If an Impact Destroyed Earth, would 'God' Care?

"Apparently with no surprise
To any happy flower,
The frost beheads it at its play
In accidental power.

The blond assassin passes on,
The sun proceeds unmoved
To measure off another day
For an approving God."


Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks. Any random disturbance ...in a totally
disordered system...can only create more order than what existed before.
Cyclic order emerges spontaneously from complete disorder. So you see
chaos, as an initial condition and constant companion, is required to give
the universe a non-random future, an ....evolving future.

Where life is possible.

The notion of chaos or randomness should not be seen as an
obstacle to life and evolution, but as the ultimate impetus of
evolution or 'Creation'.

Pity, no tragically, our so-called modern sciences have been designed
around finding detailed certainty needed to make precise predictions.
When the simple truth of our universe is that the source of all existence
resides at the exact opposite of that, where certainty and predictability
are at minimum....randomness, chaos or complexity.

The bulk of our modern science is as backwards, as dark-age, as is
scientifically possible. Things like these super colliders, which seek
to take reducing to parts, or precision, to their limit, will serve as the
ultimate example of the complete backwardness of scientific thought today.

Incredible monuments to our ignorance of Nature and it's simplicity.

The 'answers' are found in clouds of uncertainty, not particles of precision.
Where one can't tell if it behaves as a wave or a particle, where neither
classical or quantum methods can fully describe the whole.
But only both at the same time.
As in a cloud, light or an emotion.

The ultimate 'equation' for reality is found in the one and only place
where no equation is possible.

That has to be the ultimate initial assumption of science.

Where science, religion and art are all one-in-the-same.
Without a single scientific language that can deal with all three
with equal consistency, we'll never crawl out of the cave.
Any one of them alone is fundamentally incomplete.

Dynamics of Complex Systems
Full online text
http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/


"Perception of an
Object costs
Precise the Object's loss.
Perception in itself a gain
Replying to its price;
The Object Absolute is nought,
Perception sets it fair,
And then upbraids a Perfectness
That situates so far."




Thanks for reading


Jonathan


Poems by E Dickinson



s

it's really hard for imaginary characters to care about anything.

Of course he would. What a daft question. You'd better get in your
bath Jonathon, ..and batten down.
He is Not A Merciful God. His Wrath Knows No Bounds. Why would He
_Bother_ to Make you (small you) in His Image (big image), and then
not care if you are wiped off the face of His *Abundance* - Earth?
He'll mark you (just you) for Pestilence and Famine, ..because He
Loves You.

(And other such Gobbledegook.)

Wot Abaaaat Plate Tectonics? Doe Emily have anything to say about
subduction?

In an impact destroyed earth, God did it. He cared, that's why he did
it.

On Mar 4, 7:40*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
* "Apparently with no surprise
* * To any happy flower,
* * The frost beheads it at its play
* * In accidental power.

* * *The blond assassin passes on,
* * *The sun proceeds unmoved
* * * To measure off another day
* * * For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. *Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension

"tension_on_the_wire" wrote in message
...
On Mar 4, 7:40 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Apparently with no surprise
To any happy flower,
The frost beheads it at its play
In accidental power.

The blond assassin passes on,
The sun proceeds unmoved
To measure off another day
For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is
change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension

=============================================

This 'God' concept isn't quite nonsense -- it's an adult recall of what
the child guesses before reaching any age of rationality. Since this
thinking very often reappears in overt mental health issues, it's not
nonsense. It's pathology.

I can see this topic using up a lot of time and effort. Terra *will be*
destroyed eventually: so what are we going to do about it? In my view,
this certainty makes a strong case for developing the off-Terra presence
in our Solar System that we can do now. If we don't waste our time
foolishly as in intellectualization about some nonexistent 'God.'.

Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.space.policy 2009 Mar 05]

On Mar 5, 6:26*am, "Martha Adams" wrote:
"tension_on_the_wire" wrote in message

...
On Mar 4, 7:40 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:



"Apparently with no surprise
To any happy flower,
The frost beheads it at its play
In accidental power.

The blond assassin passes on,
The sun proceeds unmoved
To measure off another day
For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is
change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. *The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. *When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. *And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. *Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. *Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension

=============================================

This 'God' concept isn't quite nonsense -- it's an adult recall of what
the child guesses before reaching any age of rationality. *Since this
thinking very often reappears in overt mental health issues, it's not
nonsense. *It's pathology.

I can see this topic using up a lot of time and effort. *Terra *will be*
destroyed eventually: so what are we going to do about it? *In my view,
this certainty makes a strong case for developing the off-Terra presence
in our Solar System that we can do now. *If we don't waste our time
foolishly as in intellectualization about some nonexistent 'God.'.

