Dark Matter = God?

[Unkotare]

Most of the universe is either dark energy or dark matter. The reason this energy might in some sense be God is based on the Biblical teaching that God is invisible yet holds everything together.

Could Dark Energy Be God? | God and Brain​

God can be measured?

Insipid

 

[edthecynic]

Most of the universe is either dark energy or dark matter. The reason this energy might in some sense be God is based on the Biblical teaching that God is invisible yet holds everything together.

Could Dark Energy Be God? | God and Brain​

God can be measured?

Majority of the mass of the universe is dark matter. An as-yet undiscovered particle small than any other we know about so far. An even smaller particle is dark energy. But matter comprised of atoms only accounts for a minority of the mass of the total universe, say 20%. Dark matter's 70%, dark energy the remaining 10%. But being part of the rest of the universe, dark matter/energy are not G-d since G-d would have had to exist prior to creating the universe and the dark matter/energy.

Dark matter may not have mass at all! As Einstein has shown, inertial mass is indistinguishable from gravitational mass, so dark matter may just as well be the pull of the universal super massive black hole of the Big Crunch.

 

[Drake_Roberts]

Who's to say God isn't the universe itself? An all pervasive force and will encompassing all things. Able to shift things one way or another. Something all people of all races, creeds, or even aliens (if you believe in them) are a part of. Something that is everywhere in each and every person.

 

[Unkotare]

God can be measured?

Majority of the mass of the universe is dark matter. An as-yet undiscovered particle small than any other we know about so far. An even smaller particle is dark energy. But matter comprised of atoms only accounts for a minority of the mass of the total universe, say 20%. Dark matter's 70%, dark energy the remaining 10%. But being part of the rest of the universe, dark matter/energy are not G-d since G-d would have had to exist prior to creating the universe and the dark matter/energy.

Dark matter may not have mass at all! As Einstein has shown, inertial mass is indistinguishable from gravitational mass, so dark matter may just as well be the pull of the universal super massive black hole of the Big Crunch.

That makes no sense.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Dark matter has mass. Mass calculations for the observable universe don't add up revealing the existence of dark matter.

As to the universe itself being G-d, there's a hypothesis currently that suggests perhaps the entire universe is in some way we don't understand yet a living organism. When you look at life under microscopes you see how everything's just made up of smaller things. Go small enough and you get non-organic particles, but added together make orgsnic molecules, and eventually life. Continuing on to larger scales, this pattern is repeated in how "little" things like planets and stars are like the indinvidual cells of an organism. By themselves they're inorganic and not alive, but when you go to galactic scale things do bear an uncanny resemblance to biological systems. One of the current models of the enture universe, the web ones, do actually look like veins and arteries, especially when "zooming" in on individual veins and seeing how the galaxies in them are all "flowing" in the same direction much like we observe blood cells flowing through out our own veins.

Another hypothesis (my own) is simply that what we mistake for divinity and gods is simply the counter-intuitive way things actually work according to quantum physics. When something doesn't work like classical physics predict, say quantum entaglement, coming to believe gods might be involved isn't really all that silly a notion. And since much of what we're discovering currently is akin to that, that ancient peoples may have noticed such truths and not been able to resolve them with the sciences available to them at the time, attributing it to divinity, gods, or other supernatural explanations then makes more sense.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Quote: Originally Posted by Chuckt
God...

is...

a...

spirit.

Avg Joe:

Define "spirit".



Very good question. Interesting thread, Joe!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

If God is that big... bigger than the universe. Bigger than the universe as it's understood by Monkeys in this moment... If God is THAT big, did he really care that much more about Abraham? Was he really more than just another swinging dick taking a ride on this worlds Living Timeline?


If God is, I'll bet you a dollar that He's way bigger than ALL the ancient stories put together, let alone any one of them.

​

'Hand of God' Spotted by NASA Space Telescope - weather.com

Your questions reminded me of this photo I saw the other day. This is a photo from NASA and it looks like G-ds hand. Pretty amazing.

 

[edthecynic]

Majority of the mass of the universe is dark matter. An as-yet undiscovered particle small than any other we know about so far. An even smaller particle is dark energy. But matter comprised of atoms only accounts for a minority of the mass of the total universe, say 20%. Dark matter's 70%, dark energy the remaining 10%. But being part of the rest of the universe, dark matter/energy are not G-d since G-d would have had to exist prior to creating the universe and the dark matter/energy.

Dark matter may not have mass at all! As Einstein has shown, inertial mass is indistinguishable from gravitational mass, so dark matter may just as well be the pull of the universal super massive black hole of the Big Crunch.

That makes no sense.

