Parallel Universes

What is interesting here is, the contemplation how science and evolution works with the assumption the universe is finite. Does this say, an external, independent and outside impact is non-negotiable for any action of the universe - while nothing of this universe can be used to describe that external impact?

i should say not, personally, because even if alternate universes exist, in an infinite , or finite universe, the starting point must be the same under my own belief.which means all things true are natural, and nothing truly external, even if it was considered such.its the same idea to me as implying something to be supernatural just because you don't understand it. but by necessity, it is considered supernatural to the human mind due to the inability to understand it. but as supernatural as it would appear to man , it is natural to the order of all things that are.if i didn't misinterpret what you were asking, i should hope i answered your question?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

No such thing as nature or natural. These are placebos improvised to explain the inexplicable only. In this sense they serve the purpose intelligently. But there is no actuality or reality embedded there.

perhaps, but its just as easy to say that external to one universe as opposed to another would be false under the premise that because the starting point is the same, the alternates, if they do exist, would only appear to be external from this point of view. but in actuality be internal to the workings of the first order that was/is.to say natural or supernatural would be easier to understand, that is to say.."layman's terms".Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

There can be only one ultimate starting point. And if this universe is deemed finite, then this says there cannot be another starting point outside it - same as there cannot be space or matter outside this uni. This is the enigma posed by Genesis, and the same which confronts science and humanity. Our minds are in a finite realm, and we cannot see outside it - because there is no outside. So how this entire engineerings works, in imperical terms, is an enigma hiding inside a paradox.Thus the reason we do not know the origin of ANYTHING whatsoever. Seen from this perspective, Genesis is vindicated as a realistcally manifest science treatise. Ironically, Genesis starts with the second alphabet, and bids us to move on forward only, namely from B to Z. The 'A' factor is elusive.

quote:

---

to say natural or supernatural would be easier to understand, that is to say.."layman's terms".

---

Exactly. But there is no nature in reality, nor can one display this in a lab.

if is a mighty big word to be so small.there can be only one ultimate starting point -truecannot be space or matter outside of this universe -apparently true.unless we were composed purely of the energy that was first, we cannot say with any definite statement of what that energy chose to make possible in the condition of our universe.-imo.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

elaborate?the genisis 1:1 i am aware of states simply "in the begging there was only God." i fail to see a "paradox".Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

your just playing with me arnt you?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

whew. yes you are. thank God, i thought for a second there you had some special dictionary i'd never heard of.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

You know, replying 3 times to the same message and then replying to one of your own messages, such as you have just done, seems to indicate incoherent thinking. In other words, you're babbling.How about more thinking and less dubious messages?Do NOT reply to this message in this topic. Doing such can result in a suspension, typically 24 hours. If you feel the need to reply, go the the "General discussion..." topic, link below.Adminnemooseus

---

quote:

---

elaborate?

​

the genisis 1:1 i am aware of states simply "in the begging there was only God." i fail to see a "paradox".

---

Actually, it says, 'IN THE BEGINNING GD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH'. That the opening preamble declares there was a 'beginning' = FINITE. This is contexted in the immediately following cosmological account of creation, and marks the first statute which initiated science, which became expanded to an imperical faculty via greece. It is then followed up with the concept of Monotheism, via Abraham.From what can be derived, is while genesis gves an account for the universe, there is no hint or inference of other universes; only allusions to a spiritual realm. The latter has no time or matter, and is regarded incoporeal [non-physical]. There does not seem any deificiency here, as genesis goes on to correctly list all the life forms in their correct chronological order, and also declare that the stars are innumerable and cannot be accounted, comparing them to grains of sand as a metaphor. I see no reason to question this account of creation and the universe formation.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

unless we were composed purely of the energy that was first, we cannot say with any definite statement of what that energy chose to make possible in the condition of our universe.

​

-imo.

---

You raise a valid point here, and no contest of it. But you are talking of a source factor which is pre- or independent of the universe and all its components. I earlier agreed, the only exeception to another universe is that it not contain any of this universe's components, so your option is credible. This means, any other universe may contain something new, initiated from a source factor which made this universe, but that each universe has nothing in common.

IamJoseph So where did the event occur that began God if nothing existed except from the beginning as outlined in genesis?

not exactly. why do you hate me ? all things are relative, independant is only apparent.all i have said here was"existence is a real thing"and im being told its not, which i cant hope to reason.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

concerning in the beggining and genisis 1:1:i stand corrected . i was thinking of john 1:1Edited by tesla, : No reason given.Edited by tesla, : forgot to quote

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides