Parallels between Holy Trinity, Universe and Man

litewave · 30th October 2009, 01:24 AM

The Bible says that God is the creator of the universe and also of man, whom he created in God’s image, so we could expect to find similarities between the concept of the Holy Trinity, suggested in the Bible and explicitely formulated in the Nicene creed, and the nature of matter, the origin of the universe and the nature of man according to modern science (quantum mechanics and neuropsychology). In this article I am going to outline some parallels that I have noticed.

Holy Trinity

The Holy Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
The Father is a creator and a source from which the Son is "begotten" and the Holy Spirit "proceeds."
The Son appears to be an individuality with clear, firm boundaries of form, like a human son. He is also referred to as Logos, which in Greek means Word. All things were created through the Word. It seems that when we name things we emphasize or acknowledge their existence as individual entities, real or imaginary, but distinct from other entities. By words we define things and thus signify their boundaries that distinguish them from other things.
The Holy Spirit is also referred to as Pneuma, which in Greek means Breath (or Air, Wind). Breath indicates a diffuse, amorphous form, with unclear or indefinite boundaries. Believers are said to be "filled" with the Holy Spirit. God promises to "pour out" His Spirit. While the emanation of the Son from the Father is described by the word "begotten," the emanation of the Holy Spirit is described by the word "proceeds". The word "proceeds" seems to indicate a flowing movement while "begotten" is more like being born like a child. When the Holy Spirit is described in a concrete form it just seems to be a metaphorical description, for example a dove or tongues of fire. God uses the Holy Spirit in creating too. Metaphorically, speaking of words is accompanied by the flow of breath. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 292, creation is described as the common work of the Holy Trinity where the Father is the creator/author and the Son and the Spirit are, so to speak, his hands.

If a definite form is characteristic of the Son and an indefinite form is characteristic of the Holy Spirit, what kind of form is characteristic of their source – the Father? It seems that none. Some verses in the Bible suggest that the Father is formless (or invisible):

No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. (John 1:18)
…who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. (1 Tim 6:16)

The indefinite form of the Holy Spirit seems to be an intermediary form between the definite form of the Son and the absolute indefiniteness (formlessness) of the Father.

The Trinity and its manifestation in the world can be portrayed with the image of the cross:

Manifesting God.

The upper half of the cross represents the uncreated/unmanifest/formless/transcendent aspect of reality (God) and the lower half of the cross represents the created/manifest/formed/immanent aspect of reality (world). Son and Holy Spirit are both contained in the formless source (Father), as spontaneous (uncaused) forming tendencies, and they also manifest in form (Body). Body – in the most general sense any physical or mental form – is formed in space and time under the creative influences of Son and Holy Spirit, issuing from the source. Son (Logos) defines and separates, Holy Spirit (Pneuma) diffuses and merges; their interplay evokes and transforms the universe.

Nature of matter and origin of the universe

Quantum mechanics, the physics theory describing fundamental properties of matter, discovered that all matter manifests itself as particles and waves (the wave-particle duality of matter). It depends on the situation, on its interaction with the environment, whether matter manifests its particle-like or wave-like aspect. Particles have a definite location while waves have an indefinite location expressed in probabilities. More precisely, a wave expresses probabilities that a particle is located in particular places at a particular time. So a wave in quantum mechanical sense is different from ordinary waves like those on water surface or sound waves: a quantum mechanical wave is made up of things that could exist (or only exist with some probability) while an ordinary wave is made up of things that exist. Despite being only probabilistic, quantum mechanical waves can interact (interfere) with each other like ordinary waves. In the following picture is an example of a quantum mechanical wave that expresses probabilities with which we could find a particle in particular positions on the horizontal plane (the higher the peak the higher the probability that a particle is located in that place):

Quantum mechanical wave.

A quantum mechanical wave spreads out across the whole universe but positions with high probability of the particle’s location are concentrated in a small area on the scale of an atom. Outside this area the probability of the particle’s location is very low and that’s why we don’t observe quantum uncertainty in our daily life.

The wave aspect of matter is also associated with the phenomenon of quantum entanglement. It is a strange connection between particles that are separated from each other and exhibit correlated (coordinated) behavior. These correlations occur immediately regardless of the distance between the particles, so at first sight it seems that the particles communicate with each other at a speed greater than the speed of light, which would violate Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Einstein disbelievingly called this phenomenon "spooky action at a distance." It became clear though that relativity theory is not violated by this because there is no transfer of information in quantum entanglement – information originates in separated particles simultaneously without being determined by any of the particles. Quantum entanglement can occur under special conditions, namely when the particles have already interacted before (for example when they come from the same source) and are shielded from disturbing influences of the environment. As a result of disturbing influences of the environment this phenomenon is practically nonexistent on the level of macroscopic (many-particle) objects which we encounter in daily life. (Macroscopic entanglement was accomplished in research where it manifested in superconductivity and superfluidity of materials and it is also pursued by researchers into quantum computers.)

So, particles are definite, localized, separate entities while waves are less definite entities that spread out in space and in a sense contain, connect and merge particles in their indefinite, probabilistic character. So the dual nature of matter could be described as a product of the forming influences of the defining Logos (Son) and the diffusing Pneuma (Holy Spirit), their source being in the formless Father, the source of the universe, from which they spontaneously (without a cause) emerge. The source of the universe can be physically described as an initial state below the so-called Planck scale, i.e. below the smallest possible length of space and time. The Planck boundary is not zero but there is no space, time or energy below it. However, thanks to the indefinite, probabilistic aspect of matter it is possible that this state spontaneously (without a cause) changes into a state where space, time and energy exist (emergence above the Planck scale), and this is one of the scenarios of the origin of our universe and thus all matter with its dual nature.

