Theological Science and the Quality of Things, I
To see these wholes with one’s mind, one must recognize that the spiritual atoms form a ‘first whole.’ In my book, I call the first whole ‘the initial universe.’ So, it was always correct to say that the initial universe can be placed on the point of a pin. This initial universe can be rationalized by knowing that, in God, the spiritual atoms are ‘one’ and that the spiritual atoms become ‘many’ instantly. Accordingly, time is not a factor in God’s creation of the universe. For this reason, the creation of God must be understood ontologically.
Ontology is the study of beings. I saw the instant creation of the universe when I thought of the impulse function in the field of mathematics and modeled the creation with this mathematical function. Thus, in an instant, the universe is created by an infinite God, who, by necessity, must be the origin of the first whole of all spiritual atoms that are on the point of a pin. Ontologically, I thus see the second whole, third whole, fourth whole, fifth whole, ... nth whole. This series of wholes is not formed with leaps or steps. Instead of leaps or steps, these wholes form a geometrical continuum, just as the rational and irrational numbers form a geometrical continuum of numbers. As seen, the universe is changing continually into new wholes.
If we could stop these changes, the different wholes of the universe could be known precisely. Since no one can stop them, we cannot know these wholes exactly. For the same reason, I reject the Big Bang theory and the belief that the universe comes to an end.
Far enough for this blog.
3 Comments:
At 8:25 PM, Quantum_Flux said…
You might find this article, Picturing Excess , to be somewhat illuminating Goerge.
At 11:09 AM, George Shollenberger said…
response to quantum_flux,
I made a quick scan of the Picturing Excess and its Home. It is an interesting website. Obviously, it is a website for atheists.
Making machines exactly like us is not possible. Making machines like us is possible. Making machines like us is a necessary task of man. But a machine can only copy the current thoughts of man. As man improves his self-knowledge, machines become better and better.
Nature is not developing the human mind as atheists assume. Physical things will never create living thing as you say.
A whole made by God is very different than a whole made by man. God's wholes are 'more then the sum of its parts' whereas the wholes made by man are 'equal to the sum of its parts.'
George
At 3:31 PM, Anonymous said…
I merely meant the video of artist describing his paintings though. In my opinion, it is a good thing in order to be able to get a visual picture of our consumption here in the USA. I just liked the video because it is analogous to how rates are related to exponents in mathematical analysis. Kind of like looking under an electron microscope at a single nanoscale thing and then seeing how, when you zoom out, how all the individual parts make up a whole. Well, the video does a good job of showing how individual consumption, when multiplied by factors of millions, equals something massively huge. I guess efficiency can reduce the amount of consumption, perhaps each individual person could cut consumption in half, but overall we still consume vast quantities of things.
Post a Comment
<< Home