Concepts About the Universe | Forum

Topic location: Forum home » General » Philosophy/Politics
Shawn
Shawn Jul 30 '14
What's your fundamental concept about the universe?


Example: It's big, really really big,

Example: It was sneezed into existence by, well, something that could sneeze a universe into existence.

tgmondalf
tgmondalf Jul 31 '14

Love Douglas Adams! :)


I think that "The Holographic Universe" by Michael Talbot comes close to at least a beginning of a concept of what it might be.  I definitely think there is way more to it than seems obvious and Quantum Physics seems to be telling us very much the same things that yogis, mystics, etc have been telling us for thousands of years.


While I maintain one should always be skeptical and questioning of philosophies and spirituality, etc but keep an open-mind, there is much more than meets the eye, as I sincerely believe LaVey was trying to tell us and why he included self-empowering rituals and magic in his works and was not a strict materialist.


By the way I apologize for my unintentional skill at run-on sentences LOLz

Jul 31 '14
I think that the Universe is an ongoing explosion, there are no statics things in it, all is in movement, in expansive movement.
The Forum post is edited by Jul 31 '14
A R
A R Aug 1 '14
It's probably one of any number, and a priori I simply cannot accept that it is the only universe.  If ours can exist, can explode into all that is, it seems to me equally as absurd to say that no other universes exist as it is to say that no other planets exist.  If there is any non-zero probability for our universe to come into existence, then when thinking about reality as something beyond our universe's time and space confinements, the probability of another universe coming into existence seems certain.

The other thing I'm certain of is how utterly weird it is.  I'm quite convinced that our little corner of neat, orderly, patterned existence is a minority of what exists, which we have carved out for ourselves through careful application of human pattern-seeking.  If we were to drop our acquired intellectual and emotional baggage, everything would be far too bizarre to comprehend -- we'd go insane.  Or perhaps we're already insane, in that we don't recognize this weirdness.  I'd say that a large amount of the supposed order we see in the universe is rather a projection of our ego.

Perhaps one reason that governments fear dissociative or psychedelic drugs is that they weaken the ego and reveal this to us, showing the whole of human society and organized civilization as being the insanity that it is, the house of cards that it is, and the sand it is built on; they interfere with the chaoskampf.  It's quite hard to worry about "ordinary" concerns like elections and taxes when you find yourself stupefied at trying to comprehend the world without the benefit of cultured heuristics and stereotypes.

It seems interesting, therefor, that the first orderly civilizations had mythologies wherein creation often involves a God slaying the dragon of Chaos, as with Marduk and Tiamat, Yahweh and Leviathan, or Ra and Apep.  Conversely, the Vedic and Chinese sources are similar yet depict reality as emanating from Chaos rather than being strewn from it or resulting from its slaying, just look at their depiction of Brahman or the Dao -- go and compare the Upanishads with the Dao De Jing and you'll find a number of similarities.

The Forum post is edited by A R Aug 1 '14
Epicurus Member
Epicurus Aug 29 '14

For me the Universe is really really huge "infinate" to many galaxies and stars with the possibility that there are  planets like Earth and species similar or more evolved 

then us,I believe that the ancient "egypt" civilization that had high technology and high knowledge they could be Niphilim, Demons,Giants or they could be also Alians in reality  controlling 

everything around us.

The Forum post is edited by Epicurus Aug 29 '14
Brazy Member
Brazy Aug 29 '14

Taking the "Big Bang Theory," the "Multiverse Theory," Singularity and my all time favorite question (How does existence exist?) into consideration; my concept arose.


It's actually quite simple. On the premise of the Big Bang Theory, the universe exists as a result of "singularity." Prior to the birth of our universe (based on discoveries in physics and astronomy) there was nothing; only non-existence. To me, that "non-existence" is an existence in itself. And furthermore, how could something like singularity exist in something non-existent anyways?; it wouldn't seem plausible. That would be comparable to the first human baby being "born" unto nothingness, when common knowledge tells us two humans are needed for that to occur. That may have been a very bad analogy, but the point intended is that: In order for an existence to be produced into existence, a prior existence would have had to have preexisted. Ultimately, this concept gives me an answer to my own question about existence; it always existed. (please bare with me people, my knowledge of the latter is quite limited) 


Okay so now, getting back to the universe. Considering the big void of nothingness that created a beautiful universe such as ours, could we not deem it safe to assume that other universes have been created prior, during and after ours was birthed. If a woman can give birth to six babies in one pregnancy, why not... right? (I know, another bad analogy) But hey, we live in a world where possibilities are endless. <sidebar> I wouldn't be surprised if there were a multitude of universes identical to ours where the only difference would be: reality. Moving right along, amicably. That void seems to be a place where space and time has always existed. And since space and time is infinite and pretty much immeasurable; there would/should be no reason why there isn't an infinite number of universes either. 


