J
Jaaanosik
Guest
True, but wouldn’t it make sense that our guardian angles are close to us in the immersed parallel ‘spiritual’ universe?
- Status
W
wcknight
Guest
Actually there is some evidence that may point to multiple universes. It has been observed that that the edges of our universe many galazies are moving (flowing) in the same direction. It suggests that there is something next to our universe, perhaps another universe.
A lot of scince fiction later turns out to be science fact. As far as multiple dimensions, we already know there is a spiritual dimension. Science does not recognize that, but Christ and many saints tell us that it exists.
I’m no scientist, but some will tell you that there were many other dimensions present just after the big bang.
D
dshix
Guest
I agree. This is very impressive and interesting.
I disagree with your last premise. God is all-powerful, meaning that the action of creating the universe took the same amount of time, effort, and thought as it did to make the first atom: none.
If I were God, and I decided to make humans, I’d just create a place for them to live so massive they could not possibly ever populate it all and which would amaze and delight them.
I agree with the beginning of this part, but not the last premise, as before. As I said before, an all-powerful God can do ANYTHING. Meaning that he could make the entire universe inhospitable to human life BUT the earth, and it would not make a difference. The universe’s build is not arbitrary; it is carefully planned and set up for our best benefit.
W
wcknight
Guest
That still leaves a lot years for other civilizations to get a head start.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
I hate SF with intelligent bugs, blobs, and creepy crawly things. Too, too far fetched. Spirits and demons O.K.
G
GEddie
Guest
I’ll wait for evidence of such civilizations before I venture an opinion. Anecdotes about UFOs are not evidence.
ICXC NIKA
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
Isn’t it true that most of the galaxies we see have already died out? If so, wouldn’t the chance of finding a planet with intelligent life be pretty limited?True, but wouldn’t it make sense that our guardian angles are close to us in the immersed parallel ‘spiritual’ universe?
C
colmywaykurtz
Guest
What about ones that we haven’t seen yet? It could be that one of these days, the light from a multitude of new, previously-unseen galaxies will reach us all at once, and light up our night sky in a stellar spectacular.Isn’t it true that most of the galaxies we see have already died out? If so, wouldn’t the chance of finding a planet with intelligent life be pretty limited?
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
How is this related to the parallel spiritual universe?Isn’t it true that most of the galaxies we see have already died out? If so, wouldn’t the chance of finding a planet with intelligent life be pretty limited?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I consider myself a pretty simple man; one almost devoid of scientific knowledge. Nor do I consider myself a theologian at all.
But while I don’t totally discount the possibility of there being other life on other planets, one would think, given the billions upon billions of them, and given that the law of averages would seem to suggest that if life existed on any significant number of them, some of that life would be intelligent. And if any of it is intelligent, it would likely discover lots of the things we have discovered, perhaps long before us, including the use of radiation of various sorts; sound, microwaves, light, radio waves of all kinds of bandwidths, discharges of radiation from atomic testing.
And yet, having been listening to the universe for a lot of decades now, we have heard not a peep. Nothing suggesting the radiation (and no, I don’t know what all of it is) of anything indicating the likelihood some kind of intelligent life generated it. So, as far as we know, we, as corporeal and spiritual creatures are as alone in the universe as alone gets.
If it’s so, or even if some planet at the remotest edges of the universe is just hitting the metaphorical telegraph key in earnest, without answer from us because we haven’t received it yet despite millions of years having passed from the transmission, why does so very much of it seem utterly void of life? Is God wasteful? If not, is it somehow necessary for one of the zillion of physical requirements for our having existed at all, for all of those seemingly unrelated parts to be where and what they are?
Maybe it’s so, but it hardly seems likely that some galaxy so far away that its light hasn’t even reached us yet must exist for, say, there to be liquid water on earth. But perhaps we just lack sufficient imagination to know how that is.
I also know that science hits the wall at certain things; like what was energy like (or matter if it existed at all) before the Big Bang? Some say we can’t know because the nature of the Big Bang was such that everything would have been changed by it, including the rules by which the universe operates. I’m inclined to think there are a number of blank walls to knowledge out there…we don’t know and we’re not going to know in this life.
My own idiosyncratic speculation is that the universe exemplifies many purposes and many things. We are informed by faith, for example, that there are, indeed, other creatures called angels. They are incorporeal, totally unified in intellect and will, magnificent beyond comprehension and somehow serve God’s overall purposes in creation in ways we really don’t know.
Physicists tell us that the universe is, as far as they know, “in harmony”. It is not inherently self-contradictory. The laws governing how it works are knowable at least to an extent, and to the extent they are knowable they are not conflicting. E=MC squared is always E=MC squared. But scientists tell us our harmony is not the only possible one. The tiniest change in something fundamental would, for instance, make life totally impossible, or even make carbon, out of which we’re made, totally impossible. But such a “harmony” would not, itself, be impossible. It would just be different; a universe in which, perhaps E does not equal MC squared.
So, what do we want to think about the “rules of the harmony”, most of which we probably don’t know and possibly never will? I guess I can’t help thinking that somehow much of the universe has no purpose other than the “song it is singing” (physicists would call it the rules of physics; chemists the rules of chemistry, etc) We are informed in the bible that there are choirs of angels who perpetually sing in chorus before the throne of God. Does that singing resemble Bach, perhaps, or is it massively, massively, massively more complex than that. Is it the universe? Is, say, nuclear physics nothing but the song of one of them? Is astrophysics another? What about entropy? Does the song stop, or does the harmony take on other meters, other tones?
As a Catholic Christian, I marvel to think of the possibility that, being “a little less than the angels”, we are at times able to hear a note here and there, view a bit of the score, but that someday we will be able to dive right into the middle of it, understanding more than any physicist knows today in instants like a ticker tape on warp drive, and simultaneously with all of the harmony.
In other words, we will be let in on “the song”, and know the singers for what they are, and the Creator who simultaneously holds every bit of it in His Mind, He whose thoughts automatically are a reality so vast an eternity cannot suffice for us to plumb it.
And maybe that’s why we are able to see bits of it now; so we’ll know it’s there. And maybe there’s really not a whole lot more to know about it, from our point of view, than that.
But while I don’t totally discount the possibility of there being other life on other planets, one would think, given the billions upon billions of them, and given that the law of averages would seem to suggest that if life existed on any significant number of them, some of that life would be intelligent. And if any of it is intelligent, it would likely discover lots of the things we have discovered, perhaps long before us, including the use of radiation of various sorts; sound, microwaves, light, radio waves of all kinds of bandwidths, discharges of radiation from atomic testing.
And yet, having been listening to the universe for a lot of decades now, we have heard not a peep. Nothing suggesting the radiation (and no, I don’t know what all of it is) of anything indicating the likelihood some kind of intelligent life generated it. So, as far as we know, we, as corporeal and spiritual creatures are as alone in the universe as alone gets.
If it’s so, or even if some planet at the remotest edges of the universe is just hitting the metaphorical telegraph key in earnest, without answer from us because we haven’t received it yet despite millions of years having passed from the transmission, why does so very much of it seem utterly void of life? Is God wasteful? If not, is it somehow necessary for one of the zillion of physical requirements for our having existed at all, for all of those seemingly unrelated parts to be where and what they are?
Maybe it’s so, but it hardly seems likely that some galaxy so far away that its light hasn’t even reached us yet must exist for, say, there to be liquid water on earth. But perhaps we just lack sufficient imagination to know how that is.
I also know that science hits the wall at certain things; like what was energy like (or matter if it existed at all) before the Big Bang? Some say we can’t know because the nature of the Big Bang was such that everything would have been changed by it, including the rules by which the universe operates. I’m inclined to think there are a number of blank walls to knowledge out there…we don’t know and we’re not going to know in this life.
My own idiosyncratic speculation is that the universe exemplifies many purposes and many things. We are informed by faith, for example, that there are, indeed, other creatures called angels. They are incorporeal, totally unified in intellect and will, magnificent beyond comprehension and somehow serve God’s overall purposes in creation in ways we really don’t know.
Physicists tell us that the universe is, as far as they know, “in harmony”. It is not inherently self-contradictory. The laws governing how it works are knowable at least to an extent, and to the extent they are knowable they are not conflicting. E=MC squared is always E=MC squared. But scientists tell us our harmony is not the only possible one. The tiniest change in something fundamental would, for instance, make life totally impossible, or even make carbon, out of which we’re made, totally impossible. But such a “harmony” would not, itself, be impossible. It would just be different; a universe in which, perhaps E does not equal MC squared.
So, what do we want to think about the “rules of the harmony”, most of which we probably don’t know and possibly never will? I guess I can’t help thinking that somehow much of the universe has no purpose other than the “song it is singing” (physicists would call it the rules of physics; chemists the rules of chemistry, etc) We are informed in the bible that there are choirs of angels who perpetually sing in chorus before the throne of God. Does that singing resemble Bach, perhaps, or is it massively, massively, massively more complex than that. Is it the universe? Is, say, nuclear physics nothing but the song of one of them? Is astrophysics another? What about entropy? Does the song stop, or does the harmony take on other meters, other tones?
As a Catholic Christian, I marvel to think of the possibility that, being “a little less than the angels”, we are at times able to hear a note here and there, view a bit of the score, but that someday we will be able to dive right into the middle of it, understanding more than any physicist knows today in instants like a ticker tape on warp drive, and simultaneously with all of the harmony.
In other words, we will be let in on “the song”, and know the singers for what they are, and the Creator who simultaneously holds every bit of it in His Mind, He whose thoughts automatically are a reality so vast an eternity cannot suffice for us to plumb it.
And maybe that’s why we are able to see bits of it now; so we’ll know it’s there. And maybe there’s really not a whole lot more to know about it, from our point of view, than that.
B
Bradski
Guest
Light from anything within the observable universe has already reached us. Otherwise it wouldn’t be in the observable universe…
Whatever is on the ‘other side’ of that most distant of obejcts is moving away from us faster than the light from it is travelling towards us. That is, the light is ‘moving backwards’. We’re not going to see it. Ever.
We don’t even know what’s there. If we could never see it, can’t see it now and will never see it, I don’t know who God made it for. But it wasn’t for us.
C
colmywaykurtz
Guest
If E=MC2 is truly the universe’s “built-in speed limit,” how could a star or galaxy surpass it any more than a human spacecraft could?
Consider also that stars may be popping into existence just now that weren’t around previously, just as some are “novaing.” How would we see them previously, unless their light was exceeding C, and thus going back through time?
J
Justin_Swanton
Guest
True, there’s no question of God having to make an effort, no matter how large the universe he creates. The question is that we don’t really need a universe this massive to be amazed and delighted by God’s creative power. The earth by itself does the job.
As regards populating, the point is that humanity in its present condition is not going to be able to live away from the earth, even if a few individuals can pay a visit to neighbouring planets. I can’t help but come to the conclusion that the universe is made for us, not as we are but as we will be after the Second Coming, when the properties of the resurrected bodies of the just - immortality, impassibility, agility, subtlety - will be tailormade for exploration of the universe.
In the next life, not in this one.:takeoff:
A
Alberti_Devoveo
Guest
No, this is not true. Most of the galaxies we see are still thriving.Isn’t it true that most of the galaxies we see have already died out? If so, wouldn’t the chance of finding a planet with intelligent life be pretty limited?
c is the speed limit, not E=mc[sup]2[/sup]. In any event, space can expand faster than the speed of light (see this article). The galaxy can surpass the limit if the space between the galaxy and ourselves is expanding.
A photon (a particle of light) cannot travel at any speed but c. A star that ‘just pops up now’ was actually created ages ago (depends on the distance), and the light that we see from it now was sent away from the star when it was born. It does not travel ‘backwards in time,’ that is purely science fiction.
C
colmywaykurtz
Guest
But STARS have been seen to go nova.
To be sure, my hyperbole was showing. I meant that, stars coming into being within the last few years or centuries could conceivably be seen soon, for the first time by humanity.
I know light doesn’t travel back through time—my point was that stars coming into being now certainly wouldn’t have been seen in the past.
One thing I have always wanted to understand is how they determine the “speed” of a galaxy. Is that “speed” just purely relative to our observational standpoint—combined rates of departure speed in different directions?
B
Bradski
Guest
As Alberti said, it’s not the galaxies moving away from us - it’s the space between us expanding. And the further away from us, the greater the expansion.
As a galaxy ‘moves away’ (it’s just easier saying that instead of ‘as the space between us expands’), the speed at which it moving away from us increases (relative to our observational standpoint, as you said), so there’s a Dopller effect similar to the one you hear when the train you’re on speeds through a crossing and the sound of the bell on the crossing increases then decreases in pitch.
It decreases in pitch when you’re moving away becuase the sound waves are being ‘stretched’. The wave takes longer to reach you the further away you get.
You get the same affect with light. Instead of the sound waves getting longer, the light waves get longer and they move from visible light toward the red end of the spectrum. They ‘red shift’.
So if you know roughly how bight a star should be, then you can check it’s red shift and you can work out how fast we’re moving apart.
A
Alberti_Devoveo
Guest
Yes, we get something like 500 observed supernovae each year. The term nova is a bit of a misnomer, as it is not a new star (as nova means), but an explosion, the death of star as it was. It is still a star afterwards, just a new type (it is either a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole).
Right, that is really a redundant sentence. Of course something happening now could not be observed in the past.
B
buffalo
Guest
Anyone know what has happened to all the photons the sun has emitted since its birth?
J
Jaaanosik
Guest
Yes, God knows what has happened to every single one of them.
A
Alberti_Devoveo
Guest
For sure, some of them have been absorbed by the eyes of humans and animals throughout the ages. Others are probably still traveling off towards the ISM.
Why do you ask?
- Status