Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #370504 > unrolled thread

Re: Where is the center of the universe?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 17:45 -0600
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-20 23:48 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:27 +0100
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 05:13 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 12:57 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:44 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:17 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:22 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-21 12:08 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-21 10:56 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 08:05 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-21 14:18 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:48 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:21 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-23 17:34 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 11:31 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 15:54 -0500
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-23 13:04 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 13:43 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 16:49 -0500
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 16:17 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 16:52 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:24 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 15:24 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:43 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-30 09:55 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-02 12:50 +0100
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-21 06:43 -0500
      Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:45 -0500
        Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". Edward Stansfield <stansfield5REM6@linuxmail.org> - 2015-11-21 14:11 -0500
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-21 20:37 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-21 21:06 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 11:43 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 09:01 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 14:59 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 07:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 16:00 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 08:18 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 17:50 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:38 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 14:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 23:07 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 16:22 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-23 22:09 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-23 15:15 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 12:01 +0000
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 04:52 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 14:33 +0000
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 07:05 -0800
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 15:23 +0000
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-24 16:30 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 14:02 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:32 -0600
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 22:52 +0000
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:51 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 17:07 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 14:21 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:14 +0000
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 16:27 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 01:50 +0000
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 18:18 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:44 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 07:53 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 12:39 +0000
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:48 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:47 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 10:32 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 03:03 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 09:47 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 23:31 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 19:28 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-11-25 21:37 -0700
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 23:52 +0100
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-01 21:52 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-11-26 00:36 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 01:33 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 21:36 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:22 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:27 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 00:48 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 17:34 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-26 23:49 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 04:39 -0800
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 04:54 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 05:11 -0800
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 06:02 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 16:08 +0100
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-28 17:51 +0100
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 00:20 +0100
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 11:10 +0100
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 11:45 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 13:01 +0100
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 04:55 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 14:33 +0100
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 06:24 -0800
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 15:50 +0100
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 07:06 -0800
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 16:11 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 04:56 -0800
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 05:48 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 06:16 -0800
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-30 22:50 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 16:27 -0800
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 07:51 +0100
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 23:09 -0800
                                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 08:31 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-12-01 00:15 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 09:59 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 11:16 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 11:02 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:07 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:16 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 17:37 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 18:47 +0100
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 18:11 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:06 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:04 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 23:09 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 17:50 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:01 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:05 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 12:42 -0800

Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →

#370642

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:00:47 AM UTC-7, Walter Ilinois wrote:
>> Gary Harnagel wrote:
>> 
>> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
>> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from
>> >> the universe there.
>> > 
>> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to
>> > what the Bible says.
>> 
>> Sounds fascinating, let's hear.
> 
> "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

You are not going to allude that the creator of this simulation can be 
contained by the simulation self. This is and can be NOT possible. The 
Central Processing Unit must be outside, beyond the veil. The proof for 
this is that the computer only gives answers when *asked* (in QM 
*observation*). Please remark the requirements for "praying".

But let me know what you know.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370657

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:50:41 AM UTC-8, Walter Ilinois wrote:
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> 
> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:00:47 AM UTC-7, Walter Ilinois wrote:
> >> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >> 
> >> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
> >> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from
> >> >> the universe there.
> >> > 
> >> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to
> >> > what the Bible says.
> >> 
> >> Sounds fascinating, let's hear.
> > 
> > "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
> 
> You are not going to allude that the creator of this simulation can be 
> contained by the simulation self. This is and can be NOT possible. The 
> Central Processing Unit must be outside, beyond the veil. The proof for 
> this is that the computer only gives answers when *asked* (in QM 
> *observation*). Please remark the requirements for "praying".
> 
> But let me know what you know.


No, G-d _said_, and there _was_.

The Universe contains itself.  
It wouldn't need Earth to so be.

Gentlemen, as it were, gentle people, 
I want you all to endeavor to uphold 
this as a forum for us all to have our 
say, and to do your best to present and 
exchange knowledge about natural 
philosophy that is physics.

