The Science of God

reply to post by DaMod


God existing as pure infinite kinetics, before finitite anything existed. The kinetic was in the balance of expansive and contractive, addition and subtraction. Zero had to be created. God CHOSE to die for an infintesimal time slice by all of expansing enters into all of contractive. Finite was then created out of all infinite. A Zero. A singularity. A One. Created time and structural potential.

The rest in the Universe as fractal and chaos expansing and contracting, muliplication and division is fact as it is.

This was so God can be complete to the definition of Omnipotnet, omnipresent and omniscient, by becoming more than just infinite positive and negative, but also finite in an unlimited number of ways, times, it'll take forever.

So it is our purpose, we are to be the symbiotic vessels THROUGH WHICH God can become greater than infinite. Yes, we are being used but given free choice to have a two way comms setup instead of the standard one way comms link.

Hey, didn't some dude 2000 years ago do the same thing the Father did? Like Father, like Son. I submit it was a message on what it took to create the Universe as well as create a rift (door) between infinite and finite. ...and it's a freebe. You just need to record it in your life-span recording process and it's there for you to slip through later. The Door, once set in your recording, now can also provide a comms link if you choose before you die. Hard to keep it tuned into the right frequency with all these distractions.

The classic prog rock album by Yes, "Tales from Topographic Oceans" is supposedly about "the science of God" I thought maybe this thread would be about that at first lol

Great work putting all of that together, it was a very interesting read! I look at religion created by man as a simplistic attempt at grasping the concept of an existing god.

[edit on 21-5-2009 by mostlyspoons]

i have to correct you here DaMod, before the thread gets huge. it is not matter that cannot be created or destroyed, it is Energy .

when matter is destroyed, it turns into energy.

interesting thread over all, but you're going to have to rework the matter part.

I don't like the idea that since something is unexplainable, it somehow proves or adds to the case for God. I'm a spiritual person, but when is this nonsense going to stop? Science doesn't know everything at a given moment, so mentioning the suns would have ran out of hydrogen and things like that I find juvenal. All throughout history it seems that "unexplainable" things have been used to support God. Science is the understanding of reality through reception, and spirituality is the understanding of reality through bestowal.

Of course God could develop everything through thought, but I'd say that there is a will first to create.

How could we possibly understand something like that? How could we possibly know what something like that would want from us? How could we possibly know anything of god? This makes (at least scientifically) every religion ever thought of completely wrong. It doesn’t mean there isn’t a god, it just means we don’t know what or who god really is because god is far beyond our little brains.

God is bestowing in quality, that is scientifically sound. We are receiving in our quality through the ego, that is also sound. How is egoism incongruent with God/spirituality, that's the question. It wants us to become bestowing in our qualities so to become like God, which is bestowal. The concept really isn't that difficult if a person just thinks about the ego and human behavior. Considering how our egos will basically kill each other if it benefits us, how is that going to fit in heaven? You're going to kill your brother in heaven? Yeah, don't think so....

Therefore distance really doesn’t matter at this level of thinking

What determines closeness or distance is egoism. If God is the opposite of that, total bestowal, and we're totally receiving, we feel total separation from God. But when we develop that attribute of bestowal, then we move closer and have similarity of form.

Reduced to the smallest part, a person is an ego that seeks pleasure...something to consider.



I've read a lot of threads about creationism vs. evolution and it doesn't matter if we were instantly created or if humans developed from a long line of mutations. As someone posted, God created the physical laws of the universe, so since “natural laws” come from God, how could evolution not be seen as being entirely from God? If someone believes in a all encompassing God, then why are they afraid if we did develop through evolution from God-created natural laws. Hate to say it, but it comes from stupid people that are "told" that the *poof* humans theory has to be true and stupid people that hinge their faith upon believed impossibility observed through science.

[edit on 21-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

[edit on 22-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

Those interested in the nexus between religion and science might find a lot worth studying in sacred geometry. There is so much out there on this topic, and more than a few excellent series of youtube videos on this topic, so I won't attempt any kind of comprehensive list here. Use your old friend google if interested.

To me, math and geometry seems even more fundamental than science, so that's where I look for the true zone connecting the rational to the spiritual. Sacred geometry is particularly edifying in this respect, because in addition to being mathematically verifiable and meaningful, it also hits you instinctively and instantly on a raw visual level.

i like this thread. I wanted to add something though.