Also, I would like to add that I have read some of Stephen Hawkings writings. In one of them, it explains what a "Black Hole" is. And I quote: "A massive star starts to collapse when it exhausts its nuclear fuel and can no longer counteract the inward pull of gravity. The crushing weight of the star’s overlying layers implodes the core, and the star digs deeper into the fabric of space-time. Although the star remains barely visible, its light now has a difficult time climbing out of the enormous gravity of the still-collapsing core. The star passes through its event horizon and disappears from our universe, forming a singularity of infinite density." 


With that said, it's quite possible that the formed singularity is a bridge to that void earlier spoken about. And if that's the case, that same void that birthed our universe would also serve as one of two things (or possibly both): As a big network of universes with the void serving as a "highway" to them all and/or, serving as a "bridge" to other parts of our own universe. Either way, when it comes to our universe, one concept for sure is that it is infinite.


 

The Forum post is edited by Brazy Aug 29 '14
A R
A R Sep 1 '14

Quote from Dimitri people who favour psychedelic drugs as a means to comprehend.
I never said it would help you comprehend, quite the opposite really.  They can destroy your comprehension, which -- once sober -- can allow you to try and build them back up with fewer predispositions.

Of course, some people miss this entirely and start fantasizing about reptilians and Atlantis, but I'm speaking more of the benefits of deculturing yourself to some extent for the purpose of objectivity. 
A R
A R Sep 1 '14

Quote from Dimitri
Quote from maxstirner I never said it would help you comprehend, quite the opposite really.  They can destroy your comprehension, which -- once sober -- can allow you to try and build them back up with fewer predispositions.
I do not believe I mentioned your name when I wrote that remark. 
Entitlement can be a bitch ey? 

Well you did post that right after I made my post and mentioned the topic, so you can see how I thought you were replying to me?
A R
A R Sep 3 '14

Quote from Dimitri
Quote from maxstirner Well you did post that right after I made my post and mentioned the topic, so you can see how I thought you were replying to me?
By that same logic it would have been a reply addressed specifically to
- Shawn
- Tgomdalf
- maodogo
- Ragnar_reilly
- Greg_belial

I can only see how you're trying to cover up your admitted entitlement under an apologetic. 
Except that none of them mentioned the topic at all.  I mentioned the topic first, and then soon after you also mentioned the topic in a slightly argumentative tone, so surely you can see how one might assume it was a response?

I don't know why you're being so adamant about me feeling entitled; what does that even mean in this context?  I'm entitled because I thought you were responding to me about a particular topic that only you and I have mentioned in this thread, with me mentioning it shortly before you?  Really, I don't get why you took offense to something like that.

In a vacuum perhaps it would be a sign of entitlement for me to assume someone was talking to me with no direct indication, but in this case the context provides additional information, which I apparently interpreted wrong -- my mistake, sure, but can you not understand why I made it?  And at any rate, what bearing does that have on my statement?
The Forum post is edited by A R Sep 3 '14
Brazy Member
Brazy Sep 3 '14
Can we all just get along? <completely rhetorical> Gotta love S.I.N!!!
A R
A R Sep 3 '14

Quote from Dimitri You sure are pressing an issue in which I've said my last words for the time being. If you can't deal with a made remark, ignore it. If you're feeling entitled and discomforted with the made remarks I suggest you ignore them. That, instead of being a whiny bitch who feels as if being called out. 

I don't know why you're upset, I'm just rather confused as to your rationale.  It's almost like you're purposefully out to be upset or to start arguments or something.
The Forum post is edited by A R Sep 3 '14
A R
A R Sep 4 '14
I believe Freud would call your post an example of psychological projection.
Michael Stone
Michael Stone Sep 4 '14
I don't know.
nikey69
nikey69 Nov 14 '14
To me the universe is a history in time in that what is observed at the outer edges is very old. The universe is also a mathematical construct as posited by physicists. I do not pretend to understand it but what I see has a certain abstract and visual beauty for me. Hey this may be a rhetorical question but I'm a simple being! As for the arguments with individuals don't you love SIN for this?I certainly do and apart from the pure entertainment please feel free to destroy me. I might accept serious intellectual opposition any thing else is just interesting drama
nikey69
nikey69 Jan 22 '15
The universe is big according to telescopes of all kinds. These telescopes are looking back in time in what they observe happened many years ago. Just as in the past some believed the world was flat until we went and explored I believe that the universe will remain a conjecture of physics until we have the means to explore. Now the Solar System is local and here we may make some progess.
Satanic International Network was created by Zach Black in 2009.
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Donate - PayPal