Previously, Jim Douglas wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
A news report in the UK tells us that two of the terroist ‘pilots’ went
into a bar in Florida the weekend before the attack and got very drunk. I
leave you to draw your own conclusions about temptation.
I think that it is a very local cultural custom to associate
drunkedness with lack of piety. I recall a Tibetan Lama who
regularly got skunked.
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com
Previously, Stephen Munnings wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
I believe that God has blessed America (U.S.) in material ways by making
her a strong and rich nation. I believe that this is a consequence of
both natural and supernatural influences.
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- maschoen@pobox.com
Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote:
Previously, Alain Choquet wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
Gravity is the weakest force yet the only one that matters on a sufficiently
large scale.Gravity is only a force using the Neutonian model. In Einstein’s model,
all mass/engergy warps the shape of space/time. Objects “falling” toward
gravitational bodies are in reality following “straight” space/time lines
called geodesics.
True.
The as yet incomplete unified (with Quantum [finally a connection] mechanics)
theory will probably have gravity mediated by the exchange of gravitons.
There are strong indications that quantum mechanics and general
relativity can not be possibly unified. They just contradict each other
when applied to matter on an inappropriate scale. So physicists are
pursuing the superstring theory, which seems to be more promicing. I’ve
read a very good book on the subject recently and unfortunately matters
are too complicated to be explained in few words. I can admit though, it
would be a much more interesting discussion for me than theological
problems.
I don’t see it that way. I think and hope people are blessed equally
not
depending
on what they have done nor on what their government does… What is
evident
in
US and other country alike, is they have gain wealth and material. I
think
a hunter that catches an antilope is as blessed as you and me.I understand. There is some basis for that (even in my beliefs).
The Bible indicates that there are many blessings that He gives to the
“just and the unjust” alike.
However, He also confers “special” blessings on individuals and nations.
This is usually rather subjective - in other words you are blessed when
you feel blessed - because usually there is no other way to know if you
are getting a special blessing or not.
Or to put it another way. God gives blessings, but does not usually
share with us what type of blessing, on who, when, etc.,
I’ve very tempted to agree with one difference, the word blessing
itself. The way I understand blessing ( I don’t have a dictionnary handy
to check) is “granted special amunity, given a special chance”. I have a
problem with that. What I am ready to conceed (;-)) is that all
of our path are different for a reason and each have different
degree of challenge and difficulty. I don’t think an “easier” path
or a wealthier path is necessarly the one that is blessed.
I think as micro part of God we somehow choose our own path.
Supernatural influences: God’s intervention in a special way. There
are
probably evidences of this too, but this is harder to argue, and I
have
no particular instances to mention. However, if you do not believe
that
the US (and to a similar extent Canada) have been blessed by the
natural
influences, then it more or less only leaves the supernatural
influences.
Either way, I believe that the propserity of U.S.A. is a sign of God’s
blessing - whether is is really deserved or not.I think its evolution.
I only have the capacity to somewhat understand and care for a very
few
people
personally. I do not feel sad in a direct sense about anybody killed
in
the WTC - I did not know any of them. I feel very sad in an indirect
way
about those lives lost, and the lives affected by them.Could be, but that also means he feels happiness for the people that
perpatrate this act.
I personally don’t think so. I think he feels sadness that they were so
misled caused themselves and others such great pain. In other words, I
think that he views them as victims in this situation also! (Victims of
propaganda, falsehoods, etc.)God, however, as a truly infinite being does have the capacity to
understand and care about each and every one of us!The Bible (if you accept it as an authority)
No I don’t
I understand - just explaining my view.
even tells us so! It even goes on to indicate that God cares about
individual birds.God is perfect, but would you consider a being perfect if he/she/it
could
not empathize with another being’s pain?Can’t compute >
Yeah, a perfect being is at least as good as we can imagine! And then
much much better yet!I believe that he created the absolute best value system possible, and
has revealed to us the major structure of the system, and how to do
our
best to follow it.Our brain is extremely limited, “the major structure of the system” is
IMHO
a MAJOR overstatement. The system is far more complex, it is beyond
our comprehension. That system may include the human blowing itself
up.Maybe I did not use the right words. I meant the “broad outlines” or the
skeleton. I agree that we are too limited to understand the entirety!
What you are stating here is that you do not believe in the value
system
revealed in the Bible.Hum I really don’t know, I would have to say that they only think
I’d care about is the love part.So you don’t really care if people treat you (or your family) fairly or
not? (Or are you saying that the concept of “fairness” is not a “value
system” thing?)
(The love part is very important too!)
Hum I don’t judge, I evaluate, better or worse, not good and bad.
The feeling that it creates is very different.Well the meaning of “judge” is to evaluate. Not even necessarily in
“value judgements”
It is perfectly good english for a teacher to say: “I would judge this
essay to be a better one that that one.”The often misused biblical injunction “judge not so that you will not
be
judged”, does not indicate that judging is wrong, merely to be used
wisely indeed.That is one’s interpretation.
True enough.
The Bible states that “revenge is mine says the Lord”.
Man made.
You mean the Bible is man-made? I disagree, but (at least for now) that
is another topic.
I understand your belief. It does differ considerably from mine!Isn’t it great >
Well, yes and no. Some disagreement is inevitable.
However, I feel sad about anybody who does not understand God’s truth.However, I believe that even in religious things, we must be aware of
what reality is, and not base our thinking and actions on wishful
thinking!Hang tight >
> Want to talk about reality, here is what I think. I
think
the Universe is a stage, a stage for God to play all the billions of
billions of
billions of billions of possible act and role.You may think that. On what do you base that belief?
For all I know, I could be computer simulation, I could be a brains
hook up to some machine. I don’t think we can comprehend what
reality is, it’s a concept out of our reach.I agree that “total reality” is currently beyond our grasp.
