Randolpin

Base on the Big bang model, space is being created. Thru this, I come up the reasoning that: 1. We can assume that space is infinite because before bigbang there is nothingness. But a question still arises, if space infinite, then it is instantly created as infinite in the very time of the moment of bigbang? 2. We can also assume that before big bang there is already space existing ( I call it ultraspace) so that the space created after bigbang is in the premise of ultraspace and it is finite & grows thru time. This is only my suggestion.

Let me establish my argument for the truth of a Creator in terms of best explanation: 1. God is the best explanation why anything at all exist. 2. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe. 3. God is the best explanation of the applicability of mathematics to the physical world. 4. God is the best explanation for the fine-tuning of the universe. 5 God is the best explanation of objective moral values & duties. I will explain it as best as I can in the next posts.

I want to point that our best scientific theories points to the truth of a Creator & I believe that Christianity is true because God tells me that it is true and it's teachings are consistent and adequate in explaining our reality. For example, it consistently teach the reality of sin, it's cause and it's effects in our lives and the whole world. It is consistent in defining or explaining our reality. Such as the reality of love, morality, humanity, proper living, purpose of live etc. I found out also that other religions or views fail or inadequate in describing our reality because they are not the true worldview.

I want to clarify that time is just a measure or a meter. Because it seems to me that it only measures the amount of change. Therefore, base on your explanation above, what we experience as time is actually the different changes that the matter of this universe undergo. Yes, it's obvious that they start in the same seconds therefore by this fact,time is somewhat like a tape measure.Like a tape measure, time is use to measure the different changes of different matter in this universe.So this gives me the impression that time is not an entity or a thing that exist. It is only an abstract meter for measuring changes of matter. Now I want to ask or clarify, why Einstein treat time as a dimension or somewhat a thing that exist?

True religion is not found in this physical reality. Humans can't create the true religion because we are not perfect. The true religion is a perfect religion. That's why there are many doctrines, denominations because they have different ideas on how they look on that specific theistic view.

Does the oscillations of those elements pertains to change? Does these elements have the same rate of change? What I really mean is the rate of change that clocks should measure. For example, an ice cube changes quickly from solid to liquid. It's rate of change is faster. It changes in a short period of time. Compared to for example, plastic.The rate of change of plastic is slow. It takes years. By this, we can infer that they have different amount of change, thus, different time measurement.

I agree that religion has negative consequences to us. In fact religion turns our world up side down. I want to share that there are man-made religions and there is the true religion.

The answer is in my post # 10

The idea is that there are different amount of change a matter undergone. Plastic for example slowly change compared to example pplants that's why they have different time measurement.

Time express in G.R as the 4th dimension is the amount of matter-change.

To better understand the idea of time , I just want you to think on comparison. First, we all know that our clocks (common) or watches measure the time of the day. It meaures the movement of the earth and the heavenly bodies. Those are the bases for the measurement of clocks and watches. Secondly, a scientist measure the radioactivity of uranium. That scientist should not use the clocks that being use to measure the day but instead, he should use a special clock for measuring the amount of radioactivity that happens to that uranium. The amount of change of the movement of the earth and other heavenly bodies that is being use to measure the time of the day is different from the amount of change of the uranium. In other words, they have different times. We commonly mistaken because we use the clocks for measuring the day to the radioactivity of uranium. For me base on matter-change idea, it should not. By the way, I just want to classify change in 2 forms, namely: 1. Cyclic change; 2. Continous change When we say cyclic change, it is the measurement of time base on the movements of the earth & other heavenly bodies while continous change just like for example radioactivity and the changes took place in plants and animals from birth to death in a continuous manner and many more.

Rocks in different location have commonality. They are in this space-time reality & undergo change so still there is time for them particularly forward movement of time. With regards to your second question, it might be as long as there is no matter only empty space so time doesn't exist. Kindly look again the formula.

I already posted this idea before but I want to share it in this speculation forrum to find it's flaws if there is any or in other words accept critics so that I am able to further develop this idea. So now the idea behind this is that, what we experience as time is actually the change of matter in this space-time reality. What we commonly notice about time is actually the changes that matter had undergone.Time is my idea is merely a measurement of that change in matter in this space-time reality which we are part of. To summarize this idea, here is the formula: Time= change of matter Time here represents the measure of how much change the matter had undergone. Now thi idea would simplify the view of the problem of the arrow of time by viewing it into the act of change happening in the matter. By this idea, the arrow time is somewhat cause by some underlying principle behind the process of change of the matter. By the way, this is only my speculation or my reasoning about time. I'm not introducing theory or hypothesis here. Just an speculation. Thank you..

We are dwelling in this space-time reality. The question that I want to convey now is that"Does our space-time has a boundary?" Or an edge? Is it finitely or infinitely distributed? What is the position of science with regards to this inquiry nowadays?

The expression sorry may change the emotions of an individual. So now I want to ask a question. "If somebody say sorry to you, what is your feeling particularly in psychological aspect? Why sorry is not enough sometimes? For you, if a person say sorry, how do you assess that particular scenario in your life? Feedbacks are very much appreciated. Thank you

So in order to clarify what really my point is which is not offending is that the real question is-> "How to live life for you?" This is my question in order to solve any issue with regards to my question. I'm really really very sorry.Nobody's perfect.We are only humans. Good intention for me could be misunderstood by others as bad intention. But again sorry....

My goal in posting this guys is not to offend you but only ask you, what is the proper way of living life as a human being.. Sorry if it is offensive. I don't really want to hurt you. What I only want is to know what is your say about the true essence of being human.. What I said in my OP is just an opinion..

The issue now is the semantical use of english words and the proper use of meaning.

I want to know now is that how can we develop english language more adaptive especially to those non-native english speakers provided that we have such issues as what stringjunky pointed already.

What I try to explain here guys is that there is nothing wrong being religious at the same time being scientific. This is for me. I only asked what is for you?

It is not the number of years had passed but how they live life being religious and being scientific which could still apply today. Why you deeply disagree it? Kindly expound it so I can explain it more clearly..

This is a pet theory.

There is nothing wrong becoming religious at the same time scientific. There are lots of well-known scientist and thinkers that are religious also.. example Isaac Newton..

Thank you for that good answer.. Suffix "less" is different from word less. This is I think one of the problem in english language.

There is wire but called wireless? When wireless means no wire.