"Nothing then not nothing":  most books 
and creation mythoi over time start this 
way.  That answers a deep fundamental 
question then for the history.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370663

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 12:38:55 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:50:41 AM UTC-8, Walter Ilinois wrote:
> > Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:00:47 AM UTC-7, Walter Ilinois wrote:
> > >> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
> > >> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from
> > >> >> the universe there.
> > >> > 
> > >> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to
> > >> > what the Bible says.
> > >> 
> > >> Sounds fascinating, let's hear.
> > > 
> > > "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
> > 
> > You are not going to allude that the creator of this simulation can be 
> > contained by the simulation self. This is and can be NOT possible. The 
> > Central Processing Unit must be outside, beyond the veil. The proof for 
> > this is that the computer only gives answers when *asked* (in QM 
> > *observation*). Please remark the requirements for "praying".
> > 
> > But let me know what you know.
> 
> 
> No, G-d _said_, and there _was_.
> 
> The Universe contains itself.  
> It wouldn't need Earth to so be.
> 
> Gentlemen, as it were, gentle people, 
> I want you all to endeavor to uphold 
> this as a forum for us all to have our 
> say, and to do your best to present and 
> exchange knowledge about natural 
> philosophy that is physics.
> 
> "Nothing then not nothing":  most books 
> and creation mythoi over time start this 
> way.  That answers a deep fundamental 
> question then for the history.


Someone's supposed to emit 
"I'm an automaton, how dare 
you be so human-centric, you 
humanist".

(Here, though, we can note that 
sometimes "humanist" has been 
interpreted as opposite its clear 
meaning:  pro-human, for all not 
just for each.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370667

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
>> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the
>> universe there.
> 
> This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to what
> the Bible says.

Oh wow, I accidentally entered the crackpotverse.

JFTR: 

“¹In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ²And the earth was 
without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the 
Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. […]”
[Bible, King James Version (1611), Genesis 1]


F'up2 alt.religion

PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370668

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 4:07:25 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > [...] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the
> >> universe there.
> > 
> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to what
> > the Bible says.
> 
> Oh wow, I accidentally entered the crackpotverse.
> 
> JFTR: 
> 
> "¹In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ²And the earth was 
> without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the 
> Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. [...]"
> [Bible, King James Version (1611), Genesis 1]
> 
> F'up2 alt.religion
> 
> PointedEars

What?  You want to Bible bash?  The interpretation of the word "heaven"
can change what you think you've proven.  Some verses strongly imply that
God is an emergent property of the universe.

Gary

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370747

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 4:07:25 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:
>> Gary Harnagel wrote:
>> > [...] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> >> In Christianity, the belief is instead that the "God" *created* the
>> >> universe (for humans); "God" therefore is an entity separate from the
>> >> universe there.
>> > This may be what Christianity today believes, but it is contrary to
>> > what the Bible says.
>> Oh wow, I accidentally entered the crackpotverse.
>> 
>> JFTR:
>> 
>> "¹In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ²And the earth
>> was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
>> And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. [...]"
>> [Bible, King James Version (1611), Genesis 1]
>> 
>> F'up2 alt.religion
> 
> What?  You want to Bible bash?

No, not really.  Certainly not here, *which* *is* *why* *I* *set* *F'up2* 
*alt.religion*.

> The interpretation of the word "heaven" can change what you think you've
> proven.

Given that there is an intentional dichotomy there, it is hard to believe 
that “heaven *and* earth” does not mean “the universe”.

> Some verses strongly imply that God is an emergent property of the 
> universe.

Cite them.


F'up2 alt.religion again

PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the female magnet say to the male magnet?  
A: From the back, I found you repulsive, but from the front
   I find myself very attracted to you.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370751

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 3:09:02 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 4:07:25 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> > Lahn wrote:
> > What?  You want to Bible bash?
> 
> No, not really.  Certainly not here, *which* *is* *why* *I* *set* *F'up2* 
> *alt.religion*.

I have no idea what that meant, nor what you mean now.  But it sounds to
me like it's inhabited by even more kooks, cranks and crackpots than exist
in this group :-)

> > The interpretation of the word "heaven" can change what you think you've
> > proven.
> 
> Given that there is an intentional dichotomy there, it is hard to believe 
> that "heaven *and* earth" does not mean "the universe".

What is hard for you to believe is easy for me.  The ancients knew nothing
about the universe.  They just knew about stars, not even the galaxy.

> > Some verses strongly imply that God is an emergent property of the 
> > universe.
> 
> Cite them.

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."
-- Psalms 82:6

So it seems to be saying that we are gods in embryo, and we will emerge
as gods if we attain adulthood.

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
children of God:
"And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ;"
-- Romans 8:16-17

In agreement with Psalms 82:6.  Do you deny that an heir of God is also
a god?  Then if one who is not a god becomes a god, he has emerged.  He
has not always been such.  See also I John 3:2.  Now consider this:

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you,
The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for
what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise."
-- John 5:19

So the Father did what Jesus did?  Was He the Christ of a previous Genesis?
It sure looks that way.  And did He do what He had seen HIS Father do?

So I maintain the the Judeo-Christian God is an emergent property of the
Universe.  But take heart, God can still be an emergent property of the
Universe and still be the creator of our universe.

Gary

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370787

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 3:09:02 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:
>> Gary Harnagel wrote:
>> > On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 4:07:25 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
>> > Lahn wrote:
>> > What?  You want to Bible bash?
>> 
>> No, not really.  Certainly not here, *which* *is* *why* *I* *set* *F'up2*
>> *alt.religion*.
> 
> I have no idea what that meant, nor what you mean now. […]

Yeah, you Googlodytes seem to be positively challenged to use Google for 
anything but posting (nonsense to Usenet).


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the nuclear physicist post on the laboratory door
   when he went camping?  
A: 'Gone fission'.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370792

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:01:08 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 3:09:02 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> > Lahn wrote:
> > >
> > > No, not really.  Certainly not here, *which* *is* *why* *I* *set* *F'up2*
> > > *alt.religion*.
> > 
> > I have no idea what that meant, nor what you mean now. [...]
> 
> Yeah, you Googlodytes seem to be positively challenged to use Google for 
> anything but posting (nonsense to Usenet).
> 
> PointedEars

Just like you are posting nonsense.  You seem to have an inferiority
problem.  The only way you can assuage that is by denigrating others.
Of course, that is just posting nonsense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370795

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:01:08 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:
>> Gary Harnagel wrote:
>> > On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 3:09:02 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
>> > Lahn wrote:
>> > > No, not really.  Certainly not here, *which* *is* *why* *I* *set*
>> > > *F'up2* *alt.religion*.
>> > I have no idea what that meant, nor what you mean now. [...]
>> Yeah, you Googlodytes seem to be positively challenged to use Google for
>> anything but posting (nonsense to Usenet).
> 
> Just like you are posting nonsense.  You seem to have an inferiority
> problem.  The only way you can assuage that is by denigrating others.
> Of course, that is just posting nonsense.

Oh for crying out loud!  As you could have easily googled, “Followup-To” 
(short: F'up2) is a header field in a Network News posting (like on Usenet) 
that directs the posting agent to suggest to the user posting to another 
newsgroup (the user is free to ignore that suggestion).  It is usually set 
by a poster (which is easy to do with a newsreader) so as to keep off-topic 
discussions out of the newsgroup where they are off-topic, and to redirect 
them to a newsgroup where they are on-topic, so that it reaches the 
appropriate audience.  It is customary to announce “Followup-To” in the 
message body, which I did; it is usually considered impolite to not do so, 
however it can be an accepted means to fight trolls (“Followup-To trap”).

Google Groups, which you are using, is borked and does not support several 
features of Network News, including Followup-To, since quite a while.  
(Which is why I usually have all postings coming from there hidden, unless 
they are follow-ups to my postings.)

Get yourself a newsreader and a minimum clue, will you, *please*?


F'up2 poster (meaning that replies should be sent via e-mail)

PointedEars
-- 
A neutron walks into a bar and inquires how much a drink costs.
The bartender replies, "For you? No charge."

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370797

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 7:33:42 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
> Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:01:08 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> > Lahn wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, you Googlodytes seem to be positively challenged to use Google for
> > > anything but posting (nonsense to Usenet).
> > 
> > Just like you are posting nonsense.  You seem to have an inferiority
> > problem.  The only way you can assuage that is by denigrating others.
> > Of course, that is just posting nonsense.
> 
> Oh for crying out loud!  As you could have easily googled, "Followup-To" 
> (short: F'up2) is a header field in a Network News posting (like on Usenet) 
> that directs the posting agent to suggest to the user posting to another 
> newsgroup (the user is free to ignore that suggestion).  It is usually set 
> by a poster (which is easy to do with a newsreader) so as to keep off-topic 
> discussions out of the newsgroup where they are off-topic, and to redirect 
> them to a newsgroup where they are on-topic, so that it reaches the 
> appropriate audience.  It is customary to announce "Followup-To" in the 
> message body, which I did; it is usually considered impolite to not do so, 
> however it can be an accepted means to fight trolls ("Followup-To trap").

I have NO idea what you're babbling about.  It seems to me that all that
stuff is irrelevant technobabble.

> Google Groups, which you are using, is borked and does not support several 
> features of Network News, including Followup-To, since quite a while.  
> (Which is why I usually have all postings coming from there hidden, unless 
> they are follow-ups to my postings.)
> 
> Get yourself a newsreader and a minimum clue, will you, *please*?

Not interested.

> F'up2 poster (meaning that replies should be sent via e-mail)
> 
> PointedEars

Then why not say so instead of typing cryptic contractions?  You might
have noticed that no one else in this group uses that.  For all I knew,
it was some kind of insult.  Ya know, the "F" word.

I've never connected via email directly from a discussion group, but I
have received email from others via the group, so I know it can be done.
Since you are so knowledgeable about such things, why didn't you send
an email to me?

Gary

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370798

Gary Harnagel wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 7:33:42 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:
>> F'up2 poster (meaning that replies should be sent via e-mail)
> 
> Then why not say so instead of typing cryptic contractions?  You might
> have noticed that no one else in this group uses that.  For all I knew,
> it was some kind of insult.  Ya know, the "F" word.
> 
> I've never connected via email directly from a discussion group, but I
> have received email from others via the group, so I know it can be done.
> Since you are so knowledgeable about such things, why didn't you send
> an email to me?

You are exceeding your own standards of obtuseness.

*plonk*


F'up2 poster

PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370799

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

>> I've never connected via email directly from a discussion group, but I
>> have received email from others via the group, so I know it can be done.
>> Since you are so knowledgeable about such things, why didn't you send an
>> email to me?
> 
> You are exceeding your own standards of obtuseness. *plonk*

Only a complete brain dead retard may come on usenet, driven by the only 
reason, to show publicly that he can plonk. If you don't want to read, 
just don't read. Idiot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370662

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Please stop crossposting without Followup-To set, and start posting using
> >> your real name.
> >
> > What if his real name is PointedLips?
> 
> Then he must have had really cruel parents.
> 
> Which part of “stop crossposting without Followup-To set” did you not
> understand, again crossposting without Followup-To across three newsgroups?
> 
> > Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see the
> > edge?
> 
> Your logic is flawed: It presupposes that there is a God, that they created
> the universe, and that their perception would be like that of humans.  That
> way lies madness, not science.  F'up2 alt.religion.


I didn't mentioned anything about religion. 

Maybe I need to rephrase the question since you get convulsions when you
see the word God...


Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see
the edge?


Do you actually believe 'the laws of physics' can create a universe
where it cannot see the edge?


How will the 'laws of physics' know it got the math right??


In other words... 



Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see
the edge?


I mean, is God saying now.."What the fuck happen, I cannot see the edge
of the universe!!!"


What does logic have to do with it? I don't need no stinky logic...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370665

On 11/22/15 4:02 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> Do you actually believe 'the laws of physics' can create a universe
> where it cannot see the edge?


   No edge -- Finite and unbounded. Try reading the following links:

   No Center
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html

   Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
     http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html

   WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
     http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html

   WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
     http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370666

The Starmaker wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> > Do you actually believe God can create a universe where he cannot see
>> > the edge?
>> 
>> Your logic is flawed: It presupposes that there is a God, that they
>> created the universe, and that their perception would be like that of
>> humans.  That way lies madness, not science.  F'up2 alt.religion.
> 
> I didn't mentioned anything about religion.

“God” is not a concept of, and an entity in, religion?

Speedy recovery!


PointedEars, F'up2 set appropriately
-- 
Two neutrinos go through a bar ...

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370708

On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 5:43 AM, dvus wrote:
> If there is no "center" of the Universe then
> it would seem that it would have to be infinite in size.

No. An infinite 3-d space that is not uniform can have a center, and any uniform 
closed 3-d space will have no center.

	"Closed" is a topological term. Loosely, it means of finite
	size and having no boundary. For instance, the 2-D surface
	of a sphere, CONSIDERING ONLY THE SURFACE -- there is no
	"edge" to fall off (which would be a boundary)....


> Yet we are told the BB
> happened just under 13.75 light-years ago.

You have misread. That should be 13.75 billion years ago.


> How could it be infinite if it
> originated a finite time ago?

You are conflating different aspects of the geometry. It is quite possible for 
the 3-d space of constant time to be infinite, yet there is nothing (i.e. no 
part of the manifold) preceding the big bang. That is, an infinite space can 
arise out of the big bang singularity -- such singularities can be inscrutable.


> Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that cosmologists are
> now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after the BB. What will they
> see when they are able to see beyond those earliest galaxies?

Earlier than those galaxies is "recombination" -- the time when the temperature 
of the universe cooled enough to permit atoms to form. Before that time there 
were so many free charged particles the light could not propagate any 
significant distance. Light that existed at that time can propagate to our 
telescopes, and has been redshifted so much it is now known as the cosmic 
microwave background radiation (CMBR). The CMBR is quite visible as microwave 
radiation with a current temperature of 2.7 K; it is observed to be isotropic to 
within about 1 part in 10,000.

	Measurements of the CMBR have become incredibly detailed and
	are key aspects of testing cosmological models.


> Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe shaped kind of
> like a football. (why it isn't round I don't know) Those diagrams don't indicate
> the Universe is infinite or they would have to be be infinitely big.

You are confusing different models, thinking they are the same; they aren't.

The long axis of the "football" is TIME. The other two dimensions are space, and 
one spatial dimension is suppressed (to make visualization in 3-d possible). 
Such diagrams apply to models of the universe in which there is a "big crunch" 
-- a time-reversed version of the big bang where everything is compressed to 
infinite density and the universe ends in a singularity. In these models space 
is finite (and spherical [#]).

	[#] But it is NOT the interior of a sphere (which obviously
	has a boundary). Rather it is topologically the 3-sphere S^3,
	which has no boundary. Here "spherical" means "having the
	symmetry SO(3)", not "looking like a ball".


> Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble Universes
> surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?

By using other dimensions. Or by not having a spatially-infinite universe (see 
above).


> I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject but I still
> can't seem to wrap my mind around the seemingly contradictory facts I see here
> and elsewhere. [...]

