Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Gravity
Gravity is strange indeed. Particals are attracted to each other. These particals have no discrimination. If we being the universe are all attracted to each other than sooner or later we will all be one. I'm not sure where I"m going with this but it popped up in meditation. If anyone has input, your wisdom would be much appreciated.
0
Comments
I think the current understanding is that the universe is accelerating in its expansion.
Current science is definitely leaning towards a kind of oneness theory. Some physicists are saying that every hydrogen atom is the same hydrogen atom. Literally the same. Not like when you buy two identical tennis balls and say they are the same, but actually the same atom. Which is pretty interesting. Then there is entanglement. I think their theory for why it is is incorrect, but what they have observed, or what they haven't observed but have calculated, is that if you rotate one molecule, the same molecule on the other side of the universe will also rotate. And other cool stuff like that.
Sorry, off topic.
If it is not infinite then it's proposed that it's folded such that if you travel in any one direction you will eventually reach where you started - no centre, no edge - only space time - we are hampered in that we are unable to step outside the finite universe model to see what could be there... though there are branches of mathematics that explore different types of logic which could hint at a universe with 'different' rules - that said, it is proposed within the context of M-theory where a 'universe' is not so much an all encompassing affair.
General relativity broadly holds that the galaxies (matter) are not expanding, drifting etc - they can be considered 'stationary' - it is the space time in between that is stretching... so with the passage of time (or change in entropic states) - the space between everything is bigger relative to eachother.
You have to remember that I went through college in a geosciences program specializing in paleontology. Much of my time was spent studying aspects of evolution, particularly as related to invertebrates of the Paleozoic. As far as I knew, all of my professors, including those who specifically taught evolution, were all members of a Christian church and fairly regular church-goers. None of them taught ID, they stuck to the science of it, but all of them believed in God. None of "us" saw any divide between evolution (or other geologic processes) and the works of God.
And, just for the record, what I believe in, in terms of ID, is not as it is described by "Intelligent Designers", just as my view of God is not as described by many who preach Christianity.
I wondered the same as you. If the focus of Buddhism is the mind, then what about all the physical laws of the universe. Do they have anything to do with suffering?
anatta, non-self.
there is nothing n nobody there.......
Physically, it sounds like you're talking about a big crunch, spiritually, it sounds like you're talking about the illusion of being seperate entities.
I sometimes wonder what the shortest distance between objects is but it's like trying to find the smallest increment in time and quite possibly it's the very same thing. There is no smallest increment of time because a moment, like a whole, can be divided infinitely.
I'm just babbling uselessly now though.
Ever notice that the smaller the increment to be studied, the bigger the apparatus needed to study it?
We need the whole universe to understand fully the smallest aspect of it.
To me, there isn't too much difference except that the physical takes up space. That which has yet to manifest still exists right now in its potential form. When the conditions are right for it, a thing will manifest in space/time. Until then, it stays hidden.
To me, a beginning makes no sense.
Theoretically, an eternal process could give rise to an infinite amount of infinite processes.
Exactly... It can apply to space, numbers or time but it isn't a certain point or quantity. This is why we can divide a whole infinitely but we cannot divide a whole by infinity.
It is not a number but a set of numbers.
1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, 1/7... On to the smallest of the small. Which I'd guess depends entirely on the biggest of the big... I'd also guess this is where the "infinitely approaching zero" comes in... We have to remember that this is just the regressive perspective... There is also the "infinitely approaching the biggest of the big" viewpoint.
The OP states that mass atracts mass (or behaves in this way). This is not known. It is perfectly possible that mass repels mass. There is even a quite well-developed model by a French physicist. It is not a settled question and it may never be, since the two effects may be indistinguishable.
Doesn't make it any less weird though.
You are correct, currently the force that is accelerating the expansion of the universe is called dark energy; scientists don't really know what it is. It might not actually be a force per se. It could be that one of the forces (perhaps gravity itself) behaves differently under different circumstances; similar to how Einstein showed that immense gravity bends the space-time continuum. Or similar to how the scale at which we look at things changes its apparent behaviour... ie quantum mechanics.