- This topic is empty.
- Posts
On the front page of the website t8 writes this:
We are told that the universe began from a singularity and it created time-space.
In other words it started in 0 dimension and from what we observe now, 4 or more dimensions.
Given that, is it logical to assume that the singularity first expanded in a 1 dimensional space to 2-dimensional, then created 3-dimensional space, followed by time? And if you argue this order then perhaps you are forgetting that I said time came after space.
Questions for you, t8:
1. How is it logical that dimensions would be added one at a time?
2. Why are you asserting that time “came after space”?
3. Why do you distinguish between time and space?Stuart
Thanks Stu.
Although my blog was unbaked and just a passing thought and likely to not be the case, I asked these questions because I thought it good to discuss.
I don't have time for a full answer now, but suffice to say that if a zero dimensional singularity went from 0 to 4 or 0 to 13 or however many dimensions there are, then why could it also not go from one to another.
e.g., if 4 is time and space, then what happens to 4 when the universe expands faster than light? Maybe 5. Just wildly speculating, but to say that it went from 0 straight to 4 is also equally speculating.
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 08 2013,05:31) Why are you asserting that time “came after space”?
If time and space are X & Y axis, and height and width are also X & Y axis, then just as 1 dimension say height when adding width becomes 2, it may also be possible that space as 3 dimensions added with time becomes 4.Not saying it is true. Have no maths or evidence to support the view. But have a logical pattern.
T8,
I theorize that time may be the highest dimension that God made. I base it on spiritual beings also seem to be subject to time even though they are exist in a higher dimensions. The forth dimension, thought by most to be time, I believe may just be motion, so the first 4 are; height, width, length, vector continuing on through spiritual realms. I believe all dimensions are subject to time but God being above time can be all places at all times.Just my speculations – Wm
what if time only start in the beginning of creation but after Christ creation ,so that time ad be added through the creation THROUGH CHRIST ,THIS WOULD ALSO ACCOUNT FOR HIM BEING THE ONLY CHOICE TO COME DOWN AND SAVE ALL OF CREATION THAT ADD BEEN CREATED THROUGH HIM ,
only my 5 pennies
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 08 2013,08:49) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 08 2013,05:31) Why are you asserting that time “came after space”?
If time and space are X & Y axis, and height and width are also X & Y axis, then just as 1 dimension say height when adding width becomes 2, it may also be possible that space as 3 dimensions added with time becomes 4.Not saying it is true. Have no maths or evidence to support the view. But have a logical pattern.
Or…might you be just wildly speculating?Stuart
Stu.
Try drawing a cube.
You first put the pen to the paper and you have a point, you then make a line, now you have a dimension. Next you create another line giving rise to the second dimension, and eventually you give it breadth making it 3 dimensional.
Sure the paper is only 2D, but my point is relevant.
Did the singularity start at zero dimensions and then expand to 4 immediately. Perhaps. But that is speculation, especially considering that there are likely higher dimensions.
So going back to the original writing that you are talking about. I said the following:
Quote What if we viewed this order in backward fashion. Time contains space, which contains planes, which contains lines, made up of 0 dimensional dots. Then it is time that preceded all and is the root of all. And what of higher dimensions, I will leave that for another day, but suffice to say for now, that they contain time. And whatever is the greatest, was always there, and from itself, all the smaller things proceeded. This takes me back to something I have said before. If we start with infinity, then we can get an infinite amount of finite combinations. But if we start with nothing, then we end with nothing. The poor Atheist falls in the latter.
So I obviously had already thought about your objection.
https://heavennet.net/did-the-big-bang-follow-this-pattern/Quote (t8 @ Mar. 09 2013,11:32) Stu. Try drawing a cube.
You first put the pen to the paper and you have a point, you then make a line, now you have a dimension. Next you create another line giving rise to the second dimension, and eventually you give it breadth making it 3 dimensional.
Sure the paper is only 2D, but my point is relevant.
Did the singularity start at zero dimensions and then expand to 4 immediately. Perhaps. But that is speculation, especially considering that there are likely higher dimensions.
So going back to the original writing that you are talking about. I said the following:
Quote What if we viewed this order in backward fashion. Time contains space, which contains planes, which contains lines, made up of 0 dimensional dots. Then it is time that preceded all and is the root of all. And what of higher dimensions, I will leave that for another day, but suffice to say for now, that they contain time. And whatever is the greatest, was always there, and from itself, all the smaller things proceeded. This takes me back to something I have said before. If we start with infinity, then we can get an infinite amount of finite combinations. But if we start with nothing, then we end with nothing. The poor Atheist falls in the latter.
So I obviously had already thought about your objection.
https://heavennet.net/did-the-big-bang-follow-this-pattern/
I think you are talking complete nonsense, then putting “the poor atheist loses” after it. There is no sense in which the universe is like a cube drawn on paper. That's like those who picture the Big Bang as an explosion into space.You haven't justified any of this, so I'd suggest a withdrawal and apology to the large atheist community in NZ (which is growing rapidly).
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 08 2013,08:49) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 08 2013,05:31) Why are you asserting that time “came after space”?
If time and space are X & Y axis, and height and width are also X & Y axis, then just as 1 dimension say height when adding width becomes 2, it may also be possible that space as 3 dimensions added with time becomes 4.Not saying it is true. Have no maths or evidence to support the view. But have a logical pattern.
Hi Stuart,I would argue that motion~(time) came after matter-(space),
which I believe is the main Scientific thought the bible repeats.What say you, Stuart?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgStu you say I talk nonsense because you have shown that you are unable to draw logical conclusions or look at patterns. And this is because logical patterns point to a creator.
You fight against even the most basic of reality at times.
Your loss not mine.
And I remember that saying from Albert that went something like this, “dull minds attack bright minds”. We know that hecklers exist in spiritual matters, but they also exist in matters of Science too.
I am not saying I am right regarding how Space and Time unfolded, but ideas that are shot down by dull minds is normal behaviour with some people.
And if you read my original post correctly, you would see that I point out that the laws of Physics shows that things could go backward because there is nothing to say it cannot. Thus I draw the conclusion that infinite was first, and below that we have all the finite dimensions. So the third dimension is a subset of time and space and the second dimension is a subset of the third and so on.
So the order of unravelling to us could well be the reality we are exposed to when in fact it was the other way, infinite first and finite dimensions below that.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 26 2013,08:46) Stu you say I talk nonsense because you have shown that
you are unable to draw logical conclusions or look at patterns.
And this is because logical patterns point to a creator.
How true!Quote (t8 @ Mar. 26 2013,08:46) Stu you say I talk nonsense because you have shown that you are unable to draw logical conclusions or look at patterns. And this is because logical patterns point to a creator.
I’m sure the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bhna)will be most pleased that you have identified His Patterns. Maybe you could discuss this with Ed. He thinks his arithmetic minus statistical understanding are the patterns. You could compare patterns and be impressed with one another.Quote And I remember that saying from Albert that went something like this, “dull minds attack bright minds”. We know that hecklers exist in spiritual matters, but they also exist in matters of Science too.
I admire your bravery in admitting it.Quote I am not saying I am right regarding how Space and Time unfolded, but ideas that are shot down by dull minds is normal behaviour with some people.
Your ideas betray a basic lack of understanding of the known nature of spacetime. By all means formulate a hypothesis and outline the evidence that suggests it is a worthwhile point. Have you done that? No.Quote And if you read my original post correctly, you would see that I point out that the laws of Physics shows that things could go backward because there is nothing to say it cannot. Thus I draw the conclusion that infinite was first, and below that we have all the finite dimensions. So the third dimension is a subset of time and space and the second dimension is a subset of the third and so on. So the order of unravelling to us could well be the reality we are exposed to when in fact it was the other way, infinite first and finite dimensions below that.
Once a man has learned how easily the gullible are impressed by platitudes, I guess there is no stopping him. You aren’t exactly a master of platitude, but your alternative (the false analogy) probably impresses some who are weak of mind.Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
