I am plagued by questions of the universe - page 10
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
He is called Atman in Hinduism. The Toltecs call Him the Eagle. This one is us. Everyone is a conduit of observation. That is, in direct communication with God.
There is no logic there. It's just a game. People can imply, make it up... based on personal preferences.
If we are talking about the Toltecs, I think the idea is to deceive Eagle and not to allow themselves to be "eaten". But other than that, I agree.
But somebody or something orchestrated it.
As they say, you can't get a pimple for nothing.
You want to solve the space-time problems of an expanding universe in terms of a science lesson.
The universe is not expanding, space-time is "stretching".
For a space that is stretching something externally, the concept of closure makes no sense at all.
>> The universe is not expanding, there is a "stretching" of space-time .
And how do we, the inhabitants of this stretched space-time, know about this? That was the point of my question in the first post. If everything around us is increasing (or decreasing) in size, we cannot measure it with our standards of length (rulers) because the standards themselves are changing. Nor can we prove the extension of time, because we have no clocks that have not been subject to such extension. The stretching of space and time can only be judged by an observer outside our Universe, i.e. in the 4th dimension. The redshift of light used as proof of an expanding Universe can be explained by other phenomena, e.g. light increases its frequency over time, so light from distant galaxies is "older", redder light. Although my theory is silly, it is as clever as the scattering galaxy theory, which suggests that light does not change over time (galaxies near us presumably have the same spectrum of light as galaxies 10 billion years ago).
>> For space, which is stretched by something external, the notion of closure makes no sense at all.
What then would happen to a hypothetical traveller departing from the sun in some direction at a speed well in excess of the speed of light? Either he finds the "end of the universe" or he returns to the original point. Which is the correct answer, or is there a third answer?
>> The universe is not expanding, space-time is "stretching ".
And how do we, the inhabitants of this stretched space-time, know about this? That was the point of my question in the first post. If everything around us is increasing (or decreasing) in size, we cannot measure it with our standards of length (rulers) because the standards themselves are changing. Nor can we prove the stretching of time, because we have no clocks that have not been subject to such stretching. The stretching of space and time can only be judged by an observer outside our universe, i.e. in the 4th dimension. The redshift of light used as proof of an expanding Universe can be explained by other phenomena, e.g. light increases its frequency over time, so light from distant galaxies is "older", redder light. Although my theory is silly, it is as clever as the scattering galaxy theory, which suggests that light does not change over time (galaxies near us presumably have the same spectrum of light as galaxies 10 billion years ago).
>> For space, which is stretched by something external, the notion of closure makes no sense at all.
What then would happen to a hypothetical traveller departing from the sun in some direction at a speed well in excess of the speed of light? Either he finds the "end of the universe" or he returns to the original point. Which is the correct answer, or is there a third answer?
... New Year's Eve is upon us))))
They're in for a surprise New Year's Eve, too!
♪ And instead of their boring naked asses ♪
They'll be seeing a lot of new faces!
Here's the 3rd misunderstanding.
Scientists claim that the universe was created by the Big Bang. This conclusion is based on the observed red shift and an expanding Universe. If something is expanding, it must have been very small in the past. Although if everything in the Universe is increasing in size (galaxies, stars, planets, atoms, electrons ... and the distance between them), extrapolating this expansion into the past makes no sense to the inner observer, as by its measurements with an expanding ruler, all dimensions remain unchanged. Well let's assume that the scientists are right and the Universe exploded, and this explosion gave rise to space and time. And the way they describe it is this: The universe was in a singular state where there was no time or space, and then boom! This "then" confuses me. If there was no time, there would be no "then". That is, we have a singularity, nowhere and never, in which nothing changes, there are no processes, life, etc. that would lead to an explosion. And if these changes would exist, then there would also be time (changes are only possible if there is time). Then we cannot talk about the singularity, its explosion and the creation of time and space at all. If the singularity existed, it would always be an explosion. That is, there was an explosion, but there was no singularity preceding it - nothing was exploded. But how was so much energy born out of that nothing? Collect all the stars (10^24) and how much energy they generate by their nuclear reactions over billions of years, you get so much from nothing.
The toilets have a holiday coming up too,
They're in for a surprise New Year's Eve!
♪ And instead of their boring naked asses ♪
They'll see a lot of new faces!
The universe is infinite. As much as anyone would like to cram the universe into some kind of framework, be it space or time, they will look as dark over time as our ancestors, who thought the earth was flat, standing on three whales.
Only the "Big Bang" in today's concept was on a turtle. It couldn't get any stupider than that.
Modern scientists argue with the same fervour about an expanding universe, taking our planet Earth as their starting point, even if it is a solar system. They have never been further away.
The more powerful the telescope, the farther they see, the wider the universe becomes. I'm going to shit myself.
All this would not be bad, but we still do not know what TIME is......The idea is the fourth dimension. but it is something different, not usual, which cannot be measured with rulers, meters, and other crap..... A clock with second hands? But this is not the same... We are used to that time is constant and if you take some hydrogen particle and measure the period of its oscillation, that's it, you created atomic clocks, super accurate, and they will show the exact time for many centuries in a row.... But in nature it is probably not quite so arranged......
NO, WE NEED TO FINISH THE SUBJECT OR WE'LL SHIT ALL OVER EACH OTHER TRYING TO PROVE OUR POINT!!!!
Before the big bang, there was a single consciousness. Then it decided to explore itself. It exploded. It created the world that exists. Now that consciousness is fragmented. We are all its bearers. We study and transmit information to the centre of whoever created it. That is, to ourselves. If we get bored, we stop fooling around. Let's gather ourselves into one consciousness again.
Before the Big Bang, there was the True Ego and the Three Gunas. Atman is another name for True Ego.
The Ithin Ego (IE) collided with the Three Gunas and there was an explosion which resulted in the formation of the Big Universe.
The EE and the Three Gunas have existed since the beginningless past - a past with no beginning.
Consciousness as such does not exist, and it arises only as a result of interference of IE and the Three Gunas. Therefore, before the Big Bang, there was no Consciousness, neither unified nor divided.
Now, as far as the unity of EE is concerned. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, or maybe neither, IE is not one, but there is a great multitude of True Egos. All IEs are not different from each other in any way.
Some of the True Egos have encountered the Three Gunas and some have not.
All right, that's enough for now, or we'll have to go through the whole Genesis.