I am the living Universe (please discuss)

[emanon]

Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss...

[wuliheron]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss...

So you're the one responsible.... I want to lodge a few complaints about quality control. Just because you are so high and mighty doesn't mean you should just ignore the little folks! Either cough up some serious home improvements or I'm gonna start a new religion with you on the bottom of the social ladder as a slum lord!

[kyle_soule]

An advanced stage of the Messiah Complex, you are just schizophrenic[:)]

A while ago I found a white rock, I declared it God. It was very powerful and I attributed every good thing in the world to it. It did not eat, drink, or sleep. It was God...I threw it down and broke it.[t)]

[Mentat]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss...

Well, while I could take the road that others have taken here, I'm not going to point out the seemingly egotistical nature of this idea. I'm just going to ask you how something could possibly exist "outside of space-time". Think about it, "outside" denotes a position, and position is judged according to the spacetime dimensions.

[emanon]

Everyone's a critic...[;)]

Well really. I was Scizophrenic DSR a few years back, and that is how I worked it all out. Well actually it does not have to be me personally, but maybe me, or some other monkey did create the Universe from infinite energy?

If you watch star trek then it is not that difficult to imagine, given an infinite amount of time and energy, I am sure something could be created to get the job done.

Then all you need to access that 'something'.

Example:
Computer: Tea Earl grey.
[;)]

Or maybe it was
One Universe, expanding without end...[:D]

[Mentat]

Originally posted by emanon
Everyone's a critic...[;)]

Well really. I was Scizophrenic DSR a few years back, and that is how I worked it all out. Well actually it does not have to be me personally, but maybe me, or some other monkey did create the Universe from infinite energy?

If you watch star trek then it is not that difficult to imagine, given an infinite amount of time and energy, I am sure something could be created to get the job done.


You really don't see that there is nothing at the end of infinity, and that there is in fact no end to infinity (which rules out acting on an idea that would take infinite time)?

[Alexander]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.



Any proof?

[drag]

Originally posted by Alexander
Any proof?
I intended to post an even shorter response
(just the second word and the question mark),
but Alexander beat me to it. [:D]
Originally posted by emanon
Computer: Tea Earl grey.

+ HOT !
Picard sure knew how to pick a brand of tea. [;)]

Live long and prosper.

[heusdens]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss...

This is too sloppy defined to be called a 'theory'.

Hmmm. Well at least you have humour, this theory about life of Brian....

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss... I just wanna know two things; is Brian the name of the Brain, and, do you know the Mind? [:D]

[emanon]

Proof?

Well surely you are living proof that Brian (the living Universe) exists, unless of course you are telling me that you do not exist. In which case I am wasting my time replying to your question.
[;)]

Brian is the living Universe, as I just said, made up of the sum of all living organisms over all time. You have seen the infinity symbol used in maths in such cases, I am sure.

Now imagine a way of looking at Brian outside time.

Do you get my drift?
Or am I dealing with high school sheep only?
Bah-bah...I am just kidding...you are goats aren't you?
[zz)]

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by emanon
Basically this is my theory.

I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Brian.

Brain exists outside space-time and so eventually evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

Please discuss...
I know things you don't; therefore you have it backwards.
Thus: I created this Universe and everything else using a source of infinite energy called Ivan. QED [:D]

[emanon]

You would need to explain further, but I can assure you that his name is Brian. Maybe you created a parallel Universe by mistake???

[Lonewolf]

Ah, that must be where I left my car keys...

[Alexander]

You are all wrong. My parrot created God(s), all universes and some of souls, Adams and Eves, and Pepsi-Cola. He did that when he accidentally swallowed infinite space-time vacuum from a white hole (parrot found this hole in my back door, about 2" from bottom of door).

Donate $9.95 today to support the Creator of it all - my parrot!

You'll be saved then and will live after your death in eternity, unlimited wealth, and enormous harmony, and high above all other miserable mortal humans. (Include SASE with your pledge if you wish to get 3"x5" certificate of eternal life).

We accept money orders, all major cards, gold coins, laptops, flat panel monitors, and DVD recorders. For large volume donations our representative/appraiser will be glad to visit you and arrange all paperwork and physical transfer of valuables on site.

No CRT monitors, please.

[Mentat]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
I just wanna know two things; is Brian the name of the Brain, and, do you know the Mind? [:D]

LOL!

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Alexander
You are all wrong. My parrot created God(s), all universes and some of souls, Adams and Eves, and Pepsi-Cola. He did that when he accidentally swallowed infinite space-time vacuum from a white hole (parrot found this hole in my back door, about 2" from bottom of door).

Donate $9.95 today to support the Creator of it all - my parrot!

You'll be saved then and will live after your death in eternity, unlimited wealth, and enormous harmony, and high above all other miserable mortal humans. (Include SASE with your pledge if you wish to get 3"x5" certificate of eternal life).

We accept money orders, all major cards, gold coins, laptops, flat panel monitors, and DVD recorders. For large volume donations our representative/appraiser will be glad to visit you and arrange all paperwork and physical transfer of valuables on site.

Hehe, and the funniest part is, this makes just as much sense as religion!

No CRT monitors, please.

Tube is a major turn-off.

[Lonewolf]

Hehe, and the funniest part is, this makes just as much sense as religion!

I completely disagree...it makes far much more sense.

[THE MIND]

Originally posted by emanon
Brain ... evolves into a higher life-form made up of all of energy.

He's my Son ... part of my substance.[t)]

[emanon]

Alexander:
Again, your Universe is either a parallel Universe or else it collapsed.

It took me three attempts to create this one (Universe) so it is not surprising you lot are getting confused.

If you look at the energy signiture of a photon you will find my copyright mark embedded in it's quantum well.

However, to confirm this, you will first need to develop a way of measuring tiny discrepencies in the energy flow. currently the only system capable of doing this are brains.

[emanon]

Religion is a social club, I am only a member of the Automobile Association, so really, I do not join clubs, as a rule. Well apart from when I was at University, and then I was a club whore...[;)]

I enjoy your banta, it is quite interesting. Although the alternate Universe theory is a little iffy.

Let me just add that when I say, 'I' created the Universe, I mean to say that I started it off. It sort of creates itself, you just need to initialise it.

It is no different from fertalising an egg in that sense.

I am a proud father...[:))]

Although Einstien appears to have allowed you monkeys to tear it's fabric using FISSION, which is an infinite reaction and so will, over time destroy my baby, so really I am quite sad and annoyed with you lot.
[:(]

You failed your humanity test...see:

Hamanity score U

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by THE MIND
He's my Son ... part of my substance.[t)] I think your boy needs a good 'substance' lashing...

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Mentat
You really don't see that there is nothing at the end of infinity, and that there is in fact no end to infinity (which rules out acting on an idea that would take infinite time)?

And if the Universe is truly "eternal", then it doesn't need a "creator".

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
And if the Universe is truly "eternal", then it doesn't need a "creator". And yet what if the Universe was a manifestation of that "Eternal Creator?"

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And yet what if the Universe was a manifestation of that "Eternal Creator?"

And who created the "Creator"?

[BoulderHead]

Some theists, observing that all 'effects' need a cause, assert that God is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove.
- Dan Barker

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Some theists, observing that all 'effects' need a cause, assert that God is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove.
- Dan Barker

It's been awhile since algebra. Please tell me what the "parts" of an equation are called. I know they are not "elements" of an equation...but what ARE they called?

I want to know so that I can frame a simple question properly. Thanks.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
And who created the "Creator"? And yet what if our essence (soul) lived on unto Eternity? Then wouldn't that imply there was an Eternal Creator (in essence) who created us?

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
It's been awhile since algebra. Please tell me what the "parts" of an equation are called. I know they are not "elements" of an equation...but what ARE they called?

I want to know so that I can frame a simple question properly. Thanks. Sorry, I only got a GED [:D]

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Sorry, I only got a GED [:D]

That explains it!

[BoulderHead]

God Everyone’s Daft

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And yet what if our essence (soul) lived on unto Eternity? Then wouldn't that imply there was an Eternal Creator (in essence) who created us?

Not necessarily. It could mean that the Universe ITSELF has a "Spirit"... of which OURS is a part (if, indeed, "spirit" exists). (See PM)

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
And who created the "Creator"?

The same problem exists with or without a creator. Since we are here, it would seem that one way or the other the problem is moot.

Physicists say twelve dimensional superduperhypersurface;
Theologians say God. What's in a name? [:)]

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
The same problem exists with or without a creator. Since we are here, it would seem that one way or the other the problem is moot. [:)]

So why discuss anything ?

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
So why discuss anything ?

Pass time 'till we die?

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
So why discuss anything ? Well, because I'd like to know, how 'bout that?
But, after finding out all about 'god', if it isn't of much utility then I think I'd just go read a book.
Sound agreeable?

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
So why discuss anything ?

now now [:(] . I only meant that one way or the other, the problem appears to have a solution. The paradox of who created God, which by the definition of God is no one, is supported in kind by the problem of where everything came from; even without a God?

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Pass time 'till we die?

That works also.

[emanon]

And who created the "Creator"?

This is a little difficult to explain but I will use a mathematical shape to help you get the idea.

Imagine an infinite mobiastrip.

This is effectively what moving outside space time looks like, mathematically.

You get to see all points on the strip, which itself is continuous. There is no start of 'creation'. Just infinite time.

I hope that helps.

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by emanon
And who created the "Creator"?

This is a little difficult to explain but I will use a mathematical shape to help you get the idea.

Imagine an infinite mobiastrip.

This is effectively what moving outside space time looks like, mathematically.

You get to see all points on the strip, which itself is continuous. There is no start of 'creation'. Just infinite time.

I hope that helps.

Which is why I say that "God" as an external entity is EXTRANEOUS to the equation. If the Universe ITSELF is eternal then It doesn't need a "creator".

AND [8)] , if the Universe is actually "a living, conscious Entity that's responsive to all of Its parts"...then the EXTERNAL "God" would ALSO be "out of a job"!

Now, I'm NOT saying that the Universe is (or MAY be) "God"...the al-knowing, all-seeing "Creator". I am saying that the Universe MAY BE "an eternal Entity of energy" with NATURAL FORCES and INGREDIENTS in Its "closed" (tho expanding and contracting), cause and effect SYSTEM!

As to "why" we "should" be discussing such things: perhaps the Universe gives rise to sentient beings for this very purpose...to understand ITSELF.

Who knows?[a)]

[emanon]

Historically the energy, or life giver is given the position of God.

But I never mentioned any God(s) because I do not believe in them/it.

The Universe was born from Brian Brane, the infinite energy source. There maybe other things like Brian but it is unlikely that they will ever be detected, but there cannot be ruled out.

Natural forces? Well the forces that exist in this Universe allow it to expand indefinitely, IMO. Other Natural Forces would create a different environment.

My view of the Universe is that all the matter expands in all directions. Gravity is the effect of clumps of matter retarding space. See The Dilber Future by Scott Adams for a laymans view on this theory.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Which is why I say that "God" as an external entity is EXTRANEOUS to the equation. If the Universe ITSELF is eternal then It doesn't need a "creator". So what if God were the within of the without? Just as I am the within of my without?

[Mentat]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
And who created the "Creator"?

Who says someone had to?

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
So what if God were the within of the without? Just as I am the within of my without?

If my premise is correct -- that the Universe is a living, conscious Entity -- AND, if "spirit" exists as well, then, yes, it would be "within" every part of the Entity...just as I say consciousness may be.

But if the Universe has a "spiritual" component (in addition to physical and mental), do we have to call the aggregate of the spiritual "substance" "God"???

"God" is a loaded word...with all sorts of suppositions and embellishments "weighing it down" (for me).

Why not just call the Universe a living, conscious and SPIRITUAL Being that EVOLVING with -- and through -- the rest of us (and everything else ). Instead of "praying"...why not just "communicate"? Instead of "worshipping"...why not just "appreciate"?

Why do we, as a species, overdo the "hero worship", becoming transfixed on personalities, stories and rituals that, IMO, distract from our "relationship" with our "Source"? Any clues?

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Mentat
Who says someone had to?

But that was my point . If the Universe is "eternal" then It doesn't need a "creator"...and adding "God" doesn't solve the problem of "creation"... it (the concept) just adds another layer.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
If my premise is correct -- that the Universe is a living, conscious Entity -- AND, if "spirit" exists as well, then, yes, it would be "within" every part of the Entity...just as I say consciousness may be.

But if the Universe has a "spiritual" component (in addition to physical and mental), do we have to call the aggregate of the spiritual "substance" "God"???

"God" is a loaded word...with all sorts of suppositions and embellishments "weighing it down" (for me).

Why not just call the Universe a living, conscious and SPIRITUAL Being that EVOLVING with -- and through -- the rest of us (and everything else ). Instead of "praying"...why not just "communicate"? Instead of "worshipping"...why not just "appreciate"?

Why do we, as a species, overdo the "hero worship", becoming transfixed on personalities, stories and rituals that, IMO, distract from our "relationship" with our "Source"? Any clues? The within of the without is "the life," it is the spirit, it is the essence and, it is conscious(ness).

The reason why God might appear to be the "Great Outsider" is due to our "external perception," for which reason we fail to realize that God "resides within," the within of everything, even the within which is without (i.e., our range of external perception).

In other words, if we weren't so caught up in our "external existence," we would realize that God does not reside without, but within, in which case God becomes the "Great Insider."

As for this hero worship thing, I think it's due to a lack of maturity, or perhaps a sense of having no control (hence certainty) over one's life. Neither do I think we need to put people up on pedestals, even God Himself! ... as God is not looking for sycophants.

[RSM1000]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
The within of the without is "the life," it is the spirit, it is the essence and, it is conscious(ness).

The reason why God might appear to be the "Great Outsider" is due to our "external perception," for which reason we fail to realize that God "resides within," the within of everything, even the within which is without (i.e., our range of external perception).

In other words, if we weren't so caught up in our "external existence," we would realize that God does not reside without, but within, in which case God becomes the "Great Insider."

As for this hero worship thing, I think it's due to a lack of maturity, or perhaps a sense of having no control (hence certainty) over one's life. Neither do I think we need to put people up on pedestals, even God Himself! ... as God is not looking for sycophants.

We know the origin of a child, we know the reasoning behind the formations of celestial bodies (some of them). Why propose that the universe exists in a finite time, and it has something created it which is infinite?

You're just adding more onto the equation because you can't yet solve it in it's simplistic form!

THIS UNIVERSE may or may not be finite. Remember the universe is not (any longer) considered to be everything...

A universe is now properly definied as the entirity of a closed system.

There can and most likely is more than one universe. There is no reasoning behind there being only one.

The term universe has been redefinied, and also the term infinite might need to be. One universe (a closed system) can be inifinite, yet we could still have more than one infinite if we need to change the term to work with out multiverse concepts.


So saying (by itself) that the universe must have had a creator defies rationality. You've solved how the universe came, but now you need to solve why God came.

And furthermore, any answers you give to solve the God problem could just as likely solve the Universe problem and eliminate God.

[Duom02]

God is merly a metaphore my friend not to be taken so seriously..... Most refer to her these days but are more or less meaning the reason for creation.... don't pick at peoples indvidual words so much...

[RSM1000]

God is merely a metaphor?

Would the world agree? I doubt it.

If one is going to use a word to mean something other than whats widely accepted, one needs to let others know.

Just like your new big bang theory, you didn't tell anyone it was your theory, and thus it looks to us as if it's wrong.

Unless defined, I'll assume God as being God! [g)]

[Duom02]

*Cough* That theory was in the THEORY DEVELOPMENT forum if you look in the theorteical physics section and click the sticky for new posters you will see that you put your own theories in theory development now let that sink in for a minute.

Now as to the god being a metaphor most literary anylists agree that most religion including god isn't meant to be taken at face value. For example adam and eve eating the apple, Now was that about them eating an apple or having sex. if you ask most people around the world they say an apple but then you inquire more and they'll figure out what it really meant. Now if you were discussing this on any other form i wouldn't jump to god being a metaphor but this is meant to be a detailed discussion which you can't seem to handle. Most people around the world don't know much about algebra 1 but they do here as do many seem to think god is at least partially a metaphor.

[RSM1000]

Originally posted by Duom02
*Cough* That theory was in the THEORY DEVELOPMENT forum if you look in the theorteical physics section and click the sticky for new posters you will see that you put your own theories in theory development now let that sink in for a minute.

Now as to the god being a metaphor most literary anylists agree that most religion including god isn't meant to be taken at face value. For example adam and eve eating the apple, Now was that about them eating an apple or having sex. if you ask most people around the world they say an apple but then you inquire more and they'll figure out what it really meant. Now if you were discussing this on any other form i wouldn't jump to god being a metaphor but this is meant to be a detailed discussion which you can't seem to handle. Most people around the world don't know much about algebra 1 but they do here as do many seem to think god is at least partially a metaphor.

Like I said, unless you're using the widely accepted definition of a term, it's a good idea to let everyone know your definition to avoide confusing.

And since this isn't your original post, I wouldn't accept your definition as fitting into someone elses claim.

Try not to be hostile as in your other post. If you're creating new definitions and new theories point it out. Otherwise it looks to us as though you're just making honest mistakes.

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
The within of the without is "the life," it is the spirit, it is the essence and, it is conscious(ness).

The reason why God might appear to be the "Great Outsider" is due to our "external perception," for which reason we fail to realize that God "resides within," the within of everything, even the within which is without (i.e., our range of external perception).

In other words, if we weren't so caught up in our "external existence," we would realize that God does not reside without, but within, in which case God becomes the "Great Insider."

As for this hero worship thing, I think it's due to a lack of maturity, or perhaps a sense of having no control (hence certainty) over one's life. Neither do I think we need to put people up on pedestals, even God Himself! ... as God is not looking for sycophants.

When someone claims that "God created the Universe", would not that "God" be, by definition, an "Outsider"?

What it "spirit" anyway? Any ideas? I "know" there's a PHYSICAL "plane". And I "know" there's a CONSCIOUS "plane". And I "prefer to think" that there's a SPIRITUAL "plane"...but I'm not exactly how to characterize it.

Do we need a new thread for this...or could you make a stab at a definition here?

Without waiting for your definition, let me say that if there IS a "spiritual" component to the Universe, then it "resides" -- like CONSCIOUSNESS -- in Everything That Is...great or small.

...IMO [a)]

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by RSM1000
You are making the assumption here that God exists in reality. Why?An assumption? What makes it any more of an assumption than yours? Please understand that it's not my place to validate "your" existence. So which reality are you speaking about? The reality of our perception? Or, the reality which exists beyond our perception? Do you believe in a possible "alternative reality?"


Starting off from scratch here, what is the rationality in proposing (outside of any religious statements) that universe must have had a creator?Why start from scratch? Why forsake ten thousand years of human history? Just as everything has a beginning and an ending, why approach it from the standpoint of the middle, which is only "static" and takes us "nowhere?" How can we possibly evaluate something without first understanding what it does?


We know the origin of a child, we know the reasoning behind the formations of celestial bodies (some of them). Why propose that the universe exists in a finite time, and it has something created it which is infinite?Because our outer skins cells are temporal and "dead," compared to that which is infinitesimally more "alive" and on the inside. The material reality is but "the form" (temporal and dead), of what the spiritual reality is "the essence" (alive and Eternal).


You're just adding more onto the equation because you can't yet solve it in it's simplistic form!Who's saying I'm trying to solve anything? ... Other than the fact that I might be trying to find the best way to put it into words.


THIS UNIVERSE may or may not be finite. Remember the universe is not (any longer) considered to be everything...Since when?


A universe is now properly definied as the entirity of a closed system.Well we each live in our own little universes now don't we? And yet they're not entirely closed, because there's always something extending into them (as well their extending outwards).


There can and most likely is more than one universe. There is no reasoning behind there being only one.There's at least more than one perception of it anyway. Doesn't mean there's more than one though.


The term universe has been redefinied, and also the term infinite might need to be. One universe (a closed system) can be inifinite, yet we could still have more than one infinite if we need to change the term to work with out multiverse concepts.Redefined by whom? And yet I'm quite content to work within the confines of only one Universe -- "the one that I know."


So saying (by itself) that the universe must have had a creator defies rationality. You've solved how the universe came, but now you need to solve why God came.Does the sculpture question the hands of the sculptor in this regard? Maybe this is the reason why it's not that easy to answer ... because we are not the Creator (but its creation).


And furthermore, any answers you give to solve the God problem could just as likely solve the Universe problem and eliminate God. To whom? That's the whole beauty of it, it doesn't require Science for the answer (at least for oneself). Matter of fact it would be a long time in waiting to see when Science gets off its duff and actually does something about it. And, while it's one thing to dismiss something, it's entirely another to disprove it.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
When someone claims that "God created the Universe", would not that "God" be, by definition, an "Outsider"?And yet one can build a house for oneself and live in it. Why do we call the church the house of God? And why do we call our bodies the living temple of the living God?


What it "spirit" anyway? Any ideas? I "know" there's a PHYSICAL "plane". And I "know" there's a CONSCIOUS "plane". And I "prefer to think" that there's a SPIRITUAL "plane"...but I'm not exactly how to characterize it.I think spirit is just another manifestation of consciousness. You know, what happens to our consciousness when we die? When almost instantaneously we're gone?


Do we need a new thread for this...or could you make a stab at a definition here?That might be a good idea. At least there will be two of us talking along the same lines. Wouldn't that be something! Got any ideas?


Without waiting for your definition, let me say that if there IS a "spiritual" component to the Universe, then it "resides" -- like CONSCIOUSNESS -- in Everything That Is...great or small.

...IMO [a)] This is why I essentially equate one with the other, and why I say we have a soul (consciousness) which has a place to go when we die.

[emanon]

Just to clear up what 'the Universe' is in this case...

It is everything related to the infinite energy known as Brian Brane.

Possibly there are other Universes, in the traditional sense, that are related to Brian, but this Universe is the one we live in.

It is interesting to remember that this Universe might actually co-exist with other Universes, again in the traditional sense.

However, the more likely scenario is that there have been other Universes prior to this one, and that this one is a more stable or longer lasting Universe.

I am sure if the theorectical physicists thought about it makes sense to have this Universe pop-out from a series of Universes whose natural parameters never quite made them stable enough.

And as this Universe expanded, those parameters tuned themselves to the values we see today...[;)]

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
And yet one can build a house for oneself and live in it. Why do we call the church the house of God? And why do we call our bodies the living temple of the living God?[B]

Because we're silly.

I think spirit is just another manifestation of consciousness. You know, what happens to our consciousness when we die? When almost instantaneously we're gone?

I say EVERYTING might be a manifestation of the CONSCIOUSNESS of the Universe.

That might be a good idea. At least there will be two of us talking along the same lines. Wouldn't that be something! Got any ideas?

Nothing but!


This is why I essentially equate one with the other, and why I say we have a soul (consciousness) which has a place to go when we die.

Yes, from the PHYSICAL "plane"...back to PURE ENERGY.


And NOW -- tah tahhh -- let us SEE if i ISOLATED your QUOTES! I am not optimistic.[g)]

...back via "Edit" to say: WHAT A MESS!

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Because we're silly.Aside from the fact that it's borrowed from the "book of books" (have to kind of steer it away from religion a bit) it's a very good metaphor (or analogy).


I say EVERYTING might be a manifestation of the CONSCIOUSNESS of the Universe.And yet I would say this consciousness was none other than the "Host of Hosts."


Nothing but!I don't know about that, although I admit it was a bear of post I had to reply to before answering yours. Kind of threw me (took me out of stride) and I wasn't quite prepared to answer it. Looks like Brian McBrain would rather we didn't discuss this on his thread anyway. Maybe I'll start one up along the lines of "Is the Universe Conscious?" or "Consciousness and the Material Universe," or something like that? Keep your eyes peeled. Or, maybe I'll send you an e-mail.


Yes, from the PHYSICAL "plane"...back to PURE ENERGY.I think it's less important how we define God than it is to define ourselves, i.e., know "who" we are. And yet how we define God still effects hwo we define ourselves ...


And NOW -- tah tahhh -- let us SEE if i ISOLATED your QUOTES! I am not optimistic.[g)]

...back via "Edit" to say: WHAT A MESS! Not bad for a first try! ... And what is it that you don't like about it? Just pay attention to how many lines you want between replies (I usually maintain two) and whether you want everything to appear in bold or not. You also have the preview button in order to look it over before you submit it.

I do this a lot, and a good rule of thumb would be to do a "select all" (right-hand mouse click) and hit "copy," in case something something screws up and you need to "paste" everything into a new window. It's a good idea to do periodically especially when working with a long post.

[BoulderHead]

And yet I would say this consciousness was none other than the "Host of Hosts." Iacchus32,
I keep hearing about this ‘consciousness’ all the time. Why cannot consciousness simply cease to exist upon the death of the physical body?
Have you ever been under general anesthesia before and noticed how consciousness seems to just disappear? Even if consciousness is somehow outside the physical brain, it nevertheless certainly seems to be tied to it in a very real fashion. I am not at all ready to take for granted that consciousness is not dependant on our brains, however mysterious and wonderful it is.

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
Iacchus32,
I keep hearing about this ‘consciousness’ all the time. Why cannot consciousness simply cease to exist upon the death of the physical body?And yet what is it about being human that doesn't involve consciousness?


Have you ever been under general anesthesia before and noticed how consciousness seems to just disappear?Have you ever become awake in your dreams, and were fully conscious?


Even if consciousness is somehow outside the physical brain, it nevertheless certainly seems to be tied to it in a very real fashion. I am not at all ready to take for granted that consciousness is not dependant on our brains, however mysterious and wonderful it is. Ever feel like you have always been here, and were never meant to die?


From thread, Life and Death (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2518&perpage=15&pagenumber=2) ...

Originally posted by Iacchus32
Originally posted by Alexander
Define "death". Ahh death, the great unknown ...

So where does our consciousness go when we die? Does it just up and evaporate, like that!


Yes. But why does the conclusion of consciousness, which is our existence, seem so illogical? Can you address this in yourself consciously, and then imagine that "you" don't exist? Why does the whole idea seem so strange?


Can you clarify? I think most people have a sense about life, in the conscious sense, that we're not supposed to die. You ever feel that way? Or, feel it would be nice to extend our lives even further than we can currently? What is it about life that maintains the sense that we should "carry on," even in spite of death? ... Is this any more clear? Probably not ...

Do you ever feel like you were meant to live forever? And, is this a feeling that can be associated with one's consciousness?Have created a new post called, The Great Outsider (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2564), if you would care to go there?

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
[B]. Maybe I'll start one up along the lines of "Is the Universe Conscious?" or "Consciousness and the Material Universe," or something like that? Keep your eyes peeled. Or, maybe I'll send you an e-mail.


Iacchus:

I don't know why I logged on at this time, as I have ZERO TIME to reply to anything. HOWEVER, I will tell you that I started a thread a few weeks back entitled: Is the Universe Conscious" which I'm going to access now, do a post on it, then you'll see it appear on the PF menu again. This way, I don't have to repeat myself...IF you'll take the time to read what I -- and others -- have had to say.

Would love to continue the discussion anyway...

[Iacchus32]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Iacchus:

I don't know why I logged on at this time, as I have ZERO TIME to reply to anything. HOWEVER, I will tell you that I started a thread a few weeks back entitled: Is the Universe Conscious" which I'm going to access now, do a post on it, then you'll see it appear on the PF menu again. This way, I don't have to repeat myself...IF you'll take the time to read what I -- and others -- have had to say.

Would love to continue the discussion anyway... Actually I started a new thread called, The Great Outsider (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2564). Please take a look. Thanks!