Man

The duality of definiteness and indefiniteness also manifests in human consciousness and brain. The cortex of the human brain consists of two hemispheres, left hemisphere and right hemisphere, and it was found that these two hemispheres process information in different but complementary ways.
The left hemisphere is said to be analytic ("analysis" means "breaking up into parts") because it focuses on differentiation of details. This differentiation also seems to give rise to our sense of individuality as something separate from others. And the left hemisphere is also specialized in processing of verbal language (words).
The right hemisphere is said to be holistic because it grasps the whole, giving us a larger picture, the context, but details within the whole fade away. It's like an intuitive diffusion of perception or thinking to a broader but less differentiated area. The right hemisphere has a role in language processing too but it captures the more fuzzy or contextual aspects of language such as metaphorical meaning, emotions and the tone of voice.
So, I would compare the consciousness of the left brain hemisphere to the Son, and the consciousness of the right brain hemisphere to the Holy Spirit. The former is a consciousness of a separate individuality and the latter is a more amorphous, less differentiated consciousness transcending the boundaries of separate individuality.
It’s like there are two persons inside man, unified in a whole, as it is portrayed here:

Complementary aspects of man.

And where is the parallel with the Father? It should be an element that is the source of the two perspectives, unifies them, combines them and uses them in creation.
The trinity of man is often described as mind, spirit and body (or the word "soul" also seems to be used interchangeably with the word "mind" or "spirit"). Mind and spirit can be understood as the two fundamental perspectives or orientations reflected in the cognitive styles of left and right brain hemispheres, respectively (I would attribute an analytic character to the mind and a holistic character to the spirit). Body could be seen as the unifying element that contains the two, but the unifying element could also be the source of mind, spirit and body. In that case the body is a form through which the trinity of man (source, mind and spirit) expresses itself and the model of man is analogous to the model of manifesting God in the first picture.

It also seems that the duality of analytic and holistic orientations manifests to some degree in a number of well-known opposing human tendencies. One of them is masculinity and femininity, where masculinity seems to be characterized by differentiation, individualism, focus in a single direction, certainty, hard boundaries (in both mental and physical sense), and femininity by connecting, solidarity, intuitive diffusion, uncertainty, soft boundaries. Regarding this, let’s take notice that in the biblical verse about the creation of man in the image of God there is also a mention of the sexual difference:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. ( Genesis 1:27)

A similar duality in tendencies can be found between science and religion (the former emphasizes strict logic and facts, while the latter emphasizes faith in invisible things and intangible things like meaning of life, love, morality), between technology and art, between structured religion (doctrines, rules, rituals) and unstructured (intuitive) spirituality, between political right (individualism, capitalism) and political left (collectivism, socialism), and between Western culture (individualism, capitalism, emphasis on science, technology and material progress, separation of God and man) and Eastern culture (collectivism, socialism, emphasis on the oneness of the universe, fusion of man and God (universe and source)).
The spreading of knowledge, products, information and diverse views during globalization and the increase of human population intensify the interaction between these tendencies on social levels ranging from global to individual. This process brings tensions and threats, but also opportunities to deepen and integrate complementary sides of human nature.

Hokulele · 30th October 2009, 01:27 AM

http://www.sydneyaquarium.com.au/Dow...Cuttlefish.jpg

fishbob · 30th October 2009, 01:34 AM

What a fascinating creature - flexible, slimy, seemingly intelligent, and prey to a great variety of other animals.

And that squid is pretty neat too.

HansMustermann · 30th October 2009, 01:41 AM

Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk.

Also, quantum mechanics still does make quantitative predictions, even if they involve probabilities. Wake me up when the Logos can be put in numbers and can make testable and useful predictions too.

Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much.

And generally, do you even understand what you're talking about there, or is it just BS bingo? Just because the propagation of something... which you don't understand, _sounds_ like how you _imagine_ the propagation of something... which isn't even defined, doesn't really prove anything.

Hokulele · 30th October 2009, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much.

John, definitely John. He is pretty much the only NT writer concerned with Logos.

[galloping derail]

One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio".

[/galloping derail]

Lothian · 30th October 2009, 02:10 AM

Litewave. That is a fascinating article. I fear however that I am not qualified to comment.

However I am aware of another expert in the field, Gene Ray, who may be able to give a more valued critique. He can be contacted at oray612959@earthlink.net

Ethnikos · 30th October 2009, 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

[galloping derail]
One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio".
[/galloping derail]

The Bible, meaning the Greek New Testament part, uses that particular form of the word to mean something like, a message.
I don't men to denigrate Seife, who seems pretty cool.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk.

Maybe not when it comes to consciousness.

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much.

The Bible was not written for scientists but for ordinary people. So it's understandable that it doesn't give technical details but rather general principles.

HansMustermann · 30th October 2009, 02:37 AM

Actually especially when you apply mis-conceptions about QM to consciousness, that's your hint to stick to what you understand.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 02:44 AM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio".

The concept of Logos was already present in Greek philosophy before the gospels, as an ordering/structuring/reasoning principle.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Actually especially when you apply mis-conceptions about QM to consciousness, that's your hint to stick to what you understand.

What misconceptions about QM?

MRC_Hans · 30th October 2009, 03:22 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

Maybe not when it comes to consciousness.

'Maybe'? We are already down to 'maybe'? Not exactly an impressive argumentation, that.

Quote:

The Bible was not written for scientists but for ordinary people. So it's understandable that it doesn't give technical details but rather general principles.

Indeed! Which unfortunately also makes any attempts to correlate its content with technical details moot.

Hans

litewave · 30th October 2009, 03:49 AM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

'Maybe'? We are already down to 'maybe'? Not exactly an impressive argumentation, that.

I just pointed out meaningful parallels.

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Indeed! Which unfortunately also makes any attempts to correlate its content with technical details moot.

Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two).
For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world:
yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit
yang (masculinity) = Son
Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father
Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti):
Brahma (creator) = Father
Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son
Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit

Lothian · 30th October 2009, 03:59 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

I just pointed out meaningful parallels.

You are using the word 'meaningful' in a way I have never seen it used before.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 04:10 AM

Originally Posted by Lothian

You are using the word 'meaningful' in a way I have never seen it used before.

No wonder, it's different from Gene Ray.

Aepervius · 30th October 2009, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two).

Give me enough time and i can make a correlation between the trinity and thor, zeus, and gnome. You can pretty much correlate a lot of things to anything, if you dig enough.

Lothian · 30th October 2009, 04:39 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

No wonder, it's different from Gene Ray.

Good so you can explain in simple terms what is meaningful about the 'parallels'

MRC_Hans · 30th October 2009, 04:58 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

I just pointed out meaningful parallels.

You did? Which ones?

Quote:

Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two).

Exactly my point: Generalities are easy to correlate, and thus moot, because any corelations are just evidence that they are ... generalities.

Quote:

For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world:
yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit
yang (masculinity) = Son
Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father
Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti):
Brahma (creator) = Father
Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son
Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit

And one could point to similar dualities in Nordic mythology, Greek mythology, Egyptian mythology, and no doubt many others.

- So thank you for proving my point that generalities can be correlated to suit any purpose.

Hans

litewave · 30th October 2009, 05:10 AM

Originally Posted by Lothian

Good so you can explain in simple terms what is meaningful about the 'parallels'

They all refer to the definite, the partially indefinite and their absolutely indefinite source, in relation to God, matter and man.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 05:12 AM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

- So thank you for proving my point that generalities can be correlated to suit any purpose.

Not any purpose but nature of God.

Lothian · 30th October 2009, 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

They all refer to the definite, the partially indefinite and their absolutely indefinite source, in relation to God, matter and man.

So you can explain in simple terms in what way is this meaningful

MRC_Hans · 30th October 2009, 05:19 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

Not any purpose but nature of God.

Except that you managed to correlate with practically any known god, and I don't assume your purpose was to argue that all gods are equal?

Hans

litewave · 30th October 2009, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Except that you managed to correlate with practically any known god, and I don't assume your purpose was to argue that all gods are equal?

Hans

Different religions try to describe the same God.

Belz... · 30th October 2009, 05:57 AM

Not Buddhism, though.

Dave Rogers · 30th October 2009, 05:59 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

So, particles are definite, localized, separate entities while waves are less definite entities that spread out in space and in a sense contain, connect and merge particles in their indefinite, probabilistic character. So the dual nature of matter could be described as a product of the forming influences of the defining Logos (Son) and the diffusing Pneuma (Holy Spirit), their source being in the formless Father, the source of the universe, from which they spontaneously (without a cause) emerge.

I have very little to say about a post that seems to focus on the uses of equivocation to draw spurious parallels between two entirely unrelated areas, but I'd like to draw attention to the above couple of sentences. The idea being suggested here is that the dual nature of matter is analogous to the triple nature of the Trinity, and this is accomplished by the entirely spurious insertion of a third entity taken from scripture into a discussion of matter's inherently dual nature. In other words, this is an attempt to justify the identity 2=3.

Dave

litewave · 30th October 2009, 06:27 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

Not Buddhism, though.

Even the Hindu trinity is actually quite rare. Eastern religions generally emphasize the undifferentiated/impersonal/oneness aspect of reality.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

The idea being suggested here is that the dual nature of matter is analogous to the triple nature of the Trinity, and this is accomplished by the entirely spurious insertion of a third entity taken from scripture into a discussion of matter's inherently dual nature. In other words, this is an attempt to justify the identity 2=3.

The third element in QM is the sub-Planck matter or void, from which the particles and waves arise. This corresponds to the undefined Father who generates the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Dave Rogers · 30th October 2009, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

The third element in QM is the sub-Planck matter or void, from which the particles and waves arise.

[citation needed]

Dave

litewave · 30th October 2009, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

[citation needed]

Dave

Victor Stenger - A scenario for a natural origin of our universe

Robin · 30th October 2009, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

I just pointed out meaningful parallels.

Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two).
For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world:
yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit
yang (masculinity) = Son
Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father
Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti):
Brahma (creator) = Father
Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son
Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit

The Hindu trinity is "name, form and action", it doesn't really seem a parallel to me, however the Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad does go on to say something very close to the pre-amble to the St John Gospel.

There is also the idea of Matarisva - the wind - the moving spirit which has parallels to the idea of the Holy Spirit as wind or breath.

But of course there is nothing very profound about this - these cultures were not firewalled from each other.

Dave Rogers · 30th October 2009, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

Victor Stenger - A scenario for a natural origin of our universe

Which is a scenario for the beginning of the universe based on quantum mechanics, rather than a fundamental part of the theory of quantum mechanics. So you've chosen two fundamental properties of matter, then taken an aspect of a specific theory and elevated it to the status of a third fundamental property of matter. That, not to put too fine a point on it, is cheating.

What, in effect, you are saying, is that if you get to choose three aspects of a theory arbitrarily, then there are three of them, and that's a bit like the Trinity. You've glossed over, for example, the existence of only two types of electrical charge, six different types of quark, or indeed any other number you could think of in quantum mechanics that doesn't happen to be three, and you've even had to fiddle the books to find one that does.

Please mark me down as 'unimpressed'.

Dave

litewave · 30th October 2009, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Which is a scenario for the beginning of the universe based on quantum mechanics, rather than a fundamental part of the theory of quantum mechanics. So you've chosen two fundamental properties of matter, then taken an aspect of a specific theory and elevated it to the status of a third fundamental property of matter. That, not to put too fine a point on it, is cheating.

What, in effect, you are saying, is that if you get to choose three aspects of a theory arbitrarily, then there are three of them, and that's a bit like the Trinity. You've glossed over, for example, the existence of only two types of electrical charge, six different types of quark, or indeed any other number you could think of in quantum mechanics that doesn't happen to be three, and you've even had to fiddle the books to find one that does.

Please mark me down as 'unimpressed'.

Dave

I've chosen three fundamental features of reality. Charges, quarks and other elementary particles are secondary stuff that is all encompassed by the Trinity.

Lukraak_Sisser · 30th October 2009, 08:51 AM

When I look at the quantum wave picture I'm always impressed how clearly it simulates the meeting of the sparks of Muspelheim meeting the Ice of Nifelheim. And the biggest spike in the middle clearly shows that Ymir truly was the largest of giants ever to exist.

And the three quantum states are clearly nothing but an indication of the existence of Odin, Vili and Ve, which just goes to show that we really should return to the true worship of the Norse Panteon.

After all the vikings only lost their power over europe when they converted to christianity. And QM now gives us the logical reason to return to the true way to worship the gods.

Dave Rogers · 30th October 2009, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by litewave

I've chosen three fundamental features of reality.

Your three 'fundamental' features of reality are: its wavelike nature; its particle-like nature; and the hypothetical unstable absence of matter at a time an unobservably short interval after the origin of the universe in one theory which is acknowledged by its originator to be no more than one of many possible universe origin theories. One of these things is not like the others.

And you've done the same thing elsewhere, citing dualities as examples of trinity-like aspects.

Quote:

And where is the parallel with the Father? It should be an element that is the source of the two perspectives, unifies them, combines them and uses them in creation.

The trick you've played to do this is to say that the trinity is aspect A, aspect B, and the fact that there are two aspects. Again, you're arguing in several different ways that 2=3. Okay then, so there should in fact be four aspects to everything, because there are four aspects to the Trinity: the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, and the Trinity itself. So, in order to represent the Trinity truly, any physical phenomenon should have four separate aspects, no?

Originally Posted by litewave

Charges, quarks and other elementary particles are secondary stuff that is all encompassed by the Trinity.

[citation needed]

Dave

Ryan O'Dine · 30th October 2009, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk.

Untrue.

Look up Bose–Einstein condensate^WP.
Look up Superfluid^WP.
Look up Superconductivity^WP.

(Though how any of that could relate to litewave's OP, I haven't the faintest.)

ETA: And that, my friends, is how you make a thousandth post. I hope you took notes.

Ryan O'Dine · 30th October 2009, 09:36 AM

Actually, this thread reminds me of a character (an electrical engineer / pop religion writer) who believed that the 10 dimensions posited in certain forms of ~~quantum consmology~~ (ETA: oops, meant superstring theory) must surely have corresponded to the ten attributes (sefirot) of the Jewish God.

Unfortunately for the writer, M-theory came along and decided there were probably 11 dimensions.

Lesson: The physics of tomorrow may look very different from the physics of today.

madurobob · 30th October 2009, 09:58 AM

This thread reminds me of.. oh a half dozen debates I've had in the past with believers trying to align their religious text with current science. My response is always the same:

"So?"

All that we see is a modest (and often flawed) understanding of the science and an ability to wring some tortured parallels out of some fictional text. What are we supposed to take away from this line of discussion? That the religious text is actually a secret divinely coded book of science? Of course not. No analysis or even meta-analysis of the text yields any scientific truth or any testable prediction.

Its all just a futile exercise in literary pattern recognition. Anyone with a modest knowledge of contemporary physics and a small library could come up with something exactly similar based on a variety of books. It is a useless task in terms of finding any deeper meaning the text.

litewave · 30th October 2009, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Your three 'fundamental' features of reality are: its wavelike nature; its particle-like nature; and the hypothetical unstable absence of matter at a time an unobservably short interval after the origin of the universe in one theory which is acknowledged by its originator to be no more than one of many possible universe origin theories. One of these things is not like the others.

The theory in Victor Stenger's article is the only theory I know that answers the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?". That's why I regard it as more fundamental than other theories about the origin of the universe.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

The trick you've played to do this is to say that the trinity is aspect A, aspect B, and the fact that there are two aspects.

The third aspect is indeed unobservable, but it is the source of the other two aspects. That's how the Holy Trinity is described in Christianity.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Charges, quarks and other elementary particles are secondary stuff that is all encompassed by the Trinity.
[citation needed]

No citation this time, because it's general knowledge. All particles are also waves, whether they are quarks, electrons, photons or whatever.

Hokulele · 30th October 2009, 10:34 AM

This may not be Timecube, but it certainly sounds like the Secret of the Universe.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=140655

litewave · 30th October 2009, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by madurobob

"So?"

In the last part of my article I wrote how all this relates to humans, namely how certain conflicting human tendencies are actually complementary and so it would be useful to integrate them. This also suggests a broader concept of our identity. Usually we regard our identity as something separate from others - that's the Christian or generally Western view, but our identity is also connected and ultimately merged with all other people and things, a view emphasized by Eastern religions and by mystics in general.

Have a look at this speech by neuroscientist Jill Bolte Taylor, who experienced that mystical aspect of her identity when she suffered a stroke in the left hemisphere of her brain:

video

transcript

30th October 2009, 01:24 AM	#1
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Parallels between Holy Trinity, Universe and Man The Bible says that God is the creator of the universe and also of man, whom he created in God’s image, so we could expect to find similarities between the concept of the Holy Trinity, suggested in the Bible and explicitely formulated in the Nicene creed, and the nature of matter, the origin of the universe and the nature of man according to modern science (quantum mechanics and neuropsychology). In this article I am going to outline some parallels that I have noticed. Holy Trinity The Holy Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Father is a creator and a source from which the Son is "begotten" and the Holy Spirit "proceeds." The Son appears to be an individuality with clear, firm boundaries of form, like a human son. He is also referred to as Logos, which in Greek means Word. All things were created through the Word. It seems that when we name things we emphasize or acknowledge their existence as individual entities, real or imaginary, but distinct from other entities. By words we define things and thus signify their boundaries that distinguish them from other things. The Holy Spirit is also referred to as Pneuma, which in Greek means Breath (or Air, Wind). Breath indicates a diffuse, amorphous form, with unclear or indefinite boundaries. Believers are said to be "filled" with the Holy Spirit. God promises to "pour out" His Spirit. While the emanation of the Son from the Father is described by the word "begotten," the emanation of the Holy Spirit is described by the word "proceeds". The word "proceeds" seems to indicate a flowing movement while "begotten" is more like being born like a child. When the Holy Spirit is described in a concrete form it just seems to be a metaphorical description, for example a dove or tongues of fire. God uses the Holy Spirit in creating too. Metaphorically, speaking of words is accompanied by the flow of breath. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 292, creation is described as the common work of the Holy Trinity where the Father is the creator/author and the Son and the Spirit are, so to speak, his hands. If a definite form is characteristic of the Son and an indefinite form is characteristic of the Holy Spirit, what kind of form is characteristic of their source – the Father? It seems that none. Some verses in the Bible suggest that the Father is formless (or invisible): No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. (John 1:18) …who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. (1 Tim 6:16) The indefinite form of the Holy Spirit seems to be an intermediary form between the definite form of the Son and the absolute indefiniteness (formlessness) of the Father. The Trinity and its manifestation in the world can be portrayed with the image of the cross: Manifesting God. The upper half of the cross represents the uncreated/unmanifest/formless/transcendent aspect of reality (God) and the lower half of the cross represents the created/manifest/formed/immanent aspect of reality (world). Son and Holy Spirit are both contained in the formless source (Father), as spontaneous (uncaused) forming tendencies, and they also manifest in form (Body). Body – in the most general sense any physical or mental form – is formed in space and time under the creative influences of Son and Holy Spirit, issuing from the source. Son (Logos) defines and separates, Holy Spirit (Pneuma) diffuses and merges; their interplay evokes and transforms the universe. Nature of matter and origin of the universe Quantum mechanics, the physics theory describing fundamental properties of matter, discovered that all matter manifests itself as particles and waves (the wave-particle duality of matter). It depends on the situation, on its interaction with the environment, whether matter manifests its particle-like or wave-like aspect. Particles have a definite location while waves have an indefinite location expressed in probabilities. More precisely, a wave expresses probabilities that a particle is located in particular places at a particular time. So a wave in quantum mechanical sense is different from ordinary waves like those on water surface or sound waves: a quantum mechanical wave is made up of things that could exist (or only exist with some probability) while an ordinary wave is made up of things that exist. Despite being only probabilistic, quantum mechanical waves can interact (interfere) with each other like ordinary waves. In the following picture is an example of a quantum mechanical wave that expresses probabilities with which we could find a particle in particular positions on the horizontal plane (the higher the peak the higher the probability that a particle is located in that place): Quantum mechanical wave. A quantum mechanical wave spreads out across the whole universe but positions with high probability of the particle’s location are concentrated in a small area on the scale of an atom. Outside this area the probability of the particle’s location is very low and that’s why we don’t observe quantum uncertainty in our daily life. The wave aspect of matter is also associated with the phenomenon of quantum entanglement. It is a strange connection between particles that are separated from each other and exhibit correlated (coordinated) behavior. These correlations occur immediately regardless of the distance between the particles, so at first sight it seems that the particles communicate with each other at a speed greater than the speed of light, which would violate Einstein’s special theory of relativity. Einstein disbelievingly called this phenomenon "spooky action at a distance." It became clear though that relativity theory is not violated by this because there is no transfer of information in quantum entanglement – information originates in separated particles simultaneously without being determined by any of the particles. Quantum entanglement can occur under special conditions, namely when the particles have already interacted before (for example when they come from the same source) and are shielded from disturbing influences of the environment. As a result of disturbing influences of the environment this phenomenon is practically nonexistent on the level of macroscopic (many-particle) objects which we encounter in daily life. (Macroscopic entanglement was accomplished in research where it manifested in superconductivity and superfluidity of materials and it is also pursued by researchers into quantum computers.) So, particles are definite, localized, separate entities while waves are less definite entities that spread out in space and in a sense contain, connect and merge particles in their indefinite, probabilistic character. So the dual nature of matter could be described as a product of the forming influences of the defining Logos (Son) and the diffusing Pneuma (Holy Spirit), their source being in the formless Father, the source of the universe, from which they spontaneously (without a cause) emerge. The source of the universe can be physically described as an initial state below the so-called Planck scale, i.e. below the smallest possible length of space and time. The Planck boundary is not zero but there is no space, time or energy below it. However, thanks to the indefinite, probabilistic aspect of matter it is possible that this state spontaneously (without a cause) changes into a state where space, time and energy exist (emergence above the Planck scale), and this is one of the scenarios of the origin of our universe and thus all matter with its dual nature. Man The duality of definiteness and indefiniteness also manifests in human consciousness and brain. The cortex of the human brain consists of two hemispheres, left hemisphere and right hemisphere, and it was found that these two hemispheres process information in different but complementary ways. The left hemisphere is said to be analytic ("analysis" means "breaking up into parts") because it focuses on differentiation of details. This differentiation also seems to give rise to our sense of individuality as something separate from others. And the left hemisphere is also specialized in processing of verbal language (words). The right hemisphere is said to be holistic because it grasps the whole, giving us a larger picture, the context, but details within the whole fade away. It's like an intuitive diffusion of perception or thinking to a broader but less differentiated area. The right hemisphere has a role in language processing too but it captures the more fuzzy or contextual aspects of language such as metaphorical meaning, emotions and the tone of voice. So, I would compare the consciousness of the left brain hemisphere to the Son, and the consciousness of the right brain hemisphere to the Holy Spirit. The former is a consciousness of a separate individuality and the latter is a more amorphous, less differentiated consciousness transcending the boundaries of separate individuality. It’s like there are two persons inside man, unified in a whole, as it is portrayed here: Complementary aspects of man. And where is the parallel with the Father? It should be an element that is the source of the two perspectives, unifies them, combines them and uses them in creation. The trinity of man is often described as mind, spirit and body (or the word "soul" also seems to be used interchangeably with the word "mind" or "spirit"). Mind and spirit can be understood as the two fundamental perspectives or orientations reflected in the cognitive styles of left and right brain hemispheres, respectively (I would attribute an analytic character to the mind and a holistic character to the spirit). Body could be seen as the unifying element that contains the two, but the unifying element could also be the source of mind, spirit and body. In that case the body is a form through which the trinity of man (source, mind and spirit) expresses itself and the model of man is analogous to the model of manifesting God in the first picture. It also seems that the duality of analytic and holistic orientations manifests to some degree in a number of well-known opposing human tendencies. One of them is masculinity and femininity, where masculinity seems to be characterized by differentiation, individualism, focus in a single direction, certainty, hard boundaries (in both mental and physical sense), and femininity by connecting, solidarity, intuitive diffusion, uncertainty, soft boundaries. Regarding this, let’s take notice that in the biblical verse about the creation of man in the image of God there is also a mention of the sexual difference: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. ( Genesis 1:27) A similar duality in tendencies can be found between science and religion (the former emphasizes strict logic and facts, while the latter emphasizes faith in invisible things and intangible things like meaning of life, love, morality), between technology and art, between structured religion (doctrines, rules, rituals) and unstructured (intuitive) spirituality, between political right (individualism, capitalism) and political left (collectivism, socialism), and between Western culture (individualism, capitalism, emphasis on science, technology and material progress, separation of God and man) and Eastern culture (collectivism, socialism, emphasis on the oneness of the universe, fusion of man and God (universe and source)). The spreading of knowledge, products, information and diverse views during globalization and the increase of human population intensify the interaction between these tendencies on social levels ranging from global to individual. This process brings tensions and threats, but also opportunities to deepen and integrate complementary sides of human nature.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 01:27 AM	#2
Hokulele Official Nemesis TLA Dictatrix Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: To be determined. Posts: 21,351	http://www.sydneyaquarium.com.au/Dow...Cuttlefish.jpg
	__________________ You, madam, do not appear to be bound by the physical laws that govern the rest of us. - JoeyDonuts You should listen to the evil one - Don't try to understand it, just experience it. - AJM8125