But you make do quite nicely with “day to day” reality, and we all
experience and share that reality for the most part.
If you apply the Occam’s Razor Principle, those other things are more
science fiction than reality.
(BTW - I love reading science fiction - very entertaining and many novel
ideas - I just don’t confuse it with reality)
You put “religion” in a seperate “cubicle” from the rest of your life.Then is not what I mean. I don’t know about english, but where I come
from, the word religion is attach to an organisation of some sort, that
dictate what god is.I create my own religion. I look at all that is out there and make it
up as I go along.
Is it possible that God intended to communicate with man, but that men
(in general) have subverted the process through “organizing religion” ?
Is it possible that he still communicates with sincere seekers after him?
When things contradict, there is some untruth in there somewhere!This I don’t agree.
o.k. how would you put it?
Surely in a court of law, If I said I saw someone steal something, and he
denied it, you would be pretty sure that one of us was lying? The trick,
of course is to figure out who was lying..
If you understand and follow this reasoning, then the “religion” of
following Jesus is in contradiction with the idea that “all religions
are
valid”.Absolutely not, it means that you are right in persuing your own
religion.Jesus states that he is “THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE”.
Well there is another guy that said the same, who’s right. They
all layed out different rules ( man interpreted differenlty
what each of them god’s representative said).If you believe that, consider the historically documented fact of the
resurrection (coming back to life from the dead) as an indication of who
God pointed out to us as having the truth (being right)
This means that you rationally have no option but to conclude that
“not
all religions can be as good as any other”.I’m not sure about about this but I’d say yes. I’ll clarify (although
I’m quite confuse myself >
others, it all depends where you want to go. But i beleive “other
religions”
serves a purpuse hence they are good as well.If you wish to make that statement, then you must at the very least
consign to a lower place those religions that state that that is not
so!No I don’t
Well, I meant in the sense of saying that some are better than others -
as you have conceeded just above.They contradict your belief, how can you consider them “truth”?
(Christianity, Islam, Orthodox Judeaism, and many more)
I can’t explain it, I don’t know out to express or phrase this emotion.
Let’s say I won’t put down ANY of them cause they have the potential
to be the truth.
Wouldn’t it be nice to find out if one of them really was the truth,
rather than just having the potential?
When you say “God will be something else for me” is this a statement
that
you will be searching for whatever God may be, or that you (as God in
one
sense) will decide for yourself what God best suits you at that
moment?
Both. My current definition of God doesn’t suits me at all, but
better then it use to. I’m frustrated by my own limitation at
understanding a concept such as God. I’m just not willing to
use the bible as my only reference.
Understandable! I don’t think we are able to fully understand God. And
I don’t believe that one should use the Bible as the only reference
without first being clear on why one should do that!I guess people that don’t beleive in any God are having a laught at the
moment, lol!
I have a friend who doesn’t beleive in any type of God makes up for
interesting
discussion.
Oh, yeah, and probably being annoyed too! Those who decide not to care
about God are usually annoyed when the subject comes up.
\Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.
Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote:
Previously, Mario Charest wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
I did want to add a short reference to the question of whether
we really needed to drop the A bombs on Japan. Below is a link
to an article on the issue. The slant of the article is that it
was not necessary. I’d be happy if someone will post a link to
articles documenting the case that it was necessary. That way,
those who are interested in evaluating the question may decide
for themselves based on more than mere statements.http://www.doug-long.com/hiroshim.htm
OK, here’s one that, except for the last chapter, is chillingly
analyical. It talks about why the targets were selected, numbers
of casualties, weather influences, etc. It appears to have been
written in 1945.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/abomb/mpmenu.htm
Here is a review of some books on the subject:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hamby.htm
A collection of articles:
http://www.peak.org/~danneng/decision/decision.html
Here is a collection of links:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hiroshim.htm
Here are a couple of articles that mention there is more than one point
of view:
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/hiroshima1.html
http://users.erols.com/goodmank/
I found these by handing “hiroshima” to google, who replied it
had 546,000 links. I haven’t gotten through them all yet.
Richard
Woops hit Send to fast:
I personally don’t think so. I think he feels sadness that they were so
misled caused themselves and others such great pain. In other words, I
think that he views them as victims in this situation also! (Victims of
propaganda, falsehoods, etc.)
Have you ever consider that you may yourself be victim of propaganda?
That this whole bible and God thing is a hoaks? These people have
made choice based on the information that was given to them, I’m
100% positive they would be very difficult to convince to think
differently that is all they know. Just like it’s all you and I know.
I’m trying very hard to never assume that what I know is true,
hence I assume everything could be true or that nothing is true.
God, however, as a truly infinite being does have the capacity to
understand and care about each and every one of us!The Bible (if you accept it as an authority)
No I don’t
I understand - just explaining my view.
And explaining mine, without being afraid to be shot in the back
even tells us so! It even goes on to indicate that God cares about
individual birds.God is perfect, but would you consider a being perfect if he/she/it
could
not empathize with another being’s pain?Can’t compute >
Yeah, a perfect being is at least as good as we can imagine! And then
much much better yet!I believe that he created the absolute best value system possible, and
has revealed to us the major structure of the system, and how to do
our
best to follow it.Our brain is extremely limited, “the major structure of the system” is
IMHO
a MAJOR overstatement. The system is far more complex, it is beyond
our comprehension. That system may include the human blowing itself
up.Maybe I did not use the right words. I meant the “broad outlines” or the
skeleton. I agree that we are too limited to understand the entirety!
I think we are too limited to even understand one of its part.
History shows that all that was know to be true as changed at
some point. Earth is round, stars aren’t spirit, women aren’t
witches (well not all of them, lol), universe was created in a week.
