A dark future for cosmology

You must understand “ the mind of God � before you can grasp gravity.

Gravity is ( subjectively ) predictable,
primordial, “ momentum � in a curved spacetime.
( Actually, it's montionless world-lines in a hypervolume )

Quantum mechanics is ( subjectively ) semi-random momentum
in a ( subjectively ) flat ( Euclidean, Minkowskian ) spacetime.

Amazingly, Chinese ancients ( Taoists ) got it right,
there is no genuine free will.
Intrinsically, objectively, the cosmos is montionless.

If you ignore my ****-poor American diet ( Merry Christmas ! ),
Taoist monks have nothing on me. Praise the Jade Emperor !

I meant “ motionless � not “ montionless �, pardon me.

On Dec 25, 8:57Â*pm, Jeffâ˜*Relf wrote:

You must understand “ the mind of God � before you can grasp gravity.

Hmm.. It don't take the 'mind of God' to see gravity for exactly what
it *demonstrates itself* to be: a pressure-driven, accelerating flow
_of the spatial medium_ into mass, with mass synonymous with flow
sink. Nor does it take any deific smarts to see the *literal*
mechanism of gravity-acceleration equivalence. oc

Does your “ spatial medium � notion explain the engine of life,
Old Coot ?

Q. What drives the engine of life ?
A. It's the cosmos forever approching equalibrium,
but never getting there.

Nothing spews more than a “ black hole �;
more likely than not, the entire Milky Way is its spew.
Like the CMB, the Milky Way dates back at least 13.7 giga years.

Even neutron stars spew more than stars like our sun.
Our tiny sun spews 5 mega tons per second, mostly photons.
As the cosmos cools, life evolves with it.

On Dec 26, 5:12Â*am, Jeffâ˜*Relf wrote:

Does your “ spatial medium � notion explain the engine of life,
Old Coot ?

Q. What drives the engine of life ?

Said 'Engine' is illustrated here - http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/

The Flowing-Space model of gravity BTW, was a spinoff or 'sidebar' of
this overarching model.
It's interesting that if the FS model is bunkum,
that increasing numbers of people worldwide, independantly and without
collaboration, are deducing essentiallly the *same* model of gravity.
Google up any or all of the following:

Jerry Shifman, gravity

Henry Warren, gravity

Lew Paxton, gravity

Henry Lindner, gravity

Tom Martin, gravity

James S. Huenefeld, gravity

F. Stefanko, gravity

One thing these people all have in common: they have
rejected the 'no medium', space-as-void indoctrination. They all see
gravity as the omnidirectional, 'reverse starburst' flow of the
spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink. It's a
no-brainer like "Doh! the earth really is round and revolves around
the sun."
To observe the process of gravitation is to
*literally* observe the reverse of the BigBang process.. the
continuous BB.

(Note: response follows second dashed line.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
On Dec 26, 5:12 am, Jeff?Relf wrote:

Does your " spatial medium " notion explain the engine of life,
Old Coot ?

Q. What drives the engine of life ?

Said 'Engine' is illustrated here -
http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/

The Flowing-Space model of gravity BTW, was a spinoff or 'sidebar' of
this overarching model.
It's interesting that if the FS model is bunkum,
that increasing numbers of people worldwide, independantly and without
collaboration, are deducing essentiallly the *same* model of gravity.
Google up any or all of the following:

Jerry Shifman, gravity

Henry Warren, gravity

Lew Paxton, gravity

Henry Lindner, gravity

Tom Martin, gravity

James S. Huenefeld, gravity

F. Stefanko, gravity

One thing these people all have in common: they have
rejected the 'no medium', space-as-void indoctrination. They all see
gravity as the omnidirectional, 'reverse starburst' flow of the
spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink. It's a
no-brainer like "Doh! the earth really is round and revolves around
the sun."
To observe the process of gravitation is to
*literally* observe the reverse of the BigBang process.. the
continuous BB.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, Jeff was probably just reminding us of the endearing
and enduring Newtonian idea that "God Causes Gravity,"
oc. It's those li'l angelic gravitons that reach up from the
ground and then pull everything down. Of course, ya see,
they're not so angelic if one's parachute happens to fail!

g

Now, *my* questions are similar...

Q's.: What drives the engine of _s e n t i e n t_ life?

Sentience must begin at some point between conception
and birth, or maybe after we're born. When, exactly, does
this happen, do you think?

And sentience must end at some time after death. How
long does it last after, say, one's head is chopped off?

And lastly, if we can discover how we get "disconnected"
from this engine when we die, could we also find a way
to stay connected? indefinitely?

happy new-year days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine

P.S. Thank you very much!

P.P.S. (shh) Some secret sites...
http://painellsworth.net
http://savethechildren.org/
http://home.secretsgolden.com

On Dec 26, 6:30*am, "Painius" wrote:

Now, *my* questions are similar...

Q's.: *What drives the engine of *_s e n t i e n t_ *life?

Sentience must begin at some point between conception
and birth, or maybe after we're born. *When, exactly, does
this happen, do you think?

Well, has sentience, or life itself, ever been known to arise from non-
life? The Greeks had that thing about the ineffable 'pneuma' being the
source or "breath" of life. 'Pneuma' was synonymous with 'spirit'. But
we now know the pneuma's just plain ol' air, which although
*necessary* for life, is not the base field from which life arises.

Today we've come upon the latter-day 'Pneuma', the "stuff" of space
itself, the Sub-Planck Energy Domain, of which matter is the low-
grade, superfluous by-product (the 'dustbunny'). Yet the scientific
mainstream rejects and denies the existance of this universe-filling
Plenum of space in favor of the 'Void'. So the question is this:

Do life and sentience arise from matter alone, as the Void-Space
Paradigm would dictate? OR.. do life, consciousness, and ultimately
sentience, arise from the Base Field of space itself?

And moreover, are humans endowed with some "organ (or organs) of
articulation" by which to perceive this Base Field? Down through time
and in all cultures, have there been a few individuals genetically
gifted in this perception? Bereft of any science acumen, did they
render what they saw in terms of religious myth, metaphor and symbol?
But today, with the full lexicon of science available and no need for
archaic symbolism, should not those gifted ones be able to explain
*literally* what they've seen (once unshackled from the void-space
indoctrination)?

"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
On Dec 26, 6:30 am, "Painius" wrote:

Now, *my* questions are similar...

Q's.: What drives the engine of _s e n t i e n t_ life?

Sentience must begin at some point between conception
and birth, or maybe after we're born. When, exactly, does
this happen, do you think?

Well, has sentience, or life itself, ever been known to arise from non-
life? The Greeks had that thing about the ineffable 'pneuma' being the
source or "breath" of life. 'Pneuma' was synonymous with 'spirit'. But
we now know the pneuma's just plain ol' air, which although
*necessary* for life, is not the base field from which life arises.

Today we've come upon the latter-day 'Pneuma', the "stuff" of space
itself, the Sub-Planck Energy Domain, of which matter is the low-
grade, superfluous by-product (the 'dustbunny'). Yet the scientific
mainstream rejects and denies the existance of this universe-filling
Plenum of space in favor of the 'Void'. So the question is this:

Do life and sentience arise from matter alone, as the Void-Space
Paradigm would dictate? OR.. do life, consciousness, and ultimately
sentience, arise from the Base Field of space itself?

And moreover, are humans endowed with some "organ (or organs) of
articulation" by which to perceive this Base Field? Down through time
and in all cultures, have there been a few individuals genetically
gifted in this perception? Bereft of any science acumen, did they
render what they saw in terms of religious myth, metaphor and symbol?
But today, with the full lexicon of science available and no need for
archaic symbolism, should not those gifted ones be able to explain
*literally* what they've seen (once unshackled from the void-space
indoctrination)?

Oh, i think there is still a definite need in the
world for symbolism, both archaic and modern!
(Modern ones are pretty much just revivals of
the ancient and archaic symbols.)

When Carl Jung's archetypes are studied, one
notes an apparent genetic affinity, almost an
instinctive *need* for such symbols.

And it appears that this can easily result in the
average person being "taken to the cleaners"
by some of those "gifted ones" you mention.
Perhaps it is for the very reason that, while a
full lexicon of science is available, most of the
population cares little for it, and therefore have
very little knowledge of it.

Attach to this the fact that few scientists are
well-versed in bringing their knowledge to the
people in comprehensible terms, as well as the
fact that there is still much to learn as regards
the separation of fantasy and reality, and the
world *still has* a lot of room for both the
religious and the atheistic "gifted ones" to do
their "magic", sometimes to the point of poison
koolaid.

I believe you're right, though. It's tough to find
evidence that can be widely accepted, but there
must be more to life and sentience than "meets
the eye".

There seems to be a definite, more orderly set
of vibrations that are emitted by sentient life.
And as well, there also seems to be a definite
"receiver" of these emissions, these "vibes" if
you will, "out there somewhere". I've had a
good deal of experiences in my life for which
there appears to be no better explanation!

happy new-year days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine

P.S. (shh) Some secret sites...
http://painellsworth.net
http://savethechildren.org/
http://home.secretsgolden.com

P.P.S. Thank YOU for reading!

Jeff That is why G=EMC^2 is the equation for the universe .G for God or
G for gravity. Best to think motion(energy) for the universe than
static(no motion) Without motion there can be no universes. Action it
is. Bert

Ignorant fools, the cosmos seems semi-random to us, full of motion;
but it's not, it's a motionless hypervolume.