > >> night > > > > >> > > > > sky. After this experience I came to the conclusion that > > > > >> everything is > > > > >> > > > > very much alive. I also came to the conclusion that man, > > > > >> > > > > though > > > > >> he, > > > > >> > > > > like all other things that are an extension of God has the > > > > >> > > > > ability > > > > >> to > > > > >> > > > > know as much as God. I feel that man is very close to > > > > >> > > > > beginning > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