In my opinion we have a confusion with the concept of time.

If you were to take a particular moment in your life and look at the 'past' from there, everything is but a memory.

But memories are just factions of the brain, and the brain exists in the 'now'.

Therefore everything that exists and everything you think is from NOW.

Even a second after reading this is just a creation of your memory which is created from the 'now'.

Try and prove me wrong and your only proving a factor of your own memory wrong because, i dont even exist.. except in your own mind. And in mine

Good post OP, I'd love to hear your opinion on a similar subject over here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 21-5-2009 by anarcissus]

reply to post by silent thunder


i guess Williams Blakes vision of god and his subsequent painting could validate that point silent thunder
with the angle's (angels) being messengers of God.
i know its a religious image but William Blake probably had no other represenation to fall back on at the time.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c8ed55df6a50.jpg[/atsimg]

never discount the insights to "god" our artists and poets have given us, they ,although not scientific in nature ,could be just as important to our understandings.

reply to post by 2theC


I quite agree.

And I am quite taken with your angles/angels connection...brilliant.

well I have to say I would get along with you very well. I respect your deep thought into this whole concept of the universe. there's not a day that passes that I am not stuck thinking about one of these topics. Time: time has always been and always be and as for "GOD" there is a creator of this universe in SOME form of course.

nice videos by the way. What the Bleep do we Know: How Far Down the Rabbit Hole blows my mind and I could never watch it too many times!

good luck on your pondering. I wish you luck.

Huge star and huge Flag, my friend.

I only wish that this thread would not inevitably degenerate into a fist-fight. I agree, almost completely, with your OP...but I would also like to post a few counter points.

More to come.

Bravo for your willingness to eat the flames of the community. I am sure they are coming your way.

More to come.

I'm thinking to myself how I should go about this and one huge problem pops to mind - thanks to your original post...

I could:

1) From the scientific standpoint, google a billion websites and post links to scientific evidence that tests and demonstrates proven theories.

2) From a religious standpoint, throw up links to religious texts, which when (often extremely loosely) interpreted, can explain all things. Magnificent or Minute. You have but to read the text more closely to understand properly.


Let me sum it up in a way that i personally find beautiful:

One day of God's Creation; or thousaunds of years of documented Human development? You be the judge.



[Edit:] Don't misread my last statement. That is my POINT OF VIEW, not a question to readers. I personally am agnostic. Check out the OP and don't get to religious on me.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by SelfDestruct]

Originally posted by DaMod
Hello everyone. I've been meaning to post this for a long time. I am going [Every star is a massive nuclear furnace constantly converting hydrogen (its fuel) into helium (its exhaust). The sun in fact has only used up about 2% of it’s hydrogen since it came into existence (neat little factoid there). When a star runs out of hydrogen It eventual dies. The star’s death might be violent and might be subtle but the fact remains when the hydrogen is gone the star is doomed. During a nuclear fusion reaction, two hydrogen atoms fuze together and form one helium atom. That helium atom is eventually released into the vastness of space.

[edit on 21-5-2009 by DaMod]

In a red giant of up to 2.25 solar masses, hydrogen fusion proceeds in a shell-layer surrounding the core.[42] Eventually the core is compressed enough to start helium fusion, and the star now gradually shrinks in radius and increases its surface temperature. For larger stars, the core region transitions directly from fusing hydrogen to fusing helium.[

en.wikipedia.org...

Helium is also quite abundant, and important for star formation and stability.

During their helium-burning phase, very high mass stars with more than nine solar masses expand to form red supergiants. Once this fuel is exhausted at the core, they can continue to fuse elements heavier than helium.

en.wikipedia.org...


This describes stars of greater mass than our sun - our sun would decay at a faster rate, fusing carbon and oxygen sooner than more massive stars. Theories show however, that our sun will be washed away by stellar winds long before it starts fusing heavier elements than C and O.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by SelfDestruct]

Originally posted by DaMod
A being of this dimensional set up might be able to just think something into existence. (this is not beyond scientific possibility)

Is there a logic which would forbid more then one of these beings ?

