Dark Matter; Real? Or Imagined?

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

Isn't it?

No. It isn't. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive. So in the case of spirit creating the material world, everything which has a physical reality is really composed of mind-stuff. So... no, it isn't.

 

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That's probably because you don't possess the intellect and/or the motivation to work through the origin questions. Nor the understanding of how that knowledge and the journey to obtain that knowledge will enrich your life or the lives of those around you. Because if you did you wouldn't be so fucked up.

 

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

I didn't say we did, dummy. I said mind is the matrix or source and condition of physical reality. That the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. We live in the material world. The world is 100% real. So is the mind which composed it.

 

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

Reality can only become manifest through mind. What good is anything without mind to make it manifest? The material world was created to manifest the glory of God. The glory of God becomes manifest through minds on planet Earth.

 

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth": three things are affirmed in these first words of Scripture: the eternal God gave a beginning to all that exists outside of himself; he alone is Creator (the verb "create" - Hebrew bara - always has God for its subject). The totality of what exists (expressed by the formula "the heavens and the earth") depends on the One who gives it being.

"In the beginning was the Word. . . and the Word was God. . . all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made." The New Testament reveals that God created everything by the eternal Word, his beloved Son. In him "all things were created, in heaven and on earth.. . all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." The Church's faith likewise confesses the creative action of the Holy Spirit, the "giver of life", "the Creator Spirit" (Veni, Creator Spiritus), the "source of every good".

The Old Testament suggests and the New Covenant reveals the creative action of the Son and the Spirit, inseparably one with that of the Father. This creative co-operation is clearly affirmed in the Church's rule of faith: "There exists but one God. . . he is the Father, God, the Creator, the author, the giver of order. He made all things by himself, that is, by his Word and by his Wisdom", "by the Son and the Spirit" who, so to speak, are "his hands". Creation is the common work of the Holy Trinity.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[ding]

... Our universe is effectively a bubble. A flat one. There may be other ones. They all had a beginning and all were created from nothing.

The "universe is flat" means we are able to use the euclidian geometry in case of the universe <=> The three angles of a triangle are together 180°. That's extremely astonishing. Why not less than 180° why not more than 180°? But this has nothing to do with "bubble" except you call the spacetime per se "bubble" - but the spacetime is in general (=also in macrocosmic dimensions) flat - what's in the "normal" (=mesocosmic) dimension of our experience the opposite of a "bubble". In general you use the word "bubble" to say that it is only one bubble under much more bubbles (=you believe in the existence of a multiverse) - but that's nothing what anyone is able to know.

The term bubble is meant to convey self contained closed universes. Yes, we cannot know if they exist just like I don't know that the mailman who stops at your house puts envelopes in your mailbox but I can infer he does because I know when he stops at my house he puts envelops in my mail box. So I can infer that other universes would be like ours just as I can infer the mailman puts envelopes in your mailbox.

That's nonsense.

How so?

 

[ding]

A universe created from nothing is the only explanation which makes sense and fits the observed data. So I don't discount other universes or bubbles of space and time being created in the same manner.

But it is not a satisfying answer, because nothing comes from nothing - within our universe.

It is an immensely satisfying answer. Saying that God created the universe from nothing is immensely satisfying. Saying the universe was created from nothing is not the same thing as saying the universe was created by nothing. And lastly, God is no thing. No thing created the universe. God is no thing.

It sounds nice - but this means there is a titanic nothing between us and god, which we are not able to overstep as long as we are something on our own. We have to leave everything here to come home. But this is nothing what physicists ask for.

It is more than sounds nice, it is true. The only thing between us and God is surrendering our will to God. God has placed no barriers between us and Him. So yes, as long as we are on our own and refuse to surrender to God's will we separate ourselves from God. Knowing God's nature, knowing how God created existence from nothing is not a barrier, it is how glorification of God is manifested.

 

[ding]

Saying the universe was created from nothing is not the same thing as saying the universe was created by nothing.

no comment

 

[ding]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive. So in the case of spirit creating the material world, everything which has a physical reality is really composed of mind-stuff. So... no.

This has nothing to do with physics.

Physics doesn’t begin until after the creation of the material world from nothing created by no thing. This is the realm of philosophy and logic.

 

[ReinyDays]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light. It does not compute. There is something wrong with our understanding and I tend to believe it starts at the beginning when they gloss over the part of why the universe expanded in the first place.

TimeSpace is a non-Euclidean space ... you'll need to quite literally think outside the box here ... the universe is expanded faster than the speed of light only from our own frame-of-reference ... "out there" is in a different frame-of-reference, and the universe isn't expanding faster than the speed of light there ...

Keep in mind that the notion of "light traveling through the universe" comes much later in the history of the universe ... we can only see light from so far away, past which there is no light, all black ... we're completely blind to the nature of the universe from these earlier times ... there's no light of any kind from before the CMB Epoch ... all we have is theory and the lab experiments that demonstrate these theories ... we'll never be able to see if these theories are indeed true, out there ...

There's a number of excellent videos on YouTube that explain Special Relativity ... crazy ass shit for sure but there's many ways this can be demonstrated ... first and foremost is the orbit of Mercury, Newton's gravity fails to predict this motion, so another theory was needed ...

 

[ding]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light. It does not compute. There is something wrong with our understanding and I tend to believe it starts at the beginning when they gloss over the part of why the universe expanded in the first place.

TimeSpace is a non-Euclidean space ... you'll need to quite literally think outside the box here ... the universe is expanded faster than the speed of light only from our own frame-of-reference ... "out there" is in a different frame-of-reference, and the universe isn't expanding faster than the speed of light there ...

Keep in mind that the notion of "light traveling through the universe" comes much later in the history of the universe ... we can only see light from so far away, past which there is no light, all black ... we're completely blind to the nature of the universe from these earlier times ... there's no light of any kind from before the CMB Epoch ... all we have is theory and the lab experiments that demonstrate these theories ... we'll never be able to see if these theories are indeed true, out there ...

There's a number of excellent videos on YouTube that explain Special Relativity ... crazy ass shit for sure but there's many ways this can be demonstrated ... first and foremost is the orbit of Mercury, Newton's gravity fails to predict this motion, so another theory was needed ...

This seems to contradict what you are saying. According to Ethan - and everyone knows that anyone named Ethan always has an extremely high IQ and is never wrong - that space can expand faster than the speed of light. That there is no upper limit to physical bounds of the expansion of space.

Personally I think this is all hooey and that they need to start thinking inside the box and start with why there is expansion in the first place. Until they answer that question, they will never be able to answer the question of why it is accelerating.

If we were to ask, from our perspective, what this means for the speed of this distant galaxy that we're only now observing, we'd conclude that this galaxy is receding from us well in excess of the speed of light. But in reality, not only is that galaxy not moving through the Universe at a relativistically impossible speed, but it's hardly moving at all! Instead of speeds exceeding 299,792 km/s (the speed of light in a vacuum), these galaxies are only moving through space at ~2% the speed of light or less.

But space itself is expanding, and that accounts for the overwhelming majority of the redshift we see. And space doesn't expand at a speed; it expands at a speed-per-unit-distance: a very different kind of rate. When you see numbers like 67 km/s/Mpc or 73 km/s/Mpc (the two most common values that cosmologists measure), these are speeds (km/s) per unit distance (Mpc, or about 3.3 million light-years).

The restriction that "nothing can move faster than light" only applies to the motion of objects through space. The rate at which space itself expands — this speed-per-unit-distance — has no physical bounds on its upper limit.

Ask Ethan: How Does The Fabric Of Spacetime Expand Faster Than The Speed Of Light?

Nothing in the Universe can travel faster than the speed of light. So how does space itself do it?

www.forbes.com

 

[ReinyDays]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light. It does not compute. There is something wrong with our understanding and I tend to believe it starts at the beginning when they gloss over the part of why the universe expanded in the first place.

TimeSpace is a non-Euclidean space ... you'll need to quite literally think outside the box here ... the universe is expanded faster than the speed of light only from our own frame-of-reference ... "out there" is in a different frame-of-reference, and the universe isn't expanding faster than the speed of light there ...

Keep in mind that the notion of "light traveling through the universe" comes much later in the history of the universe ... we can only see light from so far away, past which there is no light, all black ... we're completely blind to the nature of the universe from these earlier times ... there's no light of any kind from before the CMB Epoch ... all we have is theory and the lab experiments that demonstrate these theories ... we'll never be able to see if these theories are indeed true, out there ...

There's a number of excellent videos on YouTube that explain Special Relativity ... crazy ass shit for sure but there's many ways this can be demonstrated ... first and foremost is the orbit of Mercury, Newton's gravity fails to predict this motion, so another theory was needed ...