See Ned Wright's cosmology tutorial; it is the best intro I know.
	http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm


Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370814

On 11/23/2015 11:51 AM, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 5:43 AM, dvus wrote:
>> If there is no "center" of the Universe then
>> it would seem that it would have to be infinite in size.
>
> No. An infinite 3-d space that is not uniform can have a center, and any
> uniform closed 3-d space will have no center.
>
>      "Closed" is a topological term. Loosely, it means of finite
>      size and having no boundary. For instance, the 2-D surface
>      of a sphere, CONSIDERING ONLY THE SURFACE -- there is no
>      "edge" to fall off (which would be a boundary)....
>
>
>> Yet we are told the BB
>> happened just under 13.75 light-years ago.
>
> You have misread. That should be 13.75 billion years ago.
>
>
>> How could it be infinite if it
>> originated a finite time ago?
>
> You are conflating different aspects of the geometry. It is quite
> possible for the 3-d space of constant time to be infinite, yet there is
> nothing (i.e. no part of the manifold) preceding the big bang. That is,
> an infinite space can arise out of the big bang singularity -- such
> singularities can be inscrutable.
>
>
>> Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that
>> cosmologists are
>> now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after the BB. What
>> will they
>> see when they are able to see beyond those earliest galaxies?
>
> Earlier than those galaxies is "recombination" -- the time when the
> temperature of the universe cooled enough to permit atoms to form.
> Before that time there were so many free charged particles the light
> could not propagate any significant distance. Light that existed at that
> time can propagate to our telescopes, and has been redshifted so much it
> is now known as the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). The
> CMBR is quite visible as microwave radiation with a current temperature
> of 2.7 K; it is observed to be isotropic to within about 1 part in 10,000.
>
>      Measurements of the CMBR have become incredibly detailed and
>      are key aspects of testing cosmological models.
>
>
>> Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe
>> shaped kind of
>> like a football. (why it isn't round I don't know) Those diagrams
>> don't indicate
>> the Universe is infinite or they would have to be be infinitely big.
>
> You are confusing different models, thinking they are the same; they
> aren't.
>
> The long axis of the "football" is TIME. The other two dimensions are
> space, and one spatial dimension is suppressed (to make visualization in
> 3-d possible). Such diagrams apply to models of the universe in which
> there is a "big crunch" -- a time-reversed version of the big bang where
> everything is compressed to infinite density and the universe ends in a
> singularity. In these models space is finite (and spherical [#]).
>
>      [#] But it is NOT the interior of a sphere (which obviously
>      has a boundary). Rather it is topologically the 3-sphere S^3,
>      which has no boundary. Here "spherical" means "having the
>      symmetry SO(3)", not "looking like a ball".
>
>
>> Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble
>> Universes
>> surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?
>
> By using other dimensions. Or by not having a spatially-infinite
> universe (see above).
>
>
>> I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject but
>> I still
>> can't seem to wrap my mind around the seemingly contradictory facts I
>> see here
>> and elsewhere. [...]
>
> See Ned Wright's cosmology tutorial; it is the best intro I know.
>      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

It seems as though no one can say what the "shape" of the Universe 
really is, all these mathematical terms don't describe it in a way a 
person can visualize. If someone said we lived on the surface of a 
sphere of some determinate size I could visualize that, or if they said 
it was a fairly homogenous sphere we lived inside of, I could visualize 
that. But all I see are explanations of a Universe that's "bounded" or 
"not bounded" without an explanation of just what the heck that really 
means. I suppose if you live in a Universe which you consider has no 
"outside" it's tough to give its shape except in mathematical terms.

I'd even prefer it if someone said "we have no idea" rather than these 
murky non-explanations.

