Replies

The bottom line is this: because we as yet do not have a full explanation for space/time and energy/matter – it is impossible to say that what we presume is randomness (for instance at the quantum level) is actually random in the system. Until the “system” is known, randomness is a misleading and false presumption.

A good friend of mine, and a frequent Freeper is fond of the saying "Words have meaning". Here are just two words for the debate: Quantum. Universe.

The root of quantum is of course quantity, and quatify. The meaning is one of measureable finality. The other factor is that the quantum universe is not only finite and measureable but that it is digital and that one cannot divide it any further down from half and half again beyond the 38th power before all matter loses locality and becomes every other partical of matter all at the same time.

Since the general theory of relitivity has proven that time itself is nothing but a physical property altered by momentum, gravity, and other natural processes, the theory recently postulated (and on the cover of Newsweek and Time in 2002) is that the speed of light and thus all atomic interactions have been factorily slowing down since the "bang".

So we are looking at the very logical probability that time/space is both finite and much smaller/shorter in duration than the billions and billions of eons that such improbable probabilities for random chance could occur.

This is why they have come up with the newer "billions of universes" theory to explain the billions and billions of times life did not just happen.

Which leave us again with the 2nd word: Universe.

Uni meaning one, singluar.
Verse meaning a spoken syntax.

"In the begining there was the Word... (the one verse) Let there be".

Ackhams Razor again says the simplest theory should in all cases prevail over the complex or improbable theories.

To all Evilontionists and Ignoramuses (that's Latin and not an ad hominem)

Three Givens, Three Questions:

The big bang formed a spinning mass and hurled this matter across the universe and as it cooled it formed heavier matter, stars and then lastly planets.

Thus all energy, momentum, gravity, etc was put in place and all subsequent interactions follow from this one bang absent any extra universal input.

The most basic law of physics says that objects will remain in their state of motion until acted upon by external forces.

There is a lesser known to laymen law called the conservation of angular momentum. The basics are that objects spinning in one direction releasing objects from within to the without, those objects which are cast forth retain the exact and specific momentum of the source.

For example, a merry go round spinning clockwise will release riders who inherit a clockwise rotational spin. There is no possibility of releasing counter clockwise particles. None. The only way to have any such effect is if the released particles were directly influenced by a force greater than the original force.

In the case of the merry go round and riders, some outside force greater than the merry go round would have to seize the expelled rider in mid air and produce two times the energy force to stop the clockwise rotation and then apply the counter clockwise energy required to spin the rider in the opposite direction. Again Newton said it best, an equal and opposite reaction.

The famous 2nd law of thermal dynamics and entropy naturally says that things go from order to disorder, from energy to less energy. Nothing is ever added to the universe.

We have galaxies supposedly billions of light years away (forgoing the speed of light problem for now), the questions are these:

#1: Why do some galaxies spin clockwise and some counter clockwise?
#2: Why are some spiral galaxies farther away than non spiral galaxies?
#3: What source of energy can produce both effects simultaneously without a loss of energy?

Thank you so much for your engaging reply!

You are hitting on a lot of subjects which are very, very interesting to me and which I addressed more fully on: Faithful and true? The paradoxical state of Christian colleges (post 64)

In addition to the above, I’d like to observe that many people have a worldview that “all that there is” is three spatial dimensions evolving over time. But many others (I am one) see time as a dimension – in our four dimensional space/time continuum: x, y, z and t. Relativity affirms this view. Moreover, geometric physics suggests there may be more spatial and temporal dimensions!

The speed of light is a physical constant in this universe. The violations of Bell’s inequalities at distance however suggest that the speed limit (from the aspect of four dimensionality) may be exceeded.

For Lurkers: Non-locality, also called quantum entanglement, is where the quantum states of two or more objects have to be described with reference to one another regardless of the extent to which they may be spatially separated. Or to put it another way, measurement of one of two entangled photons will determine the other even if it is 10 kilometers away, on the moon, in another galaxy, etc. This seems to violate the speed limit of the universe (speed of light) and thus is troubling to those who see reality as three spatial dimensions evolving over time. It also creates a troubling paradox for them, since they see time as proper or absolute whereas we see time as relative, a dimension. In other words, they would be concerned about what happens when both of two entangled photons are measured at the same absolute time, where each is found simultaneously determining the precise measurement of the other.

This of course is a non-issue if one realizes the potential for extra temporal dimensions which would make time in our four dimensional block a plane and not a line.

As P.S. Wesson suggests in “Five Dimensional Relativity and Two Times,” time-like paths of massive particles in four dimensions can arise from null paths in the fifth dimension, where there is an oscillation around the hypersurface we call space/time. His article also suggests that a particle in the fifth dimension could be multiply imaged in the four dimensions and that the weak equivalence principle in the four dimensions may be the symmetry of the five-dimension metric. Following the multiple imaging to its conclusion, the 10⁸⁰ particles of this four dimensional block could be as little as a single particle in the 5^th dimension, imaged 10⁸⁰ times.

You might also find the musings of certain Jewish mystics to be engaging. They see the firmament spoken of in Genesis 1 as not a geometric location but rather a boundary limit between physical reality and spiritual reality (earth v heaven) and have suggested that the speed of light might be the firmament. IOW, that there is no spatial separation between the physical and heavenly.

I agree with their musings concerning the geometry and also lean towards the speed of light as the most logical candidate for such a boundary limit.