People have died defending that the earth was the center of the univers.
Imagine how stupid they would feel if you could bring them back to live
and tell them they killed for nothing (I don’t really think they have killed
for nothing, they have killed because this was part of the grand scheme).
I’m having a hard time thinking of myself as defending or beleiving
in something that will prove to be a distorted view.
Evidences are pilling up that clarify the actual fact about many events
in our history, and thing usually are not how they were presented to us.
What you are stating here is that you do not believe in the value
system
revealed in the Bible.Hum I really don’t know, I would have to say that they only think
I’d care about is the love part.So you don’t really care if people treat you (or your family) fairly or
not? (Or are you saying that the concept of “fairness” is not a “value
system” thing?)
I’m not saying the bible doesn’t make sense in some cases, I don’t
really know the bible. I actually can’t read it, it’s tone drives me off.
I will not use the bible as a refence to define was is fair or not.
Some of my definition may agree with some of what it says,
but it’s not my reference.
(The love part is very important too!)
Hum I don’t judge, I evaluate, better or worse, not good and bad.
The feeling that it creates is very different.Well the meaning of “judge” is to evaluate. Not even necessarily in
“value judgements”
It is perfectly good english for a teacher to say: “I would judge this
essay to be a better one that that one.”
There is a difference to me. Better or worse means it’s a scale and
everything on that scale is good,like being smart or dumb, these is
nothing wrong with being dump.
The often misused biblical injunction “judge not so that you will not
be
judged”, does not indicate that judging is wrong, merely to be used
wisely indeed.That is one’s interpretation.
True enough.
The Bible states that “revenge is mine says the Lord”.
Man made.
You mean the Bible is man-made? I disagree, but (at least for now) that
is another topic.
I understand your belief. It does differ considerably from mine!Isn’t it great >
Well, yes and no. Some disagreement is inevitable.
However, I feel sad about anybody who does not understand God’s truth.
That’s my point, it’s not God’s truth, its your interpretation of the
reading of the bible (I’m oversimplifying). Other people
are reading the same book and have a totaly different
interpretation of its content and come up with a different
meaning of God. To say that this is God’s truth is putting
words in its mouth
However, I believe that even in religious things, we must be aware of
what reality is, and not base our thinking and actions on wishful
thinking!Hang tight >
think
the Universe is a stage, a stage for God to play all the billions of
billions of
billions of billions of possible act and role.You may think that. On what do you base that belief?
That is the most logical explanation I could come up with
given my interpretation of the thing I see around me.
I’ll try to explain the best I can:
Take a pen and look at it for a moment. What do you see?
A pen you might say, well you are not seeing a pen at all.
First what you perceive are photons of various wavelenght.
You only see a very very small fraction of the range available.
Other animal will perceive the pen totaly differently.
Then what you see is in essence chemical reaction in your
brain. Your perception of the pen, its presence its existance
is a small fraction of reality. Because of our scale sizewise,
we can’t see the fabric of the pen, its molecule, its atom.
You can touch it because of the spacing of your molecule.
If you where of different material you might be not
even be able to touch it or even see it. As we speak
particule are going through us without us know it.
Maybe these particul are part of a being that isn’t
aware of our presence. So all that surrounds us,
all that we define as ourself isn’t completely real,
only the perception is.
This though occurs to me while viewing “The Matrix”,
when the boudist looking child says “Do not try to bend the
spoon as there is no spoon, instead it is you who must bend
around the spoon”. To me this was enlightment
I deeply beleive (for now at least) that their is in fact
no spoon…
For all I know, I could be computer simulation, I could be a brains
hook up to some machine. I don’t think we can comprehend what
reality is, it’s a concept out of our reach.I agree that “total reality” is currently beyond our grasp.
But you make do quite nicely with “day to day” reality, and we all
experience and share that reality for the most part.If you apply the Occam’s Razor Principle, those other things
are more science fiction than reality.
Saying the earth was round was probably science fiction as well.
(BTW - I love reading science fiction - very entertaining and many novel
ideas - I just don’t confuse it with reality)
It’s not about confusion it’s about not denying that it possible.
What if Jesus was an Alien trying to give us a push in the
right direction. It’s a bold idea, but it cannot be 100%
unproven, hence it is remotely possible.
You put “religion” in a seperate “cubicle” from the rest of your life.
Then is not what I mean. I don’t know about english, but where I come
from, the word religion is attach to an organisation of some sort, that
dictate what god is.I create my own religion. I look at all that is out there and make it
up as I go along.
Is it possible that God intended to communicate with man, but that men
(in general) have subverted the process through “organizing religion” ?
Since religion are organised by men that is what I thing happens.
Is it possible that he still communicates with sincere seekers after him?
Quite possible yes
When things contradict, there is some untruth in there somewhere!
This I don’t agree.
o.k. how would you put it?
Surely in a court of law, If I said I saw someone steal something, and he
denied it, you would be pretty sure that one of us was lying? The trick,
of course is to figure out who was lying..
You have a good point. This may get out of hand here and too language
limited but:
Maybe that “theif” isn’t lying, maybe he thinks he took something he things
he deserved. Maybe he was poor and need it to feed his familly.
Maybe he stolel with the intention of returning. What we have is two
truths your and his. It’s all in the perception.
If you understand and follow this reasoning, then the “religion” of
following Jesus is in contradiction with the idea that “all religions
are
valid”.Absolutely not, it means that you are right in persuing your own
religion.Jesus states that he is “THE WAY, THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE”.
