I was thinking about Heaven...

[sukie]

What form do we take in heaven? Our souls (for those that believe in such a thing) need no body, no appearance, no senses... What form would it be?

I googled the question and found this piece from 2004. Sorry if it was posted back then but many of us were not here back then.

Enjoy.

Reason Magazine - Is Heaven Populated Chiefly by the Souls of Embryos?

Harvesting stem cells without tears

Ronald Bailey | December 22, 2004

What are we to think about the fact that Nature (and for believers, Nature's God) profligately creates and destroys human embryos? John Opitz, a professor of pediatrics, human genetics, and obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Utah, testified before the President's Council on Bioethics that between 60 and 80 percent of all naturally conceived embryos are simply flushed out in women's normal menstrual flows unnoticed. This is not miscarriage we're talking about. The women and their husbands or partners never even know that conception has taken place; the embryos disappear from their wombs in their menstrual flows. In fact, according to Opitz, embryologists estimate that the rate of natural loss for embryos that have developed for seven days or more is 60 percent. The total rate of natural loss of human embryos increases to at least 80 percent if one counts from the moment of conception. About half of the embryos lost are abnormal, but half are not, and had they implanted they would probably have developed into healthy babies.

So millions of viable human embryos each year produced via normal conception fail to implant and never develop further. Does this mean America is suffering a veritable holocaust of innocent human life annihilated? Consider the claim made by right-to-life apologists like Robert George, a Princeton University professor of jurisprudence and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, that every embryo is "already a human being." Does that mean that if we could detect such unimplanted embryos as they leave the womb, we would have a duty to rescue them and try to implant them anyway?

...

Of course, culturally we do not mourn the deaths of these millions of embryos as we would the death of a child—and reasonably so, because we do in fact know that these embryos are not people. Try this thought experiment. A fire breaks out in a fertility clinic and you have a choice: You can save a three-year-old child or a Petri dish containing 10 seven-day old embryos. Which do you choose to rescue?

Stepping onto dangerous theological ground, it seems that if human embryos consisting of one hundred cells or less are the moral equivalents of a normal adult, then religious believers must accept that such embryos share all of the attributes of a human being, including the possession of an immortal soul. So even if we generously exclude all of the naturally conceived abnormal embryos—presuming, for the sake of theological argument, that imperfections in their gene expression have somehow blocked the installation of a soul—that would still mean that perhaps 40 percent of all the residents of Heaven were never born, never developed brains, and never had thoughts, emotions, experiences, hopes, dreams, or desires.

Yet millions of intelligent people of good will maintain that seven-day-old embryos have the exact same moral standing as do readers of this column. Acting on this sincere belief, they are trying to block biomedical research on human embryonic stem cells that is desired by millions of their fellow citizens.



http://www.reason.com/news/show/34948.html

[dasaybz]

The emotional attachment of even knowing that a life exists is not there. That's why there really is no way to compare an embryo to someone that is actually living. The emotional attachment of an embryo that you didn't even know about cannot be the same thing as a living person in my opinion.

[nehemiah]

think about heaven all you want, sukie b/c you are going to hell. FACT.

[sukie]

The emotional attachment of even knowing that a life exists is not there. That's why there really is no way to compare an embryo to someone that is actually living. The emotional attachment of an embryo that you didn't even know about cannot be the same thing as a living person in my opinion.

So you need emotion to register as having a soul? BTW I am an ateist but I am still curious about such things.

[sukie]

think about heaven all you want, sukie b/c you are going to hell. FACT.

And now you know why I didn't come to Philly.... I'll get there eventually.

[dasaybz]

So you need emotion to register as having a soul? BTW I am an ateist but I am still curious about such things.

Does plankton have a soul?

[uppy]

Sukie still has time to come back to the church..he could be the next

Polish Pope.

[dasaybz]

how about viruses and bacteria? do those guys have souls?

[K-Gun]

Think about this for a second sukie, if heaven is eternal and souls have no boundries, then there is no perception of time. There is only a single "now" moment. Imagine the greatest high you ever got from you favorite drug, now multiple it by a million, and make it last FOREVER as a single moment.

[sukie]

Except souls are not physical... Therefore a physical experience is moot when thinking of our everlasting souls.

[uppy]

I like that JK

[sukie]

how about viruses and bacteria? do those guys have souls?

Awesome question.

[dasaybz]

Think about this for a second sukie, if heaven is eternal and souls have no boundries, then there is no perception of time. There is only a single "now" moment. Imagine the greatest high you ever got from you favorite drug, now multiple it by a million, and make it last FOREVER as a single moment.

But, the million dollar question is are there virgins in heaven?

[JLB]

Sukie still has time to come back to the church..he could be the next

Polish Pope.

Absolutely why not?

[uppy]

Is their sex in heaven ? or puppys

[K-Gun]

Except souls are not physical... Therefore a physical experience is moot when thinking of our everlasting souls.

