HenryB

I am having trouble following the argument. I think it might be the terms "Main stream science" and “Universal Source”, is there a difference? Can it be explained in terms of Copernicus vs. Einstein? Suppose in school each were asked to turn in a paper on astronomy and one gets an A and one goes to jail, does it matter?

After a half a billion years a sponge is still a sponge. Like all of life, sponges need sex to keep the bloodline going. Sexual reproduction is needed to evolve. If a trait is to pass on it must be a part of the act. Evolution is the work of young adults. I believe the brain evolves but I do not think reason does. We are probably as smart as we ever have been or ever will be.

I believe that time is all in your head; a tool for trying to understand two items moving apart from each other. It is a figment of the imagination that can be manipulated in any fashion (like being bent), but it should not be a factor in any consideration of how the cosmose works.

Yes, I think the closest dust (like fine particles of soot) is 50 trillion miles away. I think we should wait a while 'til we get a little closer, like maybe a few feet.

If you are saying that the cosmic whiz kids are just pulling our leg you could be right. For sure there are tiny grains of dust moving around in the universe, but identifying them from millions and millions of miles away is a bit much. I'd sooner believe that there is someone out there sweeping them up with a broom.

Not to confuse creation with “creation”. If there is such a thing as divinity it is way beyond me. I try to understand motion and size and work from that. Motion and size started somewhere. Motion is when one thing moves with respect to another. I try to understand how that first motion happened. As far as size is concerned I do not put a limit on how small or how large something is. It is not how many angels will fit on the tip of a pin, but how large was the first particle to move, and why did it move. Also I do not believe what happens in the universe is random. I believe that if there were another universe that it would behave exactly the same as the one we are in, right down to the thoughts in our head (they probably all happened before).

Keep in mind that this forum is for speculation, to throw it out and see what sticks, and have fun. I don’t go along with the idea that everything shot out of nothing. If I look into an empty box I do not expect to see things move. My theory is that everything begins as a particle with a basic brain and started the journey from its source long before any big bang. The particle is small in the beginning, like the size of the quark compared to the Milky Way. However, each one is able to make a simple yes or no decision and has the ability to remember and learn. It has only one purpose in life and that is to resist motion and to return from where it came. It came from a place where there is no energy or motion, a place where speed = zero, and energy = zero. If you look into the box it shot out of you will see nothing move. Only after a very long time does the particles, as groups, grow to become chemical and biological in size. A particle leaves the source with a trace of negative force, which is the reason for it having to leave home. The particle learns during its journey that combining with other particles that the combinations slow down. The combinations become blobs. The blobs leave the uncombined particles to continue their pace. The blobs move at different speeds, each with its own degree of force. But the selection process is not random. The combination process is natural selection and it progresses according to a fixed pattern. The blobs, as a community, still retain that one thought, though. Having slowed down (to a speed much, much faster than that of light) the blob attracts other blobs and the blob begins growing, with each blob having its own force signature. At this stage no blob is anywhere near the size of the imagined “God Particle”. The “God Particle”, or “God Blob” is a collection of particles that have slowed way, way down and in the earliest stage of becoming a chemical. It took eons for an actual “God Blob” to form. When it did it was much, much smaller than any machine can detect. Anything flying out of a proton under duress is a colossus compared to the “God Blob”. If science is to understand creation it must use the brain that it was born with and not try to create something out of nothing.

Nothing for nothing, but nothing is no longer nothing. Looking into a box of nothing you will see something. The something just comes and goes, just like the thoughts in your head. What ever it is, it must come from somewhere, because if it does not come from somewhere then it comes from nowhere and that is where God exists. This is where my nothing comes from: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/09/10076985-how-to-get-a-cosmos-from-nothing?lite

If everything in the universe is destined to return to its starting point and become motionless what’s the point?

A child’s innate behavior, like any other animal is adaptive to what’s good, not what’s bad. A healthy newborn brain knows what to do before its first inhale. Every innate thing in the brain knows what’s good and reacts accordingly. The brain is born with a lot of stuff it knows to do before it does it. As for the bad thing aspect, unfortunately, that’s something the brain learns after birth. The adaptive nature of the “inherited” brain is a product of all the good things that were experienced by the parent. A good thing makes you feel good. A bad thing is not worth remembering

Hawkins is just having fun with us. Anyone peddling a yarn that in a billion or so years all of the universe will dissolve into nothing got to be a joker. He is being ridiculous and trolling for fools. Don’t fall for it.

