A first-cause M-Brane or first-cause God or first-cause singularity of any kind whatsoever is far more plausible at present than no-boundary theories.

No boundary theories are rather weak though. They’re interesting intellectual brain candy but as far as evidence goes, currently quite fictional.

A first-cause M-Brane or first-cause God or first-cause singularity of any kind whatsoever is far more plausible at present than no-boundary theories.

==

Thank you. *whew* When you said “no-boundary” I went, “oh no… no no….” ok, I’ll let that one go since we seem to be on the same page there smile emoticon

==

I’m agnostic at present but when I _was_ religious, I took a 5 year side-trip into Eastern Orthodoxy (Christianity) and their explanations of “essense vs energies” and the theology of the nature of Uncreated quite robust.

So the “Who came before God?” stuff makes me chuckle because it kinda misses it completely by placing Time as primary, as if God is a mad scientist sitting outside of the spacetime continuum having a little fun, which is rather a silly view of God. I’m not a believer but, childish theology is still childish smile emoticon

==

No-boundary is definitely appealing in many ways. Of course there’s always the danger of a beautiful theory being beautifully wrong. Witness: “The Universe is Mathematics” guy. He leaves me shaking my head but even moreso the people who cheer it on.

==

here’s an example of ex nihlo that I was exposed to when I was with them. [I almost became a monk – I was really into this stuff at the time]

via an search for “eastern orthodox ex nihilo”


As St. Gregory of Nyssa affirms, “It begins to be, and the very substance of the creation owes its beginning to change”.

In short. Change itself is the thing, rather than a “once was/now is”

==

We’re a product of our cultures, Jorn. That’s why it doesn’t make sense to you.

What would a change without an object and without time be like?

it’s like that. Of course it’s definitely platonism in spirit.
[and I don’t mean ghost — even to say “in spirit” invokes idealism as well, as if ah idea can be animated from within.. but whatever, that’s splitting metaphorical hairs]

==

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Universe is eternal. Then again, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was first-cause.

I think it’s why I end up restricting most of my energies in this area to starting with the primal star going supernova/crashing into giant molecular gas cloud/forming all the elements that make us up, collected by static electricity then by gravity… etc etc.

’cause that leaves the other stuff open for other people to debate heavily, but at least *I* know where I came from. Thank you Primal Star for blowing up grin emoticon

[I can easily substitute: Thank you God for blowing up the Primal Star” or “Thank You systems and processes that began long ago for blowing up the Primal Star”. Doesn’t matter to me really.

==

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


three + 8 =

Leave a Reply