You're showing your materialist bias. If by physical you mean in time and space, then you have ruled out "physical experience." it is another thing to rule out the experience of consciousness as pure energy. Such experience clearly wouldn't be sense perception, but as consciouness is the energy in our brains, I don't see why that energy cannot have continue to be "pure" consciouness without a body.

[Julianna]

But, the million dollar question is are there virgins in heaven?



:noway: why must every thread turn to sex?

[JLB]

But, the million dollar question is are there virgins in heaven?

LMAO!!!:angel2:

[dasaybz]

You're showing your materialist bias. If by physical you mean in time and space, then you have ruled out "physical experience." it is another thing to rule out the experience of consciousness as pure energy. Such experience clearly wouldn't be sense perception, but as consciouness is the energy in our brains, I don't see why that energy cannot have continue to be "pure" consciouness without a body.

Amazing post man.

[Julianna]

But, the million dollar question is are there virgins in heaven?



Sure there are! They call themselves: Sister Mary Katherine
Sister Mary Angela
Sister Mary Joseph

[westphal]

In heaven, we take the form of a decomposing corpse.

[Julianna]

You're showing your materialist bias. If by physical you mean in time and space, then you have ruled out "physical experience." it is another thing to rule out the experience of consciousness as pure energy. Such experience clearly wouldn't be sense perception, but as consciouness is the energy in our brains, I don't see why that energy cannot have continue to be "pure" consciouness without a body.



Dam that was good! :bigasskiss:

[K-Gun]

Dam that was good! :bigasskiss:

Except it also points out the absurdity of a Christian heaven. It is impossible for bodies to exist eternally. Of course, you can just say "God can do the impossible" but I'm not down with that explanation.

[JLB]

Is their sex in heaven ? or puppys

Puppies having sex yes.

[uppy]

Jk is on a roll in this thread.....well done Sir

[JLB]

Except it also points out the absurdity of a Christian heaven. It is impossible for bodies to exist eternally. Of course, you can just say "God can do the impossible" but I'm not down with that explanation.

Your right everything is possible impossible doesn't exist.

[shiva2999]

I want to be a disembodied spirit wandering the world.

I figure it's the only way I'll get to see the Masters and the Superbowl in person.

[JLB]

I want to be a disembodied spirit wandering the world.

I figure it's the only way I'll get to see the Masters and the Superbowl in person.

This might just be your best post of all time right here.

Both events would be awesome!!!!!!

[sukie]

You're showing your materialist bias. If by physical you mean in time and space, then you have ruled out "physical experience." it is another thing to rule out the experience of consciousness as pure energy. Such experience clearly wouldn't be sense perception, but as consciouness is the energy in our brains, I don't see why that energy cannot have continue to be "pure" consciouness without a body.

That is what I am getting at. Pure energy of consciousness... Okay let's take that one then. Withtout the physicality part of it... we are left with a free form of energy. No eyes to see or hands to touch let alone play the harp in heaven or nerves to experience the Damnation (of Philly) in hell.

[uppy]

I want to be a disembodied spirit wandering the world.

You are already ...lol

[K-Gun]

I want to be a disembodied spirit wandering the world.

I figure it's the only way I'll get to see the Masters and the Superbowl in person.

LOL, would that be your heaven? Maybe you just get stuck inside your own dream world when you die? But talk about total injustice. The bastards with no conscience become king of the universe, and meek who can't forgive themselves for lying to their mother live an eternity being punished unmercifully.

[K-Gun]

That is what I am getting at. Pure energy of consciousness... Okay let's take that one then. Withtout the physicality part of it... we are left with a free form of energy. No eyes to see or hands to touch let alone play the harp in heaven or nerves to experience the Damnation (of Philly) in hell.

True, all you have is your essence. If you are love, you feel love for all eternity. If you are hate, you feel hate for all eternity. ah yes, no body to feel. But doesn't your brain actually do the feeling? And isn't it the energy in your brain in particular? Maybe love and hate are energy afterall?

[shiva2999]

LOL, would that be your heaven? Maybe you just get stuck inside your own dream world when you die?

Dream world? No thanks.

I enjoy watching the real world go on.

The idea of not being able to do it anymore is sad.

[dasaybz]

So can we agree that in order to have a soul, there needs to be some form of consciousness?

[dasaybz]

The idea of not being able to do it anymore is sad.

And frightening.

[sukie]

So can we agree that in order to have a soul, there needs to be some form of consciousness?

Okay then get the consensus on this and perhaps there is a starting point.

Define consciousness first.... okay?

[twosheds]

But, the million dollar question is are there virgins in heaven?

Not if I make it there. :D


Great article, Sukie. :rockstar:

[uppy]

So can we agree that in order to have a soul, there needs to be some form of consciousness?

I agree

[JLB]

Not if I make it there. :D


Great article, Sukie. :rockstar:

Beat me to it Sukie good one!!

[Carl J. Ironsides]

I want to be a disembodied spirit wandering the world.

I figure it's the only way I'll get to see the Masters and the Superbowl in person.

You and I both. That would be amazing to wander Augusta and other big-time venues without paying a dime or being noticed. It'd be an eternal ticket to awesomeness.

[shiva2999]

And frightening.

I don't know if that's a word I'd use.

[twosheds]

You're showing your materialist bias. If by physical you mean in time and space, then you have ruled out "physical experience." it is another thing to rule out the experience of consciousness as pure energy. Such experience clearly wouldn't be sense perception, but as consciouness is the energy in our brains, I don't see why that energy cannot have continue to be "pure" consciouness without a body.

According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, mass and energy are equivalent.

[westphal]

What could possibly happen in Heaven? I don't think there could be any real events because events change things from one thing to another...and Heaven is extra special nice all the time. By its definition, heaven can't fluctuate in its goodness...or can it? I don't know. Sounds like fiction. So how could we be conscious in a place where nothing ever happens and call that Heaven? I call it death, only there's no consciousness involved, and I believe it's not so bad. Peaceful.

[sukie]

What could possibly happen in Heaven? I don't think there could be any real events because events change things from one thing to another...and Heaven is extra special nice all the time. By its definition, heaven can't fluctuate in its goodness...or can it? I don't know. Sounds like fiction. So how could we be conscious in a place where nothing ever happens and call that Heaven? I call it death, only there's no consciousness involved, and I believe it's not so bad. Peaceful.

Very deep tyhought. If heaven cannot fluctuate in and of it's self, then what happens to a souls perception of heaven's constancy? Like a brand new awesome car... suddenly becomes just a car to the owner. The car didn't change.

[westphal]

Very deep tyhought. If heaven cannot fluctuate in and of it's self, then what happens to a souls perception of heaven's constancy? Like a brand new awesome car... suddenly becomes just a car to the owner. The car didn't change.
sounds boring. Imagine nothing ever happening for eternity. Sounds more like Hell to me. Like you say, the best thing possible would eventually lose its appeal, wouldn't it, especially after about a million years.

Another thing would be this: there can be no separation from other people (or souls, if you will) in heaven. Separation implies the possiblity of loneliness, misunderstanding, etc., and that just couldn't happen in Heaven. Also, there really could not be a thought process because what would there be to think about, really. Thought revolves around cause and effect, and there would be none of that...obviously, there can be no physical form because that also would imply separation, and that's where all conflicts start.

So a person's experience of Heaven would have to be one where he (or she) exists in a non-specific place, not knowing anything and not caring about anything. there would be no reason to think anything other than "this is soooo great." But that wouldn't really be a thought, it would be more of a feeling.

[Lucidvizion]

Personally I don't spend too much time thinking about it.

I'll find out someday.

[dasaybz]

What could possibly happen in Heaven? I don't think there could be any real events because events change things from one thing to another...and Heaven is extra special nice all the time. By its definition, heaven can't fluctuate in its goodness...or can it? I don't know. Sounds like fiction. So how could we be conscious in a place where nothing ever happens and call that Heaven? I call it death, only there's no consciousness involved, and I believe it's not so bad. Peaceful.

I don't know man ... I think I could sit on a beach surrounded by hundreds of naked women serving me beer and doobies for a long time.

[westphal]

Personally I don't spend too much time thinking about it.

I'll find out someday.
Or maybe not.

[westphal]

I don't know man ... I think I could sit on a beach surrounded by hundreds of naked women serving me beer and doobies for a long time.
Sex is good because of tension and lust...maybe love. LOL There can't be tension or lust in Heaven. Unless heaven is a contstant state of orgasmic frenzy, like an endless release of tension. Also, there would be no reason for mind altering substances in paradise. Beer and weed are out. Sorry to disappoint you, but I know all about it. LOL

I guess your version of Heaven is like living out your fantasies on earth, but I don't see how that can last forever. It's like an episode of the Twilight Zone I saw where this guy got everything he ever wanted all the time. To make a long story short, it drove him crazy.

[Lucidvizion]

To expand on my previous statement a little:

There are things that the human brain just cannot comprehend. For instance, can you imagine what colors that are only visible in the ultraviolet spectrum look like? Can you imagine having 4 linear physical dimensions(length, width, height, and new_dimension)?

I believe what happens after death is something that literally cannot be explained to or grasped by a human brain. I believe consciousness exists independent of the human body and brain... in fact being limited by the human form.

And if not, then you'd never even know it!

[dasaybz]

To expand on my previous statement a little:

There are things that the human brain just cannot comprehend. For instance, can you imagine what colors that are only visible in the ultraviolet spectrum look like? Can you imagine having 4 linear physical dimensions(length, width, height, and new_dimension)?

I believe what happens after death is something that literally cannot be explained to or grasped by a human brain. I believe consciousness exists independent of the human body and brain... in fact being limited by the human form.

And if not, then you'd never even know it!

Damn man, this post is another great one.

There are probably so many things that we cannot comprehend that are going to make us infinitely happy in heaven. Think about this. We live on one planet ... there are only certain things that we can do on this planet and we have adapted to these things that we enjoy to do here.