The Laws of Physics condense us into nothing. I have no problem with treating nothing as non-existent. It could turn the Laws of Physics on its head and allow me to stop thinking that I am about to be sucked into a black hole.

Time is a construct. It is an understanding of motion at the moment. It is meaningless without motion as a reference. Nothing about motion is foreseeable. Motion can stop in the next instant. You must be satisfied with the moment because that is all there is.

Disclaimer, I am an idiot, too. Apparently a singularity, for lack of a more descriptive term, is a very dense point around which suns orbit. Our sun supposedly orbits around a point in space about thirty thousand light years away (70,000 orbits in all since the big bang). They say black hole force fields swallow up the stuff contained in these dense points. But what does that point in space orbit around? Whatever it is it must be some strong singularity, or one strong ass, hole. Is the singularity growing from that strong ass, hole stationary? My guess is that it is. My guess is that we are like the Uwhackit bird that flies in ever decreasing concentric circles until it flies right up its own ass hole.

I cannot think of the moving part that created the numeral 1.

Thanks for the come back, I-Try. Just conversation, something I am playing with: My theory is coo-coo. My attempts to explain it must be even more far out. My thinking has to do with things that require motion to exist in our universe, and something that I feel does not require motion to exist. I’m accepting the theory that all universal things compress into something so small that it will fit into a pore of the skin (now, that’s pretty far out, too). It looks like the accepted theory is that this little wee thing, which I have called “stuff”, is active with moving stuff that creates heat. My thinking is that “stuff” is dormant, no moving parts, no heat. And as a result of that thinking I feel that no motion means no Time (elapses). I believe that Thought is real and is older than motion (Time). I believe Thought is not a thought but what I call “a bag of thoughts”. One thought in that bag of thoughts is poetry. I believe that poetry has always been a part of any universe. I feel Poetry is ageless (at least as far as me and all other humans are concerned, anyway). If Thought is real and was around before Time and the Big Bang, I cannot think of anything else being around that could have created the Big Bang. It is very unlikely that my thought is anywhere near the truth. Agree or disagree, or stay mum, but no need to get serious. I would like to leave religion to itself.

What I call stuff, and what science calls the “The infinitesimal volume” had a brain with the ability to accept and register thoughts from what I call Thought, or “The Bag of Thoughts”. The brain begat all other brains by virtue of a train of thought provided by Thought. Thought (my opinion) has been around, for all practical purposes, forever. Every Big Bang amounts to every other Big Bang. So, something must be essentially perpetual so as to keep the Bangs banging. I am trying to believe that Thought is real and that it can create motion in stuff. I doubt if there will ever be a universe without poetry and hate developing at some point in time. Thought, the bag of thoughts is the only thing I can think of that perpetuates poetry and hate. What else could there be? Is it possible for a universe to not contain poetry and hate? I'm getting whackier and wackier.

Hey, any feedback, serious or not, is welcome. As long as I am not pissing off a lot of people I will carry on the post. I thought "Stuff and Nonsense" was a real funny response. I think one should expect such a response from a whacky idea.

Science will go no further than tell you that from an infinitesimal volume of density and temperature there came hydrogen, then the Big Bang, http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/BigBang/ Hydrogen is a perfectly formed particle containing a proton and a neutron in motion; no scientific mention that the “infinitesimal volume” was made up of stuff like hydrogen. If it were, then the “infinitesimal volume” would not be infinitesimal; it would be big enough to see. A lot went on prior to hydrogen’s first appearance. My claim (unhumorous as it may sound) is that the “infinitesimal volume” was very quiet: no motion, no protons, and no neurons, nothing to generate heat. Something was needed to generate heat. If God did it, then shit wouldn’t stink, so I figure it could only be Thought that started the ball rolling. Now tell me that’s not funny.

Hey, if I was really serious I'd have gone somewhere else. I am having fun with a whacky idea. I came here to have fun. If it turns out not to the taste of most then I am gone. If you want to see me gone, throw my thread into the trash can. That's what it's for.

I’m saying, when time began the moving parts of stuff moved at warp speed and then some to become chemistry and biology depending on the thoughts going on in the mind of stuff. Relativity and Thermodynamics came while the various atomic shapes were taking place. A lot of thermodynamics is packed into an atom. Some atoms were more tightly packed than others. Stars became stars because so much dynamic was packed into them. Some of the chemistry and biology we cannot see because it is so densely packed. Nonsense perhaps, but fun for sure.

Time, motion, and Thought. To explain time you need motion. To explain motion you need Thought. Remove all motion from the universe and what you have left is stuff. In the beginning the universe needed something to get the stuff moving. That something is Thought. Thought is not stuff, but has always been and, for all practical purposes, always will be. As motion and time began so too did all of matter. A single thought produced what we now call matter. That thought came from a whole bag of thoughts called Thought. Thought is not perfect. Thought is not divine. But it is real. The only real thing that has no motion, no energy, and no dimension is Thought. Thought is as real as a hemorrhoid. The Stuff of the universe had the capability of putting two and two together; it had a brain. Once kick started the brain multiplies according to a train of thought determined by Thought. The brain processes the thoughts and the stuff determines weather to become animal, vegetable, or mineral. Nothing is random, our train of thought first begat animals, then humanity. A brain, like any robot, will not generate a thought on its own. The brain is merely a register of thoughts accumulated from the bag of thoughts. Our special bag of thoughts is called “The Book of Learning”. As the brain registers these thoughts the register becomes Life. Every thought in Life is given a unique number for registration. Think about the register at the time when we were all jellyfish. Our brain was called a neuron net. Billions of years went by before the miniscule jellyfish neuron net took shape. Then it took another billion years for our brain to reach the size it is today. The bag of thoughts will never empty as long as there is motion. In another billion years, barring catastrophe, our brains will weigh more than our buttocks and the bag will have hardly been touched. Whatever, we will never know the last thought in the bag. Nothing is random. Think about it, if there is such a thing as the big bang will the next universe contain poetry and hate? I bet it will. Most scientists in the body of science believe that the universe is expanding. They have most of us believing it, and that includes me. They also believe that the expansion will someday stop and reverse. They say that everything in the universe will someday compact into something...but they have not yet defined the width and breadth of the something. So I decided to call the something stuff. And I have concluded that stuff is devoid of motion, that is there is no E=MC squared in stuff because there is no C, and when there is no C there is no time, and most importantly no M. What science calls the expansion is the Big Bang. And I’m pretty sure that the body of science thinks that if it has happened once that it will happen again. My conclusion concludes that when it happens again such thoughts as poetry and hate will happen again, too. And mathematic thinking will happen again, also. Will stuff have thinking in it prior to the next Big Bang? Yes, I believe thoughts are real and older than time. So here it is: it’s all happened before. There is no such thing as an original thought. All thoughts come from a bag of thoughts (Thought). Thought as far as I am concerned for all purposes is perpetual. God knows how many times we’ve dipped into it. Thought is not perfect, therefore not divine. Was the first thought after our Big Bang the same as the first thought after every other Big Bang? I think it was. I believe that the body of science will agree that our Big Bang was same as any other Big Bang and that each Big Bang begets the same universal material as any other Big Bang. So, why not conclude that the first thought in our universe was not the first one in every other universe? Thought is real. It is as active today as when time began. It was also as active before time began. Thought is the only real thing existing today as existed when time began. It boils down to this; Thought is as real as a hemorrhoid. Thought is the only real thing capable of creating motion. Thought created time and someday may end it. Thought is older than the universe. Thought is not animal, vegetable, mineral, nor stuff. The brain is stuff. The brain is older than the universe. The brain is not animal, vegetable, nor mineral: the brain created animals, vegetables, and minerals. Prior to biology it was all chemistry. Chemistry is just a bunch of stuff in motion. It was Thought taking place in the brain that arranged the stuff into material (animal, vegetable, and mineral). When the earth was a billion years old the first biological cell made its appearance. That was over three billion years ago. You cannot imagine the things that took place before and after that first cell. The brain I’m talking about is not the same as the one in our head. The one in our head is a fabrication of the brain. Everything has a brain formed by the brain. All brains are related to the brain. Nothing is random. The first atom did not take shape for no reason at all. Thought and the brain created the moving parts that make up the atom. The first atom could have been hydrogen, because it has the fewest moving parts. As many thoughts were taking place in those tiny moving parts as are taking place in our brain today. Those tiny moving parts produced all of the elements. It’s kind of funny that our brain is trying its damnedest to find that first moving part. That’s not going to happen. That first moving part was smaller than stuff, Just conversation. Don't take it too serious.