On the other hand weak emergence runs throughout my explorations in dynamical systems in the complex plane — jgill

What they look like? Can we consider them friends?

or based on ontological events that happened in your life vs epistemic ones which you may have participated in epistemically but not actually such as watching a horror movie or waving back at someone who was not waving at you)). — Shwah

You mean real stuff that happened and imaginary? That's quite some way to put it...

Is God the/one of the best thoeries we have? — Agent Smith

Gods are no theory and neither is the big bang, not even infinite of them. Do I have proof? Ýes. Of course, that's what I think.

Neither do I see your point. So, are we good? — L'éléphant

I have no point. Im just no solipsist. I believe dreams, gods, science, life, you, me, them, all there is, equally true and why requiring proof? The need for proof is just some silly invention, taught to you since you were a kid, in schools you were forced to go by the scientific establishment ruling the planet.

If space curves time curves.

Isn't frame-dragging bending? Or is torsion the real bending? You can stretch space without bending but can you bend without stretching?

Empty space doesn't bend, IMO. :chin: — jgill

What if you put mass in it?

The false assumption though is that machines can exhibit intelligent behavior. They will always have 0 IQ.

I had a dream. Im writing a short story about it. Ill letya know!

Ah yes! I think God is a grand narrative. There are a lot of grand narratives. Who is to tell which stands close to gods? I think my narrative is the true one. Why? Ill tell you after I walked our dog!

where the two meet — Constance

Which two? Alien territory and the familiar?

I am saying a comprehensive understanding of what this could be cannot be done thinking about divine creation nor human imagination — Constance

Why not?

How would you do this? — Constance

The medium of the dream could inform. Maybe that's how the gods contact us.

No, it can't expand or contract — Constance

Yes. You are right and wrong. The global expansion of the universe is apparent but to bend around mass it can stretch, which is indeed different from expansion.

How can space be accelerated or lean? Can it sway? The metric yes. But can the metric accelerate?

space cannot move unless it moves In something else. — Constance

Space dont move. Only the objects in it. It can expand or contract but has no speed. The metric is the just the metric of GR.

Much, no, most that we casually understand has to be dismissed. — Constance

Casually yes. Non-casually, after deep contemplation ("out yonder, is this huge world, which exists, independently of us human beings, and which stands before us, like a great eternal riddle; the contemplation of this world beckons, like a liberation"), no.

Is bending curving? Space can have curvature. The metric can change.

you grateful to your god/s?
Do you express submission to your god/s?
Do you acknowledge that they were there before you and that they contextualize you? — baker

Good questions bakerboy!
-Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The humanid gods are questionable little buggers!
-Off course they were there before me
-They contextualized the whole universe and all creatures evolving in it. For there own advantage. They watch us eternally. Without moral expectations or other bs.

But this is just what I say space cannot have. Try to conceive of something bending without a medium in which something can bend. — Constance

You can't bend space like a stick. You bend it with mass.

I mean the term 'gods' was certainly an invention, a fiction created by humans long ago — Constance

That's a questionable assumption...

Okay, so the universe has a beginning (there is no infinite regression of cause and effect)? — chiknsld

There is an infinite regression and progression of beginnings. The current universe, by physical necessity (thermodynamics) has a beginning of thermodynamic time. The end of this universe, when accelerated away to infinity, is the trigger of a new inflation at the singularity, after which it all starts again. Eternally. But we wont experience boredom like the gods, which was the reason for their creation. They didn't take the human gods into account. Their panto babbles led mankind and the planet astray.

Theism proper requires active membership in a monotheistic religion. Without that, one is just making stuff up to suit one's fancy. — baker

It's the mono-freaks making things up. To be a theist one has to think one god only exists? Why? How do you know I make things up?

Sean Carroll made an interesting argument about God. He said suppose we lived in a world where children never suffered. The priests would be saying "look, clearly there is a God because we see how he protects the young ". Yet we don't live in that world. This argument for me takes down teleological arguments. What do you guys think? — Gregory

How does he know the priests would say this. He just imagines that in an attempt to oppose theism while he doesn't even understand the workings of the universe.

Sean Carroll made an interesting argument about God. He said suppose we lived in a world where children never suffered. The priests would be saying "look, clearly there is a God because we see how he protects the young ". Yet we don't live in that world. This argument for me takes down teleological arguments. What do you guys think? — Gregory

You shouldn't take Carroll too seriously. The argument he refers to is well known in philosophy. It's a fallacy, if p then no q. So p is true. Nonsense of the priests. Carroll is prejudiced as he wants to objectify his limited worldview.

I see no path forward for us on this topic.
There is no common ground to build on — universeness

The whole universe is our common ground.

No, the OP makes no claims to this. If anything is definitely negates the necessity of a divine being — Philosophim

What else kicked it in being, even if eternal?

All things in motion and processes must have gotten a kick. The kicker can be non-directional in time. The omnipresent and ever present virtual particles constitute the kicker without time direction with the power to kick of thermo-time. The creation of eternal space and time requires a different kicker which must be divine in nature. An unknowable causal power.

but I was hoping for a more meaningful exchange with you on the premise of the OP. — universeness

What kind of exchange you had in mind? It's about the invalidity of atheism. I gave reasons why it's invalid. You say it's psycho pant babble. It explains our fooking around on Earth. An explanation that sattisfies more than the scientific one. The explanation being that we just fool around like the gods did. And their fooling around was eternal and without ground. They just fooled around and got tired of it. Understandable, after eternity! And now? What are your reasons that it is valid?

I suppose I will just have to wait in anticipation of your 'report.'
I personally think YOUR god(s) come from YOUR ID (as in Freud).
Your god playthings and your personal presentation of YOUR god(s) are harmless and at best, for me, 'entertaining,' but I was hoping for a more meaningful exchange with you on the premise of the OP. — universeness

Ah! Now you try to explain my thoughts about gods in a psychological framework. From my personal constitution or ID. That's the easy way out. I can explain your atheism in the same vain.

The resulting music hurts my ears. — universeness

Of course. The music made by the god-dj sounds awful in the ears of atheists. How else can it be?

But you won't reveal any details of YOUR personal relationship with these entities you now claim to have a commlink with — universeness

The only personal relationship I have is that they made me see something in a dream and by the unusual amount of theist threads: in 2 weeks: (a)theism, good and evil, Christianity, why are things they are, omnipotency, creation, time, particles, etcetera. 20 threads related. Havent seen this before. Also you have a part in the game! Science demystifies. Which is good! But not in relation to the meaning of life and the reason for our being.

will be listening for the god story, looking for a clue to something profound. Hint: I don't think they made us. Nor did we make them. It is a conspiracy and we are both in on it — Constance

Well, they made the universe, with all life evolving in it. I don't think we made them.
You mean it's a conspiracy that both the gods and life are involved in?

To observe at all is to condition the object — Constance

Of course. But we also have to condition the subject, i.e, us. There is no such thing as "an observation". Thats already a theoretical claim. How and what we observe is not theory-laden but a theory, a story on its own. Space can have an objective existence, like the bending of it. A bend space(time) is a physical reality. The GW hunters at LIGO don't wanna chase metaphysical ghosts!

F****** heaven is actually a pretty good description!

I think though that your view of gods is pretty subjective here! With such a god (God!) I can understand turning atheist!

Ok, contemplate your gods for me. Tell me about your feelings? — universeness

What is it you don't like about them? Im working on a short story to reveil it all. It can be read before not to long exclusively here on Teeee.. Peeee. .....ah WTF! :lol:

How do you know its woo woo?
— EugeneW
Do you really enjoy the panto exchange 'How do you know it isnt — universeness

The gods showed me.

When you have a cosmological eternal model, one cannot do other than conclude intelligences created it.
— EugeneW
Pure subject opinion, the atheist position rejects this so more panto exchange. — universeness

Dumb matter, even eternal, can't bring itself into existence.

repeat again, give Science the time and resources required to do this, meantime your are just engaging in panto talk. — universeness

And I repeat, who knows gods show up in the future.Or have already even....It's quite hard to reach us!

An attempt at dramatic prose, not evidence of god. — universeness

Likewise are the equations in physics, in the even more dramatically prose of math, said to be a universal language but only spoken by some, under the guise of the scientific clothes worn by the new priests. Let me assure you, the language it not that difficult and it's used to impress and expresses just approximate non-existent features of reality. Math just breaks up, tears apart and divides. It's a silly idea the hominid gods played around with and since they were involved in creation too we're stuck with it. Most gods weren't aware of their wicked deceit during the development of creation.

If you think we are the gods, then fine. Maybe we are. — Constance

I dont think we are the gods. I think they made us. They had good reason. There are as many gods as creatures in the universe. We just play the game they played already eternally. From virus gods to hominid gods. The god story will be revealed shortly... Exclusively here on Teeee...Peee...Eeeef!

Is space time a metaphysical concept — Constance

It's a physical concept. Our perception of space is like it really is. We can move in it. Objects can move in it. It's the sauce between matter. It's the stuff objects can move in.

What do Zeno's arrow paradox, God, Einstein's theory of time space, and performative contradictions have in common? — Constance

Zeno's arrow proves spacetime is continuous. The problem with discrete spacetime is particles moving in it and time advancing. Spacetime can't be broken up though and the nature of space remains a mystery.
Einstein's theory of spacetime showed we can actually bend space by mass. How mass informs space remains a mystery in GR.
The gods created spacetime. The reasons for their grounds remain a mystery.

That's a triplet mysteries. Performative contradiction, like I'm dead, are no mystery though.