The Big Big Thread of Religious Discussion

[Sithdarth]

Originally Posted by ZAK

That wouldn't be thoughts changing anything, it would be the radio signal from the chip (I assume that's how it's done). Of course, if you were to run a wire that picks up an electrical signal in the brain and attach it to anything external, that would be the destruction of my definition. Until I clarify that it can't be the brain-contained physical manifestation of thought, but the thought itself.

But its never the thought itself. With Ki its the thought that translates into a emanation of energy from your body which then causes the effect. As I understand it you can't just change external Ki or Qi it has to interact with your own. It just so happens that its possible to do that over extreme distances almost instantly.

Also, for some more basic functions you don't even need the chip. Brainball is a really nifty example of this. It picks up ambient brainwaves you give off anyway and translates them into movement. Its a great way to have fun and mastering the games requires you to master an ability to become, and stay, relaxed very quickly.

[ZAKtheGeek]

If you read closely, you'll note the Brainball machine is still picking up on electrical signals.

And you don't even have to read that closely to see that I admitted my definition doesn't apply already.

[ZAKtheGeek]

So, those things I said I'd write about.

I'll be talking about things I don't know too well, so if you do, feel free to tell me I'm on the right track and/or talkin' crazy. Hopefully this will get something interesting started.

First. Some would claim that the creation of the universe, as well as anything that happened "before" it, is not subject to the same laws and rules of the universe itself. That would defeat, for example, the argument that the universe couldn't have ever been created, by conservation of matter and energy. Okay, but wouldn't the effects of a "lawless" event like that propagate its nonsense throughout all that exists? Basically, if one thing contrary to laws happens in a setting that otherwise abides laws, then the effects of that one action would ripple through everything it affects, making it evident in many, if not all, places that something "isn't right." I don't really know how to explain this, so if someone thinks they see what I'm getting at, please try to explain it better for everyone's benefit.

Second. A somewhat less abstract matter. So, what we've observed is that the acceleration of universal expansion is positive. It seems inevitable that everything will spread out and ice over. But, think of black holes. As far as I can determine, black holes never cease to be black holes (except small ones, which Wikipedia tells me can disintegrate, although the explanation makes no sense to me). So any sizable black hole will continue to absorb matter and become more massive, thus increasing its gravitational attractiveness and bringing even more objects closer to it. You'd think that if a black hole managed to attract objects more quickly than they moved away, it could balance the outward motion in a way. Things wouldn't necessarily be moving back towards the center, but towards some point, where a particularly massive black hole is located. Also, I imagine the result of two nearby black holes attracting each other would end in a combined black hole. So all in all, it seems plausible that much of the universe's matter could eventually end up in very massive black holes, and those black holes could attract each other and fuse, eventually ending in one ridiculously massive black hole. At which point all matter in the universe would be in a singularity. Which sounds like a familiar situation.

I reiterate that I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

[Elminster_Amaur]

Well, I'm going to take a bit of a stab at the first one, and not the second, because frankly, quantum theory has never been my strong suit. I'll leave black holes and how they die, or Gravitational Units and the uses thereof to people with a better background in physic *cough*Sith*cough*

Have you ever read anything by Deepak Chopra? I have. One book. It was about Merlin. See in this book, he uses Merlin as a euphamism for an enlightened being, and Arthur as a representation of all of the rest of mankind. The "quest for the holy grail" and Alchemy, as described in this book, are merely more terms for trying to turn the impure human soul into a more pure substance. Basically, at least, this is what I assume, considering the Buddhist stance that most of the teachings Merlin gives young Arthur in the book, the only real problem that mankind has is his sense of self as a completely separate entity.

Don't worry, this is going somewhere.

