Cern was holding a two day event to invite religious leaders and philosophers to debate their data to try to find a middle ground of agreement between philosophy, religion, and science. Since science contains a lot of data with no real interpretations when addressing potentials of soul or beginnings. I sent this to Cern, and I would like to debate the letter for the truth is either does, or does not contain. Here is the letter:
The argument coming soon would do well to recognize, first and foremost, that the debate is about the first cause.
You will soon conclude that you have no real answer, but I can supply one bit of philosophy that may be useful in debate.
By observation, and by thought, with patience, and much study, the first cause 'could' be Decision.
Now though it may sound unreasonable by data, our sight is still to limited to rule out that the universe, and all we can see and know, is liken to an egg inside of something entirely different. since a cell is of itself, shut off from what is outside of it, like the shell of an egg. Now time is nothing to what you could call 'timeless' for lack of any other data, and unlimited possibility. This paragraph is simply to illuminate debaters to unlimited possibilities, and too keep looking, as science hopefully can unlock some questions as we come to understand our own consciousness, and it's abilities, be it projection through subconscious realms, or what have you.
To go back to the first cause, I have concluded that in the beginning, by all data, our universe was a single energy. You can argue that it could have come from 'apparently' nothing, but if 'literally nothing' nothing could ever be, as nothing would be absence of anything of energy or substance, which all data shows is impossible.
The universe is constantly evolving, but from whence came the first evolution, if in the beginning all that is, was one thing, with no two points to measure? the only variable I could find for such a change of a perfect singularity of all things (inside this universe, or perhaps beyond the shell of the egg): is decision. then change becomes possible.
This does not mean that the first cause, making a decision, cares about such tiny parcels inside itself, nor that it is necessarily aware, but the potential, by this reasoning, is there. and so then does the name of 'God' become existence (Noun). Because until existence 'is', nothing can exist, and if the first evolution was a decision (there are no other variables to implement change in a perfect singular energy): Then what else could you call a change of a singular energy with no other variable but itself to change, when it was timeless and unchanging in it's pure essence of origin?
This is a potential by all observations of what is now. which would mean the galaxies would be liken to cells, perhaps mankind liken to bacteria in our own bodies, which break down feces so that we may live: yet we cannot communicate with our bacteria very well, and to the bacteria its universe does not exist outside it's spot in the body. how must that look like to the bacteria in our bodies staring into their heavens as food rains from the sky after we eat? and so the living species of bacteria will feed, never knowing of the brain or the heart, and especially not the cars and buildings we inhabit.
Is this true? Who knows? that is not the point to know the truth when our sight is so limited, and our ways of thinking so finite within the infinite possibilities of consciousness and awareness. The important thing to understand: is that it is potential. and that does not mean endorse religion and stop looking. It means keep looking. believe what you will, but know what you know, and admit where your knowledge stops.
-Tim Brown
™ Version 4.2
(1)