30th October 2009, 01:34 AM	#3
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 4,758	What a fascinating creature - flexible, slimy, seemingly intelligent, and prey to a great variety of other animals. And that squid is pretty neat too.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder Arlen Specter to Alberto Gonzales: "You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General." I hate bigots.

30th October 2009, 01:47 AM	#5
Hokulele Official Nemesis TLA Dictatrix Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: To be determined. Posts: 21,351	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much. John, definitely John. He is pretty much the only NT writer concerned with Logos. [galloping derail] One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio". [/galloping derail]
	__________________ You, madam, do not appear to be bound by the physical laws that govern the rest of us. - JoeyDonuts You should listen to the evil one - Don't try to understand it, just experience it. - AJM8125 Last edited by Hokulele; 30th October 2009 at 02:12 AM. Reason: Crap, missed a close quote. My computer programming days are far behind me.

30th October 2009, 02:10 AM	#6
Lothian (edited for breach of rule 10) Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: A small, blue-green world in one of the less fashionable sectors of the galaxy Posts: 7,033	Litewave. That is a fascinating article. I fear however that I am not qualified to comment. However I am aware of another expert in the field, Gene Ray, who may be able to give a more valued critique. He can be contacted at oray612959@earthlink.net
	__________________ "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly half way between. It is possible for one side simply to be wrong." Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne JREF Forum Campaign Group Last edited by Lothian; 30th October 2009 at 02:13 AM.

30th October 2009, 01:41 AM	#4
HansMustermann Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,100	Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk. Also, quantum mechanics still does make quantitative predictions, even if they involve probabilities. Wake me up when the Logos can be put in numbers and can make testable and useful predictions too. Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much. And generally, do you even understand what you're talking about there, or is it just BS bingo? Just because the propagation of something... which you don't understand, _sounds_ like how you _imagine_ the propagation of something... which isn't even defined, doesn't really prove anything.

30th October 2009, 02:27 AM	#7
Ethnikos Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: USA Posts: 1,712	Originally Posted by Hokulele [galloping derail] One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio". [/galloping derail] The Bible, meaning the Greek New Testament part, uses that particular form of the word to mean something like, a message. I don't men to denigrate Seife, who seems pretty cool.
	__________________ God did not spare the angels who sinned, but threw them into hell and locked them up in chains in utter darkness, to be kept until the judgment Last edited by Ethnikos; 30th October 2009 at 02:30 AM.

30th October 2009, 02:33 AM	#8
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk. Maybe not when it comes to consciousness. Originally Posted by HansMustermann Third, verses please. With chapter and number. If you want to claim that the Logos explains QM or has any relevance to the Planck lenght, I want to know exactly what verses say that. Is there some verse that reads "and lo, below a tiny scale the photon used to measure it would cause a tiny black hole"? Just inventing bullcrap doesn't impress me much. The Bible was not written for scientists but for ordinary people. So it's understandable that it doesn't give technical details but rather general principles.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 02:37 AM	#9
HansMustermann Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,100	Actually especially when you apply mis-conceptions about QM to consciousness, that's your hint to stick to what you understand.

30th October 2009, 02:44 AM	#10
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Hokulele One of my favorite books, Charles Seife's Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea, posits that the logos referred to in John shouldn't be translated as "word", as litewave does here, but as "ratio". The concept of Logos was already present in Greek philosophy before the gospels, as an ordering/structuring/reasoning principle.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 02:46 AM	#11
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Actually especially when you apply mis-conceptions about QM to consciousness, that's your hint to stick to what you understand. What misconceptions about QM?
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 03:22 AM	#12
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: N55.47'36" E12.30'21" Posts: 10,485	Originally Posted by litewave Maybe not when it comes to consciousness. 'Maybe'? We are already down to 'maybe'? Not exactly an impressive argumentation, that. Quote: The Bible was not written for scientists but for ordinary people. So it's understandable that it doesn't give technical details but rather general principles. Indeed! Which unfortunately also makes any attempts to correlate its content with technical details moot. Hans
	__________________ The time is always right to do what is right. (Martin Luther King JR.)