It is assumed that dark matter exists because at the extremes of the universe the objects seem to be accelerating away from us. Thus Dark Matter was postulated as the mass that was attracting and accelerating them. However it is just as likely that they are accelerating towards the universal super massive black hole of the theoretical Big Crunch, the opposite pole of the Big Bang. The universe expands and decelerates from the Big Bang and then at some point starts to accelerate and contract into the Big Crunch. Dark Matter does not explain why the universe decelerates as it expands from the point of the Big Bang. If Dark Matter exists it would accelerate all matter in the universe.

 

[Unkotare]

Dark matter may not have mass at all! As Einstein has shown, inertial mass is indistinguishable from gravitational mass, so dark matter may just as well be the pull of the universal super massive black hole of the Big Crunch.

That makes no sense.

It is assumed that dark matter exists because at the extremes of the universe the objects seem to be accelerating away from us.

Um...no. Everything is moving away from everything else. The things further away from us are moving away more rapidly. This means that the universe is expanding, not contracting. Dark energy is required to explain how this is happening despite the force of gravity.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Reason everything's expanding isn't because it's moving away from a big bang center starting point like, but the 'fabric' of space itself is expanding and getting bigger. All objects like stars and planets are only moving because the fabric on which they rest is itself moving away. Like a conveyer belt. The belt itself is what's moving, not the objects on it. They move too as they orbit like, but not in how they move away from everything else.

Universe itself is several times larger than most realize. The term 'visible universe' refers to how since the universe is only ~13 billion year old, we can't see beyond 13 billion light-years. But due to inflation, the actual size of the universe is approximated at about 80 billion light-years. Good illustration of this here. Best, most crazy awesome thing I've ever seen.

Scale of Universe - Interactive Scale of the Universe Tool

Move the slider left or right to zoom in and out. All the way right will show the whole viisble universe and has notes about visible, vs actual size. Cool stuff.

 

[edthecynic]

That makes no sense.

It is assumed that dark matter exists because at the extremes of the universe the objects seem to be accelerating away from us.

Um...no. Everything is moving away from everything else. The things further away from us are moving away more rapidly. This means that the universe is expanding, not contracting. Dark energy is required to explain how this is happening despite the force of gravity.

No, it means they are ACCELERATING away from us, nothing more. You assume it is an expansion, but it can also be assumed it is a contraction. Your problem is you are thinking the universe is linear, whereas I see the universe as a cosmic vortex. You assume that anything moving farther away from us is moving in a straight line, whereas I see it as spiraling away from us toward the contracting base of the vortex.

I see the universe expanding from the Big Bang in a spiral vortex and curving around on itself as it expands and as it passes its "equator" it spirals into a contracting vortex leading to the Big Crunch. So the universe viewed from an outside observer would see Feynman's sphere when viewed above the equator and Hawking's vortex when viewed above the poles, one expanding and one contracting.

 

[Unkotare]

It is assumed that dark matter exists because at the extremes of the universe the objects seem to be accelerating away from us.

Um...no. Everything is moving away from everything else. The things further away from us are moving away more rapidly. This means that the universe is expanding, not contracting. Dark energy is required to explain how this is happening despite the force of gravity.

No, it means they are ACCELERATING away from us, nothing more. You assume it is an expansion, but it can also be assumed it is a contraction. Your problem is you are thinking the universe is linear, whereas I see the universe as a cosmic vortex. You assume that anything moving farther away from us is moving in a straight line, whereas I see it as spiraling away from us toward the contracting base of the vortex.

I see the universe expanding from the Big Bang in a spiral vortex and curving around on itself as it expands and as it passes its "equator" it spirals into a contracting vortex leading to the Big Crunch. So the universe viewed from an outside observer would see Feynman's sphere when viewed above the equator and Hawking's vortex when viewed above the poles, one expanding and one contracting.

The vast majority of astronomers do not agree with you. This is just your self-indulgent 'play time.'

 

[edthecynic]

Um...no. Everything is moving away from everything else. The things further away from us are moving away more rapidly. This means that the universe is expanding, not contracting. Dark energy is required to explain how this is happening despite the force of gravity.

No, it means they are ACCELERATING away from us, nothing more. You assume it is an expansion, but it can also be assumed it is a contraction. Your problem is you are thinking the universe is linear, whereas I see the universe as a cosmic vortex. You assume that anything moving farther away from us is moving in a straight line, whereas I see it as spiraling away from us toward the contracting base of the vortex.

I see the universe expanding from the Big Bang in a spiral vortex and curving around on itself as it expands and as it passes its "equator" it spirals into a contracting vortex leading to the Big Crunch. So the universe viewed from an outside observer would see Feynman's sphere when viewed above the equator and Hawking's vortex when viewed above the poles, one expanding and one contracting.

The vast majority of astronomers do not agree with you. This is just your self-indulgent 'play time.'