Well there is another guy that said the same, who’s right. They
all layed out different rules ( man interpreted differenlty
what each of them god’s representative said).If you believe that, consider the historically documented fact of the
resurrection (coming back to life from the dead) as an indication of who
God pointed out to us as having the truth (being right)
Other people have come back from the dead. Actually
some think he never died (I’ve read somewhere
their might be evidence leading to that conclusion)
This means that you rationally have no option but to conclude that
“not
all religions can be as good as any other”.I’m not sure about about this but I’d say yes. I’ll clarify (although
I’m quite confuse myself >
others, it all depends where you want to go. But i beleive “other
religions”
serves a purpuse hence they are good as well.If you wish to make that statement, then you must at the very least
consign to a lower place those religions that state that that is not
so!No I don’t
Well, I meant in the sense of saying that some are better than others -
as you have conceeded just above.They contradict your belief, how can you consider them “truth”?
(Christianity, Islam, Orthodox Judeaism, and many more)
I can’t explain it, I don’t know out to express or phrase this emotion.
Let’s say I won’t put down ANY of them cause they have the potential
to be the truth.
Wouldn’t it be nice to find out if one of them really was the truth,
rather than just having the potential?
Maybe, however I’m not prepare to say which one. It might
also be none of them.
I guess people that don’t beleive in any God are having a laught at the
moment, lol!
I have a friend who doesn’t beleive in any type of God makes up for
interesting
discussion.
Oh, yeah, and probably being annoyed too! Those who decide not to care
about God are usually annoyed when the subject comes up.
Not to care, hum don’t agree with that either. It’s not that they don’t
care about God its that they don’t beleive in its existence, very
different.
–
Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.
. I can admit though, it would be a much more interesting discussion
for me than theological problems.
I’ve read this book which is an essaie (doesn’t claim to be true).
I used todays information and tries to fill the void with rather
surprising theory.
It centralize one the theory that there is life beyond
speed of light Very interesting. It attemps to explain
why to particule moving in opposite direction at the speed
of light can affect one another. That is if you affect the spin
of one particle it changes the spin of the other, instanteanously.
There also this observation about the dark matter, apprently
over 80% (or 60% not sure from memory) of the matter
in the universe is unaccounted for. This dark matter may
be invisible because it exists beyond the speed of light barrier,
where time/space are the oposite of ours.
Gets my neurons all excited
- igor
Hi Mario…
Mario Charest wrote:
Have you ever consider that you may yourself be victim of propaganda?
That this whole bible and God thing is a hoaks? These people have
Mario, have you ever read the Bible? Do you believe in God? In Jesus?
You either believe that the Bible is the word of God, or you do not.
This believe, however, is not based on emotions, intellect, propaganda,
or any other such thing.
If you go to a local library, get a hold of a Bible, and look for the
book of John, chapter 1, verse 1 it says: “In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Do you have any sense for what the above means? I could tell you, but I
am not sure that you may want to hear…
made choice based on the information that was given to them, I’m
100% positive they would be very difficult to convince to think
differently that is all they know. Just like it’s all you and I know.
I’m trying very hard to never assume that what I know is true,
hence I assume everything could be true or that nothing is true.
It seems to me that you are trying to explain -or not explain, I am not
quite sure- God and the word of God (i.e. the Bible) with your head
using some earthly -circa 20001- logic. This path will lead you no where
closer to any thing related to God, unless you would sincerely be open
to hear about and would like to experience God in a real way.
Respectfully…
Miguel.
Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com
“Igor Kovalenko” <Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> a écrit dans le message news:
3BA7E938.5E7A927B@motorola.com…
Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote:
Previously, Alain Choquet wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
Gravity is the weakest force yet the only one that matters on a
sufficiently
large scale.Gravity is only a force using the Neutonian model. In Einstein’s model,
all mass/engergy warps the shape of space/time. Objects “falling”
toward
gravitational bodies are in reality following “straight” space/time
lines
called geodesics.True.
The as yet incomplete unified (with Quantum [finally a connection]
mechanics)
theory will probably have gravity mediated by the exchange of gravitons.
There are strong indications that quantum mechanics and general
relativity can not be possibly unified. They just contradict each other
when applied to matter on an inappropriate scale. So physicists are
pursuing the superstring theory, which seems to be more promicing. I’ve
read a very good book on the subject recently and unfortunately matters
are too complicated to be explained in few words. I can admit though, it
would be a much more interesting discussion for me than theological
problems.
- igor
Well, well, well… I may yet learn something as the result of a quite
unrelated posting!
I know that the Einsteinien paradigm says that mass warps space/time. It
certainly evokes a different imagery in my mind. But what are the practical
consequences of considering gravity this way (rather than as a force) ?
And wouldn’t the existence of gravitons as exchange mediator restore the
gravity as a force ?
Alain
However, I believe that even in religious things, we must be aware
of
what reality is, and not base our thinking and actions on wishful
thinking!Hang tight >
think
the Universe is a stage, a stage for God to play all the billions of
billions of
billions of billions of possible act and role.You may think that. On what do you base that belief?
That is the most logical explanation I could come up with
given my interpretation of the thing I see around me.I’ll try to explain the best I can:
Take a pen and look at it for a moment. What do you see?
A pen you might say, well you are not seeing a pen at all.
First what you perceive are photons of various wavelenght.
You only see a very very small fraction of the range available.
Other animal will perceive the pen totaly differently.
Then what you see is in essence chemical reaction in your
brain. Your perception of the pen, its presence its existance
is a small fraction of reality. Because of our scale sizewise,
we can’t see the fabric of the pen, its molecule, its atom.
You can touch it because of the spacing of your molecule.
If you where of different material you might be not
even be able to touch it or even see it. As we speak
particule are going through us without us know it.