Titeotwawki -- mha *[sci.space.policy *2009 Mar 05]

Since God and the Universe (out to the causal horizon, that is) are
identical (pantheism), no, "God" would not care. The rest of the
Universe would just look at the destroyed earth and say, "Too bad.
Luck of the draw. Like a wildebeest being brought down by a lion.
Better him than me. Darlene, peel me another grape."

Good argument for an asteroid deflection system not operated by that
madman Sagan worried of.

On Mar 5, 3:08*pm, tension_on_the_wire
wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:40*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:





* "Apparently with no surprise
* * To any happy flower,
* * The frost beheads it at its play
* * In accidental power.

* * *The blond assassin passes on,
* * *The sun proceeds unmoved
* * * To measure off another day
* * * For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. *Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. *The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. *When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. *And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. *Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. *Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Only when you take 'dark matter' into account, do you recognise that
all is order, even if it cannot be seen.The 'reassembly' process is
infinite, and totally predictable.

Now the observer ! Thats is a whole different subject.

BOfL

On Mar 5, 10:26*pm, "Martha Adams" wrote:
"tension_on_the_wire" wrote in message

...
On Mar 4, 7:40 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:





"Apparently with no surprise
To any happy flower,
The frost beheads it at its play
In accidental power.

The blond assassin passes on,
The sun proceeds unmoved
To measure off another day
For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is
change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. *The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. *When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. *And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. *Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. *Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension

=============================================

This 'God' concept isn't quite nonsense -- it's an adult recall of what
the child guesses before reaching any age of rationality. *Since this
thinking very often reappears in overt mental health issues, it's not
nonsense. *It's pathology.

I can see this topic using up a lot of time and effort. *Terra *will be*
destroyed eventually: so what are we going to do about it? *In my view,
this certainty makes a strong case for developing the off-Terra presence
in our Solar System that we can do now. *If we don't waste our time
foolishly as in intellectualization about some nonexistent 'God.'.

Titeotwawki -- mha *[sci.space.policy *2009 Mar 05]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Spoken like a true creator, who creates creators who continue to
create.

Waste time?

Please explain...together, and seperately.

BOfL

On Mar 5, 11:01*pm, Don Stockbauer wrote:
On Mar 5, 6:26*am, "Martha Adams" wrote:





"tension_on_the_wire" wrote in message

...
On Mar 4, 7:40 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

"Apparently with no surprise
To any happy flower,
The frost beheads it at its play
In accidental power.

The blond assassin passes on,
The sun proceeds unmoved
To measure off another day
For an approving God."

Nope!

Not at all, I believe if there is a god, 'He' would approve.

As the primary driving force for the evolution of all things is
change.
The basic element of life and the universe is found in ...far...from
equilibrium systems, not near equilibrium. Events...random events
are required to fuel the dynamics needed to initiate self organizing
or evolving systems which define our material and living reality.

To the very core, it's randomness that is the source of all Creation.

After all, a totally disordered or random system has as it's future
only one possible direction, towards more order. As is shown in the
study of random boolean networks.

I'm afraid your basic premise is incorrect. *The system to which you
are assigning a random state is one made of atoms. *When it comes to
order and chaos, atoms tend to follow the laws of thermodynamics, not
the behaviour of random boolean networks. *And the laws of
thermodynamics are pretty clear about the fact that order begets chaos
in closed systems, and it is irrelevant whether you are examining very
small molecular systems or those of great big astronomical bodies.
The concept of absolute zero, in heat measurement, describes exactly
what happens in a closed system which is allowed to run down to total
chaos and zero order. *Those systems do not reassemble themselves
spontaneously into ordered systems. *Show me at least one example
where this is not the case and I'll be happy to retract.

--tension

=============================================

This 'God' concept isn't quite nonsense -- it's an adult recall of what
the child guesses before reaching any age of rationality. *Since this
thinking very often reappears in overt mental health issues, it's not
nonsense. *It's pathology.

I can see this topic using up a lot of time and effort. *Terra *will be*
destroyed eventually: so what are we going to do about it? *In my view,
this certainty makes a strong case for developing the off-Terra presence
in our Solar System that we can do now. *If we don't waste our time
foolishly as in intellectualization about some nonexistent 'God.'.

Titeotwawki -- mha *[sci.space.policy *2009 Mar 05]

Since God and the Universe (out to the causal horizon, that is) are
identical (pantheism), no, "God" would not care. *The rest of the
Universe would just look at the destroyed earth and say, "Too bad.
Luck of the draw. *Like a wildebeest being brought down by a lion.
Better him than me. *Darlene, peel me another grape."

Good argument for an asteroid deflection system not operated by that
madman Sagan worried of.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I didnt think Sagan ended up worried in later life. I got the
impression he started to see the multiverse, well depicted in his book
"Contact".

BOfL