This seems to contradict what you are saying. According to Ethan - and everyone knows that anyone named Ethan always has an extremely high IQ and is never wrong - that space can expand faster than the speed of light. That there is no upper limit to physical bounds of the expansion of space.

Personally I think this is all hooey and that they need to start thinking inside the box and start with why there is expansion in the first place. Until they answer that question, they will never be able to answer the question of why it is accelerating.

If we were to ask, from our perspective, what this means for the speed of this distant galaxy that we're only now observing, we'd conclude that this galaxy is receding from us well in excess of the speed of light. But in reality, not only is that galaxy not moving through the Universe at a relativistically impossible speed, but it's hardly moving at all! Instead of speeds exceeding 299,792 km/s (the speed of light in a vacuum), these galaxies are only moving through space at ~2% the speed of light or less.

But space itself is expanding, and that accounts for the overwhelming majority of the redshift we see. And space doesn't expand at a speed; it expands at a speed-per-unit-distance: a very different kind of rate. When you see numbers like 67 km/s/Mpc or 73 km/s/Mpc (the two most common values that cosmologists measure), these are speeds (km/s) per unit distance (Mpc, or about 3.3 million light-years).

The restriction that "nothing can move faster than light" only applies to the motion of objects through space. The rate at which space itself expands — this speed-per-unit-distance — has no physical bounds on its upper limit.

Ask Ethan: How Does The Fabric Of Spacetime Expand Faster Than The Speed Of Light?

Nothing in the Universe can travel faster than the speed of light. So how does space itself do it?

www.forbes.com

An interesting explanation for little children ... but it misses some important points ... the ones you seem to be having difficulty with ...

When we look at a galaxy 8 billion light years away, we see it as it was 8 billion years ago ... not as it is today ... it's dangerous to extrapolate, but if we do then we can make some reasonable statements as to the state as it is today ... by applying the Lorenz Transformation, not a shear transformation ... it's math ...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light.

Then you arent thinking of it correctly. Think of it as two people holding a rope taut. Every meter of the rope expands into two meters of rope after one minute. Eventually, you and your friend will be moving away from each other faster than the speed of light. Once that threshold is passed, you will never see your friend again.

 

[zaangalewa]

Nothing I am describing limits God.

God is an entity which we are not able to describe - but his creation we are able to understand and to describe, because god is not a liar. So it is clear that every description of his creation not needs knowledge about god.

Studying God's creation provides knowledge of God.

Everyone is able to study physics! This has nothing to do with a special form of religion including atheism. And also religious people (including atheists) know nothing about god. Everyone only believes (also atheists do so!) to understand god - but indeed is no one able to know for example that god exists and/or not exists. And in case god exists and not exists - what's easily possible for god, because god is almighty - we are again in the situation to know nothing about god, because we are not able to think with a contradiction. Everything would be true in our thoughts in this case - what's nevertheless able to be the same time wrong in the reality all around us. There are reasons why only one "god" exists in physics - the "god" with the name "experiment".

There is no thing that can describe God because God is no thing.

I never said god is a thing. I speak about what we are able to think and what we are not able to think. The creator is not his creation. But this strangeness of god finds an end in Jesus, the Christ ... and in us, the children of god. There is no need to live in fear.

God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit.

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

A spirit is no thing.

Isn't it?

Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness.

The closest I imagine is god is not a grmpftltrmpf, ... but I'm not sure about.

That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality -

We don't live in any matrix. The world is real.

that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

I'm sure the moon is in the sky with or without any mind on planet Earth.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.

In the beginning was the word (in sense of information)Anton Zeilinger

Is he only spirit, if he is? Is he also not spirit, if he is?

If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive. So in the case of spirit creating the material world, everything which has a physical reality is really composed of mind-stuff. So... no.

This has nothing to do with physics.

Physics doesn’t begin until after the creation of the material world from nothing created by no thing. This is the realm of philosophy and logic.

God is by the way always new and I wish you also a Happy Christmas.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light. It does not compute. There is something wrong with our understanding and I tend to believe it starts at the beginning when they gloss over the part of why the universe expanded in the first place.

TimeSpace is a non-Euclidean space ... you'll need to quite literally think outside the box here ... the universe is expanded faster than the speed of light only from our own frame-of-reference ... "out there" is in a different frame-of-reference, and the universe isn't expanding faster than the speed of light there ...