For example, I said let's have some naked broads on the beach serving beer and doobs. Now because we live on earth, these things are provided to us by our planet. Beer, women, doobs, they are all a product of this planet. The planet has provided our level of pleasure for us. Now take a look at how big the universe is. There are so many planets that must have forms of pleasure that we can't even imagine. I think that we could keep ourselves busy for a few billion years just searching the universe for things that make us happy.

[westphal]

To expand on my previous statement a little:

There are things that the human brain just cannot comprehend. For instance, can you imagine what colors that are only visible in the ultraviolet spectrum look like? Can you imagine having 4 linear physical dimensions(length, width, height, and new_dimension)?

I believe what happens after death is something that literally cannot be explained to or grasped by a human brain. I believe consciousness exists independent of the human body and brain... in fact being limited by the human form.

And if not, then you'd never even know it!
I'll go along with that.

There is no way we can ever comprehend what is going to happen to us when we die. Even if death is the end, you really can't imagine that experience, or lack of experience I should say.

I hope there is a heaven and I qualify for admission, but I just can't bring myself to believe that.

[twosheds]

There are things that the human brain just cannot comprehend. For instance, can you imagine what colors that are only visible in the ultraviolet spectrum look like? Can you imagine having 4 linear physical dimensions(length, width, height, and new_dimension)?

I think you mix up comprehension and visualisation. I cannot visualise both, except by mapping it to a spectrum/dimension I can visualise (like we map three-dimensional objects on two-dimensional surfaces sometimes). I can comprehend both, though. Mathematically speaking, it is "easy" to work with n-dimensional spaces.

[westphal]

I think you mix up comprehension and visualisation. I cannot visualise both, except by mapping it to a spectrum/dimension I can visualise (like we map three-dimensional objects on two-dimensional surfaces sometimes). I can comprehend both, though. Mathematically speaking, it is "easy" to work with n-dimensional spaces.
I don't know about that.

that's like saying that you can comprehend eternity and infinity, and I don't believe anyone can do that.

[sukie]

Okay... BUT what about the authors premise? Are embryos void of a soul?

[twosheds]

I don't know about that.

that's like saying that you can comprehend eternity and infinity, and I don't believe anyone can do that.

I can comprehend it. I can reason about it. I cannot visualise it.


You can say heaven is beyond human logic and reasoning. Yet by doing that you take away the ability to talk and think about it at all. It becomes an abstract concept beyond human thought that is easily swept away by occam's razor.

[JLB]

I'll go along with that.

There is no way we can ever comprehend what is going to happen to us when we die. Even if death is the end, you really can't imagine that experience, or lack of experience I should say.

I hope there is a heaven and I qualify for admission, but I just can't bring myself to believe that.

Qualify for admission well thats easy.

If you believe Jesus Christ died for your sins.

Thats really the only requirement.

You either believe he's your saviour or you don't.

[Lucidvizion]

I think you mix up comprehension and visualisation. I cannot visualise both, except by mapping it to a spectrum/dimension I can visualise (like we map three-dimensional objects on two-dimensional surfaces sometimes). I can comprehend both, though. Mathematically speaking, it is "easy" to work with n-dimensional spaces.

You are correct, I did mix them up.

[dasaybz]

Okay then get the consensus on this and perhaps there is a starting point.

Define consciousness first.... okay?

Is the ability to think the same as consciousness?

[westphal]

Qualify for admission well thats easy.

If you believe Jesus Christ died for your sins.

Thats really the only requirement.

You either believe he's your saviour or you don't.
And if you don't believe that, you are going to Hell?

I guess most of the world's population is going to hell. Chances are, if you are born in another part of the world and are taught a different religion, you are automatically going to hell. Is that the way it is?

Then if Hitler fancies himself as a Christian, he will go to Heaven while a perfectly virtuous Hindu or Buddist would go to Hell because they haven't accepted Jesus Christ as their personnal savior?

Have I got that right?

[westphal]

I can comprehend it. I can reason about it. I cannot visualise it.


You can say heaven is beyond human logic and reasoning. Yet by doing that you take away the ability to talk and think about it at all. It becomes an abstract concept beyond human thought that is easily swept away by occam's razor.
I have been talking about it. But the reality of it can't be known from where I'm sitting. I have my own ideas, but there can be no definition of Heaven. The concept means different things to different people.

I still don't think you can comprehend infinity. As a concept, you can grasp it, but you can't really wrap your mind around it the enormity of it...but I guess that's what you meant when you said you can't visualize it, but we are getting into semantics here.

[K-Gun]

According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, mass and energy are equivalent.

So the question is, which is considered substance, and which is considered the epiphenomenon? Substance (in the way I am using it) is the one necessary type of stuff in the universe. An epiphenomenon is a secondary form of the one substance.

According to inflationary theory, matter cannot be a substance because matter must always have a body, and a body must always exist in space. According to the Big Bang and the Law of Conservation, all the matter and energy in the universe existed at the moment of the Big Bang. Prior to the Big Bang, all the matter and energy must have still existed. But prior to the Big Bang, there was no space and no time. Thus, all the matter in the universe must have existed as potential energy, in neither space nor time. Thus energy has no beginning or end, in that it is essentially non temporal. The easy jump here is to say energy is consciousness. I like to think of the whole universe as a single entity coming to know who it is through self-aware creatures like us. We are the the dreams and nightmares of the universe, only we are real. We are the universe struggling to become itself.

[JLB]

And if you don't believe that, you are going to Hell?

I guess most of the world's population is going to hell. Chances are, if you are born in another part of the world and are taught a different religion, you are automatically going to hell. Is that the way it is?

Then if Hitler fancies himself as a Christian, he will go to Heaven while a perfectly virtuous Hindu or Buddist would go to Hell because they haven't accepted Jesus Christ as their personnal savior?

Have I got that right?


Truly believe he died for your sins.

That he is your lord and saviour.

That is it he made it easy.

Hitler and what he may believe I don't know.

Hindu and Buddhist no idea there either.

Not our call to make on anybody for that matter.

[Lucidvizion]

Truly believe he died for your sins.

That he is your lord and saviour.



I cannot do this because I am a skeptic.

I cannot truely believe the words of men.

[JLB]

I cannot do this because I am a skeptic.

I cannot truely believe the words of men.

As easy as it might sound it is also easy to have doubt.

TigerJ could better answer the concerns you mention.

He's in the field if you know what I mean.

[westphal]

I cannot do this because I am a skeptic.

I cannot truely believe the words of men.
I'll see you in Hell. Just kidding.

[sukie]

Alright stop hijacking this thread with the Son of God crap.

[Ru]

Think about this for a second sukie, if heaven is eternal and souls have no boundries, then there is no perception of time. There is only a single "now" moment. Imagine the greatest high you ever got from you favorite drug, now multiple it by a million, and make it last FOREVER as a single moment.

So Heaven is a perpetual whippet buzz?? Cool!!

[westphal]

:aerobics: :boogie2: ha, ha.

[sukie]

JKiG, If there is no perception of time... How can there be a quantified eternal suffering for me in hell? (Philly)

[westphal]

Here is another question entirely: if there is a heaven, does that automatically mean that there is a Hell as well? What about limbo, or purgatory?

I believe that the we all go to the same place when he die. It doesn't matter what you do or believe while you are alive, the same thing happens to everyone. If I thought I could get some kind of time off for good behavior, I'd do the right things, whatever things the supreme being wanted, or whatever.

[sukie]

I believe , truly, thatwhen the chemical reactions cease... I will cease, period, end of the sukie story.

[westphal]

I believe , truly, thatwhen the chemical reactions cease... I will cease, period, end of the sukie story.
Until proven otherwise, I gotta agree.

When you're dead, you're dead.

Game over.

[sukie]

That gives me an idea.... New thread coming.

[twosheds]

According to inflationary theory, matter cannot be a substance because matter must always have a body, and a body must always exist in space. According to the Big Bang and the Law of Conservation, all the matter and energy in the universe existed at the moment of the Big Bang. Prior to the Big Bang, all the matter and energy must have still existed. But prior to the Big Bang, there was no space and no time. Thus, all the matter in the universe must have existed as potential energy, in neither space nor time. Thus energy has no beginning or end, in that it is essentially non temporal. The easy jump here is to say energy is consciousness. I like to think of the whole universe as a single entity coming to know who it is through self-aware creatures like us. We are the the dreams and nightmares of the universe, only we are real. We are the universe struggling to become itself.

"Prior of time" is a contradiction. "Prior" describes a timespan, but there can be no timespan prior of time. It would be like saying "all natural numbers smaller than zero".

The laws of physics do not apply "prior of time".

Still, energy has no beginning and no end, since it cannot be destoyed or created, and there is no point talking about "prior" of "after" time.

I'll have to think about the conciousness part.

[westphal]

"Prior of time" is a contradiction. "Prior" describes a timespan, but there can be no timespan prior of time. It would be like saying "all natural numbers smaller than zero".

The laws of physics do not apply "prior of time".

Still, energy has no beginning and no end, since it cannot be destoyed or created, and there is no point talking about "prior" of "after" time.

I'll have to think about the conciousness part.
Let me know when you figure it out. LOL.

[K-Gun]

"Prior of time" is a contradiction. "Prior" describes a timespan, but there can be no timespan prior of time. It would be like saying "all natural numbers smaller than zero".

The laws of physics do not apply "prior of time".

Still, energy has no beginning and no end, since it cannot be destoyed or created, and there is no point talking about "prior" of "after" time.

I'll have to think about the conciousness part.


It is not a contradiction at all. If energy had no beginning, and space and time had a beginning (at the Big Bang), then something existed "prior" to space and time. In the strictest sense, the notion of “temporally prior” does not apply. I am not saying energy is temporally prior to time, I am saying it existed non-temporally prior to the beginning of time. I am using the second defition of priority which has nothing to do with temporality.

You do agree that time must have a beginning, don’t you? Time simply appears to be the measure of bodies in motion through space. If energy had no beginning, and time and space had a beginning, then matter had a beginning in time and space. I realize I am hitting on a touchy subject, I believe that the laws of physics will prove the impossibility of the laws of physics to prove everything, in virtue of the necessary non-local/non-temporal foundation of the universe.

[westphal]

It is not a contradiction at all. If energy had no beginning, and space and time had a beginning (at the Big Bang), then something existed "prior" to space and time. In the strictest sense, the notion of “temporally prior” does not apply. I am not saying energy is temporally prior to time, I am saying it existed non-temporally prior to the beginning of time. I am using the second defition of priority which has nothing to do with temporality.

You do agree that time must have a beginning, don’t you? Time simply appears to be the measure of bodies in motion through space. If energy had no beginning, and time and space had a beginning, then matter had a beginning in time and space. I realize I am hitting on a touchy subject, I believe that the laws of physics will prove the impossibility of the laws of physics to prove everything, in virtue of the necessary non-local/non-temporal foundation of the universe.
Whatever. Get as technical as you want, but how do you explain energy always existing? How could something always exist, especially when there wasn't time for it to exist in? That would mean that there never was a beginning of any kind, really...just changes to the way things are. And what exactly is space and time if there is no living conscious thing there to experience it? If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around, does it make a noise? So if there was a (pardon the expression) time when there was no matter, why would it follow that matter is a prerequisite of time and space? Either something always existed, or the universe created itself spontaneously out of nothing at all, or energy maybe.

Energy must exist in time and space otherwise it would have no context to exist in, at least as far as I understand things. If something were to exist outside of space and time, be it energy or whatnot, it would never change. I can't see how something can never change. That would mean a total state of static for all existence at one point. Then again, I'm totally confused at this point. Are you trying to say that the Big Bang happened, then somebody hit a stopwatch?

[Green Lantern]

Whatever. Get as technical as you want, but how do you explain energy always existing? How could something always exist? That would mean that there never was a beginning of any kind, really...just changes to the way things are. And what exactly is space and time if there is no living conscious thing there to experience it? If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around, does it make a noise? So if there was a (pardon the expression) time when there was no matter, why would it follow that matter is a prerequisite of time and space? Either something always existed, or the universe created itself spontaneously out of nothing at all.

Energy must exist in time and space otherwise it would have no context to exist in, at least as far as I understand things. If something were to exist outside of space and time, be it energy or whatnot, it would never change. I can't see how something can never change. That would mean a total state of static for all existence at one point. Then again, I'm totally confused at this point. Are you trying to say that the Big Bang happened, then somebody hit a stopwatch?

E=MC2.

Energy and matter are interchangeable. Without space, there is not time. Before space, therefore, there was only energy. Only potential. Think of God as Energy; always was, always will be.

[westphal]

E=MC2.

Energy and matter are interchangeable. Without space, there is not time. Before space, therefore, there was only energy. Only potential. Think of God as Energy; always was, always will be.
That is if you assume that there was a time before space, no pun intended. It's not proven that space didn't always exist, and therefore time. The Big Bang is a theory. The truth is that nobody really knows. There can be an infinate number of universes out there just like ours, and maybe our universe is an offshoot of one of them somehow. If we are talking about space here, where does it end, and what's beyond it? Eh, smart guy? LOL

[Green Lantern]

That is if you assume that there was a time before space, no pun intended. It's not proven that space didn't always exist, and therefore time. The Big Bang is a theory. The truth is that nobody really knows. There can be an infinate number of universes out there just like ours, and maybe our universe is an offshoot of one of them somehow. If we are talking about space here, where does it end, and what's beyond it? Eh, smart guy? LOL


Sorry for the confusion. I thought it was taken as read that we were theorizing. Beyond space is only energy untransformed.

Anything is possible. The Hindu's could be right in worshiping me.

[K-Gun]

Whatever. Get as technical as you want, but how do you explain energy always existing?

How could something always exist? That would mean that there never was a beginning of any kind, really...just changes to the way things are.

LOL, I wish I could take credit for saying that energy had no beginning, but that is a simple consequence of the Conservation of Energy, “Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only altered in form.” If it is true that energy cannot be created, then it must have always existed.

And what exactly is space and time if there is no living conscious thing there to experience it? If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around, does it make a noise? So if there was a (pardon the expression) time when there was no matter, why would it follow that matter is a prerequisite of time and space? Either something always existed, or the universe created itself spontaneously out of nothing at all.

I am saying that the universe always existed; it did not create itself out of nothing. But for this to be true, for something to have no beginning, time must not be the measure of existence. In fact, time is only a secondary phenomenon. That is to say, there is a beginning of time, but no beginning of existence. There is a beginning of space and matter, and that is the beginning of the physical world. But energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so it had no beginning. Energy can exist outside space as a singularity. That seems to be what happens in a black hole. The very fabric of space and time are ripped apart, all the matter taken into the black hole is converted to energy, and exists at a point that is dimensionless.

Energy must exist in time and space otherwise it would have no context to exist in, at least as far as I understand things. If something were to exist outside of space and time, be it energy or whatnot, it would never change. I can't see how something can never change. That would mean a total state of static for all existence at one point. Then again, I'm totally confused at this point. Are you trying to say that the Big Bang happened, then somebody hit a stopwatch?

Pretty much, the Big Bang is not only the beginning of the stop watch, but the beginning of space itself. Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed; therefore all the matter and energy that currently exists in the universe existed at the moment of the Big Bang. It must have existed as potential energy outside space and time. Its funny that you can’t picture something as changeless, because for the first 2000 years of Western philosophy, thinkers believed that you could only have knowledge of that which is changeless.




Take that.

[shiva2999]

You guys are making my brain hurt.

[K-Gun]

You guys are making my brain hurt.

Don't worry about that, I have it all figured out. Now I only have to find someone that can understand what I'm saying.

[westphal]

Sorry for the confusion. I thought it was taken as read that we were theorizing. Beyond space is only energy untransformed.

Anything is possible. The Hindu's could be right in worshiping me.
There is confusion, but no need to apologize because it's not your fault. Although it may be your fault according to the Hindus.

[westphal]

Take that.
It will take me years to recover from this...

[dasaybz]

I believe , truly, thatwhen the chemical reactions cease... I will cease, period, end of the sukie story.

Alright Sukie, I have a question for ya. When the end of sukie comes, what happens next? Eternal nothingness? Could you explain what that is like?

[dasaybz]

You guys are making my brain hurt.

like that's really hard to do

[westphal]

Don't worry about that, I have it all figured out. Now I only have to find someone that can understand what I'm saying.
Take it up with God, or have a private understanding between yourself and a black hole.

Maybe our universe came shooting out of a different dimension from a black hole because of a strange occurance within, and this theory can take the place of the Big Bang, and explains only the formation of a new pocket of space in time, if you will. I guess it boils down to how you can be sure that energy existed first. Even if energy can exist apart from space and time, this is not a reason to come to the logical conclusion that is ever has. You can't say for sure whether energy was ever the singular reality, although I really believe that to be the case even now. What I'm saying is that maybe there was always time and space, too. You talk a good game, and my brain hurts just as much as Shiva's, but there is still no proof of this. I'm still trying to wrap my head around considering a time before time.

[sukie]

Alright Sukie, I have a question for ya. When the end of sukie comes, what happens next? Eternal nothingness? Could you explain what that is like?

First let me toss this at ya... Why must there be more? The batteries are dead on this energizer bunny and that is all there is ... No sequel.

From the posts in this thread... heaven would be nothingness for a non exsistant eternity without time and tangible physicality. The crematorium better have the scrubbers on the stack because torching me might be the final nail in the global warming doom scenerio.

[Mouldsie]

see


this is why I voted for JKiG

[westphal]

see


this is why I voted for JKiG
voted for what? biggest brain bulge?

[Mouldsie]

best prs poster


id much rather read about this than some pissfest about dems/repubs response to gay marriage
borrringgg

[twosheds]

It is not a contradiction at all. If energy had no beginning, and space and time had a beginning (at the Big Bang), then something existed "prior" to space and time. In the strictest sense, the notion of “temporally prior” does not apply. I am not saying energy is temporally prior to time, I am saying it existed non-temporally prior to the beginning of time. I am using the second defition of priority which has nothing to do with temporality.

I am not aware of such a definition of prior. If it's not temporal, then we're talking about a point in time (and a point in space). And that would be the "beginning" (otherwise there would be a hole between the beginning and the point in time you're talking about). Now, the beginning of the Universe, and the planck time afterwards, are not observable to us.

You do agree that time must have a beginning, don’t you?

I think time has a beginning as much as a sphere has a beginning. The "beginning" of spacetime is an interesting point of the sphere, because there is a singularity. But it's not a sharp cut like the beginning of a line.

Take the earth as a sphere. The (magnetic) south pole is an interesting point of that sphere. Now, just like you can go backwards towards the beginning of time, you can go south on the earth, until you reach the south pole. At that point, you will invariably go north again, just like when travelling backwards in time, you'll reach a point where you'll invariably go forward in time again.

This theory (by Stephen Hawking) would be hard to prove, but it is mathematically sound, and it eliminates a lot of problems that exist with the singularity at the beginning of time.

[dasaybz]

First let me toss this at ya... Why must there be more? The batteries are dead on this energizer bunny and that is all there is ... No sequel.

From the posts in this thread... heaven would be nothingness for a non exsistant eternity without time and tangible physicality. The crematorium better have the scrubbers on the stack because torching me might be the final nail in the global warming doom scenerio.

I get what you are saying, but none of us have ever experienced nothingness to that extent. I don't see how just turning off the lights works either. I dunno.

[sukie]

It's pretty simple. Ever loose and bury a pet? Consciousness ceases and the energy goes into the decay and worm food process. Conservation of energy is at hand. Same goes for us humans... No ego need apply.

[dasaybz]

It's pretty simple. Ever loose and bury a pet? Consciousness ceases and the energy goes into the decay and worm food process. Conservation of energy is at hand. Same goes for us humans... No ego need apply.