In the Christian religion, several monks, and priest(less often), would have an experience that they could not define with words. So, what did they do? Attempt to define it with words, of course. These experiences would come about after days of constantly chanting a single verse of the bible in their head or walking around counting the beads of a rosary, and finally (probably the most important part) seated prayer in a private area (most likely a monk's cell). They finally termed this experience "Returning to the Kingdom of God" and said that they felt as though God were "both within them, and around them" and that at that point in time they were indeed "one with the Almighty".
*above quotes are from memory, but I'm usually fairly accurate at obscure quotes, just not attributing them to the proper names

Anyone familiar with the Buddhist religion, or at least familiar with various meditation techniques, would recognize that all of those things that the monks do (verses, rosary, prayer) are considered a form of meditation in the east (mantra, I forget the name, and meditative prayer, respectively).

Certain people in the Jewish religion have also had those same experiences, as well as people of the Muslim, Daoist, and several other faiths.

Why do they seek this state of oneness with divinity/the universe? It is an inherent need in humans. Want an example? Look at this thread. 57 pages of people either trying to help each other find that state, or athiests saying that such a state should not exist. If it weren't such an inborn need to find that peace with all of existance, athiests wouldn't be posting in this thread, because they wouldn't care except in cases where there is some personal stake (i.e. someone lied to them before, and stole all their money, so now they wish to tell everyone that religion is dumb. That doesn't happen often, since people who get their money stolen are often still quite happy to give it to the guy who's taking).

I know, I know, it's taking too long. I'll try to wrap up.

There is some incongruity sometime in the past, where the universe didn't follow its own rules for some reason or another. That's why we all seek to return to a state that does not contradict itself. Did you know that there are over 6 billion people in the world today? Well, consider that number, when you also consider that almost all of them have felt lonely for extended periods of time. How does one feel lonely with 6 billion other people out there to talk to? The key word there is other. See, as Merlin told young Arthur, "as long as there are other people in this world, there will be loneliness".

Do you understand the depth of that statement? I'm really tired right now, so I'll let you think on it, while I sleep, and if anyone wants me to answer my own question, I'll do so when I get home tomorrow.

[ZAKtheGeek]

Sorry, but like much of what I've heard from Chopra, a lot of what you're saying just sounds like various unrelated metaphysical ideas cobbled together to form an appealing statement. Like here:

There is some incongruity sometime in the past, where the universe didn't follow its own rules for some reason or another. That's why we all seek to return to a state that does not contradict itself.

You really don't explain how this other state doesn't "contradict itself" at all. This one part doesn't seem to be connected to the rest of your writing in any way; like it's just inserted so it seems like a more specific answer.

One more poke...

Did you know that there are over 6 billion people in the world today? Well, consider that number, when you also consider that almost all of them have felt lonely for extended periods of time. How does one feel lonely with 6 billion other people out there to talk to? The key word there is other. See, as Merlin told young Arthur, "as long as there are other people in this world, there will be loneliness".

Sounds like another appeal to "depth" without much actual substance. 6 billion people. It's a big number, but it's also a big planet. And, everyone is not in touch with everyone else. Factor in ideological and personality compatibility, and it starts to make sense that there might not be anyone around you'd feel like talking to at some point.

I will, however, address this:

Why do they seek this state of oneness with divinity/the universe? It is an inherent need in humans. Want an example? Look at this thread. 57 pages of people either trying to help each other find that state, or athiests saying that such a state should not exist. If it weren't such an inborn need to find that peace with all of existance, athiests wouldn't be posting in this thread, because they wouldn't care except in cases where there is some personal stake (i.e. someone lied to them before, and stole all their money, so now they wish to tell everyone that religion is dumb. That doesn't happen often, since people who get their money stolen are often still quite happy to give it to the guy who's taking).

Well, there certainly is a stake, at least that's what religions would claim. I do see the evidence as providing little reason to believe in any of this afterlife/ID/superbeing stuff, but if I were conceited enough to think I considered everything perfectly, I wouldn't be bothering with this. The fact is, I could have made a mistake or overlooked something, so I let myself be challenged and see how well I can defend my views against opposing ones.

I assume people believe for a reason (sometimes a faulty assumption...), so I ask. Maybe their reason will work for me; maybe I hadn't seen it before. Obviously I've yet to be convinced as such. But I keep trying, since the claims of these religious are quite tantalizing. Plus I like to argue anyway.

