Indeed. It has to do with the western god image.

The DIMP guy and the Mobius strip guy never posited a god to fill in any gaps in their physics however. — universeness

You really don't get it. There is no gap.

No doubt the DIMP guy and the Mobius strip/Klein bottle guy and probably a whole army of other individuals who think they know the true T.o.E would have a similar opinion of your posit to the one you hold of theirs — universeness

You forgot to mention the string woowoo. But that's the official woowoo not? By guys who really know it. The only thing the guys like Witten, Strominger, etc. are good at is getting tax money for the woowoo they spend their days thinking on.

No doubt the DIMP guy and the Mobius strip/Klein bottle guy and probably a whole army of other individuals who think they know the true T.o.E would have a similar opinion of your posit to the one you hold of theirs. The DIMP guy and the Mobius strip guy never posited a god to fill in any gaps in their physics however. — universeness

The point is, I understand ohysics and they don't. I read some stuff of the DIMP guy and lemme tell you, if you don't know about quarks and basic QM, which he tried to explain by wave crests, than you relaize his intentions are good, but his physics sucks. Just like strings and a CY manifold to fit the forces. The manifold is constructed to project a particukar symmetry in, the SU3)×SU(2)xU(1) symmetry of the SM. The more basic symmetry is SU(3)xSU(3)xU(1). You could readjust the manifold but the flaw of strings is that it poses vibrating strings in a manifold coupled to 4d. And that manifold is just used as a mathematical closet to out the charges and properties of interactions in with no real existence as the make belief, i.e., woowoo. No dark energy, And strings are background dependent, i.e., no real gravity description from a quantum, as the space is alresdy used as inout. And many more. What's your problem with gods in the first place. I think it shows the vanity of man that science explains everything. Because it doesn't. It were the gods who brought it into existence. My cosmological model can account for all cause, until infinite big bangs in the past. But the first reason were the gods. So no gods of the gaps, but gods for a reason. But be free not to see that reality. Stumble on in the dark... :lol:

Well, if you would underdstand the string theory and the bounce and the reason for the MWI you would see that these are BS woowoo's and you fall for the bait. Probably because of the math involved. The DIMP guy doesn't even have his knowledge about simple quarks straight and woowoofs even more. Sounds interesting but his theory is BS all the same.I like it that he tries but his attempt fails, Im sorry to say. An eternal series of big bangs just needs the 7d quantum vacuum with wormhole structure to be created and the bangs follow naturally, exactly as the intention of the gods was and I'm greatful they showed me!

Then this is where we strongly disagree! I think your physics failed to provide you with your last reason — universeness

Like that, physics never can offer a reason. My cosmology provides an explanation for dark energy, mass, matter-antimatter, the nature of particles and space, a following up of big bangs, particle families, dark matter, the existence of a mirror universe, time and pre inflation era. What more is there to explain? You can, as in the many worlds woowoo in the string landscape, or the MWI, include the universe in a larger picture, but that merely shifts the problem. Like that you push the solution farther and farther away. I know you have taken the woowoo of many worlds for granted, as propagated by the upper priests, but they offer you the same woowoo as the gods.

It shows again your "but in the future...(fill in all you wish for)" attitude. I have a final physical explanation. It doesn't need extra physics to explain it again! Now what?

In honesty: :clap:
Great words! Which shows their power!

I agree the reason or purpose for live is life itself, with all ups and downs (I experience both rather extremely, if you know what I mean), and the things you mentioned. And in this light gods disappear into thin air indeed. Still, all the great things in life, like painting, photography, dance, love, physics, etc. get a kind of load then in the sense that science can't explain them.

Thanks for your great comment!

So if you were having a meal with your wife and some of her family, in a restaurant to celebrate her birthday and the next table of 6 men, right next to you all started masturbating loudly, perhaps even helping each other. Would that be a nice night out for you? — universeness

Dunno. If I were in the mood I might even join in. I like women as well as men! My wife would disagree, naturally. And probably the restaurant owner too.

"Mayo on your french fries, gentlemen?"

"No thanks, we brought our own! We have to shake the container first pretty firmly though!"

"Ah, I see. Need some help?"

"No, but maybe you can bring some extra fries!"

:lol:

So, as I said. Your physics fell short, so, in your frustration, you turned to the woo woo in your dreams. — universeness

Again, precisely the point that I do understand the physics makes me pose woowoo. That's the only last reason, the closure. So it's my knowledge, not a gap in it, that makes me see, and the dream, of course.

