Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Did Infinity Have To Be Created, Or Is Infinity G_D?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Phillip Martin on September 20, 2002 03:13:58 UTC

"The source of that input is G_D from what seems to be a void and it is not a void but alive and aware."

If the source of that input is G_D, and G_D inputs that information from what "seems to be a void" (I am guessing that what you mean by void is expanse that we would otherwise consider empty space, infinity beyond the reaches of the Universe), and that void is alive and well, then that would make that "void" G_D... right? If G_D can be invisible and infinite, then can G_D be (and is G_D, indeed) everything? Is existence itself G_D?

"...G-D [...]has to be eternal without beginning and without end?"

I can see that, but I do not know much about what many people think about it. What do you think G_D was doing a few trillion years ago?

"Am I not right that any set has to have an input for continuance in order to last?"

I am not sure. It has to be either that, the lack of a 'stop' order, or a combination thereof. I, currently, believe that in order for a set to last it must not get a 'stop' order, but I am never 100% set in my beliefs. But then again, how would we know that it lasts without something else, like light? Is that what you mean? Now that I think about it, I doubt it.

What can we do with sets that we are not sure exist anymore? If we launch a theoretical particle at such a speed to escape our universe, we would not know if it still existed, unless we could somehow measure it. Do we treat that information in two sets: one for if the particle exists, and the other for if it does not. Did any of that make any sense? If so, what do you think about it?

Warm Regards,

Phillip Martin

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins