God for scientists. Putting God in scientific terms

0
God for scientists

In the already closed Orkut.com I posted a short explanation of God for scientists. (I love science)
Here it is with small changes and additions.
So, let’s see whether there is such thing as God for scientists.

I’ll start with the famous question: „Did a falling tree in the forest made a sound if nobody heard it?“

The answer is NO. The tree didn’t make any sound but did produce vibration with a frequency between 20 and 20000 hertz.
Sound appears to us (and some sentient beings) when we with our ears detect (observe) these vibration frequencies.
The same explanation stands for all observations we do.
We do not observe matter but patterns created by wave interference.
Those patterns have to be observed in order to „turn in to“ the thing, which we call „matter“ in all its observable variations. If not observed everything is nothing but waves interfering with each other.

When Einstein heard about „consciousness causes the wave function to collapse“, he said – „Does that mean that if I don’t look at the moon it doesn’t exist?“
Now we have the answer for Einstein. The moon is still there as a pattern from wave interference but it becomes the moon Einstein knows only when observed by Einstein.

To simplify it in a simple scientific language I’d say that by observing we make the wave function to collapse, making it possible for as to see the particle behavior exhibited in what we call matter.

Since the singularity is beyond any mathematical explanation, we don’t have a mathematical proof for the Big Bang theory but that doesn’t stop science using this explanation for the creation of the universe.
I’ll use part of the Big Bang theory to make my point.
Science doesn’t have an explanation for the first moments of the Big Bang but at one point all which Universe was is put in two words – photons and neutrons (wave-particles).
Note that some of you can be deceived from the „particle“ part in the „wave-particle“ term.
That entity is not a particle. It is an entity said to behave either as a wave or as a particle, but „behavior“ is not „substance“.
Therefore, it would be safer to think of it as of wave.

Every wave emission needs a source and since the Universe was (and still is) waves, it could not be the source for itself.

That missing source in the scientific theories is what people call God.
I would not call it emission source though.
I would call it „awareness-wave“ which interferes with itself.
My favorite word for this interference is „DREAM“.
A mind creates dream by interfering with itself.

I can imagine the difficulties that many of you would have, comprehending this idea.
Just play with the idea that by observing, your mind makes the things appear in their sensible nature. Your mind is like a medium, in which the wave turns into particle and becomes interactive sensible part of your surrounding.
The mind as part of the „awareness-wave“ (God) can observe its own interference thus creating delusion about existence out of the self, hence the observable surrounding.

From this point on, the science can be right in most of its conclusions, but also very wrong in some of its bases.

Religious people BELIEVE that God created the world.
But creation implies deliberate action, intention.

The world wasn’t intentionally created, therefore we can not call it creation.It is an appearance.

God, which I already explained as „awareness-wave“, is not even aware of its „creation“, the same way like the dreamer is not aware of its dream. However, we as part of the „awareness-wave“ can become aware of the „fact“ that we observe the pattern of our self-interference. We could become aware that we are part of our own dream. (Did you ever had a dream in which you were aware that you are dreaming and just now the nightmare will end?)
The state in which the mind knows that it is observing its own self-interference is known as „awaken“.

You read about many such awakened people who brought the knowledge for God in this world. Those people are actually God-The Son (born in spirit)
The knowledge they gave, was given in different times to people with different intellectual levels, and the explanations about God had to match the intellectual capability of the audience.

People with low intelligence tend to accept old explanation without questioning, thus becoming blind religious followers. They don’t need „God for scientists“.
The need for salvation brings obedience to rules, which were and still are in great number of cases used by the church authorities for self-interests.

Possible argument:

– We may not hear the sound but it is still there. We can not say that we create the sound by hearing it.

The answer to the above:

The „sound“ meaning has no absolute value because it describes our perception for certain vibration frequency.
That is valid for all concepts created by the mind, based on the perceptions.

Why our perceptions have no absolute value?

Let’s take the word „red“ for example.
It is a word for color.
We named a range of the light spectrum with the name „red“.
We agree on the fact that most humans can recognize that certain range, and we use the word red for it, but we cannot know how each of us sees the color with that name.
Therefore, „red“ is just a word for a certain range of the light spectrum, which has no absolute value for all observers.

In other words, one must not put absolute value for what we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell.
The universe which we know is just a perception of interfering waves.
Let’s try to make it clearer: The Universe is a big mixture of waves which interfere with each other, and our senses are detecting this interference, thus creating the surrounding image for us.

And now to make it complete: The Universe is wave interference + conscious observation.

We can not apply noise, and light as a property of the Universe, because for sentient being without the ability to perceive that wave frequency range, it is not noisy and visible.
To say that the noise and the light are still there is illogical, knowing that we are using not absolute values.
The absolute values are in the length and the phase of the interfering waves not in our perception of those values.

Another possible argument:

– Do you know what „wave function collapse“ is?

The answer to the above:

Yes, I know.
By using it in „God for scientists“, I mean that we as measuring (observing) tools are defining the value to which the set of calculated probabilities will collapse. Everything around us is set of systems, interfering with each other and us. We are defining the values for the wave function collapse of all that systems.

Psa 17:15  As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.

Споделете, ако ви е харесало

Оставете Мнение

avatar

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Запиши се за отговори  
Уведоми ме за