Maybe these particul are part of a being that isn’t
aware of our presence. So all that surrounds us,
all that we define as ourself isn’t completely real,
only the perception is.This though occurs to me while viewing “The Matrix”,
when the boudist looking child says “Do not try to bend the
spoon as there is no spoon, instead it is you who must bend
around the spoon”. To me this was enlightment >
Talking about satori, I had this one some time ago:
God is perfect, unlimited by the material world, God is eternal, has no
beginning, no end.
Somehow, don’t ask me how, I can envision infinity. I can accept the idea
that something has no beginning an no end.
But time is no more spiritual than matter. In fact time and matter are
intimately related. I read once that matter entering a black hole could
follow laws were space and time are reversed, space being described by one
dimension and time by multiple ones. This may have been proven false, I
don’t care, it is (has been) thinkable.
It may be that I could learn and apply the laws of a multi-dimensionnal
time. Yet it is very alien to my normal way of thinking. And in order to
keep god perfect, I have to push him totally out of time; it is not that he
had no beginning and will have no end, he has to be beyond time, a being
without duration.
The universe is too strange to be really understood and I fail totaly to
imagine a personal relation to something that is still stranger.
I still hope and try to learn a lot from this universe but I stopped
thinking about god.
Alain
“Alain Choquet” <choquet@cam.org> a écrit dans le message news:
9o9amf$hr8$1@inn.qnx.com…
“Igor Kovalenko” <> Igor.Kovalenko@motorola.com> > a écrit dans le message
news:
3BA7E938.5E7A927B@motorola.com> …
Mitchell Schoenbrun wrote:Previously, Alain Choquet wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
Gravity is the weakest force yet the only one that matters on a
sufficiently
large scale.Gravity is only a force using the Neutonian model. In Einstein’s
model,
all mass/engergy warps the shape of space/time. Objects “falling”
toward
gravitational bodies are in reality following “straight” space/time
lines
called geodesics.True.
The as yet incomplete unified (with Quantum [finally a connection]
mechanics)
theory will probably have gravity mediated by the exchange of
gravitons.
There are strong indications that quantum mechanics and general
relativity can not be possibly unified. They just contradict each other
when applied to matter on an inappropriate scale. So physicists are
pursuing the superstring theory, which seems to be more promicing. I’ve
read a very good book on the subject recently and unfortunately matters
are too complicated to be explained in few words. I can admit though, it
would be a much more interesting discussion for me than theological
problems.
- igor
Well, well, well… I may yet learn something as the result of a quite
unrelated posting!I know that the Einsteinien paradigm says that mass warps space/time. It
certainly evokes a different imagery in my mind. But what are the
practical
consequences of considering gravity this way (rather than as a force) ?
I will try to be more precise:
I guess that usually, when the scientific vocabulary changes, it is not only
because new meaning has been added but also because the old meaning evokes
discredited ideas. In what way is the concept of gravity force invalidated
(and not only extended) by relativity?
And wouldn’t the existence of gravitons as exchange mediator restore the
gravity as a force ?
I guess it would make gravitation an interaction rather than a force. Yet
again, how is the concept of force invalidated by the concept of
interaction?
I’m not asking for an extended physics course; just wondering if there is a
simple answer to these questions.
Alain
Stephen Munnings wrote:
In article <> 3BA791E2.C46910D7@s.com> >, > a@s.com > says…
Stephen Munnings wrote:
[ clip ..]
Very untrue! History teaches us general lessons - the history of Israel is very
instructive on what happens when a nation leaves God.
[clip ..]Stephen, please tell me that this is not your serious opinion !!
Hi Armin.
Sorry, that is what I believe is the truth. It doesn’t matter that it is
not politically correct. Truth is truth. (And this is what I believe to
be the truth - in other words - accurate historical fact)
So if you something ‘believe’ … then it is an accurate historical fact?
Accurate historical fact is that the nation of Israel has a strong relationship
with its view of God … and they have never left God even if they were
pursued because of their religion.
[ clip ..]
I’m very astonished to read in that thread such nationalistic colored
religious fundamentalism =:-/
I am sorry that “nationalistic colored religious fundamentalism” has
become such a nasty idea!
Any abuse of religions and all religious dogmatic indoctrination are the enemy of the
civilized world.
The thoughts of e.g. Leibniz, Rousseau, Voltaire, Bayle in the 17/18th century were in
vain ??
I don’t hope …
Armin
Mitchell,
As you didn’t put any smileys I am not sure whether you were being facetious
or you missed the point…
A news report in the UK tells us that two of the terroist ‘pilots’ went
into a bar in Florida the weekend before the attack and got very drunk.
I
leave you to draw your own conclusions about temptation.I think that it is a very local cultural custom to associate
drunkedness with lack of piety. I recall a Tibetan Lama who
regularly got skunked.Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com
My intention was, in the context of the previous posting, to draw attention
to the conflict in the minds of the terrorists before the attack, possibly
brought about by unprepared exposure to an alien culture. Their belief
system was telling them that they were engaged in a war for the furtherance
of a society (or religion, if you prefer) that has a strict ban on alcohol.
They also believed that they were about to become martyrs for the cause, and
their reward was that they would go to Paradise i.e. they would be bestowed
with eternal pleasure (and who are we to know otherwise?).
However, they were unable to resist the temptations of the earthly paradise
as created by the society in the USA, against which they were supposed to be
totally opposed. It’s a real shame that they couldn’t have sampled a few
more of its delights and decided it wasn’t such a bad place after all.
As a PS we are now getting interviews in the media with some of the parents
of the alleged terrorists. The US propaganda machine may be filtering these
out. The parents claim to be unable to comprehend why their sons joined such
an extremist organisation. By all accounts most were well educated. It may
be that they were exposed to brainwashing techniques on a par with cult
groups such as the Moonies et al?
Jim Douglas
If I may intrude again, I’d like to remind that Jew and Arabs lived quite
well in palestine, as Islaam is a religon of peace and tolerance, and has a
sweet spot for Jews and Christians (Jesus is the second of prophets, just
after Mahomet -don’t know the english name- there is a saying : Jesus
builded the house and Mahomet put the roof on top)
Then sionists initiated acts of terrorism to lead to the creation of Israel
(“A land without people, for peopel without land” as it was said in the
50ies). Some may laugh when they hear Harafat disaprove of terrorism, but
then how can they keep serious when they listen to Israelis officials ?
Just before someone replies just to “peace and tolerance” Christianism is
also a religion of peace and tolerance, and still some maniacs used the name
of god to kill Jews, Muslims (crusades and inquisition) and other Christians
(what exactly led the pilgrim fathers in america ?)
“Igor Kovalenko” <kovalenko@home.com> a écrit dans le message news:
9o11gq$96l$1@inn.qnx.com…
“Rennie Allen” <> RAllen@csical.com> > wrote in message
news:> 64F00D816A85D51198390050046F80C9C8DD@exchangecal.hq.csical.com> …You seem to be mixing the concept of nuclear fusion, and nuclear
synthesis. According to what I have read, synthesis is comprised of the
set of reactions that produce elements heavier than iron. These
reactions yield less energy than they consume (thus producing heavy
elements, and proving to be really sucky for bombs, which in general
should produce more energy than they consume >I did not know proper term and I did not know that term ‘synthesis’ was
already taken for something else. So I used it as it seemed to be generic
enough to describe the process.What I implied (and it was deliberately implied) that you were
“forgetting”, was that Russia lost a substantial competition. You had
implied that Americans always seem to “forget” that Russia was first out
of the gate. Well, if you watch a horse race, you probably don’t
remember who was first out of the gate, it’s who crosses the finishing
line that is memorable.So you consider sending man on the Moon a ‘finish line’? That would be
rather modest goal. I actually thought of it as ‘out of gate’ event, just
different gate. Amd finish is not even in sight yet >And if you have higher goals in mind, then why so much pride in being
first
on Moon? Sorry Rennie, you are being totally unreasonable here. Americans
just can’t come to terms with the fact they were beaten, so they cope with
it using ‘selective education’ and ‘selective memory’. That’s all what it
is.Huh ? You think that when there is a genocidal maniac killing people by
the truckload, and you decide your gonna take him out, that you should
give him weapons and fuel (just to make it a fair fight). That Igor, is
the most insane statement I have ever heard.I did not say you should haven given him weapons and fuel. I said
Yugoslavia as country was denied right to self defense, by UN embargo on
weapons/fuel export to them.Your argument is pathetic Igor. We all know that once a war starts
innocent people are going to die. Less people died because the U.S.
undertook the action, than if it did not.So you’re applying ‘statistical value’ to lives of innocent people. That
makes previous arguments about upholding value of human life quite
pathetic.You also can’t deny there are dual standards in US foreign policy. Why
does
not US bomb Israel for systematic openly admitted killings of
palestinians?Because the Palestinians initiated the terror attacks on the Israelis
?May be that’s because they were uprooted from their homes and had to flee
when Israel was formed in the first place? You realize, nobody asked their
opinion when UN resolution creating Israel was issued? So who’s initiated
what?
Israel responds to Palestinian acts, with restraint, not wholescale
genocide, it is easy to see the difference.
Definition of restraint is very subjective. Looking at numbers of killed
palestinians and israelis, one may doubt that there’s sufficient
restraint.
Israeli policy of ‘tracking and killing’ whomever they want is heavily
criticized by whole world, including even US. I don’t know another state
in
the world which openly kills people without any kind of trial. However
US
does not go further than just criticizing, isn’t that strange?This is an interesting point. May be you are right, although I suspect
case
with India was considerably simpler. It was classical colony, and
Britain
had no rights there other than colonial rights. Israel can’t just
‘free a
colony’. I suppose Britain would not conceede so easily if India
demanded to
make East London their capital.Nonsense. Israel was clearly willing to trade land for peace, if it
Israel is not willing to trade Jerusalem for peace, not even East
Jerusalem.
That was major obstacle to the peace deal. You’re very quick to label my
statements as ‘nonsense’ and ‘insane’, before giving them proper
consideration. I was just making an analogy.wasn’t for radical elements of the Palestinian community there would be
a Palestine today (granted it wouldn’t be the same as the original
Palestine, and sure, the Palestinians are entitled to all of their
land back, but the bottom line is they’d be a lot better off).Problem is, they don’t want Pelestine without East Jerusalem. They’ll
rather fight for another 50 years. They already conceeded half of their
original land when Israel was created. They already conceeded West
Jerusalem
(Jerusalem was not part of Israel according to UN resolution, it was
occupied later). I can quite understand they don’t want to conceede any
more.I can see this kid, being ignored, not killed.
Well I already told about my life experiences and yes I can see him
killed,
in some societies. It makes me wonder how all the mass shootings in US
schools were possible if you can’t see that kid killed in US …
- igor
Same for the French. We had hundreds of professionals FireFighters (Firemen
I guess ready to board from Paris to New-York, but America can handle
its problems itself. Which it can. It is just sad to hear then that nobody
ever helped.
Lafayette must be spinnig in its grave.
“Igor Kovalenko” <kovalenko@home.com> a écrit dans le message news:
9nv24k$5bo$1@inn.qnx.com…
“Richard R. Kramer” <> rrkramer@kramer-smilko.com> > wrote in message
news:> 3BA2B089.DB9B3FB1@kramer-smilko.com> …Indeed. One of our presidents recommended we “Walk softly, and carry a
big
stick.” We seem at times to forget the “walk softly” bit. I don’t think
we
“show off” so much to control them as to protect the status quo here. We
don’t seem that eager to take over the world, although we don’t seem to
be
inclined to fret if the world bows to us. A fine difference perhaps.
Here’s an Eric Hoffer quote. I don’t know when he wrote this, but he
died
in 1983:
“The Americans are poor haters in international affairs because of their
innate feeling of superiority over all foreigners. An American’s hatred
for a fellow American…is far more virulent than any antipathy he can
work up against foreigners…Should Americans begin to hate foreigners
wholeheartedly, it will be an indication that they have lost confidence
in their own way of life.”Keep in mind, Igor, you’re one of us now.
Not quite >
Technically I am ‘legal alien’, lol.I liked your quote. It could not be said better, I was getting there but
did
not want to say the piece about ‘innate feeling of superiority’ myself.
When
it is very obvious to any foreigner, not many americans will openly admit
it.And I got a side note, illustrating american character. According to
russian
sources, a team of couple hundreds trained and experienced rescuers along
with all needed equipment was offered to US by russian ‘ministry of
emergency’. Those are people with extensive record of saving survivors of
earthquakes. They were ready to board their own plane plane as soon as
they
had ‘go’ from US. They were told ‘thanks, we will handle it ourselves’.Guess they had reasons to decline the offer
- igor
\
“Alain Choquet” <choquet@cam.org> wrote in message
news:9o9kmd$o6c$1@inn.qnx.com…
There are strong indications that quantum mechanics and general
relativity can not be possibly unified. They just contradict each
other
when applied to matter on an inappropriate scale. So physicists are
pursuing the superstring theory, which seems to be more promicing.
I’ve
read a very good book on the subject recently and unfortunately
matters
are too complicated to be explained in few words. I can admit though,
it
would be a much more interesting discussion for me than theological
problems.
- igor
Well, well, well… I may yet learn something as the result of a quite
unrelated posting!I know that the Einsteinien paradigm says that mass warps space/time.
It
certainly evokes a different imagery in my mind. But what are the
practical
consequences of considering gravity this way (rather than as a force) ?
You would not need force carrier particles (gravitons) to describe it then.
I will try to be more precise:
I guess that usually, when the scientific vocabulary changes, it is not
only
because new meaning has been added but also because the old meaning evokes
discredited ideas. In what way is the concept of gravity force
invalidated
(and not only extended) by relativity?
General relativity treats gravity as warpness of space-time fabric. That
invalidates ‘quantum’ aspects of ‘gravitational force’ and allows to avoid
(not resolve) major conflict with quantum mechanics. The conflict is, laws
of general relativity fall apart when applied to matter on sub-Planck scale.
Likewise, quantum mechanics becomes gibberish on scales much larger than
‘Planck-size’.
So, general relativity allowed to describe practical effects of gravity (on
planetary scale) pretty well, while quantum mechanics allowed to describe
sub-atom processes very precisely. Nonetheless, physicists (Einstain
including) were deeply disturbed by understandning that those major pillars
of physics can not be both right. Einstain spent last 40 years of his life
trying to solve the issue, but never succeeded.
The Superstring theory makes them both parts of much larger picture and
resolves conflict. Basically it suggests that space has 10 dimensions, of
which 3 are ‘expanded’ and 7 are ‘warped’. Time is 11th dimension. All
material objects correspond to certain vibrational pattern of ‘strings’
which are basic 1-dimensional objects. There is explanation (of statistical
nature) as to why there are exactly 3 ‘expanded’ space dimensions.
The theory really blows your mind as you read it and realize consequences.
It has no experimental proof (and it would be next to impossible to get
one). Even mathematical part has largely approximational character due to
unsurmountable mathematical difficulties. However, there is large amount of
circumstantial evidence, some of it of very convicing nature. It is also
currently the only theory capable of explaining majority of known physical
facts.
And wouldn’t the existence of gravitons as exchange mediator restore the
gravity as a force ?
It would, if they were found. But that probably would invalidate quantum
mechanics, lol
In article <Voyager.010918165118.198E@schoenbrun.com>, maschoen@pobox.com
says…
Previously, Stephen Munnings wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
There is some evidence to suggest that He has in the past. The prayer (or
request) is that He will in the future.And the evidence is?
Covered in another post..
(Please note that I said suggest, not prove - not trying to prove
anything with that statement)
I guess that is why He had to tell us (in His Word) that He did indeed
have expectations for us!What is the evidence that the Bible is the word of G-d?
This is a BIG topic - I do not have time to really do it justice right
now.
Here is a link to a very comprehensive examination of this subject:
http://www.rae.org/bibref.html
for those interested enough to follow it up.
In short, however.. because it has shown itself to be reliable in the
past, particularly in regards to foretelling the future.
Jesus made many hard requests of his followers. Not fully following them
is what has made a lot of people believe that “Christians are
hypocrites”. But, please remember - they are HARD to do!Hard to avoid the Spanish Inquisition? Hard to avoid the Chrusades?
Not all people who call themselves Christians really are!
Not even those in positions of power in the “organized” church.
In matter of fact those that held beliefs similar to mine were among
those persecuted by the Spanish Inquisition!
I know this causes much confusion - how do you know who really is a
Christian, then?
The key point is that we should not be following other Christians
(whether they are in name only, or true sincere Christians) - the point
of the name is that we should be following Christ (Jesus).
God does indeed punish! He may delay the punishment, and He may find a
willing and worthy substitute (Jesus - also God) to take your punishment
for you, but He punishes! Both on a personal and national level.And the evidence is?
The Bible, and history. Of course, if you discount the Bible, and wish
to attribute the events of history to other causes, then you will find no
evidence. In this respect, the reasoning is somewhat circular. Great
calamities befall people and nations. We search for the causes (or lack
thereof). Some come to one conclusion, some to another. Some are valid,
some partway, some accurate.
It all boils back down to whether the Bible is a reliable communication
from God Himself.
You are surely not asserting that great disasters do not happen? (I know
you are not)
One of the better proofs for this is the fact that great downfalls of
certain nations are foretold in the Bible, where it is asserted that
these will be punishments from God. These came to pass (in the writer’s
future, but in our past).
As for the treatment of how reliable this evidence is, I refer you to the
link previously mentioned.
–
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com
\
–
Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.
In article <Voyager.010918165518.198G@schoenbrun.com>, maschoen@pobox.com
says…
Previously, Stephen Munnings wrote in qdn.public.qnxrtp.advocacy:
I believe that God has blessed America (U.S.) in material ways by making
her a strong and rich nation. I believe that this is a consequence of
both natural and supernatural influences.Wouldn’t common sense then suggest that he would have made Italy,
the strongest nation centuries ago?
It might indeed suggest it! But you need to assume a lot of things that
I am unwilling to assume..
–
Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com
\
–
Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.
“Miguel Simon” <simon@ou.edu> wrote in message
news:3BA800DE.B9AFA1F3@ou.edu…
Hi Mario…
Mario Charest wrote:
Have you ever consider that you may yourself be victim of propaganda?
That this whole bible and God thing is a hoaks? These people haveMario, have you ever read the Bible?
Long time ago yes.
Do you believe in God?
Not as pictured in the bible
In Jesus?
I really don’t know.
You either believe that the Bible is the word of God, or you do not.
These word were apparently told by a man claiming to speak the words of God.
The bible was written by men 2000 years ago. It has gone through 2000 years
of translations, re-writting, etc. Just last night, I saw an ad in the back
of the bus
about a new version of a bible (“The story is the same, but said better”)
I must said I’m confuse by the bible, I’m turn off by it. I will have to
look
in this. It is probably because I associate it with the Christian religious
system (Church) and that I’ve diassociate myself with it.
I’ll give you an example. Women are not allow to be preist. From
what I heard this is because Jesus chose 12 man has its disciple.
Since Jesus hasn’t selected a women, the Church does the same today.
What a bunch of crap. Jesus lived in a different time in a different
place, with different reality that ours. That the bible is used
to set today’s rules and guide line repulses me. My mistake is probably to
reject
it alltogether.
This believe, however, is not based on emotions, intellect, propaganda,
or any other such thing.
It’s based on what then?
If you go to a local library, get a hold of a Bible, and look for the
book of John, chapter 1, verse 1 it says: “In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”Do you have any sense for what the above means?
I think I do and I agree with this. But I’m disputing the fact
the bible is THE WORD.
I could tell you, but I am not sure that you may want to hear…
I’m willing to hear anything. I may choose to beleive it or not.
Your use of the elipses (…) tells me you think I have a close
mind because I beleive in something different then you.
I have read somewhere " my way is one way amongst many,
and no way is better then any other way" (something close
as the book was in french . The book claim this
is the what God suggest the author of the book we should
be telling ourselves everyday.
People weren’t willing to hear that universe wasn’t created in
7 days. I had a conversation with my friend’s sister and she
is convince the universe was created in 7 days. And you know
what see said, "look in the bible book of X, chapter X, verse X it
says “God created the world in 7 days”. As we both try to explain
that there is a huge number of material evidence that state otherwise,
she keep on hanging on to the bible, like her life depended on it.
Like she wasn’t allow to dispute and disagree with its content,
probably afraid she would go the hell if she die.
I don’t like the bible for what it has done to her. Thinking about this
it may not be the bible fault after all. I will have to think about this.
It seems to me that you are trying to explain -or not explain, I am not
quite sure- God and the word of God (i.e. the Bible) with your head
using some earthly -circa 20001- logic.
Yes I think I am.
This path will lead you no where closer to any thing related to God,
??? I’ve been wondering for about 5 minutes now what to answer
to this. I’ve gone through many feeling in this 5 minutes, mostly anger.
Hence I will refrain since it don’t feel it would do any good to express
it in this context.
Ok after another 5 minutes I calm down Let me give you an
extreme example. I’ve seen this thing on TV. A killer
was interview from prison. I don’t recall the exact details
if he was a serial killer or not, but I remember that the killing
made headlines at the time. The guy had turn to the bible,
every 5 minutes he was making reference to something in the bible,
and you know what the guy sounded “holly”. He was helping
people around him, apparently he changed for the better. The
bible helped him in the process. So what am saying if he
hadn’t kill he would probably not have met God. Killing
was his path to God.
In my views (and that of the bible ?doesn’t it say somewhere, there
are many path to god?) you are in no position to make such
a statement.
unless you would sincerely be open to hear about and would like to
experience God in a real way.
I’m ready to conceed my heart is close and that I may
not be experiencing God in a real way, are you?
Respectfully…
I believe you
Miguel.
–
my opinions are mine, only mine, solely mine, and they are not related
in any possible way to the institution(s) in which I study and work.Miguel Simon
Research Engineer
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
University of Oklahoma
http://www.amerobotics.ou.edu/
http://www.saic.com
[snip]
One of the better proofs for this is the fact that great downfalls of
certain nations are foretold in the Bible, where it is asserted that
these will be punishments from God. These came to pass (in the writer’s
future, but in our past).
Funny I was reading stuff a moment ago about Islam religion on Internet,
and they make the same observation/statement
As for the treatment of how reliable this evidence is, I refer you to the
link previously mentioned.
\Mitchell Schoenbrun --------- > maschoen@pobox.com
\Stephen Munnings
Software Developer
Corman Technologies Inc.
