This is quite an interesting question, and one most hotly debated among humans. The problem is essentially that we don't, or more precisely, can't know. Let's start with one man's model of the inter-dimensional universe.
After watching this video, let us now then define god. For the purposes of this discussion, we will say that god is defined as a being which knows all, and has the power to change anything. In this imagining, based on the universal model in the video, it begs the question, in what dimension does god exist? Let us follow logically through the system.
We exist in the third dimension, thus by necessity god must be in the fourth dimension. God sees all of time, our past and our future.
This being true would mean though that god only has the capability to observe time. Thus by necessity God must exist within the 5th dimension, wherein god could see not only our own timeline, but all possible timelines of existence.
However if we imagine this to be true, then we limit god to only viewing all possible timelines of existence, yet it is the 6th dimension which allows god to travel to alternate timelines. Therefore, we must conclude that god must exist within the 6th dimension.
This does allow god to see and travel into all possible timelines, without altering the universe itself, but can only see one at a time. Thus we must say that god exists within the 7th dimension, wherein god sees all possible outcomes our current universe as a whole, collectively, and has the ability to instantly be anywhere in the universe, at any time.
This is now starting to sound more like the god most people imagine, however this does not encompass all that god is, for it limits god to only observing and acting in a physical frame of reference within the universe, but not altering the properties of the universe itself. This is where we come to a crossroads of belief. If one believes that god exists as a physical being which can travel anywhere, at any time to any possibility of the known universe, then god needs only exist in the 7th dimension. this is supported by string theory informing us that all of reality as we know it ends at the 7th dimension, wherein one observes all possible outcomes and beginnings of existence as we know it.
Yet this leaves us with the question, is god "all powerful"? For if god is, then the 7th dimension constrains him to only the universe as we know it. It is then that god must exist within the 8th dimension, wherein god exists to be able to travel to another universe in which a different physical property exists, but only one.
This adds yet another constraint upon god, thus for the constraint to be lifted one must imagine that god can travel to physical universes wherein all physical laws are optional. Again though, this constrains god, for moving through these universes is tiresome and tedious, as all physical properties of the universe must be traveled through in a line. In order for god to exist in context of power, god must be able to instantly transport from one physical universe to a completely different one, thus exist within the 9th dimension.
Again though, this constrains god, by having god physically jump from one physical universe into another, without seeing it first. Essentially, god is travelling to a realm in which god knows exists, but does not exist in the context to see, such as you or I traveling to another place in 3rd dimensional space. We know it exists but we cannot necessarily see it. For god then to know all, god would then need to exist in the 10th dimension, see all possible beginnings and all possible outcomes from those beginnings.
Thus we have logically arrived at the conclusion that god exists within the 10th dimension, of all possible possibilities of everything. Yet to imagine a being as this we must consider that the 10th dimension itself is everything, and anything that exists therein is indeed an expression of itself. Thus we can logically conclude that god not only exists in the 10th dimension, but that god is the 10th dimension. Or said another way, god is the universe of all universes, wherein all possible existence is defined as itself. God therefore is existence. This means that in a very real sense, you and I are god. It would also expand to say that everything you do in the universe, you then do to yourself.
This is why we cannot define god, because to define god, we must first define our own existence, and that is the path of life.
12.20.2015
12.06.2015
Original thought
I've often wondered how new innovations come about in society. It seems as though it should not be possible for original thought to occur, at least when you consider society as a whole. Yet as has been shown countless times in the past, innovation does indeed exist, contrary to societal expectations.
Consider as an example, the arch.
In Ancient Greece, temples were built using columns. This technique, while effective to a point, could never be used to create the massive structures of the Romans. While Roman architecture copied Greek heavily, the innovation of the arch led to a new way of thinking about architecture. It allowed the Romans to build grander and more ornate buildings than the Greeks ever imagined.
So what was it that caused the first arch to appear? How could someone have possibly thought that leaning stones against each other would create a stronger structure than stacking them?
Society teaches us to think in linear patterns. 1+1=2 and so forth. We are taught to think in forms of this leads to that which is why this is how things are. But as scientists are finding out, linear thinking does not explain the universe.
As another example, let's take the process of photosynthesis. Plants use solar energy to create food for themselves (they also use water and carbon dioxide, but for now let's just focus on the light). Plants have an extremely effective method of transferring the energy from sunlight to other parts of their cells. So effective in fact, that it's estimated only 5% of the potential energy is lost in the conversion process. By contrast, the most effective solar panel in existence still has more than a 40% loss rate with the conversion.
When a plant receives sunlight, it needs to find the most efficient way to send the sunlight to other parts of it's cells, so the energy is sent out in wave form, along every single path possible, until it reaches the destination, then the path is chosen and all other paths become void. This is a difficult concept to grasp, especially considering that it seems mere plants are bending the very laws of time and space. So consider this: The law of general relativity states (in a very general sense) that anything traveling faster than the speed of light becomes energy; quantum physics tells us that energy exists in wave form until acted upon by another source, filling all possible points of existence. Therefore, it's not so inconceivable that a plant could receive sunlight, and transfer that energy in an instant along all possible paths to the destination in it's cells, and once the most efficient path is found, choose that path for the actual particle of energy.
So how does a plant differ from human ingenuity? In the same way the human brain differs from a computer.
Human society is based on precision. But nature is based on approximations. And that's precisely how we break free of the mold. Original thought happens by accidents, and seeing the good which arises from such accidents. It happens when somehow, a few of our neurons win the shouting match allowing us to ignore linear thinking, and use our lateral thinking instead.
Consider as an example, the arch.
In Ancient Greece, temples were built using columns. This technique, while effective to a point, could never be used to create the massive structures of the Romans. While Roman architecture copied Greek heavily, the innovation of the arch led to a new way of thinking about architecture. It allowed the Romans to build grander and more ornate buildings than the Greeks ever imagined.
So what was it that caused the first arch to appear? How could someone have possibly thought that leaning stones against each other would create a stronger structure than stacking them?
Society teaches us to think in linear patterns. 1+1=2 and so forth. We are taught to think in forms of this leads to that which is why this is how things are. But as scientists are finding out, linear thinking does not explain the universe.
As another example, let's take the process of photosynthesis. Plants use solar energy to create food for themselves (they also use water and carbon dioxide, but for now let's just focus on the light). Plants have an extremely effective method of transferring the energy from sunlight to other parts of their cells. So effective in fact, that it's estimated only 5% of the potential energy is lost in the conversion process. By contrast, the most effective solar panel in existence still has more than a 40% loss rate with the conversion.
When a plant receives sunlight, it needs to find the most efficient way to send the sunlight to other parts of it's cells, so the energy is sent out in wave form, along every single path possible, until it reaches the destination, then the path is chosen and all other paths become void. This is a difficult concept to grasp, especially considering that it seems mere plants are bending the very laws of time and space. So consider this: The law of general relativity states (in a very general sense) that anything traveling faster than the speed of light becomes energy; quantum physics tells us that energy exists in wave form until acted upon by another source, filling all possible points of existence. Therefore, it's not so inconceivable that a plant could receive sunlight, and transfer that energy in an instant along all possible paths to the destination in it's cells, and once the most efficient path is found, choose that path for the actual particle of energy.
So how does a plant differ from human ingenuity? In the same way the human brain differs from a computer.
Human society is based on precision. But nature is based on approximations. And that's precisely how we break free of the mold. Original thought happens by accidents, and seeing the good which arises from such accidents. It happens when somehow, a few of our neurons win the shouting match allowing us to ignore linear thinking, and use our lateral thinking instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
