Quote:
Originally Posted by Someday
I should not have said that to God, time does not exist. What I really meant is God is not subjugated to time in the manner that we are.
I congratulate you on your research into QM and the many different theories being discussed out there today. All of it is extremely interesting.
I'm not completely sold on some theories such as observer participancy on a macro scale, because if observation leaves an imprint on the object, this should affect subsequent observations by others. I would expect this to be detectable and verifiable on the macro scale. Schrodinger's cat is a nice thought experiment, but it is based on the fact that we cannot know what things are doing when we are not looking at them. Newtonian physics on the other hand is based on the belief that we can know what things are doing even when we are not looking at them. On the quantum level, Newton seems to be wrong but QM is at best an extremely accurate estimation and not supported by valid acceptable mathematical procedures as its formula and equations are “normalized” to get rid of all those pesky infinities. Not that they are not onto something, it's just not very well understood.
In one sense, the observer participancy, if true on a macro scale would be a dart in science. Science is based on empirical evidence that can be duplicated and verified by more than one person or group.
The operative word here is EMPIRICAL.
If you were to look up the definition of empirical, it may bring back something similar to "that which is observed or experienced; capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment."
Here “observation” is the operative word.
On the other hand, I am a fan of Greek Pre-Socratic philosophy. They were mostly materialists, but eventually their arguments led Leucippus and Democritus to insist that there are two elements, atoms and the void. The atomists recognized that the best ontological explanation of the natural world would have to recognize that space is just as much a substance constituting the world as matter is. What they meant by the 'void' was something like a big three-dimensional container in which all the atoms had a location and could move. But modern science doesn't recognize that space is a substance in that sense. It's mainly just "the space between One thing and another.." in science.
The real questions I would ask are:
Does reality depend on our existence?
Does this observation participancy, if true, mean that God needs our existence?
Blessings
|
We are not victim and controlled by time any less than God is, everything we do is a choice and an act of creation.
As for your questions
does reality depend on our existence... this depends on what you class as reality, most of what we assume is reality is a guess at what something is..this is a bootstrapping argument.
God needs for nothing...otherwise God is not God as proclaimed even by the Bible as it would be contradictory..which is one of the most clearest contradictions seen in the bible/christianity which teaches and foundations are built upon a God of need
So the questions are.. does God choose our existence? do We(God/US) choose existence?
Its like saying.. does the ocean as a whole depend on the individual drops to be the ocean? Are the drops any less the substance of the ocean? A single drop may not be able to wield the same impact/power of the collective drops/ocean could..yet again that depends on the conditions and the manner of how and what we are applying that drop too
As for the space between one thing and another.. to say that Science calls it space only would be to only speak for a small unverfied amount of the science community and would be only in reference to a particular topic or situation that doesnt require discussion of connection. There is an overhwleming acceptance in the scientific community that agree that everything is just energy, one thing from another is just vibrational energy distinguished only by speed.. Everthing is energy.. that is why when you take an ice cube which is solid and melt it to water then to vapour.. its still there its just changed formed.. Conditions reveal a lot about what we perceive as nothing, which in reality is something.
Tests have been done which verify this. Everyday we use items around us that show us this.
God is everything, including the nothing, the all in all.. so even the SPACE that some refuse to believe is a Something is still part of the Everything.. as the everything is the something and the nothing.. not one without the other... God holds everything together because Everything is God, the formless, the form, the male, female, the no gender, the up the down, the left the right the black the white and all the colors inbetween.. a whole expression of God/everything
Yet to keep alive assumed absolutes..people live in the illusion and from this form thoughts about themselves and God as being seperate and create theologys around this in an attempt to make sense of the choices people make and natural disasters which harms others without any apparent intervention on Gods part to prevent it....