30th October 2009, 03:49 AM	#13
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by MRC_Hans 'Maybe'? We are already down to 'maybe'? Not exactly an impressive argumentation, that. I just pointed out meaningful parallels. Originally Posted by MRC_Hans Indeed! Which unfortunately also makes any attempts to correlate its content with technical details moot. Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two). For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world: yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit yang (masculinity) = Son Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti): Brahma (creator) = Father Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 03:59 AM	#14
Lothian (edited for breach of rule 10) Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: A small, blue-green world in one of the less fashionable sectors of the galaxy Posts: 7,033	Originally Posted by litewave I just pointed out meaningful parallels. You are using the word 'meaningful' in a way I have never seen it used before.
	__________________ "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly half way between. It is possible for one side simply to be wrong." Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne JREF Forum Campaign Group

30th October 2009, 04:10 AM	#15
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Lothian You are using the word 'meaningful' in a way I have never seen it used before. No wonder, it's different from Gene Ray.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 04:21 AM	#16
Aepervius Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,391	Quote: Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two). Give me enough time and i can make a correlation between the trinity and thor, zeus, and gnome. You can pretty much correlate a lot of things to anything, if you dig enough.
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat One doesn't necessarily need evidence to back up arguments. Interresting Ian own's words. Plus that is an old skeptic game, to ask for evidence. Historian's take on skepticism

30th October 2009, 04:39 AM	#17
Lothian (edited for breach of rule 10) Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: A small, blue-green world in one of the less fashionable sectors of the galaxy Posts: 7,033	Originally Posted by litewave No wonder, it's different from Gene Ray. Good so you can explain in simple terms what is meaningful about the 'parallels'
	__________________ "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly half way between. It is possible for one side simply to be wrong." Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne JREF Forum Campaign Group

30th October 2009, 04:58 AM	#18
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: N55.47'36" E12.30'21" Posts: 10,485	Originally Posted by litewave I just pointed out meaningful parallels. You did? Which ones? Quote: Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two). Exactly my point: Generalities are easy to correlate, and thus moot, because any corelations are just evidence that they are ... generalities. Quote: For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world: yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit yang (masculinity) = Son Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti): Brahma (creator) = Father Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit And one could point to similar dualities in Nordic mythology, Greek mythology, Egyptian mythology, and no doubt many others. - So thank you for proving my point that generalities can be correlated to suit any purpose. Hans
	__________________ The time is always right to do what is right. (Martin Luther King JR.)

30th October 2009, 05:10 AM	#19
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Lothian Good so you can explain in simple terms what is meaningful about the 'parallels' They all refer to the definite, the partially indefinite and their absolutely indefinite source, in relation to God, matter and man.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 05:12 AM	#20
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by MRC_Hans - So thank you for proving my point that generalities can be correlated to suit any purpose. Not any purpose but nature of God.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 05:16 AM	#21
Lothian (edited for breach of rule 10) Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: A small, blue-green world in one of the less fashionable sectors of the galaxy Posts: 7,033	Originally Posted by litewave They all refer to the definite, the partially indefinite and their absolutely indefinite source, in relation to God, matter and man. So you can explain in simple terms in what way is this meaningful
	__________________ "When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly half way between. It is possible for one side simply to be wrong." Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne JREF Forum Campaign Group Last edited by Lothian; 30th October 2009 at 05:19 AM.

30th October 2009, 05:19 AM	#22
MRC_Hans Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: N55.47'36" E12.30'21" Posts: 10,485	Originally Posted by litewave Not any purpose but nature of God. Except that you managed to correlate with practically any known god, and I don't assume your purpose was to argue that all gods are equal? Hans
	__________________ The time is always right to do what is right. (Martin Luther King JR.)

30th October 2009, 05:33 AM	#23
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by MRC_Hans Except that you managed to correlate with practically any known god, and I don't assume your purpose was to argue that all gods are equal? Hans Different religions try to describe the same God.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 05:57 AM	#24
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a multiverse of my own creation Posts: 16,226	Not Buddhism, though.
	__________________ - "Crom laughs at your four winds. He laughs from his mountain." - "My god is stronger. He is the everlasting sky! Your god lives underneath him." -- Conan and Subotai, Conan the Barbarian Current avatar from Jaestudio.com

30th October 2009, 05:59 AM	#25
Dave Rogers The Unbanned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Notlob Posts: 8,013	Originally Posted by litewave So, particles are definite, localized, separate entities while waves are less definite entities that spread out in space and in a sense contain, connect and merge particles in their indefinite, probabilistic character. So the dual nature of matter could be described as a product of the forming influences of the defining Logos (Son) and the diffusing Pneuma (Holy Spirit), their source being in the formless Father, the source of the universe, from which they spontaneously (without a cause) emerge. I have very little to say about a post that seems to focus on the uses of equivocation to draw spurious parallels between two entirely unrelated areas, but I'd like to draw attention to the above couple of sentences. The idea being suggested here is that the dual nature of matter is analogous to the triple nature of the Trinity, and this is accomplished by the entirely spurious insertion of a third entity taken from scripture into a discussion of matter's inherently dual nature. In other words, this is an attempt to justify the identity 2=3. Dave
	__________________ "I guess for Truthers the great thing about Google is that it abolishes context automatically, thus saving your precious reserves of stupid for more important tasks." - Dr. Adequate GENERATION 6: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

30th October 2009, 06:27 AM	#26
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Belz... Not Buddhism, though. Even the Hindu trinity is actually quite rare. Eastern religions generally emphasize the undifferentiated/impersonal/oneness aspect of reality.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 06:32 AM	#27
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers The idea being suggested here is that the dual nature of matter is analogous to the triple nature of the Trinity, and this is accomplished by the entirely spurious insertion of a third entity taken from scripture into a discussion of matter's inherently dual nature. In other words, this is an attempt to justify the identity 2=3. The third element in QM is the sub-Planck matter or void, from which the particles and waves arise. This corresponds to the undefined Father who generates the Son and the Holy Spirit.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 07:19 AM	#28
Dave Rogers The Unbanned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Notlob Posts: 8,013	Originally Posted by litewave The third element in QM is the sub-Planck matter or void, from which the particles and waves arise. [citation needed] Dave
	__________________ "I guess for Truthers the great thing about Google is that it abolishes context automatically, thus saving your precious reserves of stupid for more important tasks." - Dr. Adequate GENERATION 6: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