-- 
dvus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370817

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 2:07:31 PM UTC-8, dvus wrote:
> On 11/23/2015 11:51 AM, Tom Roberts wrote:
> > On 11/21/15 11/21/15 - 5:43 AM, dvus wrote:
> >> If there is no "center" of the Universe then
> >> it would seem that it would have to be infinite in size.
> >
> > No. An infinite 3-d space that is not uniform can have a center, and any
> > uniform closed 3-d space will have no center.
> >
> >      "Closed" is a topological term. Loosely, it means of finite
> >      size and having no boundary. For instance, the 2-D surface
> >      of a sphere, CONSIDERING ONLY THE SURFACE -- there is no
> >      "edge" to fall off (which would be a boundary)....
> >
> >
> >> Yet we are told the BB
> >> happened just under 13.75 light-years ago.
> >
> > You have misread. That should be 13.75 billion years ago.
> >
> >
> >> How could it be infinite if it
> >> originated a finite time ago?
> >
> > You are conflating different aspects of the geometry. It is quite
> > possible for the 3-d space of constant time to be infinite, yet there is
> > nothing (i.e. no part of the manifold) preceding the big bang. That is,
> > an infinite space can arise out of the big bang singularity -- such
> > singularities can be inscrutable.
> >
> >
> >> Additionally, I have read numerous articles that purport that
> >> cosmologists are
> >> now able to see galaxies that formed a short time after the BB. What
> >> will they
> >> see when they are able to see beyond those earliest galaxies?
> >
> > Earlier than those galaxies is "recombination" -- the time when the
> > temperature of the universe cooled enough to permit atoms to form.
> > Before that time there were so many free charged particles the light
> > could not propagate any significant distance. Light that existed at that
> > time can propagate to our telescopes, and has been redshifted so much it
> > is now known as the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). The
> > CMBR is quite visible as microwave radiation with a current temperature
> > of 2.7 K; it is observed to be isotropic to within about 1 part in 10,000.
> >
> >      Measurements of the CMBR have become incredibly detailed and
> >      are key aspects of testing cosmological models.
> >
> >
> >> Also, I constantly see diagrams supposedly of the entire Universe
> >> shaped kind of
> >> like a football. (why it isn't round I don't know) Those diagrams
> >> don't indicate
> >> the Universe is infinite or they would have to be be infinitely big.
> >
> > You are confusing different models, thinking they are the same; they
> > aren't.
> >
> > The long axis of the "football" is TIME. The other two dimensions are
> > space, and one spatial dimension is suppressed (to make visualization in
> > 3-d possible). Such diagrams apply to models of the universe in which
> > there is a "big crunch" -- a time-reversed version of the big bang where
> > everything is compressed to infinite density and the universe ends in a
> > singularity. In these models space is finite (and spherical [#]).
> >
> >      [#] But it is NOT the interior of a sphere (which obviously
> >      has a boundary). Rather it is topologically the 3-sphere S^3,
> >      which has no boundary. Here "spherical" means "having the
> >      symmetry SO(3)", not "looking like a ball".
> >
> >
> >> Then I read about theories of the "multiverse" composed of many bubble
> >> Universes
> >> surrounding ours. How can you surround an infinite Universe?
> >
> > By using other dimensions. Or by not having a spatially-infinite
> > universe (see above).
> >
> >
> >> I try to read everything I can get my hands on about this subject but
> >> I still
> >> can't seem to wrap my mind around the seemingly contradictory facts I
> >> see here
> >> and elsewhere. [...]
> >
> > See Ned Wright's cosmology tutorial; it is the best intro I know.
> >      http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
> 
> It seems as though no one can say what the "shape" of the Universe 
> really is, all these mathematical terms don't describe it in a way a 
> person can visualize. If someone said we lived on the surface of a 
> sphere of some determinate size I could visualize that, or if they said 
> it was a fairly homogenous sphere we lived inside of, I could visualize 
> that. But all I see are explanations of a Universe that's "bounded" or 
> "not bounded" without an explanation of just what the heck that really 
> means. I suppose if you live in a Universe which you consider has no 
> "outside" it's tough to give its shape except in mathematical terms.
> 
> I'd even prefer it if someone said "we have no idea" rather than these 
> murky non-explanations.
> 
> -- 
> dvus

The visible universe 
is what can see us.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370823

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:

> The visible universe
> is what can see us.

Not even wrong.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the nuclear physicist post on the laboratory door
   when he went camping?  
A: 'Gone fission'.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web