Jump to content


Photo

Particle physics and the UB


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#21 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 26 October 2012 - 02:02 PM

Hi Nelson G:

Your point is well taken. Electron emit and absorb fragments of themselves in the form of photons, no? They are made up of 100 ultimatons. Matter is essentially units of motion. TUB states that the most fundamental of motions is that motion of the ultimaton, which has Paradise a its nucleus.

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#22 Nigel Nunn

Nigel Nunn

    Poster

  • Administrators
  • PipPip
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 27 October 2012 - 10:39 AM

Hi Louis,

Does this model that Nigel mentions have the electron equal in size to the proton, as TUB states? I would think that the authors are helping us to come up with a model consistent with this statement from TUB. And do you think that TUB hints at what relationship there exists, if any, between the proton and the ultimaton? Are there 100 ultimatons in a proton spinning 2000 times faster, or does the proton (and neutron) have a make-up of 200,000 ultimatons? Charge may just involve right or left spin. Any thoughts on this. TUB also states that gravity is the sole control of energy-matter. This does not seem to be consistent with the nuclear forces of the standard model. So, a true model model of matter must be explained using only gravity as a cohesive, controlling force in order to be consistent with TUB.


Something interesting about "size" and "gravity". Think of a white dwarf star (held up by electron degeneracy pressure) weighing say (0.7 to 1.3) times the mass of our Sun, radius more or less about that of Earth (say 6,000 km). Now imagine a neutron star (held up by neutron degeneracy pressure) say 3 times heavier than the white dwarf. Its radius? Say 12 km, the size of a big city.

So a neutron star weighing three times as much as a white dwarf is 500 times smaller? The main difference (between neutron star and white dwarf) is the way their electrons and protons are packed. So, when we start to compare the size of electrons and protons, the way their components (ultimatons) are packed may be significant.

So this becomes an interesting question: how are ultimatons packed into material structures?

Does the UB have anything to say about this? Well, it does reveal that ultimatons spin and huddle. But can we assume some sort of intermediate assembly on the road to collecting 100 as an electron? To get the ball rolling, let's assume we can. So imagine two ultimatons, plus some sort of interaction that leads to their "huddling". Don't forget that each part of this tiny pair is spinning, so we can imagine a tiny pre-electronic (thus pre-photonic) "di-pole".

Our (current, toy) model takes the simplest next step: use a simple (e.g. Lennard-Jones) potential to model the huddling of three ultimatons. Thus we have a tiny "tri-pole", three Planck scale oscillators, locked together. And here begins a story to delight next generations of young physicists.

Attached File  Tripole.jpg   148.54KB   1 downloads


PS: why do we want to build a model on tri-poles? Well, one reason QCD is harder that QED is that QCD (quantum chromo-dynamics) involves a three-fold color charge. This three-fold feature has to start somewhere, and it seems easiest to have this in the foundational layer of the model.

Nigel

#23 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 27 October 2012 - 02:52 PM

Hi Nigel:

When TUB says that the ultimatons have Paradise as their nucleus, I am looking for a 'pattern' that illustrates this. The torus is the only topological structure that I can think of. Spinning, expanding/contracting (huddling) donut shells with Paradise in the donut hole. In order to add more ultimatons, add more shells to the donut. The electron would be 100 inbedded donut shells. The proton can be the portion of the donut adjacent to the donut hole and the electron portion the outer portion of the donut. The concentric rings keep sticking in my mind. It is the basic topology of the Master Universe given in TUB. As above so below, no? Just a thought.

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#24 Alina

Alina

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,393 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UNIVERSO
  • Interests:*

Posted 28 October 2012 - 10:53 AM

Hello Luis!

Louis, I lack scientific terminology and many knowledge, but I think in fact the proton is a part ultimatón.No movement is not consistent with the model standar. I think there are many points of UB, which are not.So I think the teachings found within both traditional and physics to quantum depends if it is if you are purely material phenomena or nonmaterial interventions exist ...
Even knowing that, on balance, energy, matter, light, heat,electricity, magnetism, are in their
origin and destination the same thing, "along with other material realities that have not yet been discovered on Urantia." Paper 42
It is true that as a wrench can discover fascinating things, if we are interested, through what we say and our observation the revelations and ours discernment.
Every day I am more convinced that everything in creation is analogous.