30th October 2009, 07:35 AM	#29
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers [citation needed] Dave Victor Stenger - A scenario for a natural origin of our universe
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 07:48 AM	#30
Robin Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,778	Originally Posted by litewave I just pointed out meaningful parallels. Nevertheless, the correlations between QM and Trinity are there. And since they also correlate with the two cognitive styles, even ancient people could create cosmological visions that are based on duality or trinity (where the third element unifies the two). For example in Taoism there is the yin-yang duality through which the indescribable Tao manifests in the world: yin (femininity) = Holy Spirit yang (masculinity) = Son Tao (source, undifferentiated) = Father Or the Trinity in Hinduism (Trimurti): Brahma (creator) = Father Vishnu (maintainer, preserver) = Son Shiva (destroyer, transformer) = Holy Spirit The Hindu trinity is "name, form and action", it doesn't really seem a parallel to me, however the Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad does go on to say something very close to the pre-amble to the St John Gospel. There is also the idea of Matarisva - the wind - the moving spirit which has parallels to the idea of the Holy Spirit as wind or breath. But of course there is nothing very profound about this - these cultures were not firewalled from each other.
Robin Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,778	__________________ If any one alters the definitions, I cannot pretend to argue with him, until I know the meaning he assigns to these terms. - David Hume 1711-1776

30th October 2009, 08:18 AM	#31
Dave Rogers The Unbanned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Notlob Posts: 8,013	Originally Posted by litewave Victor Stenger - A scenario for a natural origin of our universe Which is a scenario for the beginning of the universe based on quantum mechanics, rather than a fundamental part of the theory of quantum mechanics. So you've chosen two fundamental properties of matter, then taken an aspect of a specific theory and elevated it to the status of a third fundamental property of matter. That, not to put too fine a point on it, is cheating. What, in effect, you are saying, is that if you get to choose three aspects of a theory arbitrarily, then there are three of them, and that's a bit like the Trinity. You've glossed over, for example, the existence of only two types of electrical charge, six different types of quark, or indeed any other number you could think of in quantum mechanics that doesn't happen to be three, and you've even had to fiddle the books to find one that does. Please mark me down as 'unimpressed'. Dave
	__________________ "I guess for Truthers the great thing about Google is that it abolishes context automatically, thus saving your precious reserves of stupid for more important tasks." - Dr. Adequate GENERATION 6: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

30th October 2009, 08:31 AM	#32
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers Which is a scenario for the beginning of the universe based on quantum mechanics, rather than a fundamental part of the theory of quantum mechanics. So you've chosen two fundamental properties of matter, then taken an aspect of a specific theory and elevated it to the status of a third fundamental property of matter. That, not to put too fine a point on it, is cheating. What, in effect, you are saying, is that if you get to choose three aspects of a theory arbitrarily, then there are three of them, and that's a bit like the Trinity. You've glossed over, for example, the existence of only two types of electrical charge, six different types of quark, or indeed any other number you could think of in quantum mechanics that doesn't happen to be three, and you've even had to fiddle the books to find one that does. Please mark me down as 'unimpressed'. Dave I've chosen three fundamental features of reality. Charges, quarks and other elementary particles are secondary stuff that is all encompassed by the Trinity.
litewave Scholar Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 70

30th October 2009, 08:51 AM	#33
Lukraak_Sisser Scholar Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 97	When I look at the quantum wave picture I'm always impressed how clearly it simulates the meeting of the sparks of Muspelheim meeting the Ice of Nifelheim. And the biggest spike in the middle clearly shows that Ymir truly was the largest of giants ever to exist. And the three quantum states are clearly nothing but an indication of the existence of Odin, Vili and Ve, which just goes to show that we really should return to the true worship of the Norse Panteon. After all the vikings only lost their power over europe when they converted to christianity. And QM now gives us the logical reason to return to the true way to worship the gods.
Lukraak_Sisser Scholar Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 97

30th October 2009, 09:06 AM	#34
Dave Rogers The Unbanned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Notlob Posts: 8,013	Originally Posted by litewave I've chosen three fundamental features of reality. Your three 'fundamental' features of reality are: its wavelike nature; its particle-like nature; and the hypothetical unstable absence of matter at a time an unobservably short interval after the origin of the universe in one theory which is acknowledged by its originator to be no more than one of many possible universe origin theories. One of these things is not like the others. And you've done the same thing elsewhere, citing dualities as examples of trinity-like aspects. Quote: And where is the parallel with the Father? It should be an element that is the source of the two perspectives, unifies them, combines them and uses them in creation. The trick you've played to do this is to say that the trinity is aspect A, aspect B, and the fact that there are two aspects. Again, you're arguing in several different ways that 2=3. Okay then, so there should in fact be four aspects to everything, because there are four aspects to the Trinity: the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, and the Trinity itself. So, in order to represent the Trinity truly, any physical phenomenon should have four separate aspects, no? Originally Posted by litewave Charges, quarks and other elementary particles are secondary stuff that is all encompassed by the Trinity. [citation needed] Dave
	__________________ "I guess for Truthers the great thing about Google is that it abolishes context automatically, thus saving your precious reserves of stupid for more important tasks." - Dr. Adequate GENERATION 6: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

30th October 2009, 09:28 AM	#35
Ryan O'Dine OD’ing on Damitol Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Walk in an ever expanding Archimedean spiral and you’ll find me eventually Posts: 1,033	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Dude, seriously, any application of quantum mechanics at macroscopic scales is a priori bunk. Untrue. Look up Bose–Einstein condensate^WP. Look up Superfluid^WP. Look up Superconductivity^WP. (Though how any of that could relate to litewave's OP, I haven't the faintest.) ETA: And that, my friends, is how you make a thousandth post. I hope you took notes.
	__________________ I collect people like you in little formaldehyde bottles in my basement. (Not a threat. A hobby.) Last edited by Ryan O'Dine; 30th October 2009 at 09:36 AM.