Keep in mind that the notion of "light traveling through the universe" comes much later in the history of the universe ... we can only see light from so far away, past which there is no light, all black ... we're completely blind to the nature of the universe from these earlier times ... there's no light of any kind from before the CMB Epoch ... all we have is theory and the lab experiments that demonstrate these theories ... we'll never be able to see if these theories are indeed true, out there ...

There's a number of excellent videos on YouTube that explain Special Relativity ... crazy ass shit for sure but there's many ways this can be demonstrated ... first and foremost is the orbit of Mercury, Newton's gravity fails to predict this motion, so another theory was needed ...

This seems to contradict what you are saying. According to Ethan - and everyone knows that anyone named Ethan always has an extremely high IQ and is never wrong - that space can expand faster than the speed of light. That there is no upper limit to physical bounds of the expansion of space.

Personally I think this is all hooey and that they need to start thinking inside the box and start with why there is expansion in the first place. Until they answer that question, they will never be able to answer the question of why it is accelerating.

If we were to ask, from our perspective, what this means for the speed of this distant galaxy that we're only now observing, we'd conclude that this galaxy is receding from us well in excess of the speed of light. But in reality, not only is that galaxy not moving through the Universe at a relativistically impossible speed, but it's hardly moving at all! Instead of speeds exceeding 299,792 km/s (the speed of light in a vacuum), these galaxies are only moving through space at ~2% the speed of light or less.

But space itself is expanding, and that accounts for the overwhelming majority of the redshift we see. And space doesn't expand at a speed; it expands at a speed-per-unit-distance: a very different kind of rate. When you see numbers like 67 km/s/Mpc or 73 km/s/Mpc (the two most common values that cosmologists measure), these are speeds (km/s) per unit distance (Mpc, or about 3.3 million light-years).

The restriction that "nothing can move faster than light" only applies to the motion of objects through space. The rate at which space itself expands — this speed-per-unit-distance — has no physical bounds on its upper limit.

Ask Ethan: How Does The Fabric Of Spacetime Expand Faster Than The Speed Of Light?

Nothing in the Universe can travel faster than the speed of light. So how does space itself do it?

www.forbes.com

Eventually, the galaxies we see will start to disappear, as they move away from us faster than the speed of light. Eventually we will see no galaxies in the sky. Imagine how different our scientific knowledge would be, if humans had just recently evolved in this environment. We would think there were no other galaxies, and Hubble would lose the Great Debate!

 

[zaangalewa]

Sorry but I can't wrap my mind around space expanding faster than the speed of light but objects not traveling at faster than the speed of light. It does not compute. There is something wrong with our understanding and I tend to believe it starts at the beginning when they gloss over the part of why the universe expanded in the first place.

TimeSpace is a non-Euclidean space

Some years ago they measured a triangle with the very first emissions, up to now. It showed 180° => The universe is flat. It follows the euclidian geometry.

 

[zaangalewa]

... Physics doesn’t begin until after the creation of the material world from nothing created by no thing. This is the realm of philosophy and logic.

Physics is natural philosophy. What you try to do has not a lot to do with philosophy. You say practically "I know, what I'm not able to know".

 

[zaangalewa]

A universe created from nothing is the only explanation which makes sense and fits the observed data. So I don't discount other universes or bubbles of space and time being created in the same manner.

But it is not a satisfying answer, because nothing comes from nothing - within our universe.

It is an immensely satisfying answer. Saying that God created the universe from nothing is immensely satisfying. Saying the universe was created from nothing is not the same thing as saying the universe was created by nothing. And lastly, God is no thing. No thing created the universe. God is no thing.

It sounds nice - but this means there is a titanic nothing between us and god, which we are not able to overstep as long as we are something on our own. We have to leave everything here to come home. But this is nothing what physicists ask for.

It is more than sounds nice, it is true.

Or not.

The only thing between us and God is surrendering our will to God.

It is the will of god to have children without an own will?

God has placed no barriers between us and Him.

Except that no one knows whether god exists or not exists?

So yes, as long as we are on our own and refuse to surrender to God's will we separate ourselves from God.

?

Knowing God's nature,

God's what? His meta-nature?

knowing how God created existence from nothing is not a barrier, it is how glorification of God is manifested.

And you think this has to do with physics? What has it to do with physics?