Explaining God with Physics

[HydrogenBond]

I would like to begin a discussion that will probably insult the sensibilities of both the theological and scientific communities. The subject is to see if it is possible to use some of the frontier theories of physics to explain God.

 

To begin, physics has postulated the existence of other dimensions within space and time as well as parallel universes. Some have postulated an original energy based universe from which matter will appear. And still others are toying with the idea of phenomena that can travel faster than the speed of light. If one looks closely at these, one can see a strong parallel between these and some of the teachings of religion. For example, when one dies many religions believe that the moral body will remain and decay, but the soul/spirit will live on for eternity. If we translate the theology into physics, the physics might say that our soul/spirit goes to a parallel energy universe, where matter does not exist. Being parallel the soul/spirit can be absorbed no matter where one dies in the universe. Unfortunately, if one looks deeper into the bible, this very simple explanation cannot be true.

 

To get the extra parameters, one only needs to go to the beginning of the bible or Genesis. In the beginning the universe was formless and void and Spirit of God was brooding over the deep. He said let there be light! If we translate this to physics, the first statement would imply that our initial universe was originally empty. The spirit of God brooding over the empty universe could mean interaction between parallel universes with our universe originally void. The statement, “let there be light”, shows energy appearing in our universe from which the matter of the universe would eventually appear. This could mean energy from God’s reference flowing into our universe. The one practical problem with this transfer of energy between references is that a simple energy transfer will lack the potential needed to make it directed enough for the rest of Genesis. In other words, energy going from one dimension into another dimension, leading to order, should require a potential difference between the two dimensions, with God’s reference being at a higher potential. This suggests that God reference is not composed of energy, but stems from a reference moving faster that C.

 

If we traveled at the speed of light, our mass, distance and time would become altered, due to special relativity. Since mass would become infinite at C, we could no longer exist with mass but would have to become pure energy. Our time reference would be analogous to eternity and our distance reference would make the universe appear like a point. If we go faster than C, we could no longer be energy, but would have to change into something else. Going faster than C would also imply our eternal time reference would have to become something more than eternity. The question that is raised is, what is more than eternity? One simple answer is eternity with some extra potential.

 

In my imagination, what I picture all the analysis to mean is that as we approach C, our mass will depart and we will be converted to energy. At C we will be pure energy within an energy reference of eternal time and point space. If we go faster that C, our energy nature will disappear. The extra potential added to eternity, by going faster than C, seems to imply an expansion of the point reference to create an expanded potentiated eternity that we call heaven (two reflected cones that touch at C). The bible says that earthly things are a shadow of heavenly things. If we translate that to physics our expanded potentiated eternity is loosely similar to our current universe (depending how close to 2C we are), but is not composed of matter or energy but of substance that can move faster than C. Being faster than a C reference, it can provide potential into a void reference from which energy could appear and form structure. Since the two reflected cones meet at the C point, the “let there be light” should mean something like the big bang stemming from a point of energy/mass that appears in the void reference. As the universe expands, it is paralleled by the potentials emanating along the parallel eternal (+) cone. This is an attempt to explain the impossible; I hope it stimulates the imagination.

[bartock]

strange and weird. i've been thinking about the same things. how did you come up with this?you are good at physics and religion.

[infamous]

I would like to begin a discussion that will probably insult the sensibilities of both the theological and scientific communities. The subject is to see if it is possible to use some of the frontier theories of physics to explain God.

 

I hope it stimulates the imagination.

Stimulating thoughts; I have often wondered about the possibility that the energy we experience in this universe is simply the result of an intersection by matter from a parallel universe with the space in our present universe. Where the matter in one is evidenced by energy in the other and visa versa. In the transition between matter and energy, matter is converted into energy as it passes into the parallel universe where it again resumes the character of matter. The signature which is left in our universe represents itself as energy. This action can be understood as a two way street where matter from either side moving to the alternate universe leaves an energy signature behind.........Just a thought??????????????

[TheBigDog]

Nicely layed out post HB! Amazing how they stay dormant sometimes.

 

Can you please give us your definition of the God you would be trying to explain? I have struggled with this, and finally decided to redefing God to fit the world as I understand it instead of trying to bend the world to the will of a definition that is difficult to justify logically.

 

Is God the creator of the universe? If so, is God also the designer? Could there be a creator or a designer that is not all powerful, but something as simple as you or I? Could physics be the tools of God, but not His creations?

 

Bill

[ughaibu]

It seems to me that this is more about the Bible than about god. If the Bible is somehow more accurate and reliable than other religious texts, that will first need to be established. If it isn't, your theory will need to fit the accounts presented by the texts of all god-based religions.