Coincidental"? Please identify the things upu consider coincidental. — Relativist

I mean the random distribution of the momenta of real particles that are inflated from the vacuum. Well, maybe not all random as they all inflate alike. But still... The real particles, out of which you and I are formed, started to inflate. I think a previous universe is the trigger for a new inflation, but that still doesn't explain where this eternal triggering comes from. There just has to be intelligences behind it. Or not, who knows, but I feel more comfortable, in the knowledge that there is such reason behind it. It doesn't provide moral or any other religious BS. Only a reason. If the heavenly gods got bored with eternal live I can imagine they created a material copy of heaven. And since there are a lot of god kinds, we should be carefull with creation. It's not meant for us only. That's maybe the only moral...

In the broad river of time there might be tiny eddies where momentarily particles of reality circle before being caught up in the forward momentum — jgill

Yes! Kind of. The vacuum contains particles fluctuating in time and from them forward time emerged, before the big inflation.

I guess you mean "Undercover"? The guy playing the major role, Frank Lammers, plays the role of the silly family father in a commercial for a supermarket. He runs for Jumbo, with an empty plastic Jumbo bag, passes people going there too, the camera shows his greedy face (which is fun!) he jumps on a small wagon, and rolls in, with arms wide open...

Actors, all suffering from identity crisis. I know...

What do you mean by "default position"? I had assumed you were mirroring atheists who propose that atheism should be assumed as a starting point, but your statement implies you concluded it only after learning about the cosmos, after previously having a contrary or neutral position. — Relativist

My default position was that science has the answers. But it hasn't, in principle. So now my default position is science plus gods. They provide the reason for origin and the nature of matter.

After growing up Catholic, and spending years questioning what I'd been taught, I concluded gods don't exist. My default would have been to unquestioningly accept what I was taught, like most theists — Relativist

With me, it's exactly the opposite. I studied physics and was tought in the books that all can be explained by physical processes (the university was Christian though and I even had to sign I was a Christian! I didn't visit college, except for the last year, a few times; I can't stand classrooms). But science can't explain everything, especially not the origin of the universe, which gets clearer the more you know about such stories as strings or my own theory.

My Second Universe can lick your Second Universe." — Ken Edwards

:lol:

What stones do you make? I do treetrunks, which I found out after painting and photographing, is really rewarding. Nature's, around the corner, in a forrest, is full of crazy natural forms. I take them, and live myself out on them. Lovely!

I think your definition is incomplete. I learned that we have two different things - Memory and the Recall of eventsl. I learned that memories are only memories of one's own thoughts during the event and are not a reconstruction. But "Recall" is the revisiting of the event and listening and watching the event again. A photographic memory is a good example. — Ken Edwards

If you have learned a math formula, like a quadratic equation, that's because you saw one or invented one in your inner world. Both the physical world and your thoughts about it leave memory trails in your brain. If you see a quadratic equation in front of your nose, examples of it, you get to learn the concept. You can recall them or remember them them because there is a kind of pattern that has been engraved on your neural structure, but that pattern only exists when it's active. When you remember it. The pattern is reconstructed when you think about it. It clicks, or falls, or strangely attracts, to the pattern once imprinted. One neuron is involved in zillions of patterns, so it's not the a memory like on a computer chip (with zeroes and ones patterned) but an implicit memory that gets clear when an already experienced pattern is experienced again. The recall is the clicking into an earlier engraved patter, and only when the pattern actually is reconstructed, can you speak of a memory. So if you are dead, I can't see, by looking in your brain, what memories there still are. That's only to know for a living brain. You brain implicitly contains more memories than it contains particles. A computerchip contains far less memory than it's constituting particles.

Hillary is a lost cause in my opinion — Nickolasgaspar

:lol:

Well, at least you make me laugh! Gnight!

I rarely do so. I don't need to do that. I have to clarify my position --and I usually do that-- myself. If I can't it means that my opinion or explanation is not good or I have not understood the subject. Einstein has said “If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.” Here, I used a quote myself! :smile: (But only after I have made my point and because I love this quote! :smile: — Alkis Piskas

Are you my mirror image...? Damned, it looks so. Seems I read my own writing. Scarry! :grin:

Speaking of time... Its almost three in the night here... Gnight!

Memories are the same thing: Patterns and arrangements of brain cells. — Ken Edwards

Here, I don't agree. A memory is an active reconstruction of an experience you had. Learning is creating the right substrate for memories to be reconstructed (by strengthening neuron connections).

Ken's law #20. All movements and all actions of any kind can exist, as such, only in the Real Universe. Including actions made by a second universe.

Ken's law #21. No negatives can exist in the Big Bang Universe. — Ken Edwards

You have 19 other laws? Interesting thoughts. I agree, more or less. The inner universe can simulate every process in the outer, physical world. We can mentally shape it and as bodies influence it physically. The body walks between these two worlds. The outer world is continuously projected into our inner world, which resonates and shapes it.

Listen,the Freddie chip replaced most on board logic enabling the production of cheaper boards. Also all daughter boards where remove in the previous update. The SIO connection was an early implimentation of the USB protocol allowing hot swap and daisychain of peripherals. The architecture consisting of one cpu and many co processors was adopted by the industry and it its the standard to this day! — Nickolasgaspar

I couldn't agree more! Do you need a chip replacement?

The arguments you use for your beliefs and for the excuses you use to avoid exposing your beliefs are ridiculous. — Nickolasgaspar

The point is, I don't use arguments. A belief is not based on argument. It's based on reason.

Hillary ...first be honest to your self and then to others. You act like a child. — Nickolasgaspar

I am honest. With myself and with you. Children are honest.

If you weren't trying to convince people you wouldn't be whining about other scientists not listening to you — Nickolasgaspar

That's gotta do with science, not gods. If they don't wanna belief in gods, it's completely up to them. But as they claim to be interested in science and the material universe, I thought it would be nice to offer them a new cosmology (which the gods made me see!). But they won't answer or help me refine it. Or even give a simple reply. Except for Haim Harari.

I agree. Well, except that matter can move in all kinds of directions — Alkis Piskas

But not back to time zero...

Time reversal in physics formulae is often touted as an indication that processes might run backwards in time, but I suspect the interchangeability of + or - signs are just mathematical artifacts. — jgill

Yes. All processes are reversible on the small level. But try to reverse it all. You won't get it done! That's why the laws of thermodynamics are time asymmetric. But why is entropy increasing, instead of decreasing? Of course the chance of a gas in a container to be in one corner is small, but if it's motion was reversed it would go towards smaller volume and the law would be that the smaller chance is visited. If the motion of the whole universe was reversed it would be crunching towards the singularity.

It can ... If take its battery out or I break it! — Alkis Piskas

:lol:

And sometimes, when I clap my hands and yell: SILENCE!

I have seen a guy in English parliament smashing his writchwatch! Time's up!

You like his basking in his anti-intellectualism? Right, let’s dumb down all discussions by shutting off reference to those who have articulated the issues most throughly — Joshs

No, it's not that I don't like references, but Alkis is right that a lot philosophical conversation is about what other philosophers say. Which is good, don't get me wrong, but they are just humans too.

I don't know. But I do know Smolin.

Do you mean Smolen or Smolin?

Some of us, like Mr Hillary comes with beliefs and makes absolute statements for their truthiness — Nickolasgaspar

Yes. But Im not trying to convince you. If you dont believe it then it's up to you. If I would use my believe to teach you morals, it would be different. But I dont. Be hetero, be gay, be socialist, capitalist, aboriginal, whatever. But when you say my belief is childish and needs proof, Ill get defensive, naturally.

For me, it's true, for you its not. As simple as that. If you ask positive proof, I ask you for negative proof. And you havent. The proof I gave you, you dont accept. What more can I do? You want me to get all gods from heaven and show you? So they can meet their mortal counterparts?

In Physics, "static" refers to bodies at rest or forces in equilibrium. That is, it refers to physical things. Time is not one of them. But even then, something static has the possibility to change state, like something "stationary" that I mentioned earlier. — Alkis Piskas

The clock can't be stopped. There is no configuration of objects that stays the same forever. The global arrangement of matter always moves in one direction.

So you seem to believe there has to be a reason for everything. Why think so? — Relativist

Well, not for everything. Only for the existence of the universe... which is pretty much everything...

I just can't imagine we are the result of coincidental quantum fluctuation leading to an evolving universe. Or that we are the result of evolving life whose only purpose it is to pass on genes or memes. There has to be something unexplainable in the universe and gods put that in it. Why there are eternal gods who got bored? Bored virus gods, bored whale gods, bored human gods? Dunno! A mystery, which makes the universe mysterious again. So you could say that the scientific explanation is the cause!

I believe that we are here to express our opinion, however it is formed. If, for example, I ask you, "What do you think about death?", would you answer "Well, Kierkegaard in his Philosophical Fragments said that ...". I don't care about what Kierkegaard said. I asked what do you think — Alkis Piskas

Better one even! :grin:

I also know about what a lot of guys who have or had an opinion about time If cite them, and then other TPF members cite from their own guys, would that be a discussion? — Alkis Piskas

Ha! Good one!

Why not from future to past? Because it doesn't exist. Time is just illusion. All there is, is just human memory. If every human died today, then tomorrow there would be no time. Just silence and nothing. I
think it is what Kant said too - about time.

Space and time is nothing but a form of human intuition according to Kant. I think he is correct. — Corvus

Sounds reasonable! I wished I could see it like that. Indeed, when all life has gone, time and space are gone. Only black silence... And then... what's that sound...? Is it a guitar...? What lovely sounds! Aaahh! It Corvus, on the eternal guitar! Great thing not, the guitar! Timeless! :smile:

I wanna buy an electric one. It looks so easy, playing on them. With a headset for the neighbors and going fully fledged in the weekend. On Sunday morning...

don't learn the truth in my dreams by gods! — Nickolasgaspar

Neither do I. But they showed themselves. I can't help it. Flober can tell you they don't exist but then he's lying. Did you ask him proof?

They first have to be demonstrated as true before one claims they provide a reason for existence...... — Nickolasgaspar

The existence of the universe is sufficient proof for me. Science offers no reason, only mechanisms. The mechanisms and the material it offers can't provide reason for its own existence.

In other words, its no gods of the gaps I believe in. That would be too easy. And you can get to know the gods by looking at the universe and life in it. It resembles a temporally finite version of eternal heaven. All animals, all humans, all life, has a god counterpart. They just got bored living eternal heavenly life. So they created us. For me that's an absolute truth. Other people might have different absolute truths. There is not one, an idea the old Greek invented and we are stuck with.

wants...but he can not make up his own facts on the Ontology of the universe — Nickolasgaspar

I don't make up claims about the ontology of the material universe. Science investigates that universe and material is bound to certain behavior. But insofar the reasons for the material universe,and life in it, are concerned, how can I use scientific inquiry?

. If he'd like to convince others that his belief in God is rational, then (and only then) he would need to demonstrate that its rational by sharing and discussing his reasoning. — Relativist

Well said! :up:

Dude I don't want to believe that someone old enough to vote, raise children and drive can make such silly claims....I think you are a troll... — Nickolasgaspar

I believe they do on a base of scientific knowledge. They provide a reason for existence.

think you are a troll... — Nickolasgaspar

You believe in trolls? Did the gods tell you in a dream they don't exist? How did they tell you if they don't exist?

I make many scientific claims. They need evidence. But gods are no scientific claim. They don't need evidence. Believe would not be believe anymore with evidence.

I don't promote any claims — Nickolasgaspar

You promote gods don't exist. Why should I prove them in the first place? But if you want. They cant show themselves directly. That would fuck up the material order. They could use hidden variables of QM but only on microscale. So who knows in what QM experiments they show up as a divergent chance. Or i dreams, like they did for me. You think they would show themselves in you? Don't think so.

Yeah, every cloud has sliver lining as they say. — Corvus

How's the guitar play? :smile:

0

Yes. The clock to capture time with, is a human invention. But time itself, the irreversible natural processes flow from less to more global entropy (with local reduction as on Earth). Aint processes flowing? The question is though, why not from future to past?

This isn’t authentic time you’re describing, it’s a game being played within the bounds of a pre-given schematics masquerading as time. — Joshs

It's reversed time. But why isn't this actually happening? It could have been like that. Just reverse all motion. Why was it set in motion like it has been set?

that's your problem Mr Hillary, not mine. To be precise its an intrinsic problem of unfalsifiable claims based on non naturalistic principles.
Fortunately the burden is on the claim and as a believer you will have to meet it. — Nickolasgaspar

The burden is on you, dear Nickolast. Try to disprove your claim. You can't.

I don't have a "default state" about gods — Relativist

Yes you have. You consider them non existent, and just to be safe you say that might evidence show up you believe in them. Well, you need the evidence and I don't. I know for sure they exist. I saw them in a dream, making preparations for creation.

Theists are apt to form arguments from ignorance — Relativist

Yes, arguments from ignorance. The usual reply. I have heard the same thing from others. But the fact is, I argue from knowledge of the cosmos. I know the workings of the cosmos. And thats the basis of my my default position that next to the cosmos gods exist.