--Part Two--

Vacuum states and solid matter have observed, quasi-observed quantum under-states, which science is just beginning to articulate, and, as yet, cannot understand or unified. Further, vacuum states and solid matter are post~priori events, which are posited contemporaneously to have been once unified. If one runs the Second Law of Thermodynamics backwards in space-time, even space-time, itself, breaks down into/towards unity.

Keiran, I feel you see teddy clutching people, when it comes to accepting infinity (no beginning), but would suggest this conclusion is not always the case, at least, for some, those with a fair understanding of the Big Bang. Maybe, likewise, some defenders of the Solid State theory might have a problem with time and the three spatial once not being in existence.

These elusive constructs do give our mere primate brains a thorough workout. :-)

Oliver, your responses are somewhat confusing. When you say " If the expansion of space-time is asymmetrical (admittedly not the most widely held view) then we have previous universe states existing before our/this generation universe. In which case there might not be a first universe. " i need to ask what you understand by universe. My understanding is that by definition there can only be one universe not multiples of them. The other distinction i would make is that the universe is not a closed system but an infinite environment.... a major distinction. It cannot expand because what does it expand into? ........... itself? Also why is the present universe so lumpy? There is no place for the universe to grow into because the required empty space is an idealization anyway, not a reality. The only expansion i can see is in the minds of people as we learn more and more, probe deeper and deeper into the universe's existence.

It is also significant that Hubble did not think the universe was expanding and many people believe now the cosmological red shift is due to the Compton effect rather than the Doppler effect. There is also the tired light issue. This relationship would arise if the light we receive from galaxies loses some of its energy to the intergalactic medium through which it must pass. In that case, the greater the depth of the intergalactic medium between a galaxy and the observer, the more its light is shifted toward the low-energy (red) end of the spectrum. There are also many other scientific papers indicating that non-velocity produced redshifts have been observed.

I note that you refer to the Solid State theory which is something to do with electricity, but i presume you mean the Steady State Universe. My thoughts are of an infinite material universe with three infinite spatial dimensions but i admit to the average joe, the notion of infinity is difficult to accept because it is so far at variance with the "perceived" finite world of everyday life.

This thread seems to have drifted off into the cosmological never-never. Is there noone prepared to answer the original question posed by Sells: is heaven real?

Does anyone believe that heaven is real and where? Does anyone have a vision of what after-life would be like there? Don't forget, if you get there it is going to be for an eternally long time.

These are not trivial but basic questions which every christian must have contemplated at some time and be satisfied with their answers.

Thank you John W

Thread had become verrrry borrrring.

Heaven is a state of mind.

I am in heaven when I watch the King Parrots and Rosellas feed outside my window - there are some other experiences I would describe as heavenly, but as this is a PUBLIC (as in female and male) forum, I will respect the sensitivities of others and refrain from explicit detail.

To the best of my ability I have no idea of any life after death and neither does anyone else - if they say they do they are liars.

Cheers

Dianne

John wants us to get back to heaven.... perhaps all this talk of expanding universes is a bit too much and i agree.

When i was quite young and playing in the bush i had many formative experiences. One such time i was alone and sitting in this bushy gulley surrounded by boxgums some old and hollow and many others just beautiful young gums with their fresh blue-grey leaves. I could hear finches peep peep peeping, other birds communicating and seemingly with an aesthetic tune of their own, there was a kookaburra on a branch to admire, the bush smells and a small lizard sunning itself a few metres away on a flat rock that I had purposely stepped around. As i sat there contemplating i focussed on the fact that everything surrounding me had to be in a state of continual flux ..... an infinite process of change. Was this heaven one may ask? But then the kookaburra i was admiring swooped down and picked up the little sun lizard and flew off to have him for a meal. Of course you then realise the consequences of your own actions and that heaven can only be an idealised state of mind but never real ......... even after your life.

Keiran,

"John wants us to get back to heaven.... perhaps all this talk of expanding universes is a bit too much and I agree."

I am happy to tapper off on the physics but will make a reply to your earlier comments, soon. I will need read up on the Compton Effect, as I thought it had more to with x-rays. I do follow what you say about the sprecta downshift. Just the same, my preliminary expectation were photons to collide with, say dark matter, there would be two specta signatures (different to fatigue),not one diminished one. Just off the top of my head only.

What is a universe? I think talk of multiple universities (and dimensions)has arisen out of physics over the past few decades, because the four dimensional spacetime has been expanded-on. Penrose notes that if energy were borrowed in this universe from another universe, why not call the entire outsider/insider model, The Universe. I would be happy this, but the many universes option is the majority opinion; wherein, the four dimensional spacetime continuum is merely one universe arising from phase-space, which has infinite dimensions.

We (our lives longitudely) are made out of four dimensional spacetime. The configuration of atoms we have are borrowed and redistributed are it. These fundamental particles have an "afterlife" or should I say an "afterstate", when we die. Eventually, we will be "star stuff" again, as the Late Carl Sagan would say. We, at least the physical, We, do not pass-over, our components are redistributed. Heaven would not seem to exist within this continuum.

Philo's state of relation with a divinity would seem a more reasonable proposition for thesists than probing around the planets for heaven. Catch is, validating the proposition.

p.s. multiple universes? what about multiple heavens? Some religions believe in the latter.