That hardly makes me wrong and you right! After all, this is all purely theoretical. Both theories explain the acceleration at the extremes of the universe, but my theory also explains why the universe decelerated after the Big Bang and Dark Matter does not!

 

[Unkotare]

No, it means they are ACCELERATING away from us, nothing more. You assume it is an expansion, but it can also be assumed it is a contraction. Your problem is you are thinking the universe is linear, whereas I see the universe as a cosmic vortex. You assume that anything moving farther away from us is moving in a straight line, whereas I see it as spiraling away from us toward the contracting base of the vortex.

I see the universe expanding from the Big Bang in a spiral vortex and curving around on itself as it expands and as it passes its "equator" it spirals into a contracting vortex leading to the Big Crunch. So the universe viewed from an outside observer would see Feynman's sphere when viewed above the equator and Hawking's vortex when viewed above the poles, one expanding and one contracting.

The vast majority of astronomers do not agree with you. This is just your self-indulgent 'play time.'

That hardly makes me wrong and you right! !

As I was saying..............................

 

[HenryBHough]

The vast majority of astronomers took it up after trying, in childhood, to tie their own shoes and failed.

 

[edthecynic]

The vast majority of astronomers do not agree with you. This is just your self-indulgent 'play time.'

That hardly makes me wrong and you right! After all, this is all purely theoretical. Both theories explain the acceleration at the extremes of the universe, but my theory also explains why the universe decelerated after the Big Bang and Dark Matter does not!

As I was saying..............................

I added back what you edited out.

If Dark Matter exists then it has to exist everywhere in the universe, not just at the extremes, at least not without an explanation. So if Dark Matter exists everywhere then it must accelerate matter everywhere, not just at the extreme ends of the universe, but matter is decelerating from the point of the Big Bang. How does Dark Matter explain that paradox????

 

[Unkotare]

That hardly makes me wrong and you right! After all, this is all purely theoretical. Both theories explain the acceleration at the extremes of the universe, but my theory also explains why the universe decelerated after the Big Bang and Dark Matter does not!

As I was saying..............................

I added back what you edited out.

If Dark Matter exists then it has to exist everywhere in the universe, not just at the extremes, at least not without an explanation.

No one has said it doesn't. I don't think you understand at all what you're trying to talk about.

 

[edthecynic]

As I was saying..............................

I added back what you edited out.

If Dark Matter exists then it has to exist everywhere in the universe, not just at the extremes, at least not without an explanation.

No one has said it doesn't. I don't think you understand at all what you're trying to talk about.

OK, since you acknowledge that Dark Matter must exist everywhere in the universe, then why does it ONLY accelerate matter at the farthest extremes of the universe?????
You won't acknowledge that you can't answer that question!

You are ASSUMING that because the matter furtherest away from us is moving farther away from us faster means that the universe is expanding, when the only thing we know for sure is that it is moving farther away from us faster. That assumption of an expanding universe is based on another ASSUMPTION, that the universe is moving in a linear fashion. That assumption falls apart if the universe is itself a vortex, the most common shape throughout the universe!

The beauty of physics is you are allowed to reject conventional assumptions and assume something different, like a universal cosmic vortex to explain observed phenomena. You should try it some time!

 

[Derideo_Te]

Just my 2 cents but for the sake of argument let's assume that dark matter consists of a single quantum string at rest and it is everywhere in the universe.

As more stars are formed following the Big Bang they radiate energy. This energy is absorbed by the DM strings closest to the stars and they start to vibrate which in turn pushes the DM strings nearest to them away. This happens in all directions so it appears as though everything is moving apart. The more stars, the more energy radiated and absorbed by the DM strings (or are they now dark energy strings instead) and the more inflation of the universe.

Pure speculation on my part but it makes sense on a simplistic level.

Speaking of which the concept of what is beyond the visible horizon of the universe is equally fascinating. What if we are living in an infinite universe with cycles of Big Bangs occurring randomly throughout? Could the background radiation just be echos of other Big Bangs that have occurred at immense distances from our own?

The answers to questions like these will probably never be answered in my lifetime but we didn't know about planets around other stars until the last 2 decades and that is a relatively short span in the history of human knowledge and an infintisimal [sp?] fraction of time in the universe.

 

[Unkotare]

I added back what you edited out.

If Dark Matter exists then it has to exist everywhere in the universe, not just at the extremes, at least not without an explanation.

No one has said it doesn't. I don't think you understand at all what you're trying to talk about.

OK, since you acknowledge that Dark Matter must exist everywhere in the universe, then why does it ONLY accelerate matter at the farthest extremes of the universe?????

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNsrK6P9QvI]Picard's Epic Double Facepalm - YouTube[/ame]



It doesn't, you idiot. Maybe you need to start with something easier for you to understand.