(477.4) 42:7.2 Within the atom the electrons revolve about the central proton with about the same comparative room the planets have as they revolve about the sun in the space of the solar system. There is the same relative distance, in comparison with actual size, between the atomic nucleus and the inner electronic circuit as exists between the inner planet, Mercury, and your sun.

477.5) 42:7.3 The electronic axial revolutions and their orbital velocities about the atomic nucleus are both beyond the human imagination, not to mention the velocities of their component ultimatons. The positive particles of radium fly off into space at the rate of ten thousand miles a second, while the negative particles attain a velocity approximating that of light.

(479.4) 42:8.6 The mesotron explains certain cohesive properties of the atomic nucleus, but it does not account for the cohesion of proton to proton nor for the adhesion of neutron to neutron. The paradoxical and powerful force of atomic cohesive integrity is a form of energy as yet undiscovered on Urantia.

(479.5) 42:8.7 These mesotrons are found abundantly in the space rays which so incessantly impinge upon your planet.



Well, a humble contribution, but I wanted to answer. :)

Greetings,

Alina
***

#25 Nigel Nunn

Nigel Nunn

    Poster

  • Administrators
  • PipPip
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 28 October 2012 - 03:15 PM

Hi Louis,

The relationship revealed between Paradise and each ultimaton (467.4, 42:1.2) seems to be "gravitational".
Did you want to add some structural, or topological, assumptions?

Nigel

#26 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 28 October 2012 - 07:02 PM

Hi Nigel and Alina: Thanks for the response.

I most certainly agree, Nigel. The relationship is absolutely gravitational. The question is how does Paradise exert its control over matter- energy solely through gravity. Control implies the third derivative of mechanics, a term engineers use, 'jerk'. Jerky gravitational fluctuations are suggested, IMO.

As far as structural, topological assumptions, my opinion is Hyperbolic.

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#27 Nelson G

Nelson G

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Pianos fast cars and airplanes.

Posted 28 October 2012 - 11:04 PM

Maybe I am reading more into this than should be but I cannot help but thinking about this thread and conjecturing about this:

(1297.7) 118:3.6 It may help to an understanding of space relationships if you would conjecture that, relatively speaking, space is after all a property of all material bodies. Hence, when a body moves through space, it also takes all its properties with it, even the space which is in and of such a moving body.

Gravity in these big stars is squishing space out of these material bodies at an atomic or sub atomic level. Do you think this same space remains a property of the material body once displaced? Is the relationship stated suggesting that space can move within space? That one space is separate from another because of it's association with matter?
As the vacuum highlights space by displacing matter, so gravity highlights matter by displacing space?
Life often gives us our greatest gifts brilliantly disguised as our worst nightmares.

#28 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 30 October 2012 - 06:49 PM

Hi Nelson G:

I do believe that space is a property of matter as TUB states in the very quote you mentioned. And since Paradise is the focus of space, the nucleus of the ultimaton must also be the the focus of space. The two spaces may be separated by semi-quiescent space zones (not sure on this one). As for the relationship between gravity and space, I refer you this quote from TUB.


0:6.11 Pattern may configure energy, but it does not control it. Gravity is the sole control of energy-matter. Neither space nor pattern are gravity responsive, but there is no relationship between space and pattern; space is neither pattern nor potential pattern. Pattern is a configuration of reality which has already paid all gravity debt; the reality of any pattern consists of its energies, its mind, spirit, or material components.



In you question, If by the word 'highlights' you mean contrasts, I think it is a matter of density. Although there seems to be a relationship between gravity and space, it is not one of control. Space is a system of associated points and these points, collectively, are the focus of space. Therefore, space and gravity share the same focus and source. :)



Regards, Louis


His Will Be Done

#29 Nelson G

Nelson G

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Pianos fast cars and airplanes.

Posted 30 October 2012 - 10:38 PM

Indeed "contrasts" may have been a better choice of wording - nobody has demonstrated as far as I know that matter and space can be completely 100% separated from one another.
On the other hand, as pattern is a configuration of reality of which space has no relation to, it is kind of like saying space is nothing. But as space is a property of matter, it must be more than nothing.
If the space between two points means something, does that same space have meaning when those points are removed?
Life often gives us our greatest gifts brilliantly disguised as our worst nightmares.

#30 Nigel Nunn

Nigel Nunn

    Poster

  • Administrators
  • PipPip
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:59 AM

Hi Louis,

I think your (superfluid) Anu vortices touch a truth of the matter; but where you suggest one end as electron and the other as proton (angular momentum), I go all out and suggest we use your vortex as a model for the ultimaton itself: ultimaton as superfluid vortex of segregata. The model I mentioned above tames these superfluid vortices by locking them into (reactive) tri-poles, which then (naturally, by design) link and loop themselves into leptons and quarks. The quarks combine as hadrons, and "thar she blows", the standard model.

When I wrote that the relationship revealed between Paradise and each ultimaton (467.4, 42:1.2) seems to be "gravitational", I meant to imply that regardless of space-like separation, as soon as segregata has been organized into ultimata, it responds gravitationally to "the pull of Paradise gravity":

"This modification of the force-charge of space is produced by the action of the Paradise force organizers. It signalizes the appearance of energy systems responsive to the pull of Paradise gravity."


Earlier you wrote,

When TUB says that the ultimatons have Paradise as their nucleus, I am looking for a 'pattern' that illustrates this. The torus is the only topological structure that I can think of. Spinning, expanding/contracting (huddling) donut shells with Paradise in the donut hole. In order to add more ultimatons, add more shells to the donut. The electron would be 100 inbedded donut shells. The proton can be the portion of the donut adjacent to the donut hole and the electron portion the outer portion of the donut. The concentric rings keep sticking in my mind. It is the basic topology of the Master Universe given in TUB. As above so below, no? Just a thought.


I think your confusion comes from misunderstanding the use of "nucleus" at the end of 42:1.2. At the time of writing, electrons were thought of as tiny particles "orbiting a nucleus". In the case of Hydrogen, a single proton serves as nucleus to the shell traced out by the orbits of a single electron. Here, we imagine the electron orbiting its proton nucleus. The proton is not seen as being "inside" the electron. Does this make sense? If so, let's step outwards to the idea of ultimatons orbiting the Isle of Paradise:

In the heart of Havona, the worlds of the Father, Son and Spirit have Paradise as their nucleus. In the grand universe, the material capitals of the Ancients of Days all share Paradise as their eternal and absolute nucleus. In the master universe, Paradise serves as material nucleus for the outer space levels.

Now think about all that segregata freshly organized into ultimata,

This modification of the force-charge of space is produced by the action of the Paradise force organizers. It signalizes the appearance of energy systems responsive to the pull of Paradise gravity.


For me, this conjures an image of the outer space levels as essentially vast belts of ultimata, flowing in paths of "lessened resistance to motion", held eternally by the perpendicular pull of Paradise. For these vast belts of ultimata (lots and lots of unassociated ultimatons), Paradise serves as nucleus. Of course, even after these ultimatons are organized into particles (and begin to notice linear gravity), they are still just a bunch of ultimatons, and thus gravitationally responsive to the absolute material gravitator.

This idea of putting Paradise topologically inside each ultimaton was (I believe) Phil's attempt to justify his idea that material light is Paradise shining out through ultimatonic windows. Such a belief seems like trying to locate the Paradise Trinity inside each human... cute, but "not even wrong".

Nigel

#31 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 01 November 2012 - 11:33 AM

I see what you mean Nigel there are two ways to read nucleus. I will have to find the quote again, but I recall the authors mentioning the havona worlds as the pattern for our worlds. Could this relationship have some sort of correlary to the atomic world? Of coarse trying to imagine 7 dimensional reality as the pattern for 3 dimensional reality seems like a mighty task haha. Let alone trying to bridge the two.

Edited by boomshuka, 01 November 2012 - 11:35 AM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#32 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:21 PM

.


0:4.12 The Isle of Paradise — Paradise not otherwise qualified — is the Absolute of the material-gravity control of the First Source and Center. Paradise is motionless, being the only stationary thing in the universe of universes. The Isle of Paradise has a universe location but no position in space. This eternal Isle is the actual source of the physical universes — past, present, and future. The nuclear Isle of Light is a Deity derivative, but it is hardly Deity; neither are the material creations a part of Deity; they are a consequence.



0:6.11 Pattern may configure energy, but it does not control it. Gravity is the sole control of energy-matter. Neither space nor pattern are gravity responsive, but there is no relationship between space and pattern; space is neither pattern nor potential pattern. Pattern is a configuration of reality which has already paid all gravity debt; the reality of any pattern consists of its energies, its mind, spirit, or material components.



15:4.1 While creation and universe organization remain forever under the control of the infinite Creators and their associates, the whole phenomenon proceeds in accordance with an ordained technique and in conformity to the gravity laws of force, energy, and matter. But there is something of mystery associated with the universal force-charge of space; we quite understand the organization of the material creations from the ultimatonic stage forward, but we do not fully comprehend the cosmic ancestry of the ultimatons. We are confident that these ancestral forces have a Paradise origin because they forever swing through pervaded space in the exact gigantic outlines of Paradise. Though nonresponsive to Paradise gravity, this force-charge of space, the ancestor of all materialization, does always respond to the presence of nether Paradise, being apparently circuited in and out of the nether Paradise center.



41:9.1 The larger suns maintain such a gravity control over their electrons that light escapes only with the aid of the powerful X rays. These helper rays penetrate all space and are concerned in the maintenance of the basic ultimatonic associations of energy. The great energy losses in the early days of a sun, subsequent to its attainment of maximum temperature — upwards of 35,000,000 degrees — are not so much due to light escape as to ultimatonic leakage. These ultimaton energies escape out into space, to engage in the adventure of electronic association and energy materialization, as a veritable energy blast during adolescent solar times.



42:2.14 4. Universe power. Space-force has been changed into space-energy and thence into the energy of gravity control. Thus has physical energy been ripened to that point where it can be directed into channels of power and made to serve the manifold purposes of the universe Creators. This work is carried on by the versatile directors, centers, and controllers of physical energy in the grand universe — the organized and inhabited creations. These Universe Power Directors assume the more or less complete control of twenty-one of the thirty phases of energy constituting the present energy system of the seven superuniverses. This domain of power-energy-matter is the realm of the intelligent activities of the Sevenfold, functioning under the time-space overcontrol of the Supreme.



105:3.4 3. The Paradise Source and Center. Second nondeity pattern, the eternal Isle of Paradise; the basis for the realization-revelation of “I AM force” and the foundation for the establishment of gravity control throughout the universes. Regarding all actualized, nonspiritual, impersonal, and nonvolitional reality, Paradise is the absolute of patterns. Just as spirit energy is related to the Universal Father through the absolute personality of the Mother-Son, so is all cosmic energy grasped in the gravity control of the First Source and Center through the absolute pattern of the Paradise Isle. Paradise is not in space; space exists relative to Paradise, and the chronicity of motion is determined through Paradise relationship. The eternal Isle is absolutely at rest; all other organized and organizing energy is in eternal motion; in all space, only the presence of the Unqualified Absolute is quiescent, and the Unqualified is co-ordinate with Paradise. Paradise exists at the focus of space, the Unqualified pervades it, and all relative existence has its being within this domain.



Hi Nigel, NelsonG and All:



I do not have your expertise in Physics and Astrophysics, but one cannot escape TUB's statement on gravity being the SOLE control of energy-matter. The Standard Model requires nuclear forces because no one can explain why protons don't fly apart in the atomic nucleus. If we are to believe that like charged particles repel, you have only gravity to explain it if you are to believe TUB. Electrons should collapse into the nucleus if one is to believe that opposite charges attract. The standard models says what on this?



TUB says that gravity controls the electron. Does the Standard Model theorize this fact?



I may have misunderstood the meaning of 'nucleus' but the truth remains that the ultimaton has Paradise as its nucleus. TUB says Paradise is not in space but the ultimaton IS in space! What is to be understood here? Does it not follow that the nucleus of the ultimaton is not in space? How is this possible? Is the topology if the ultimaton a donut?



Paradise exists at the focus of space. Space, a system of associated points, focuses at Paradise. Space must focus at all these points, IMO. The Unqualified Absolute pervades space.



The point (no pun intended) is, TUB authors must be using the word, point, in the Euclidian definition as, "That which has no parts". This sounds like Absolutum to me.



So, if the nucleus of the Ultimaton is does not exist in time-space, it exists in the domain of Infinity, the domain of the Unqualified Absolute. This begs the question, can Paradise exist at the center at the Master Universe AND at the center of the Ultimaton? If neither is in time-space domains, then there only remains the Infinity domain. And so Infinity is everywhere else. Let's ponder that one for a minute or two.




Also, Nigel, has astrophysics been able to explain the forces that allow for elliptical orbits? Not the equations that describe the orbits, but how gravity actually controls celestial mechanics. The ellipse is interesting in that it represents an ever changing curvature. Since we live in an elliptical Universe, would it not be important to assume that gravity is not an acceleration but an accelerated acceleration? A simple circle is a represents a constant acceleration. An ellipse has two foci to contend with, one of mass and one 'ghost'. Science cannot give gravity, as we now know it, the ability of exerting its force from two localities. Paradise would solve this problem, but the Standard Model does not recognize Paradise. Those of us on this blog can use the fact of Paradise in conversation without being ridiculed.




Regards, Louis


Edited by loucol, 01 November 2012 - 10:04 PM.

His Will Be Done

#33 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 01 November 2012 - 10:27 PM

Indeed "contrasts" may have been a better choice of wording - nobody has demonstrated as far as I know that matter and space can be completely 100% separated from one another.
On the other hand, as pattern is a configuration of reality of which space has no relation to, it is kind of like saying space is nothing. But as space is a property of matter, it must be more than nothing.
If the space between two points means something, does that same space have meaning when those points are removed?


Hi Nelson G:

Yes, I agree that space must be more than nothing. Space is a property of matter but TUB tells us that space is not gravity responsive whereas matter-energy is controlled by gravity. This next quote from TUB is interesting:


105:2.10 6. The Infinite Capacity. I AM static-reactive. This is the endless matrix, the possibility for all future cosmic expansion. This phase of the I AM is perhaps best conceived as the supergravity presence of the Unqualified Absolute.


I believe this is the only time TUB makes mention of supergravity. The word matrix is also of keen interest in that one can think of space as a matrix, a system of associated points. Space is subabsolute because it is inwardly bounded by Paradise but is boundless as we proceed outwards as far as we can tell. The Unqualified Absolute is above gravity but we are not really told if space is responsive to it, but maybe so. Perhaps your question regarding space being nothing is answered here. Perhaps the points of space are 'holes' of Infinity where the Unqualified Absolute exerts its supergravity presence in the organizing of Ultimatonic formation (I AM static-reactive). Space is the arena of motion (reactive) surrounding Paradise (static).

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#34 Alina

Alina

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,393 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UNIVERSO
  • Interests:*

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:22 PM

Hi Nelson G:

Yes, I agree that space must be more than nothing. Space is a property of matter but TUB tells us that space is not gravity responsive whereas matter-energy is controlled by gravity. This next quote from TUB is interesting:


105:2.10 6. The Infinite Capacity. I AM static-reactive. This is the endless matrix, the possibility for all future cosmic expansion. This phase of the I AM is perhaps best conceived as the supergravity presence of the Unqualified Absolute.


I believe this is the only time TUB makes mention of supergravity. The word matrix is also of keen interest in that one can think of space as a matrix, a system of associated points. Space is subabsolute because it is inwardly bounded by Paradise but is boundless as we proceed outwards as far as we can tell. The Unqualified Absolute is above gravity but we are not really told if space is responsive to it, but maybe so. Perhaps your question regarding space being nothing is answered here. Perhaps the points of space are 'holes' of Infinity where the Unqualified Absolute exerts its supergravity presence in the organizing of Ultimatonic formation (I AM static-reactive). Space is the arena of motion (reactive) surrounding Paradise (static).

Regards, Louis


Hi Nelson. Luis!

It is interesting what you say Louis: "Perhaps your question regarding space being nothing is answered here. Perhaps the points of space are 'holes' of Infinity where the Unqualified Absolute exerts its supergravity presence in the organizing of Ultimatonic formation (I AM static-reactive). Space is the arena of motion (reactive) surrounding Paradise (static)"

Nothing is impenetrable because space is associated a point system, and is in all material
We're saying crossed ourselves through space, we are a point system! We are in space and in turn the space in us and drag the surrounding space, as it somehow.It would be like the earth that drag space during movement.Something curious from the last quote (below)
"Does the pattern — the reality — of an idea occupy space? We really do not know, albeit we are sure that an idea pattern does not contain space. But it would hardly be safe to postulate that the immaterial is always nonspatial"

I am inclined to think that an idea in effect takes up and contain space, but not material...

(1297.6) 118:3.5 Space comes the nearest of all nonabsolute things to being absolute. Space is apparently absolutely ultimate. The real difficulty we have in understanding space on the material level is due to the fact that, while material bodies exist in space, space also exists in these same material bodies. While there is much about space that is absolute, that does not mean that space is absolute.

(1297.7) 118:3.6 It may help to an understanding of space relationships if you would conjecture that, relatively speaking, space is after all a property of all material bodies. Hence, when a body moves through space, it also takes all its properties with it, even the space which is in and of such a moving body.

(1297.8) 118:3.7 All patterns of reality occupy space on the material levels, but spirit patterns only exist in relation to space; they do not occupy or displace space, neither do they contain it.But to us the master riddle of space pertains to the pattern of an idea. When we enter the mind domain, we encounter many a puzzle. Does the pattern — the reality — of an idea occupy space? We really do not know, albeit we are sure that an idea pattern does not contain space. But it would hardly be safe to postulate that the immaterial is always nonspatial.



Tkanks!

Greetings,

Alina
***

Edited by Alina, 02 November 2012 - 02:33 PM.


#35 Nigel Nunn

Nigel Nunn

    Poster

  • Administrators
  • PipPip
  • 1,118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:28 PM

Hi Louis,

So, if the nucleus of the Ultimaton is does not exist in time-space, it exists in the domain of Infinity, the domain of the Unqualified Absolute.


Bingo! Well, almost. You've left out the absonite mechanism used as buffer between finite and absolute domains. If you're looking for a pattern, consider the relationship between individuated persons and the First Source and Center. Now, compare and contrast the relationship of individuated ultimatons to their source and center: sure, the structures dependent on ultimatons can be manipulated locally by finite interactions, but they remain gripped by the one attraction they cannot escape, Paradise gravity. Likewise, mind can accelerate the vehicle for personality manifestation in all sorts of directions, but the personality itself is subject only to the gravity of its circuit. As persons, we have no resistance... to our Father's love.

Regarding "standard models" of 2012, you do well to raise questions. But keep in mind that standard models for particles (QED, QCD) do not include gravity. Current scientific beliefs about gravity are all deeply incompatible with "standard models" for particles. Which means the door is wide open if we have a better description to offer. But keep in mind that with regard to standard models, there are two distinct issues: (1) the nature of the material components, and (2) the nature of the interactions between those components. The simpler first step is to model how ultimatons are assembled into the material components we can measure (e.g. leptons and quarks). The second step is to model how these components interact.

My "thar she blows" moment above refers only to getting the quantum actors on stage, not how they act :D

TUB says Paradise is not in space but the ultimaton IS in space! What is to be understood here? Does it not follow that the nucleus of the ultimaton is not in space? How is this possible? Is the topology if the ultimaton a donut?


This is the interesting question. N-dimensional "donuts" feature in many "beyond the standard model" theories. But let's look at the core of the question. When we think of the space that Paradise is not in, but in which ultimatons exist, Louis, what do you envisage? If we can allow more than three space-like dimensions, then I imagine that something to do with the motion of the Seven Master Spirits through an absonite kernel of the Master Universe sets up what we call subspaces on which standard model interactions can occur.

This finite/absonite interface may solve the mystery of what we call "quantum weirdness". One idea I toss around goes like this: ultimatonic structures are not so much in our (light-accessible, measureable) 3-space, rather they are sequestered onto this manifold via point-like intersections. In this case, given a free, unassociated electron, how many of its component ultimatons are actually on our 3-brane, and how many are oscillating across it? Like chemistry requires valence electrons to work, do particles require valence ultimatons in order to lock onto our 3-brane? If something like this were actually involved, no wonder we have trouble differentiating waves from particles, that is to say "oscillating assemblies of ultimatons".

With regard to Paradise control of its material domain, you point to the failure of what we call "gravity" to account for atomic interactions. But what you identify as insufficient are merely certain current beliefs about how masses attract. That we happen to call these "gravity" should not imply they have anything to do with the control Paradise exerts on the ultimatons bound into quarks and leptons. And while you point to quotes about material control, keep in mind this other side of the coin:

As atoms are constituted, neither electric nor gravitational forces could hold the nucleus together.


Recall that the authors dismiss (as a local perturbation, nullified by intergalactic space) the sort of gravity that holds planets in elliptical orbits. In the context of Paradise control of subatomic interactions, let's ignore this trivial perturbation and consider how "Paradise gravity" may be in operation. Referring to my two diagrams (above) of a hypothetical tri-polar arrangement of ultimatons, how about we associate Paradise gravity with this three-fold color interaction; ultimatonic structures spinning in 3-space, while locked onto an absolute perpendicular pull: is this the origin of quantised chromo-dynamics?

It's worth pointing out that the familiar equations of physics were built simply to predict interactions between components. No one claims to explain what these "standard model forces" are. To give you a feel for the issue, even in today's world of electricity and electronics, we have no idea what EMF (electro-motive force) is, but our equations allow engineers to manipulate it exquisitely. A bit like the way Power Directors and Centers so exquisitely manipulate energies with absolutely no idea about what those energies are :D

Thanks for helping to stretch the old grey matter!!

Nigel

#36 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 02 November 2012 - 03:57 PM

My question is how does motionless paradise interact with 7 dimensional time and space and than how does 7 dimensional time and space interact with 3 dimenionsal time and space? Does the fact that spiral galaxies are all coplanar help them to interface with the absonite reality of Havona which is also coplanar to paradise? It would seem that somehow that all of these domains interface with each other. How they do, I have no idea?!

Could paradise be the nucleus of the atom even though it is hundreds of millions of miles away?

Edited by boomshuka aka Warren Scott, 02 November 2012 - 04:14 PM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#37 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:10 PM

My question is how does motionless paradise interact with 7 dimensional time and space and than how does 7 dimensional time and space interact with 3 dimenionsal time and space? Does the fact that spiral galaxies are all coplanar help them to interface with the absonite reality of Havona which is also coplanar to paradise? It would seem that somehow that all of these domains interface with each other. How they do, I have no idea?!

Could paradise be the nucleus of the atom even though it is hundreds of millions of miles away?


Hi Warren:

I will give you my take on dimensions first. I see the physical universe as having two basis shapes. A sphere and a cube. More specifically, picture a sphere inside a cube where the sides of the cube just touch the sphere and are tangent to it. The cube represents space and the sphere, as it rotates inside the cube, represents time. Now we must imagine the cube-sphere complex as getting bigger and smaller, similar to how the universe expands and contracts. They share a common center.

The cube is 3 dimensions, but the sphere must have twice that because it is rotating and this doubles its dimensions. Now we have 6 dimensions. The 7th dimension comes by virtue of the expansion and contraction of the cube-sphere complex.

I have no good ideas as to how these dimension interact with Paradise but I would venture to surmise that it is the same manner of interaction as this cube-sphere has with its shared center point.

Regarding the absonite domain, I'll leave that to Nigel. I have not a clue and this seems to be Nigel's corner of interest.

As to your question about the nucleus of the atom being Paradise, I'll go you one further. IMHO, I have long opined that Paradise must be at the nucleus of all motion in the Universe, from the nucleus of the Ultimaton, to the nucleus of the Sun and Earth, to the nucleus of the Galaxy, right up to the nucleus of the Master Universe.

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#38 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:11 PM

I guess its kind of impossible though to try and picture 7 dimensional reality when we do not even know what 3-d looks like as a morontia being, let alone any of the higher 3 dimensional worlds haha. Its probably a stretch for our minds to even comprehend what true 3 dimensional reality looks like.

I know one thing is for sure, motion begins to slow down the closer we got to paradise.

Edited by Warren Scott, 04 November 2012 - 05:15 PM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#39 Louis aka loucol

Louis aka loucol

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Florida
  • Interests:Science Philosophy and Religion as they relate to The Urantia Book

Posted 04 November 2012 - 06:41 PM

Hi Warren:

I will give you something to picture that is 3 dimensional; A brick. Now 6 dimensional; A spinning top. Now 7 dimensional; A tornado.

Regards, Louis
His Will Be Done

#40 Nelson G

Nelson G

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Pianos fast cars and airplanes.

Posted 04 November 2012 - 06:44 PM

Regarding "standard models" of 2012, you do well to raise questions. But keep in mind that standard models for particles (QED, QCD) do not include gravity. Current scientific beliefs about gravity are all deeply incompatible with "standard models" for particles. Which means the door is wide open if we have a better description to offer. But keep in mind that with regard to standard models, there are two distinct issues: (1) the nature of the material components, and (2) the nature of the interactions between those components. The simpler first step is to model how ultimatons are assembled into the material components we can measure (e.g. leptons and quarks). The second step is to model how these components interact.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Getting lost in standard models - last I recall the standard model was 12 particles and 4 forces and the top quark has yet to be found.
Maybe the idea that there may be compatability between particles and gravity should go the same way that similar ideas about the aether went.
Life often gives us our greatest gifts brilliantly disguised as our worst nightmares.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users