[Sithdarth]

Originally Posted by ZAKtheGeek

Second. A somewhat less abstract matter. So, what we've observed is that the acceleration of universal expansion is positive. It seems inevitable that everything will spread out and ice over. But, think of black holes. As far as I can determine, black holes never cease to be black holes (except small ones, which Wikipedia tells me can disintegrate, although the explanation makes no sense to me). So any sizable black hole will continue to absorb matter and become more massive, thus increasing its gravitational attractiveness and bringing even more objects closer to it. You'd think that if a black hole managed to attract objects more quickly than they moved away, it could balance the outward motion in a way. Things wouldn't necessarily be moving back towards the center, but towards some point, where a particularly massive black hole is located. Also, I imagine the result of two nearby black holes attracting each other would end in a combined black hole. So all in all, it seems plausible that much of the universe's matter could eventually end up in very massive black holes, and those black holes could attract each other and fuse, eventually ending in one ridiculously massive black hole. At which point all matter in the universe would be in a singularity. Which sounds like a familiar situation.

A few things:

All blackholes are basically destined to die at some point. They all lose mass to Hawking's Radiation. Its just the more massive they are the slower that rate of loss is. I think for the supermassive blackholes in the center of galaxies the time span is something on the oder of several hundred times the current age of the Universe. Don't quote me on that precisely all I can remember at the moment is that its a freaking huge number. (And of course they have to spend all that time not sucking crap up.)

Its not very accurate to say the Universe is expanding. The only thing expanding is the relatively empty space between galactic clusters. Though I think there may be some small expansion between galaxies in a cluster but I'm not sure. Anyways, galactic clusters are already so far apart that there gravity wells don't really interact. And because gravity strength doesn't really depend on concentration of matter nothing changes by concentrating all the matter of a galactic cluster into a single point. (A blackholes gravity my be infinite at the even horizon but out side of its actual gravity still depends solely on its mass. Blackhole are funny beasts that way.)

Basically the only way all matter is going to go back into a singularity is if empty space between galactic clusters suddenly decides to contract on us. That or despite current evidence the universe happens to be curved in on itself.

[42PETUNIAS]

Originally Posted by Elminster

Why do they seek this state of oneness with divinity/the universe? It is an inherent need in humans. Want an example? Look at this thread. 57 pages of people either trying to help each other find that state, or athiests saying that such a state should not exist.

I don't think anyone is really talking abou this state, but the specific existence of a god. Personally, it's obvious to me that such a state exists that can be easily attributed as "religious, oneness with the universe, etc". My opinion is that this results from chemicals or something in the brain, and when people go through certain processes like you mentioned, their brain does something funny, and the have a "religious" experience. I don't say that this state doesn't exist, but that it is caused by the brain, and not by "returning to the kingdom of god".

[Elminster_Amaur]

Originally Posted by Oedy

I don't say that this state doesn't exist, but that it is caused by the brain, and not by "returning to the kingdom of god".

You misunderstand me. I am not completely Christian any longer. In fact, I am far closer to Buddhist in practice. That "returning to the kingdom of god" state is merely the human consciousness reuniting with the rest of itself. I believe that during this state, the mind is finally in unison with every other living and nonliving thing in the universe.

Zak, before I address your points, I'd like to point this little part of my own post out to you:

Originally Posted by Me

...I'm really tired right now, so...

That would be why my post was long, rambling and seemingly disconnected.

Well, there certainly is a stake, at least that's what religions would claim.

I'm sorry, my post should have said "most athiests". See, I have found that there are very few (both thiestic and athiestic) people who will discuss this particular subject openly. Yell there own position at you, maybe, but discuss openly, no. And on to the subject of what is at stake. Inner peace. Very often, people are drawn into religions because they lack inner peace. The problem is that practicing only the physical aspects of a religion will never give you inner peace, it will only give you a small fix (i.e. As long as I go to church every week, God will protect me). Most people don't seem to realize that a person is not the random thoughts that your conscious mind spits out rapid-fire. A person can't even be considered the sum of their actions, so why would thoughts, things that, very often, last a few seconds, make up a a person? Even if there is no link between the subconscious mind and the mind that makes up everything in the universe, getting in touch with your subconscious would still go VERY far toward bringing a person inner peace. Now, say what you will about everything else in religious tradition, but meditation is probably the greatest thing that ever came out of it.

