String Theory and the Spiritual Realm (mystic, experience, bible, miracles)

[Æsahættr]

Originally Posted by fantôme profane

Most people use the word physical to refer to things that they can see and touch, a basketball, a car, a doorknob etc. But when we start talking about sub atomic partials things become quite different. You mention wave/particle duality for example. Consider the idea that a “particle” (a bit of “physical” matter) can exist in different places simultaneously. Consider that particles can be linked in such a way that they affect each other when nothing “physical” can move between them. Consider particles moving backwards through time. Consider effect preceding cause. Absolutely everything that we think we knew about the “physical” can be tossed right out.

I don’t think we can say that the new understandings in science are leading us in the direction of the “spiritual”. But that is largely because the “spiritual” is by nature undefined. But what it is leading to is a completely different understanding of that it means for something to be “physical”.

Yes. It's certainly true that common sense is wrong on in quite a lot of modern physics. But I don't think that the changes we're seeing now are any more different than many changes in the past. Aristotle (I think, correct me if it was someone else) thought that things like a falling rock could be explained by saying that the rock was a thing of the earth, and as such wanted to return to its natural home. That was common-sense then. Now, it isn't. Our definition of what "physical" means changes all the time.

Originally Posted by Comet

Thus it is only "gravity" that is unexplained in all these things still for what it is...........

Surely string theory's strongest point is that it is the only theory that does explain gravity in conjunction with everything else, due to the idea that gravitons are closed strings.

Originally Posted by Comet

When a dimension is so "big" that all others exist within it: then by rational a dimension so "small" would come into play it IS IN everything.......

I just thought, if you don't mind me assissting your explanation here Comet, if anyone wants to know what it would look like if the extra-dimensions were small, it basically means that there is something like this at every single point in spacetime:

[Archaeopteryx]

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

You are no different from the religous mainstream who stand firmly on the tailor made answers to the difficult questions. It is your personal opinion on spiritual matters that keeps you from seeing that our answers are equal. Spiritual and religous are not the same.

And by only relying on things already proven by evidence, you've allowed yourself to be closed to the fact that all proven things were at some point unproven. And it has never gone the way mainstream initially thought it would go. You are mainstream. A follower.

Why are you directly judging this man's character so pretentiously? When in a debate with someone, one is not challenging their opponent directly, but rather their opponent's argument. I do not believe you to have summed up Opethian's entire disposition from this argument sufficiently enough to be in a place to make such rash comments about him.

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

By the way, I know what UFO means. Most people refer to extraterrestrial life as UFO's, so thats the language I'm using. If you paid attention to my meaning and not the letter of the words, you would have seen that. But you don't strike me as the kind of person to look at the meanings of things...

Well, who the hell knows what you mean, when you won't say what you mean?

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

I have a question for you. How will science explain everything to be physical when not all real things are physical? Einstein's equation proves that mass is only a form of energy, so I think once again you are trying to be too technical (just because you can) and you are missing the point. Science still doesn't even know for sure whether an electron is a wave or a particle yet you are here telling me that all things are physical?

Name one element of the known universe that you know not to be physical. Also, you are correct in stating that mass, while physical, is merely a [highly compressed] form of energy, which is also physical - So what's your point?

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

Let me rephrase that. How can you claim everything will have a physical answer when that equation alone proves that nothing is really physical?

Now you claim that no material thing is truly physical, even when the entire definition of the word physical rests upon material things?

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

Are dreams physical?

A dream is merely an involuntary sensory lapse occurring during the REM cycle of cerebral unconsciousness, generated by the cerebral cortex and catalyzed by the cerebellum. The entire process can be delineated by describing its many facets as physical interactions, so yes - Dreams are physical, just as farts are physical.

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

Science can detect what a person physically does during a dream, but can you detect the dream itself?

The dream itself is a physical interaction - One can detect and reproduce the many components of the interaction, just as one can detect and reproduce the components of an internal combustion engine cycle, or that of a washing machine or a human footstep. The entire interaction is merely the sum of those components, so yes.

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

Have you ever had a dream? Can you prove you've had a dream to someone who has never experienced it?

I don't have to prove that I've had a dream to describe a dream in its entirety as a physical interaction.

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

It doesn'y matter whether or not science has proven the physical cause of dreams, because we accept that there is a scientific explanation. Or what about a thought. I had one but can science detect the thought itself?

A thought is merely a neurological, physical interaction. It continues to stand to reason that everything in the universe can be described by physical means, so there is no need for metaphysical speculation, and none presented can be logically justified.

[Freedomelf]

Actually, I DO believe that the string theory helps to explain that there are other dimensions and worlds besides this one. One of my religious beliefs is that there are 11 realms of earth, in addition to Heaven and Hell, and the string theory only reinforces that view, in my opinion.

However, there could be a hundred dimensions....it's hard to say with any certainty. I do believe that heaven and hell exist outside of this universe....on a plane beyond human understanding, but that God exists everywhere except Hell.

But my beliefs are only opinions.....not fact. So everyone else is welcome to disagree with me, and who knows...they may be right.

[bigvindaloo]

For something simple that is real and inaccessible to scientific method try the structure of your own mind. I invite you to do some meditation to find out. Not sure string theory is relevant though.

[Zsr1973]

Originally Posted by Archaeopteryx

Why are you directly judging this man's character so pretentiously? When in a debate with someone, one is not challenging their opponent directly, but rather their opponent's argument. I do not believe you to have summed up Opethian's entire disposition from this argument sufficiently enough to be in a place to make such rash comments about him.


Well, who the hell knows what you mean, when you won't say what you mean?


Name one element of the known universe that you know not to be physical. Also, you are correct in stating that mass, while physical, is merely a [highly compressed] form of energy, which is also physical - So what's your point?


Now you claim that no material thing is truly physical, even when the entire definition of the word physical rests upon material things?


A dream is merely an involuntary sensory lapse occurring during the REM cycle of cerebral unconsciousness, generated by the cerebral cortex and catalyzed by the cerebellum. The entire process can be delineated by describing its many facets as physical interactions, so yes - Dreams are physical, just as farts are physical.


The dream itself is a physical interaction - One can detect and reproduce the many components of the interaction, just as one can detect and reproduce the components of an internal combustion engine cycle, or that of a washing machine or a human footstep. The entire interaction is merely the sum of those components, so yes.


I don't have to prove that I've had a dream to describe a dream in its entirety as a physical interaction.


A thought is merely a neurological, physical interaction. It continues to stand to reason that everything in the universe can be described by physical means, so there is no need for metaphysical speculation, and none presented can be logically justified.

Every time I leave, it seems someone new has come with more information to add. Welcome to the room Archaeopteryx.

I made it personal because he was debating the same point I was trying to make. What we call science and what we call spiritual matters are both reaching toward the same end. What is the difference if you know scientifically what melanin is, but an African has experience in how to use it?

I understand that science today calls energy physical but it is not the case. Physical things are really a form of energy (which existed first), not vice versa. Water may be a solid one day, liquid the next, and a gas the 3rd day. However that doesn't mean it is still a solid on the third day just because the material is the same (water).

"Physical" is a human perception. Energy is the only true reality. Let me show you what I mean in a different way to be clear. We see the planet Mercury as a physical object. But if I could shrink down to the size of a quark, I would not see a physical object. I would see forms of energy being attracted or repelled in different manners, which on a grander scale gives the illusion of a physical object. But it is all really energy.

So instead of saying energy itself is physical, the more correct way of saying it would be that all physical things come from energy. However I do realize we can argue this until the end, so i will agree to disagree. Just note that as much as you like to quote the textbook definitions of things, textbooks are changed yearly (at least). Theories are overturned in every generation. However, the princibles shared with the world from Egyptian alchemy have remained true for millenia.

If you are a freemason, you will understand what I am saying. If you are a Shriner, you should know exactly what I am saying.

So you and your friend want proof of something spiritually real that is not physically possible according to science? Sure, I will give you this. In the bible (Revelation 4:6,7) there are described 4 beasts, one each with the face of a lion, calf, man, and then eagle. This was an old teaching from ancient Egypt, symbolized by the Sphinx which originally had wings. These four images represent the four great empires of the western world before this era ends and another begins.
1. Lion - this represents babylon which was founded by Nimrod, a mighty hunter.
2. Calf - This represents Greece, which almost immediately split upon the death of Alexander the Great, just a the cloven hoof of a calf is split.
3. Man - This represents Rome as it most notably was ruled by Ceasers, who were as human gods.
4. Eagle - This is the final major empire, America (Western culture). It goes without saying that the eagle is America's symbol, however there is greater meaning. The eagle is a bird of prey (devours its prey) with great eyesight (we are in an age where more is seen and known then ever before) and talons (great weaponry). Yet many do not know that originally the pheonix was suggested to be america's symbol. America rose from the death of its native Americans and new life sprouted in their place with immigrants coming from Europe to begin this empire.

Somehow, without your technology and "science", we were able to see the major events that would shape the world during this 6,000 year period.

This is how today's science is a controlled industry. The Sphinx is officially dated to have been constructed around 2,500 BCE. However, watermarks on its body prove it is at least 10,000 years old. So why won't science revise their dates? Because they don't believe, even with proof, that African civilization could have been that advanced at that time. Thus, your textbook says 2,500 BCE but your textbook is wrong.

Your physical knowledge based on equations is correct however many of your concepts are wrong.

[Zsr1973]

I am surprised that there is no comment. i guess you really didn't want the truth after all. I will tone it down, then.

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

I am surprised that there is no comment. i guess you really didn't want the truth after all. I will tone it down, then.

Perhaps it is not your premise that we don't "want". When what I consider to be a flawed premise regarding a spiritual world is married to science, the co-joining of the two is still flawed. Your insistence that the the two are facets of the same, frankly, leaves me cold.

[Zsr1973]

Originally Posted by Pah

Perhaps it is not your premise that we don't "want". When what I consider to be a flawed premise regarding a spiritual world is married to science, the co-joining of the two is still flawed. Your insistence that the the two are facets of the same, frankly, leaves me cold.

So you don't think that spiritual experiences which are obviously real to the one experiencing it, have scientific explanations?

There is a tribe in Africa called the Dogon tribe. They claim that they were visited by "angels" or reptilians from the skies who gave their ancestors information. This information became their religion. Where science comes in is that their religious symbols is an exact duplicate of the orbit of Sirius A. However, along with that symbol was another orbit, the orbit of Sirius B which cannot be seen with the naked eye. Yet their symbol is also an almost exact duplicate of its orbit too. This is where those being are supposedly from. So now you have religion and science both seeing the same thing in their own particular way, yet the facts are the facts whether you see them as a Dogon shaman or as a degreed astronomer. How did this come to be, since science and religion can't be married?

See for yourself:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward109.htm
http://www.csicop.org/si/7809/sirius.html
http://www.skepdic.com/dogon.html

At the origin of these Eastern religions you will find true teachings based on the laws of nature as well as real experiences with real beings.

[Zsr1973]

not surprised