No, I get the physical part. How about us? We have thoughts, and we think even when we are sleeping and our minds are racing all the time.

[Lucidvizion]

I get what you are saying, but none of us have ever experienced nothingness to that extent. I don't see how just turning off the lights works either. I dunno.

I've never been there myself, but the time passed during general anesthesia could be described as nothingness.

You get knocked out, and the next instant you're in recovery.

[sukie]

No, I get the physical part. How about us? We have thoughts, and we think even when we are sleeping and our minds are racing all the time.

So What? When the electro chemical machine is running we have thoughts. Big deal. Kill the machine the thoughts end. They are not mutually exclusive.

[dasaybz]

I've never been there myself, but the time passed during general anesthesia could be described as nothingness.

You get knocked out, and the next instant you're in recovery.

Thats a real scary thought man. I can't imagine what it's like to just cease to exist.

[dasaybz]

So What? When the electro chemical machine is running we have thoughts. Big deal. Kill the machine the thoughts end. They are not mutually exclusive.

I understand what you are saying. But I just think about eternal nothingness and it's just hard to fathom it happening.

[sukie]

Easier to phatom nothingness that nonquantifiable slendor and simultaneous time void eternity.

[Green Lantern]

I understand what you are saying. But I just think about eternal nothingness and it's just hard to fathom it happening.

Eternal nothingness?

[dasaybz]

Easier to phatom nothingness that nonquantifiable slendor and simultaneous time void eternity.

I suppose

[Maz]

It dosen't matter because there is no real "exsistence", this is all a figment of my thoughts and imagination. Nothing is ever real! How about that for making your head hurt?

[dasaybz]

Eternal nothingness?

Ya, do ya like it? hahahah

[Green Lantern]

Ya, do ya like it? hahahah

Offensive-defense?

[Lucidvizion]

It makes as much logical sense to fear death as it does to fear the time that existed before you were born.

[Green Lantern]

It makes as much logical sense to fear death as it does to fear the time that existed before you were born.

That is why it is called "irrational" fear.

[dasaybz]

It makes as much logical sense to fear death as it does to fear the time that existed before you were born.

Well put man.

I do see a logical sense however. We did not know of death before we were born. Now that we are born, we do fear death because we know it is inevitable.

[Green Lantern]

Well put man.

I do see a logical sense however. We did not know of death before we were born. Now that we are born, we do fear death because we know it is inevitable.

Fearing inevitable is irrational. Do you fear the fact that the sun will rise?

[dasaybz]

Fearing inevitable is irrational. Do you fear the fact that the sun will rise?

I'm not questioning the fact if it is irrational or not.

[K-Gun]

Easier to phatom nothingness that nonquantifiable slendor and simultaneous time void eternity.

You can't fathom nothing. Nothingness can not exist. Even in empty space, there is space. If energy can not be created or destoryed, how can there be nothing?

[dasaybz]

You can't fathom nothing. Nothingness can not exist. Even in empty space, there is space. If energy can not be created or destoryed, how can there be nothing?

Thanks man, you are the voice of reason!!

haha

[sukie]

There can't be a void of energy? Don't you need a void possibility to define energy?

[K-Gun]

There can't be a void of energy? Don't you need a void possibility to define energy?

Do you realize that you are saying that all the energy in the universe is nothing? I prefer to think of your "void" as everything that will ever be.

[dasaybz]

so if energy cannot be created or destroyed what happens to the energy that is inside of us living creatures?

[Green Lantern]

so if energy cannot be created or destroyed what happens to the energy that is inside of us living creatures?

Purple.

[sukie]

It is dispersed in it's entirety as we are burned or consumed by bacteria and earthworms... Very energetic belches ensue.

[K-Gun]

so if energy cannot be created or destroyed what happens to the energy that is inside of us living creatures?

Personally, I think all energy is a single entity in its essential form. Its essential form is timeless and space-less. The beginning of time and space allows the universe to individuate itself. That is to say, evolution is the process through which the universe realizes it’s potential. We are separate from each other in time and space, we have free will, but in the end we are all one being which is eternal. That doesn’t mean we will keep our memories from this life, in fact “I,” as the person who I have become in life will cease to exist at one point in time. But I am a microscopic spec of a larger whole that is eternal.

[dasaybz]

Personally, I think all energy is a single entity in its essential form. Its essential form is timeless and space-less. The beginning of time and space allows the universe to individuate itself. That is to say, evolution is the process through which the universe realizes it’s potential. We are separate from each other in time and space, we have free will, but in the end we are all one being which is eternal. That doesn’t mean we will keep our memories from this life, in fact “I,” as the person who I have become in life will cease to exist at one point in time. But I am a microscopic spec of a larger whole that is eternal.

so, uhhh, when you wanna get together and puff on a fat one?

hahahah

this shit is way deep man, physics at its finest

[sukie]

I'll agree with that JKiG.... I'll be back on when I get home.

[sukie]

See... 1 hour and 1 minute of nothingness in this thread. Wish I was here to experience it.

[uppy]

I have no clue what JK posted