Message
Anonymous wrote:FruminousBandersnatch wrote:Anonymous wrote:FruminousBandersnatch wrote:Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.
Explain it, atheist!
The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.
For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.
It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.
Dark matter?
I had a feeling this was going to go that way. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain why there's more gravity in the universe than there ought to be given the amount of matter/energy we can observe. Dark matter can't be seen directly with telescopes - as far as we can tell it neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any detectable level. So, the properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, radiation, and the large-scale structure of the universe.
Based on the current theory about how the universe works, called the Standard Model, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains roughly 5%ordinary matter/energy and roughly 95% dark matter and a force called dark energy. The total mass of that 5% is estimated to be around 1x10^53 kg. (There are several different ways this estimate has been reached, and they generally agree with each other.)
The dark matter is believed to be composed of particles called WIMPs - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles.
It's possible that if souls exist then they are made of WIMPs. (Note, when I say "possible" that means I can't disprove it, not that I think it's likely.)
But if souls are made of some kind of WIMP, then that has consequences and raises significant questions, all of which make it less likely that they are.
First, dark matter and dark energy are relatively uniform across the universe, including "empty" space. Does that imply that the universe is just full of "soul stuff"? Why scatter it equally all over the place? Does that imply that there are other beings with souls all over the universe?
Second, why would the WIMPs interact with human bodies if they don't interact with other forms of matter? And, just as importantly, HOW would they interact with the matter that forms our bodies? (For example, neutrinos are a type of weakly interacting particle and a neutrino could travel through roughly 35 LIGHT YEARS of water without interacting with the ordinary matter.) Since human bodies are physically and chemically identical to those of pretty much all other living things on the planet, why would the WIMPs only interact with humans and not all other living things (which gets to the question of whether all other living things have souls, as well)? What would keep the particles around a human? How would WIMPs "attach" to a human fetus/baby at whatever point it gets attached, or would the human fetus/baby somehow generate it's own WIMPs as part of development? What would keep these non-interacting particles "attached" to a human?
Third, even though they are virtually undetectable, WIMPs are still subject to physical laws. Among other things, that means that if a hypothesis called Super Symmetry is correct, then each WIMP particle would have a corresponding anti-particle and they would occasionally annihilate each other. It would kinda suck to have your "immortal" soul bump into its anti-particle and blow up. Staying with the physical limits concept, WIMPs are still subject to the limitations of the speed of light. So you get to the question of if souls are made out of WIMPs, what happens when they detach from their human and go to Heaven (or Hell)? If WIMPs are bound into this physical universe, how would they make the transition to some other place, or does that mean that Heaven/Hell are part of this physical universe? Would a soul made of WIMPs experience the passage of time travelling through space to get to Heaven/Hell?
These are just the issues that come up off the top of my head. I'm sure that others who are similarly acquainted with physics could add more.
These are "just issues that came up off the top" of your head? Hilarious. This is word for word from a web site I read not too long ago. Quote your source otherwise this is plagiarizing.
Sheesh. I try to be nice and explain something about the universe and get accused of plagiarism for my troubles. I have a degree in physics and wrote that today, which is why I said it was the issues that came up off the top of my head. If I actually put some thought into it, I could probably come up with a lot more reasons why the idea of souls being made of dark matter wouldn't work. If you're going to accuse me of plagiarism (cowardly anonymous poster on a discussion board) either cite to the website you "read not too long ago" or apologize.
Anonymous wrote:10:27 again. Since I'm in apoloqizing mode, let me add an apology to Fruminous for my earlier comment about the Fruminous theory of angels. That time my tongue was firmly in my cheek. Of course, it would not surprise me if the same were true of the Fruminous response to that note.
No apology necessary or merited! I thought your comment was funny!
Anonymous wrote:And we explained countless times that our belief is not based on science.
I never said it was. However, this thread is about whether Heaven (or the Seven Heavens) is in dark matter. I attempted to explain why that hypothesis is unlikely to be correct, and some of the consequences if it is.
Anonymous wrote:We are not discussing whether heaven exists. But this is what you atheists repeatedly try to discuss with us.
Nope. I said I disagree with you, but that I'm not going to argue about the existence of Heaven (or the Seven Heavens).
Anonymous wrote:So there is no discussion. No believer is interested in engaging a cyclical argument over whether God or heaven exists. We know it does. Not up for discussion. Its foolish to keep revisiting this since we are not likely to change our belief system.
And, I specifically said that I'm not trying to change your belief system. This thread is about applying a real world cosmological hypothesis (the existence of dark matter) to a theological concept in terms of asking the question about whether Heaven (or the Seven Heavens) could be in dark matter. All I've tried to do is explain the consequences and questions raised by that application. If you still want to believe in it, that's fine with me - you have every right to believe whatever you choose.
Anonymous wrote:FruminousBandersnatch wrote:Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.
Explain it, atheist!
The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.
For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.
It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.
Dark matter?
I had a feeling this was going to go that way. Dark matter is a hypothesis to explain why there's more gravity in the universe than there ought to be given the amount of matter/energy we can observe. Dark matter can't be seen directly with telescopes - as far as we can tell it neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any detectable level. So, the properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, radiation, and the large-scale structure of the universe.
Based on the current theory about how the universe works, called the Standard Model, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains roughly 5%ordinary matter/energy and roughly 95% dark matter and a force called dark energy. The total mass of that 5% is estimated to be around 1x10^53 kg. (There are several different ways this estimate has been reached, and they generally agree with each other.)
The dark matter is believed to be composed of particles called WIMPs - Weakly Interacting Massive Particles.
It's possible that if souls exist then they are made of WIMPs. (Note, when I say "possible" that means I can't disprove it, not that I think it's likely.)
But if souls are made of some kind of WIMP, then that has consequences and raises significant questions, all of which make it less likely that they are.
First, dark matter and dark energy are relatively uniform across the universe, including "empty" space. Does that imply that the universe is just full of "soul stuff"? Why scatter it equally all over the place? Does that imply that there are other beings with souls all over the universe?
Second, why would the WIMPs interact with human bodies if they don't interact with other forms of matter? And, just as importantly, HOW would they interact with the matter that forms our bodies? (For example, neutrinos are a type of weakly interacting particle and a neutrino could travel through roughly 35 LIGHT YEARS of water without interacting with the ordinary matter.) Since human bodies are physically and chemically identical to those of pretty much all other living things on the planet, why would the WIMPs only interact with humans and not all other living things (which gets to the question of whether all other living things have souls, as well)? What would keep the particles around a human? How would WIMPs "attach" to a human fetus/baby at whatever point it gets attached, or would the human fetus/baby somehow generate it's own WIMPs as part of development? What would keep these non-interacting particles "attached" to a human?
Third, even though they are virtually undetectable, WIMPs are still subject to physical laws. Among other things, that means that if a hypothesis called Super Symmetry is correct, then each WIMP particle would have a corresponding anti-particle and they would occasionally annihilate each other. It would kinda suck to have your "immortal" soul bump into its anti-particle and blow up. Staying with the physical limits concept, WIMPs are still subject to the limitations of the speed of light. So you get to the question of if souls are made out of WIMPs, what happens when they detach from their human and go to Heaven (or Hell)? If WIMPs are bound into this physical universe, how would they make the transition to some other place, or does that mean that Heaven/Hell are part of this physical universe? Would a soul made of WIMPs experience the passage of time travelling through space to get to Heaven/Hell?
These are just the issues that come up off the top of my head. I'm sure that others who are similarly acquainted with physics could add more.
Anonymous wrote:The only reason for an atheist to come and intrude into a religious discussion among believers is to try to weaken people's faith. If people were leaving religion in droves, why would you need to be here?
You keep telling yourself whatever helps you to sleep at night, dear. Regardless of people leaving religion, they are not leaving belief in God or an afterlife.
Like I said, find your own buddy group so you can find some solace in your life too.
As an atheist, I can say unequivocally that I am not trying to weaken anyone's faith in their deity of choice. You have the unfettered right to believe whatever you choose, and I support your right to do so.
I came into this conversation because it was a discussion of a scientific topic, attempting to apply aspects of a cosmological hypothesis to religion, and I attempted to explain why trying to link the supernatural/spiritual does not make sense.
Is it just me, or does this post make absolutely no sense. The energy that makes a heart beat, makes brain waves, that are produced within the cells, leaves the body once it dies. Where does this energy go after the body dies? It has to go somewhere. It clearly isn't leeching onto the body because the EEG's show no activity when a person is dead.
It's just you. The energy that makes a heart beat is electricity, the same as is measured in brain waves (EEG stands for electro-encephalograph).
Where does the "energy" go when you turn off a light? Where does the "energy" go when you turn off the generator that provided the electricity that powered the light? Where does the "energy" that powers your car go when you turn off the engine?
The body converts food to energy used by the body in different forms. Cells use that energy to perform certain functions. When you stop taking in food, the body has reserves that the cells can use for a while, but ultimately, they run out of "gas." When you turn off an incandescent light bulb, the filament continues to glow briefly as it cools off and releases all of its radiant energy, and if you looked at it in the infrared spectrum it would glow for a lot longer, but without electricity continuing to pump energy into the filament, the light goes dark.
When you die, higher functions of your brain cease. Among other things, the brain stops sending the electrical nerve impulses that cause the heart muscle to contract, and you stop breathing. If the heart doesn't beat and the lungs don't exchange CO2 for oxygen, then the rest of the body runs out of fuel pretty quickly.
There's no mystery to this. It's a pretty well understood biological process.
Anonymous wrote:Then it flies in the face of Einsteins' law of conservation then. That energy does not die. It has to go somewhere or change into something according to this law.
Explain it, atheist!
The law of conservation of energy is not "Einstein's law." (Einstein is most famous for his Theories of General Relativity and Special Relativity. You might be thinking of Einstein's formulation of the mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, but that's not a statement of the law of conservation of energy.) The law of conservation of energy applies to a closed system (i.e. nothing gets in or out) and says that the total amount of energy in that system cannot change.
For the universe to be a closed system and for the soul to be physical energy of some kind has significant theological implications. Among other things, if you want this "soul energy" to be within a closed system, that would mean that Heaven (and Hell) would have to be part of that closed system, which would mean that Heaven and Hell would be subject to the physical laws that apply to the observable physical universe. AFAIK, none of the various sects of the Abrahamic traditions professes to believe this. If you want to talk about the religious traditions that involve reincarnation (e.g., Hinduism), on the other hand, that would be consistent with a closed system and would not require a Heaven/Hell.
It would also require that "soul energy" to be subject to physical laws, and the energy would have to be carried by a particle of some kind in the same way that photons are the fundamental particle associated with light and gravitons are the theorized particle associated with gravity. Such a fundamental "soul" particle would have physical characteristics that could be measured and detected.
Anonymous wrote:HR promotes Culture Change
how about a quote like this ...
A Cultural Belief is a B2 belief that is prioritized as key to how people need to think and act in the C2 culture to achieve R2 results. Cultural Beliefs inform a way of thinking. They work in concert to create just the right balance among the beliefs. You can't articulate just one belief, promulgate that belief, and expect it to motivate the right actions. You need a set of beliefs that function together as a system. That's how Cultural Beliefs work: they form an interdependent system of how people in the organization need to think and act differently to achieve R2. They are a set of beliefs that harmonize with one another and work together to guide A2 actions. Cultural Belief statements, particularly those crafted in a participative manner with an eye toward getting people to sign on, provide an extremely powerful tool for culture change.
another management fad from HR
Odds are that you can't blame that one directly on HR. Some consulting firm came up with that crap and some executive in your company (possibly one who used to work at said consulting firm) hired them to "help" your HR dept.
Anonymous wrote:FruminousBandersnatch wrote:... It's a modern version of asking the question how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...
DCUM is going to be legendary in cosmology when the Fruminous Theory of Galactic Mass* becomes widely accepted.
* Dark matter consists of angels dancing on the heads of pins.
The tragic thing is that if that's correct then I'm wrong about so many other things. But then isn't that the way it always goes?
Anonymous wrote:
I am free to use science, nature, philosophy, any subject I like to validate belief in God and heaven. That heaven exists is not at issue for believers. We know it does. But we wonder where it exists. If I say it might exists in trees, will you then ask me why I am using plant biology to validate religion? If I say it exists underground at earths core, will you then ask me why I am using geology to validate religion? If I say heaven exists in the oceans, will you ask why I am using oceanography to validate religion. Its absurdity to think I am not permitted to validate my belief system with dark matter. You are looking for a justification to thwart a genuine discussion of religion simply because you reject religion.
Stop sabotaging the discussion, its not necessary for you to understand or join it. Its meant for people who are devout in their belief in God and heaven.
If the existence of Heaven is not an issue for you, then why do you need to use anything to validate your belief?
Your thread is about whether it's possible for Heaven to be in clumps of dark matter and if the discovery of dark matter and/or multiverse hypotheses and/or Brane hypotheses and/or other aspects of string theory open up the possibility that Heaven is located either in this Universe and is detectable via the gravitational effects of dark matter or is in one of the other "spaces" that are implicit if those other theories are correct.
It appears, though, that unless someone is willing you say, "Wow. That's so cool. You might be right Heaven might be in dark matter!" that constitutes sabotaging the discussion to you.
If you want to use science to validate your religious beliefs, then you should learn a lot more about the science you're trying to use. But if you really need science to validate your faith, then I'd say you've got issues with your faith.
Anonymous wrote:FruminousBandersnatch wrote:
Well people who are devout believe in the unseen world of angels and souls, and these entities also do not collide. Just makes sense that it could be where heaven is. It just makes it more awesome that science is finally beginning to prove all this.
You're looking at this backwards from a scientific perspective. You are assuming that heaven/etc. exists and then trying to say, "See - all this new stuff they're finding out could be where heaven is."
Science, on the other hand, looks at the evidence and draws conclusion from the evidence. There is no scientific evidence that heaven exists. There is no supernatural requirement associated with the theories around dark matter or any other cosmological theories.
I think that should have been evident from the title of my thread. This thread assumes heaven exists. It is a topic that only people of faith would understand, not atheists. So I ask again- why are you here to discuss where heaven exists, if you can not even accept that heaven even exists in the first place? We are going in circles with atheists on a thread that discusses a religious concept and its connection to science. If dark matter interests you, start a topic in off-topic. This thread assumes heaven does exist because people of faith believe that. Its not up for debate here.
I have no argument with you about whether Heaven exists. (I disagree with you, but there's no point in arguing it because neither of us could prove the point to the other's satisfaction. I would also point out that the initial post in this thread is somewhat theologically uncertain about the nature of the "Seven Heavens" vs. the paradise of the other Abrahamic religions, and it doesn't even reference places like Valhalla, the Happy Hunting Grounds, etc.)
My point is that you are trying to conflate the physical realm with the spiritual, supernatural realm. There is no evidence to imply that there is anything supernatural or spiritual about dark matter, and by trying to tie the location of Heaven (or the Seven Heavens or Valhalla or the afterlife-paradise of your choice) to large clumps of dark matter, and then postulating that immaterial, supernatural, immortal soul, upon death, streaks through a wormhole (something theoretically possible, but never observed) to $paradise$ is simply silly.
Let's consider some of the questions raised by your hypothesis.
If Heaven is out there in some massive clump of dark matter, why would God create Earth so far away? Seems kinda inconvenient. Is God's monitoring of Earth and occasional interactions with people subject to physical limitations like the speed of light? Is prayer subject to those delays? Or does prayer operate via ansible? If God, the angels, and all of the souls are massless and immaterial, what provides the mass of dark matter?
Is there one large, stable wormhole sitting out there (if so, why haven't we noticed its physical effects because each end of a wormhole is a black hole, with all of the gravitational effects that implies), or is a new wormhole created for each soul (again, we might've noticed that, even if the wormholes were small because of the showers of particles that would be created when the wormhole closed).
Perhaps we didn't notice them because the wormholes themselves are so far from Earth. How fast does an immaterial soul travel when it leaves the body to head for the wormhole? Should we postulate that the soul travels at light speed? Does a soul experience time dilation while travelling at light speed? If a soul is made of dark matter and has mass, its acceleration from rest attached to a body to near light speed would release a lot of radiation and would be detectable - especially since with the current population various websites say that roughly 150,000 people die per day.
If a soul is not made of dark matter and is truly immaterial, then why would it have any speed limit and why would it need a transport mechanism like a wormhole? Would a soul notice the passage of time between death and its arrival in Heaven?
If the wormholes are temporary, what provides the energy to open them for each soul?
On the other hand, if God, Heaven, the angels and all of the souls are truly supernatural and have no physical links to this mortal plane, then why would Heaven have to be so far out in the universe? Why wouldn't it be a supernatural realm "right next door" to ours?
There's no evidence that there is anything supernatural or divine about dark matter, and so no reason to assume that it might be the home to a divine entity.
Well people who are devout believe in the unseen world of angels and souls, and these entities also do not collide. Just makes sense that it could be where heaven is. It just makes it more awesome that science is finally beginning to prove all this.
You're looking at this backwards from a scientific perspective. You are assuming that heaven/etc. exists and then trying to say, "See - all this new stuff they're finding out could be where heaven is."
Science, on the other hand, looks at the evidence and draws conclusion from the evidence. There is no scientific evidence that heaven exists. There is no supernatural requirement associated with the theories around dark matter or any other cosmological theories.
Anonymous wrote:I am the OP so I would like to redirect this thread back to its original topic- is dark matter where the seven heavens lie?
I am in awe that science has finally discovered an area that is completely invisible to the naked eye but we now know truly exists. I read somewhere that dark matter takes up 80% of space ( there may be other figures, not sure). I was fascinated that astrophysicists who first detected dark matter were stunned to see a constellation of stars, gases, space debris everywhere but when they saw the space containing dark matter, it was void of anything..a stark contrast to the rest of space.
If its true and the heavens lie there, I wonder also how our souls reach there. It has to be wormholes, as described by people who have had near death experiences.
I'm just in awe of the possibility....
Science is still working a lot of things related to cosmology out.
There is the possibility our universe exists within a much larger space and new "universes" like ours that are popping into existence all the time - but that are undetectable to us due to the incredible distances involved. Or there is the possibility that our universe is part of a meta-space containing multiple "universes" on separate membranes.
Then there some recent theoretical work that says black holes can't exist due to collapsing stars' production of Hawking radiation in a manner that drops them below the critical mass necessary to form a singularity, after we spent the last 50 years or so convincing ourselves that they do exist and are at the center of galaxies. Whether they exist or not, there are debates about how they would work.
Your comment about wormholes, though, is an attempt to apply science to something that fundamentally unscientific. It's a modern version of asking the question how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. According to Christian theology, a soul is insubstantial and immaterial - it is a non-physical, non-corporeal aspect of our being. To attempt to apply physics to it and require a physical process like a wormhole for this immaterial thing to travel to some other physical place in the universe doesn't make sense.
Anonymous wrote:I need tips on talking to him about it.
He likes fat women. I am fat, very fat.
I have been working out, eating better etc. I am not going to be thin anytime soon. Before anyone asks he is successful, good looking, and in very good shape. Last night he asked how much weight I had lost because I am noticeably smaller. I casually said 52 lbs. He told me I am losing weigh way too fast and he thinks a safe amount would be 1 lb a month. Since I have been losing weight he has stopped having sex with me. I would like to work on my relationship. We have been together for a few years.
Thanks in advance
52 lbs is a lot of weight and that's a HUGE accomplishment! Congratulations from someone who knows how hard that is.
Over how much time did you lose the 52 lbs? How much more do you want to lose?
A pound a month is definitely healthy, but although IANAD, I think even up to a pound every week or two is still considered healthy controlled weight loss.
With that amount of weight loss, though, you probably should be consulting a doctor (if you aren't already), especially if you did it more quickly than 2-3 lbs every 2 weeks.
If he's in good shape, he must appreciate how much better you feel, how much more energy you have, etc.
Congratulations, again. That is a tremendous achievement and good luck going forward and keeping it off.
Anonymous wrote:This is the stupidest thread ever. Why doesn't Holton? Why doesn't a lot of private schools? You want the schools to close for RH?? Kids are allowed to be out excused! Just like for the other holidays. If you knew ANYTHING you would know that Landon and Holton also don't close for Ash Wednesday, Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and Easter Monday. Stop looking for problems. You just sound like a dummy.
There is one poster (possibly a couple-few) who look for any opportunity to say bad things about Landon. Look at every Landon thread and you'll see the same thing regardless of the actual topic of the thread. I don't know where their vitriol comes from - maybe they had a bad experience/their DC had a bad experience or maybe they just enjoy trolling - but you'll see the same pattern/accusations across each thread.