I believe in a combination of things. Have you ever seen the movie "What Dreams May Come"? It's a lot like that. People either go to heaven or hell, or they reincarnate, or they become a ghost for a predetermined amount of time, that's my personal belief.cnredd said:I believe in a Heaven & Hell, but I run into this problem....
The belief is that what you do on earth will decide what happens to you in the afterlife....I find that odd....
What you do in 60 years of existence will define your place for all of Eternity?
That's a little harsh, don't you think?
Thanks robin. In cosmology, there are four aspects to *space-time*. The fabric of space-time has three axial dimensions... x=height, y=width, z=depth. The final aspect of space-time is the dimension of time. These four aspects are inextricably woven together, and denoted in calculations with the mathematical notation 3:1.robin said:There is an interesting viewpoint on time.. that the universe can be regarded as a 4d block diagram.. 3 axis of space & one axis of time.
Since every 'present' moment along the time axis could consider itself to be as special as any other 'present' moment, then what is it that signifies the true 'present' & that makes it so special compared to any other 'present' moment along the time axis.
Until we understand 'time' fully we won't even know what the hereafter is & indeed whether it is the hereafter or indeed whether it is after the here :smile:
The immortal laws of nature perhaps... outside of space & time. In saying this I'm wondering how can one say the word 'immortal' without indicating a flow of time, which may not be possible in a meta universe or fit with the definition of a meta universe since time doesn't flow there the word immortal may be out of context.Tashah said:Some cosmologists such as Lee Smolin have put forth the notion that rather than time ceasing to exist in the initial singularity known as the Big Bang, it instead exists in a state of infinity. This scenario (very possible) allows and even encourages the metaverse concept of creation.
It was conjectured long ago that perhaps time is a construction of the human mind. When you think about it though, you realize that the effects of time are valid even in the absence of human observation. Processes such as entropy and thermal dynamics which are time dependent occur whether we are there or not. Cause and effect is a phenomena of the arrow of directionality and every observation to date verifies the directionality of cause-effect rather than effect-cause.robin said:but how our idea of the direction of the arrow of time may be wrong.
Imagine a perfume bottle with the lid off. The perfume evaporates &Tashah said:It was conjectured long ago that perhaps time is a construction of the human mind. When you think about it though, you realize that the effects of time are valid even in the absence of human observation. Processes such as entropy and thermal dynamics which are time dependent occur whether we are there or not. Cause and effect is a phenomena of the arrow of directionality and every observation to date verifies the directionality of cause-effect rather than effect-cause.
Tashah said:The multi-universe scenario is complex, but it has been shown via mathematics and statistical analysis that for a universe like ours to come into being via a multi-universe, only a few initial requisites are required. One is that time is infinite in a singularity. Another requirement is that life-bearing universes must be able to produce black holes (which spawns decendents). A final requirement is that any particular universe on a universal limb will resemble others that reside on that limb with only minor differences. Physics and statistical analysis tends to support the last requirement. With these simple requirements, all it takes is one initial universe that meets these criteria to spawn an ever increasing number of its children that also possess these criteria. Although it may seem a bit far-fetched, the only tricky part is the state of time in a singularity. The two remaining criteria would eventually happen (with an infinite number of random choices) if time is infinite in a singularity.
So nature might be like a giant Mandelbrot set.Tashah said:A final requirement is that any particular universe on a universal limb will resemble others that reside on that limb with only minor differences.
The best conjecture to date is that time is a tightly curled dimensional entity.robin said:This shows the arrow is born from the arrangement of matter/energy in the big bang rather than as an intrinsic property of matter.
On a purely personal basis, I also favor the meta-universe concept.robin said:I am inclined to believe there are an infinite number of universes.
TashahTashah said:The best conjecture to date is that time is a tightly curled dimensional entity.
On a purely personal basis, I also favor the meta-universe concept.
Barukh atah Adonai Eloheinu,
melekh ha'olam oseh ma'aseh v'reishit.
Blessed is God,
who shaped the work of creation.
Many folks believe that this life is simply an audition for the next.cnredd said:I believe in a Heaven & Hell, but I run into this problem....
The belief is that what you do on earth will decide what happens to you in the afterlife....I find that odd....
What you do in 60 years of existence will define your place for all of Eternity?
That's a little harsh, don't you think?
There are four aspects to space-time: height=x | width=y | depth=z | time=t [(t) time is subdivided mathematicaly as +t=future, t=present, -t=past]. In Galilean and Newtonian physics, these aspects are regarded as absolutes and are denoted as x y z t.robin said:I'm not sure how time being a tightly curled entity could make it seem like there's a direction to time or that time seems to flow from a fixed past to an open future.
It would appear that the assistance of a Supreme Being is needed to provide the solutions which man is incapable of providing. Perhaps that is as it should be if one wonders Who set the charge and lit the fuse that put the big bang in "The Big Bang Theory".Tashah said:There are four aspects to space-time: height=x | width=y | depth=z | time=t [(t) time is subdivided mathematicaly as +t=future, t=present, -t=past]. In Galilean and Newtonian physics, these aspects are regarded as absolutes and are denoted as x y z t.
In Newtonian physics, it was accepted that the distance between two observers would remain the same as the difference between two instants. Spatial distance was defined in terms of Euclidean geometry. This however, led to different values of the velocity of light (c) in the vacuum as measured by two observers.
In accordance with our experience, if we assume that both observers measure the same value of the velocity of light, we must introduce the spatiotemporal interval. It is this interval that is conserved when we move from one inertial observer to the other. In contrast to Euclidean geometry, we now have the Minkowski space-time interval. The transition from one coordinate system x y z t to another x` y` z` t` is the famous Lorentz transformation that combines space and time.
Thus we have two ways of looking at space-time. The absolute background envisioned by Newton x y z t and the relational background envisioned by Einstein x` y` z` t`. Although our universe is fundamentally quantum in nature (relational), both backgrounds have a certain validity.
In the absolute background, if one knows what are called the *initial conditions* of an x y z t plot, one can accurately plot both predictive and postdictive actions. Time has no arrow.
However in the relational background x` y` z` t`, time does indeed have an arrow which is manifested in many processes such as entropy, heat loss, viscosity etc.
The core of the problem then is that time and motion can be both indeterminate (nondirectional) or determinite (directional) depending on the background and conditions upon which it is measured or observed.
According to M-theory, the intrinsic properties of space-time (and perhaps gravity) are tightly curled (smaller than a Plank Length) and reside on the brane in which our universe is located. Until science better understands gravity waves and can isolate the *gravitron* (the gauge particle that mediates gravity), M-theory will remain in the realm of hypothesis.
I cannot answer your questions about God... as many far wiser than I have grappled with these questions and have failed to arrive at definitive and conclusive answers. Much like the questions concerning time, theology remains in the domain of philosophy.
That may be so Fantasea. It may also be true that the answers are available to us through empirical knowledge gained with the passage of time.Fantasea said:It would appear that the assistance of a Supreme Being is needed to provide the solutions which man is incapable of providing.
Although the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is the current cosmological standard, there are other viable possibilities...Fantasea said:Perhaps that is as it should be if one wonders Who set the charge and lit the fuse that put the big bang in "The Big Bang Theory".
I think one way or another nature is infinite & immortal & never needed to be created in the 1st place becuase of that. Just as one can say God is immortal so he himself did not need to be created in the 1st place. So if nature is infinite it kind of makes God redundant or an unecessary invention.Tashah said:Although the Big Bang Theory (BBT) is the current cosmological standard, there are other viable possibilities...
• This universe is a random event due to an imbalance in a scalar field.
• This universe is a random offspring of a meta-universe.
• This universe is one of many on a specific limb of a meta-universe
The interesting denominator is that none of the scenarios mentioned above completely exclude a deistic creation. In effect, the meta-universe concepts change the historicity of creation, but perhaps not the origen. Something like moving a lump under the carpet from one spot to another... the lump still exists, we have simply moved it from in front of the sofa to a far corner.
Hope this helps.
cnredd said:I believe in a Heaven & Hell, but I run into this problem....
The belief is that what you do on earth will decide what happens to you in the afterlife....I find that odd....
What you do in 60 years of existence will define your place for all of Eternity?
That's a little harsh, don't you think?
Scholastic said:The average life span is 74 years. Secondly, if you are a Christian, you will believe that belief or unbelief in Christ really decides what happens to you. How long do you need to accept or deny Christ?
cnredd said:The average life span in some other countries is less than 50....
Why do you bring up an American statistic?
And if there are people like you on Christ's side...I'm gonna need MUCH more time...:rofl
TJS0110 said:Realy if you look at it this way there is no way a human can judge, in an eternal since, another human. Look at it this way say a man is born in a bad part of town and somehow ends up killing a man, then imagen he was born in a suberb and becomes a company CEO is he a different soul or just in a different situation?
So we cant realy judge about eternity.
Scholastic said:I am bringing up the statistic of the majority of the civilized world. I really don't care about the life spans of barbarians.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?