But to the point of the OP, what do you think reason is, and should we trust it — Philosophim

If I want to know the reason of existence, I wanna know why there is a universe with life in it. A physical mechanism offers no answer to that question. I think I have a reasinable(!) cosmological model, but that still offers no reason. It just can't have come into existence out of the blue. There has to be a reason, an intention, a purpose, to let it appear from nothing. That reason offer gods. And power of creation was used. Took them a while though to invent the basic structure, like it took me 15 years to find the model. So the reason for lifee is not to pass on genes or memes (which is circular and based on the unproven central dogma in molecular biology), to sing, to perform, do science, dance, sport or paint, etc. Science can't explain it. All these activities are disenchanted by science. Gods bring back the wonder.

Most men will beat you up, some will beat you very badly if you act like that in front of those they feel protective towards. — universeness

The question is, why? How do I offend?

Dunno. Why people have such difficulty with sex in public? I can remember kissing a girlfriend in a public swimming pool once. A lady was offended because of it. She asked us not to do it in public. It was that it was an elderly lady... I absolutely wouldn't mind it if people procreated in public. We're an animal species! Why are people offended by it? What's the big deal about sex? It's an expression of love!

YOUR gods really are 'fake plugs' for the parts of the origin story YOUR struggles with physics currently can't answer. You are merely a 'gods of the gaps' facilitator. — universeness

The point is, I don't need no plug anymore i struggled with physics over 15 years now, even dreamt about it. The physics ain't the problem anymore. The big question then: became, what's the reason for that material to be there? Where did it come from? And that was answered in a vivid dream, in which I saw them tinkering to find the needed material contents. The people gods delivered their part...

Your scigodians offer no physical cosmology. Specially for you:

Scigod!

Mahatma Gandhi, Lincoln, JFK, Martin Luther king, Joan of arc, Jesus Christ etc - all martyrs. — Benj96

True, they all got killed and are the opposite of the tyrant, I saw once wisely observed. The tyrant rules when alive, the martyr when dead. Everybody loves you when your dead. Your fans will love when you're alive but wreaths are laid by the rest instead.

I see! According to some sources...the idea is to surrender one's freedom (free will). Islam translates as "surrender" your will to Allah! — Agent Smith

Most interesting! Will the will remain free after you waved the white flag to logica?

Nature says few words:
Hence it is that a squall lasts not a whole morning.
A rainstorm continues not a whole day.
Where do they come from?
From Nature.
Even Nature does not last long (in its utterances),
How much less should human beings? — T Clark

Let's analyze rationally and offer rational critique.

Nature says a lot of words, whispers constantly, screams at times. On just have to listen with a pure mind, unclothed by culture. As people are part of nature, so is culture, and nature even speaks and spells louder then. Speaking to us in the language we like to hear, in the language she wants, or sometimes screaming us something loudly in the ears without us actually hearing because we don't listen or maybe don't listen because we are deafened by culture.

Information is information, not matter or energy — Wayfarer

Information is contained in matter. The information in the braun is completely and totally different than used to operate on in computers. The Bekenstein maximum information content in the brain, proportional to the surface enclosing it, is valid for a dead brain. The living brain offers a place for all processes in the universe. Unlike a static computer memory chip that contains disconnected ones and zeroes only, connected by a computer program. The number of pathways in the brain by far exceeds the number of patterns of ones and zeroes on the computer memory chip.

1. Pre-Shannon: Vague, unquantified, concrete (easily graspable)

2. Post-Shannon: Precise, quantified, abstract (not easy to get a handle — Agent Smith

:up:

And finally that if gods are beyond logic, the conversation ends. — Banno

Gods are even more logical than people. Except the hu.an gods. It's not intent that brought them into existence. Neither is it belief. You put the horse behind the wagon.

I received an an alert that your link was blocked due to a Trojan virus — Harry Hindu

A new variant showing up?

No, that's the piper. He wants his money — Agent Smith

Does he pipe for money?

"pijpen: whistle; blow; hum; give a blow-job; suckpijp: tobacco-pipe; pipe; piping; pipage"

What say you?
↪180 Proof — 180 Proof

Ceramic psycho! Unholy...

Please explain. Atheism causes suffering? — Jackson

A lot!

It is a mystery to me why anyone believes in a benevolent God. — Jackson

That's because of the western conception of god or the scientific religion ruling supreme. Richard Dawkins and the likes are revolting against gods because their incapacity to understand and by revolting they show their obedience to science, trying to get the respect of that of the genius physicist they always so aspired to be but lack the genius for.

The fact that they exist is not subject to logic? — Banno

Of course not. They just exist. No logic required. Our knowledge of them follows logically.

Information, as the word implies, means in formation. In physics, entropy is related to information. A solid at zero kelvin contains zero entropy. There is only one rigid state. The same material in a gas state contains the maximum of entropy. The number of states is high and the entropy is proportianal to the number of possible configurations of particles that leaves the overall structure the same. Both the maximum entropy (which is also temperature dependent) and the minimum can easily be described. The interesting things happen if the particles form intermediary patterns. The information is not high nor low but contains interesting "in formations".

I mean the fact that they exist. Not their existence.

Then god is an egg riding a bicycle made of flatus. — Banno

:lol:

Why, if they are the same as life in our universe then they obey the same laws.

The only reasonable conclusion is that this conversation with you is utterly pointless, because you have left reason behind. — Banno

I think gods offer the only reason for existence of the basics of the universe.

Frankly, if they are not subject to logic, — Banno

Well, their existence is not subject to logic. They are subject to the same logic as we are subject to.

Logically absurd. — Banno

That might be but gods are not subject to logic.

But they can't all be — Janus

That's the idea our brains are short-wired with. It's the Greco-Roman idea tought at our schools from young age. Modern thinking is based on that silly idea some cooked up. Why is it so difficult to accept there can be more of them? Because then it isn't one anymore?

then money does not exist logically prior to our belief in it. — Banno

Indeed. Before the common believe in the value of money existed, a banknote would be a strange object.

But gods are a belief brought into existence because they exist prior to the belief. It's not that complicated. And maybe belief is not the right word. It's a certainty.

The idea of many absolute realities contradicting one another makes no sense. — Janus

It's a paradoxical idea. I had a long discussion about this on another philosophy forum. The idea of a unique absolute reality originates in the Greek philosophers. Xenophanes created the idea in the context of the many Greek gods and changed them into one omni super god monster, which became the one and only, unimaginable God. Similar like Plato's mathematical, unknowable ultimate reality, approximately knowable. Both ideas formed the basis of western religion and science. Let the idea gi and we're left with a multitude of absolute realities, if people want them to be.

In the sense I mean it, no one can have any absolute (context free) objective reality so the problem doesn't arise. — Janus

Maybe they can't but they want to have their worldview absolute existence. The particle physicist wants his preons to be true, the theist his gods, the astrologist his system of prediction, or the Aboriginal his dreamtime.

It's unclear what this means. It sounds a bit like direction of fit, but at the least needs some clarification. — Banno

How can gods become reality by believing in them? They exist, like the paper for money exist. We can collectively project value in banknotes, but how can we project a belief in gods into gods that already exist?

.
— whollyrolling

:fire: — Agent Smith

:lol:

...

Some do. Others, like me, question the very idea that the idea of anything being objectively true in any absolute (context free) sense is even coherent. — Janus

Well, an absolute reality has the living being as context, paradoxically as it might sound. My absolute reality of gods is a different one from the atheist scientist. Why should there be one absolute reality? By definition? That's a silly invention made in ancient Greece, on which, sadly enough, modern science is based. I think there can be more objective realities. It depends on who you ask. Many problems arise by claiming that your objective reality should be the same for everyone.

There's more to it than that. If you alone believe that certain pieces of paper are money, then you will never be able to use them as such. What is required is a collective intent to use the paper as money. — Banno

Of course. If other people don't know the value of my 20 euro note, it will be hard to buy something with it.

Considering gods, there is a difference with projecting the believe of value in money. When believing in gods there is no projecting of a belief but rather, the believe is projected into us, like the material existence of the moneypaper is projected into us. We don't project the belief in gods like we project the belief of value of money.

I don't think any of the stories necessarily are, or can be shown to be, objectively true, if by "objective" is mean 'true regardless of belief or opinion'. — Janus

Not necessarily. But we want them to.

Considering matter and mind, information is, in all humble humbleness, is not the determining property. True, particles interact with one another to form structures, forms, in form, but its the content of matter that allows these patterns to occur. Particles are small pieces of mind combining because their charges allow them to couple via the medium of the quantum vacuum between them. The pieces of mind combine into more and more complex minds in matter with bodies to reach out and interact, i.e., living beings!

Very many did lose their faith and the enormous cultural or secular Jewish diaspora is, in part, testament to this. — Tom Storm

Don't overdo it...

The only deity consistent with a world (it purportedly created and sustains) ravaged by natural disasters, man-made catastrophes & self-inflicted interpersonal suffering is either a Sadist or a fiction – neither of which are worthy of worship. — 180 Proof

Total BS! The only eternal deities in an eternal non-physical heaven consistent with the ways of the material universe, are the eternal non-physical deities of which all universal lives are temporary material copies, eternally recurring. As simple as that. Your divine counterpart laughs atya... :lol: