haha.

I google stuff like a mutha fucka. I only go to academic sites tho (universities and think tanks) and use peer reviewed stuff . . but i use google every chance i get. It is technology that opens up a world of learning to us (as long as u don't just get info from anywhere).  I think anyone dissing google as a resource just misses the plot completely.

I haven't responded cause I'm working on my paper. half way done. 

BTW, deep sight. i have an appointment with one of my profs in 4 hours and I'm goin to question him on the grail message (a lot of stuff that i (in my very limited capacity) see as nonsense is being said about that book on nairaland and i just want to get another perspective). I'm gonna have my "hidden" camera rolling and I'll post it on youtube.  If u have any specific questions u want to clear up holla back. Nothing theological though. . .  here is his wiki page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_E._Cowan

That's really really great Krayola, i looked up the Wiki page. . .

Please throw these up for me in your discussion with him -

1. What specific issues did the Nazi Regime have with Abd Ru Shin, the authour, and why was he incacerated?

2. Are there any possible links between his lifetime in Germany and the fact of the two world wars occurring during his time there.

3. Is there any relationship whatsoever between the authour and the Nazi Holocaust.

4. Does the authour have any link with Jews?

I'll tell you later why i'm interested in these. But let's see what he says. Cheers.

By the way - what got you interested in your field of study, why are you studying it, and what do you plan to do after the study?

I think that the original Romance of the Grail legend is rather different from the Grail Message movement of today. Quite possibly the only thing they have in common is the name 'Grail'. I wonder if Krayola's prof will be able to show us the links.

Krayola:

I'm gonna have my "hidden" camera rolling and I'll post it on youtube.

Haha. . depends on how 'hidden' it is. . but methinks he may not be impressed seeing his face on Youtube without consent.

viaro:

Haha. .  depends on how 'hidden' it is. . but methinks he may not be impressed seeing his face on Youtube without consent.

haha. i know. I have about 3 gigs of footage from class and discussions with my profs just waiting to hit youtube and Nairaland. I'm scared to post them now cause i could get kicked out of school so I'm goin to wait till I'm finished in about 5 weeks. WOOOOHOOO!!!  But so far I have 4 classes (almost 12 hours)  from my Course on the historical Jesus, and then some discussions with My Judaism/ bible and Archaeology prof regarding how the Bible is understood by Jews, and what is historical and what is legend. He is an orthodox Jew so he knows the Old testament inside out (New testament too, surprisingly. the guy was quoting the book of acts off the top of his head the last time i spoke with him).

It depends on what this guy tells me today. . .if it's controversial i won't post it yet cause some person might get angry and send him a email ratting me out. So it'll have to wait till december. Once I'm done i no send. . . they can sue me. . . i ain't got no money 

Deep Sight I need your help, can you help me start the following topics anytime you find the time.
[list]
[li]Where should information about human sexuality be taught to youth: at home, at school, at religious institutions, or at some combination of the above.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list][list]
[li]
Whether methods of prevention of pregnancy and/or STDs (sexually transmitted diseases) should be included in sex-ed classes .[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Whether abstinence should be taught alone or in addition to disease and pregnancy prevention.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Whether condoms should be supplied to students in schools.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Whether information about sexual orientation (particularly about homosexuality and bisexuality) should be taught in class.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]What beliefs about minority sexual orientations should be taught. Almost all gays, lesbians and human sexuality researchers believe that a person's sexual orientation is fixed, not inherently sinful, and not chosen. Most religious conservatives believe that homosexual behavior it is changeable, sinful, and chosen.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
Just pick anyone and give it one of those faction spins, I really love em.
Thanks.

@ deepsight and pastor. I had to send him an email to cancel and make another appointment. Sorry to disappoint. I haven't finished my paper yet and It's due in half an hour.

Deep Sight:

By the way - what got you interested in your field of study, why are you studying it, and what do you plan to do after the study?

haha. . . u wanna see my diary too? 

I grew up around a lot of religion (Christianity- My mum actually ran a church, and is still very involved in the Church community) but it didn't have much of my impact on me.  I was a dirty rotten scoundrel headed for a premature death, Jail, or rehab ( I know thats a cliche but it applies) . Almost 4 years ago a series of devasting events, runnings with the law, and a very high speed car crash in which i walked out with nothing but bruises from the airbag caused me to start to think about gettin my act together. I decided to go back to school cause I had too much time on my hands and all i  did was messed up stuff. I used to be an economics major but i had dropped out in my second year, and so i knew I had no interest in that. I had always been fascinated by religion, and i thought studying religion would be a good first step in getting my head together. It was the best decision i ever made cause though I'm not religious, i'm not the same person i was when I started. it's impossible to read this much about religion and not become a "softie". I won't even kill bugs or spiders anymore cause i don't want to harm any of "God's" creations.


This is my last term so i'm done in december. I'm applying to business school (Schulich) for 2011 to do an MBA specializing in Arts and Media management. In the interim I'm goin to make music. Hip Hop Music. I'm planning to go to Naija either in Late December or early next year to see whats poppin. If betta dey, fukc school, if not, then na MBA get me.

does that answer your kweshun? 

see this Dbanj wannabe

haha. Dbanj ain't got shit on me.  Michael Jackson sef go fear!!

And I said hip-hop, not disco

Deep Sight:

Panting from the the hectic dash, we move speedily along, avoiding delays and distractions, to the next proof. This one, i must concede, will take the form of an explanatory deduction, and not a pure mathematical argument. In this, we need to address a cardinal question:

Great. Let’s start from here. But before we kick off, let me regurgitate this –

Yes. Back to “the oneness of infinity.” Are there any problems envisaging this as a “hot capsule” of all possible infinite energy? Let us use a detailed analysis to understand this, so we are clear that we do not speak only of matter.

I started this thread with numeric postulations. This we understand to be a system of abstract quantification. The very word “abstract” indicates certainly the non-material. Thus we need to understand that this postulation starts in what philosophers call “the world of forms”.

Basically, for the beginner, the world of forms refers to the “ideas” of things existing. It is non-material, and abstract. (As we go along we will see that it is transcendent, and is the real “existence” which brings further or material existence into being.)

Thus to elucidate (contrary to the poorly informed view of Davidylan) numbers are abstract forms which exist in and by themselves within the world of forms. Man did not invent numbers. He invented symbols and words to ascribe to already existing quantities. For example, if man saw 9 planets around the sun, those planets have been 9 in number ever before man began to exist on Earth, but man required a way to articulate the quantity he was seeing – and in this he comes up with his own numeric system, the figure [9] and the word [nine]. But there were always nine [quantity] planets there already! Just as there were already x zillion galaxies in the universe, whether man was there to count them or not, or use the word "zillion" or not!

Numbers are an abstract form, an abstract reality that exists in the world of forms.

The reason I am dwelling on this is to show one thing – abstract realities can create energy, and further on, matter. Proof?

A crude example. What’s that thought in your head? Can you touch it? Feel it? Smell it? No – It is intangible, it is an abstract form, and this abstract form because it has meaning will lead to energy and action e.g: you get up to drink the beer in the fridge you have ben thinking about. This is a very crude and simple analogy, and I will strive to produce better ones as I go along. But to make a slightly better attempt, let me try another crude example. Let me ask – what is mental strength? Or what is called strength of mind? It is not muscle. It is not brain-cells either, as that may be tied with intelligence. It is not even synapses within the brain. It is nothing physical at all. It comes rather from the thoughts formed by the mind: e.g: I love my family and as such I will run into that burning building to save them even if I die or am maimed in the process. That is strength of mind. It does not come from anything physical, but from an abstract thought.

(Perhaps a finer example, which i will elaborate further upon at a later time, is music. Imagine all the un-sung or un-conceived tunes of music that can be. There are infinite. They are un-conceived as yet, yes? Wwhere will they be conceived from? Ideas - they exist permanently and immutable in the world of forms, and that will translate into conceived music at some point.)

Thus strength can be derived from abstraction. It therefore follows abstract realities, by the very nature of their abstraction are imbued with energy. I realize that this is a very “grandiose” assertion (apologies to Dususpace) which we may be light years away from confirming, but I am persuaded that a simple and calm reflection of the line of thinking, and looking closely at what we mean by an abstraction, along with the very crude analogies above, can serve to confirm this in our minds.

Yes guys, the abstract form of the number [1] is imbued with energy.

Now back to the Oneness of Infinity. I have already described above what that means.

Now what sort of energy would such a oneness of all infinity in existence exhibit. Clearly, it will exhibit infinite energy!

Thus we have the basis for energy being imbued within the oneness of all empty infinity.

Now with that in mind, let us take a look at our own universe. Are there any suggestions of an underlying pulsating energy which may be attributed to such?

Yes there is –

[size=16pt]Dark Energy[/size]
From Wikipedia.
In physical cosmology, astronomy and celestial mechanics, dark energy is a hypothetical form of energy that permeates all of space and tends to increase the rate of expansion of the universe.[1] Dark energy is the most popular way to explain recent observations that the universe appears to be expanding at an accelerating rate. In the standard model of cosmology, dark energy currently accounts for 74% of the total mass-energy of the universe.[2]
Two proposed forms for dark energy are the cosmological constant, a constant energy density filling space homogeneously,[3] and scalar fields such as quintessence or moduli, dynamic quantities whose energy density can vary in time and space. Contributions from scalar fields that are constant in space are usually also included in the cosmological constant. The cosmological constant is physically equivalent to vacuum energy. Scalar fields which do change in space can be difficult to distinguish from a cosmological constant because the change may be extremely slow.
High-precision measurements of the expansion of the universe are required to understand how the expansion rate changes over time. In general relativity, the evolution of the expansion rate is parameterized by the cosmological equation of state. Measuring the equation of state of dark energy is one of the biggest efforts in observational cosmology today.
Adding the cosmological constant to cosmology's standard FLRW metric leads to the Lambda-CDM model, which has been referred to as the "standard model" of cosmology because of its precise agreement with observations. Dark energy has been used as a crucial ingredient in a recent attempt[4] to formulate a cyclic model for the universe.

What can we glean? The universe is pulsating with a constantly moving and unseen energy. As it expands outward, this energy cannot be quantified.

Let us return to the Big Bang.

Deep Sight:

>>>>It shows us that the universe began to expand from a point, a singularity.

We have seen that that singularity may be described as a oneness of all infinity. We have seen that it was imbued with, and was, a “hot capsule of infinite energy” as I stated before. We have seen that invisible energy continues to propel more than 70% of it.

We can accordingly deduce that the oneness of infinity imbued with infinite energy caused it to begin to expand from that singularity, and sustains it with invisible energy till date. This is what I call God, and as we go along will see why this infinite force is per force self conscious.

Nobody responded to these posts.

I take it then that no loop holes were found.

I will move speedily ahead to the next proof.

Deep Sight:

Nobody responded to these posts.

I take it then that no loop holes were found.

Slow down, dear senior. . slow down!

Of course, there are some major objections to observe; and I for one was slow to jump in with a scimitar lest I appear before the panel for the umpteenth time!

Anyhow, I was particularly interested by some inferences you arrived at -

Yes guys, the abstract form of the number [1] is imbued with energy.

Now back to the Oneness of Infinity. I have already described above what that means.

Now what sort of energy would such a oneness of all infinity in existence exhibit. Clearly, it will exhibit infinite energy!

Thus we have the basis for energy being imbued within the oneness of all empty infinity.

Now with that in mind, let us take a look at our own universe. Are there any suggestions of an underlying pulsating energy which may be attributed to such?

I'm trying to be cautious here; but for the moment, I dare say that those conclusions have taken the physics out of reality and rather presented us with serious problems. The key notes that caught my curiosity are these -

* the idea of a oneness of all empty infinity

* what sort of energy is exhibited by the above

* what is meant by an infinity that is both -

(a) 'inclusive' (all empty infinity); and

(b) 'vacuous' (all empty infinity)

The inferences drawn from these postulations are hard, if not impossible, to defend by any dimension or stretch of imagination. By the time we begin to try to analyse each of those factors and try to synthesise them into the framework of your postulations, there would be a whole world of false mirrors against defined reality.

That was most certainly why I'd wanted to slow down (here and in the other thread) and see further developments of your postulations before I could attempt to wrap up anything.

So far, so interesting. Ride on.

Viaro, i feel you, but i am not using the word "empty" in the conventional sense. I had thought i had explained before. I use it to mean devoid of matter as presently known; i.e: the singularity.

At this point before proceeding, it might be useful to reproduce a summary of the Five Proofs of the Existence of God offered by St. Thomas Aquinas:


The Argument of the Unmoved Mover
The argument of the unmoved mover, or ex motu, tries to explain that God must be the cause of motion in the universe. It is therefore a form of the cosmological argument. It goes thus:

Some things are moved.
Everything that is moving is moved by a mover.
An infinite regress of movers is impossible.
Therefore, there is an unmoved mover from whom all motion proceeds.
This mover is what we call God.

The Argument of the First Cause
The argument of the first cause (ex causa), tries, unlike the argument of the Unmoved Mover, to prove that God must have been the cause, or the creator of the universe. It is therefore another form of the cosmological argument. It goes thus:

Some things are caused.
Everything that is caused is caused by something else.
An infinite regress of causation is impossible.
Therefore, there must be an uncaused cause of all that is caused.
This causer is what we call God.

The Argument from Contingency
The argument from contingency (ex contingentia):

Many things in the universe may either exist or not exist. Such things are called contingent beings.
It is impossible for everything in the universe to be contingent, for then there would be a time when nothing existed, and so nothing would exist now, since there would be nothing to bring anything into existence, which is clearly false.
Therefore, there must be a necessary being whose existence is not contingent on any other being or beings.
This being is whom we call God.

The Argument from Degree
The argument from degree or gradation (ex gradu). It is heavily based upon the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. It goes thus :

Varying perfections of varying degrees may be found throughout the universe.
These degrees assume the existence of an ultimate standard of perfection.
Therefore, perfection must have a pinnacle.
This pinnacle is whom we call God

The Teleological Argument
The teleological argument or argument of "design" (ex fine), which claims that everything in the Universe has a purpose, which must have been caused by God:

All natural bodies in the world act toward ends.
These objects are in themselves unintelligent.
Acting toward an end is characteristic of intelligence.
Therefore, there exists an intelligent being that guides all natural bodies toward their ends.
This being is whom we call God.