You really don't explain how this other state doesn't "contradict itself" at all. This one part doesn't seem to be connected to the rest of your writing in any way; like it's just inserted so it seems like a more specific answer.

Here, I probably assumed that you had more background than you do with Buddhism. In my explanation here, I will attempt to fill in what I left out, and also attempt to explain the lesson Merlin was trying to bestow upon young Arthur.

Understand that the following is merely an attempt to properly explain how Buddhism views the universe/multiverse. This is entirely based upon my understanding of that religion, and what their religious writings are trying to convey.

In Buddhism, it is assumed that this state that we are in is what is unnatural. The Buddhists believe that the entire multiverse is made up of one consciousness. This consciousness, for some reason or other, decided to create a delusional world to explore itself and how multiple, lesser, consciousnesses would interact with each other. It created multiple planes of existance for these consciousnesses to move through, and then shattered a portion of itself off, but left a small bit of attachment that these "new" conscious minds would not be able to sense so that it could observe what happens. (This is pretty hard to distill into a non-rambling, nonpsychotic format) Unfortunately, this super consciousness did not realize the vast amount of pain that doing this would cause it. So, now every being in the multiverse is trying to get back into a state of union with the super consciousness, but can't because they are tainted in some way and not pure enough to reunite.

That's where they get that whole rebirth cycle thing from, though they believe that after this earth you will be reborn in a heaven or a hell. That's also the reason for loneliness. See, because the "universal consciousness" longs to be completely whole again, all of its pieces feel its pain, and we have called this pain loneliness. So, Merlin was trying to tell Arthur that, until he reached a point in his spiritual journey where he no longer considered himself a separate entity, he would be lonely, even surrounded by friends, lovers and kin. I hope that was clear enough for you, because I don't know how to make it much clearer.

[ZAKtheGeek]

A few things:

All blackholes are basically destined to die at some point. They all lose mass to Hawking's Radiation. Its just the more massive they are the slower that rate of loss is. I think for the supermassive blackholes in the center of galaxies the time span is something on the oder of several hundred times the current age of the Universe. Don't quote me on that precisely all I can remember at the moment is that its a freaking huge number. (And of course they have to spend all that time not sucking crap up.)

Its not very accurate to say the Universe is expanding. The only thing expanding is the relatively empty space between galactic clusters. Though I think there may be some small expansion between galaxies in a cluster but I'm not sure. Anyways, galactic clusters are already so far apart that there gravity wells don't really interact. And because gravity strength doesn't really depend on concentration of matter nothing changes by concentrating all the matter of a galactic cluster into a single point. (A blackholes gravity my be infinite at the even horizon but out side of its actual gravity still depends solely on its mass. Blackhole are funny beasts that way.)

Basically the only way all matter is going to go back into a singularity is if empty space between galactic clusters suddenly decides to contract on us. That or despite current evidence the universe happens to be curved in on itself.

Thank you.

Although Wikipedia told me that fairly massive black holes couldn't be depleted through Hawking's radiation. Maybe it was wrong. *shrug*

Elminster_Amaur:
Okay, I understand the things you're saying. However, they still seem to me to:
1. Be fairly wild claims without much substantiation
2. Have little to do with the idea they were supposed to address

I shouldn't blame you for the latter, though, since, as I said, I haven't explained the matter very well.

[42PETUNIAS]

Originally Posted by Bastard

You misunderstand me. I am not completely Christian any longer. In fact, I am far closer to Buddhist in practice. That "returning to the kingdom of god" state is merely the human consciousness reuniting with the rest of itself. I believe that during this state, the mind is finally in unison with every other living and nonliving thing in the universe.

Actually, I think you misunderstood me. I just used "returning to the kindom of god" because it was one of the phrases you used in your post, and I was looking for a term to use. I wasn't putting a christian spin on it or anything, I was trying to speak across all religions.