I'm sure that if you can exercise possibility of ONE that you will not have problem allowing for more then one

reply to post by 5thElement


It's illogic to assume that can know for sure one way or the other.

Originally posted by DaMod
Without a god there could not have been a beginning of time. Think about it! What would have been before that? More time right? If nothing created the universe then it had no beginning and therefore has always been there.

If you can answer that question, you belong at MIT. The current argument goes:

The Big Bang gave birth to the dimensions that we know (and dont know), time being one of those - and its the most controversial of the dimensions that we can observe, obviously.

Einstein resolved these problems by invoking a method of synchronizing clocks using the constant, finite speed of light as the maximum signal velocity. This led directly to the result that time appears to elapse at different rates relative to different observers in motion relative to one another.

As of now, we measure time time based on the speed of light, as observed by Einstein. Before the big bang there was no light. We know this because the mass of the singularity (much more massive than our current entire universe) would have prevented anything from escaping.

So, it is, based on our current human understanding impossible to comprehend what - if anything - was before the big bang.

Here is where even I have to lean toward creationism. Why would such a singularity exist? What created it? What came before it?

The possibilities are infinite.


[Edit:] source = en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 22-5-2009 by SelfDestruct]

reply to post by DaMod


Time is a dimension, therefore it did not exist before the universe existed. As the universe expanded, so did all the rest of the dimensions that make up this vast universe. Time was formed when the universe was formed, to contradict your claim that there HAS to be a beginning of time. Time began when the universe was created.

On the topic of your hydrogen as a "gas" in the universe, all the hydrogen in the universe that exists now, was created during the big bang. The early stages of the universe were very unstable and rough, and it took a while for the universe to cool and for the hydrogen to settle. In the large expanse of space, hydrogen was very spread apart, and over a VERY long period of time. Through gravity, this hydrogen was able to come together and form stars. We are talking about a LARGE amount of hydrogen by the way. Seeing that are universe is roughly 13.6 billion years old, It took a long time for the hydrogen to come together and form the very first stars. Our sun itself is 4.5 billion years old, and we know that it is the offspring of another star's supernova, seeing that our solar system contains elements only produced from supernovae.

Continuing on god, I am a firm believer in human consciousness. The human mind is much more than what we perceive it to be. Through spiritual awakening and expansion of consciousness, us humans can do much more than what we are capable of. Many people dismiss the idea of psychic powers, but it is actually a very serious topic. Many governments, including the United States government, researched Remote Viewing (if you don't know what it is, google it) and many other things related to psychic abilities.

From what I see, we aren't the only beings in this universe. Not at all. God can be anything, and we have only the slightest ideas of our capabilities at the moment.



This is a good video for everyone to understand the 10 dimensions



[edit on 5/22/09 by synyster.]

[edit on 5/22/09 by synyster.]

WOA WOA WOA. I walk away for a bit and see what happens. I have so many people to respond to, but its time for bed. I will respond later but I think I have something to offer on the subject still after reading the replies offered. Please be patient! I am tired!!

[edit on 22-5-2009 by DaMod]

Originally posted by optimus primal
i have to correct you here DaMod, before the thread gets huge. it is not matter that cannot be created or destroyed, it is Energy .

when matter is destroyed, it turns into energy.

interesting thread over all, but you're going to have to rework the matter part.

I will reply to this one though before I go to bed. I think the rest I'm going to have to spend a bit of time on.

for you however.....

First law of thermodynamics.

Originally posted by ghaleon12
God is bestowing in quality, that is scientifically sound. We are receiving in our quality through the ego, that is also sound. How is egoism incongruent with God/spirituality, that's the question. It wants us to become bestowing in our qualities so to become like God, which is bestowal. The concept really isn't that difficult if a person just thinks about the ego and human behavior. Considering how our egos will basically kill each other if it benefits us, how is that going to fit in heaven? You're going to kill your brother in heaven? Yeah, don't think so....

[edit on 21-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

This thread does not mention the existence of heaven. Heaven is a man made term and does not apply. For all we know in reality there is no heaven and there is no hell. How do we know these things? Man made them.. Therefore the concept does not apply to this thread. Remember this is about god as a scientific concept. Heaven would imply a specific religion involved which is off topic. For all we know god and the devil are the same being therefore implicating polarity is invalid.

Ok really going to bed now...