Appendix 4. ON METAPHYSICS: PROVING THAT ETHER (AND CAUSE AND EFFECT) IS LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED,
BEGINNING WITH THE ARGUMENTS
OF PROBABILITY BY CYRENE'S CARNEADES OF THE THIRD PLATONIC ACADEMY; AND WHY BOTH THE
GEOCENTRIC THEORY AND HELIOCENTRIC THEORY ARE BOTH VALID BECAUSE OF RELATIVITY
1. ON PROBABILITY
On Carneades' Probability
1. The Platonist Carneades says that although we can never
know the true cause-and-effect of every event (with 100% accuracy), we can still get to the practical truth
of things through probability. I will try to
explain what I believe he means in the text below.
2. Science and philosophy try to figure out cause-and-effect truths by way of higher probability.
Higher probability can be as low as 51% of the time (in any given instance) and higher probability
can go up to 99.9999999999999999% etc. (in any given instance). But higher probability will never be
100% certain to our finite minds, since it requires an infinite mind to see all of our
future, present, and past: meaning, to see if there exists an exception to any cause-and-effect event.
3. Because everything in our Universe is finite (including our minds) we shall never know a true 100% cause-and-effect belief in anything if it has not already been proven by God.
For we may think some cause-and-effect event is 100% proven (by our scientific knowledge) but it may truly just be 99.9999999999999999% etc. proven in reality.
4. For any future cause-and-effect event 100% known is infinitely known, and any future cause-and-effect event infinitely known is 100% known. So only an infinite being can know cause-and-effect events with 100% accuracy all of the time. Therefore only God is truly wise in his infinite 100% accurate knowledge, and we finite beings are only somewhat wise in our knowledge concerning predictions through higher probabilities.
5. For if we know 99.9999999999999999% of the time that some cause-and-effect event will occur in nature (because of our scientific research) then we can be surer in our knowledge than if we only knew what might happen 50% of the time, if science was not used to investigate that event.
6. Meaning, science and philosophy can narrow down any cause-and-effect event to almost just as excellent as 100% accuracy, which is why science and philosophy are still important.
And if any natural counter event (to a cause-and-effect event) occurs that proves our belief was not 100% accurate, we can narrow down the likely culprits and still have the advantage of knowing what is going to happen for most of the time.
Higher probability, proven by our sciences, is nothing to laugh at when you come to realize that higher probabilities, combined with our ability to analyze and correct for unseen events (or mistakes) for cause-and-effect events, can make our cause-and-effect knowledge accurate to a very high degree—which is nothing to sneer at.
So the skeptics are wrong in making sport of our scientific and philosophical knowledge concerning cause-and-effect events and
probabilities--for by higher probability we can predict
the future, with very great accuracy, concerning any event or occurrence.
7. Now Carneades did not argue against the skeptical claims laid down by the previous philosophers
of the school he belonged to.
And even though
he knew that we could never know anything with 100% certainty (like those previous philosophers also
believed), he still believed we need probability
in many areas of life. In a sense, his philosophy of
probability is suited towards William James' philosophy of Pragmatism, since Carneades' philosophy of
probability is meant for the practical side of life.
I. Aristotle's Probability of the Psyche: On Probability's Mind Trick
1. In his On Rhetoric, Aristotle says we are more efficient at demolishing a probability than at trying
to build one up. Meaning, the mind is tricked into thinking that what is not necessary is instead
2. Aristotle, however, did not state why the mind is tricked. I believe the reason that we are tricked into
thinking a probability is not probable, with the use of
a single counter example, is because from birth we watch out
for dangers just by the limited experience that one example makes. This process can increase a child's
survival rate since what they lack in experience they make up for in always alert caution.
3. For when you think of some probability as not probable, you are taking into account multiple causes
and effects. But when you think of some probability as not necessary, you are just thinking of a single
counter example of cause or effect.
4. And because of the mental wiring of our early years in life, we get confused into thinking that what
is possible (in only one instance) seems highly probable (in most instances)
and that what is impossible (in only one instance) seems highly improbable (in most instances).
But this is actually false.
II. Aristotle's Probability of the Psyche: On Reversion
1. There are some people who cannot determine Fiction from Fact. They no longer judge by probability;
they instead judge only by possibility. Meaning, they think everything is possible.
2. But the truth is not everything is possible. And a corollary to this is not everything is probable.
3. A cure for someone who judges by possibility alone would seem to be to make them able to judge by
4. The childlike psyche is the most gullible because it doesn't judge every event by probability.
There are a lot of things that the child judges by possibility without probability.
5. When a child grows older that child relies on probability in judgment more and more. However,
a reversion in psyche (or its breakdown) similiar to Rene Descartes' First Meditation, can bring any adult back
to a childlike state.
III. Examples of Probability on Space Junk crashing into a Golf Course again.
1. E.g. a child may say: "I will never go to any golf course so that no Space Junk falls on me."
2. E.g. an adult scientist may say: "There is a 76% chance that the falling of Space Junk
will occur again on that golf course over the next 100 years."
3. E.g. God might say: "Falling Space Junk on that golf course will only happen two more times in all of eternity."
IV. Aristotle's Probability of the Psyche: On Induction
1. In his natural state, a man becomes certain of something through induction.
E.g. two or more probable instances are linked together to form a generalized certainty.
2. When man's brain becomes mentally ill this process is damaged by over thinking:
i.e. a constant ripping apart of probable instances is created so that nothing is certain and everything becomes possible.
3. E.g. a normal man will need just three instances or more (of memorized signs) to remember that a door was closed and locked by him ten minutes ago, etc..
4. What the over thinking, mentally sick man will do is destroy each of the three (or more) memorized signs by thinking up a counter example to each one. And there will follow a chain reaction of counter instances that will destroy every probability thought up by the sick man.
5. Some may comment that there exists a counter instance to every probability. That is true. But wheras the mentally ill person will not get tired of this query, the sane man will. It is this non-caring impulse of the sane man that allows him a better experience in judging by probability than the mentally ill man.
6. For the root of mental illness is the belief that every counter instance matters.
And the root of sanity is the belief that every counter instance does not necessarily matter. This gives the sane man more of an advantage in logic
and judging by probability than the mentally ill man.
[Note: The sane man takes calculated risks and recognizes the value of probable, multiple signs. The insane man doesn't do such
things and is obsessed with
his own confusing thoughts.]
V. Probability's Rhetorical Algebra
1. "There is an exception to every rule." I.e. one counter instance to any probability.
2. "There is an exception to every exception to every rule." I.e. the exception to every rule is canceled out
and we judge again by probability.
3. Probability and 'the exception to every rule' are logically connected and work in one cycle with each other.
2. ON THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE
On the error of Werner Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
I believe Werner Heisenberg's declaration that no one can predict the future is misleading.
But, yes, because we men are finite beings
we can only judge by higher probability--which, by itself, can be very accurate.
We cannot know any future event with 100% certainty though, but only an infinite
being (meaning an omnipotent God) can. Isaac Newton's strict causality is valid because God himself exists.
But only God himself understands the universe through strict causality. We however can only know universal
causality through higher probability--which, like I said, can be very accurate.
However, this lack of omniscience in the human finite state is how we are fooled
into thinking that Newton's law of strict causality is wrong. But because God exists, Newton's law of strict
causality is a true law in the universe. Therefore, Albert Einstein was right in opposing Heisenberg's theory
and in defending Newton's laws.
Heisenberg was correct in that we finite beings cannot know with 100% certainty the future,
but he was wrong
in thinking the universe has no fixed laws (created by God in his economy)
that dictate the future of the universe.
[I think Jesus himself is not omniscient, nor knows
all causality, as he hints at in the Gospel of Matthew 24:36. However, this does not mean that God
did not give great powers to Christ. It just means Jesus is not the exact same thing as God the Father.
Of course, this would mean Jesus is homoiousios with the Father (or like him)
and is not homoousious with the Father (or the same as him.)]
Now one of the differences between a finite being and an infinite being is that a finite being, no
matter how much knowledge he possesses, can only predict things through higher probability. And an
infinite being, or God, predicts all predictions with 100% accuracy. The Koran itself teaches that
one should only say 'God willing' when stating any kind of future action. For we do not know
with 100% certainty how something will turn out but only God knows. Although, science and philosophy
can make our predictions very accurate--just not 100% accurate. For God has 100% knowledge of the
future, but we finite beings don't have 100% knowledge of the future.
[By the way, Newton and Einstein's belief in determinism does not rule out the belief in chance events.
I may pick up a ball and throw it from point A to point B, but God willed me and allowed me to do that.
Likewise, if I am not mistaken, Lady Luck
may exist and turn a poor man into a rich man, but the power of economy to will and do that
was created by God himself and not Lady Luck. An example of this is when Jesus is at trial and he tells
Pontius Pilate that the only reason Pilate had power to judge Jesus by trial was because God gave him that
power. So chance may exist in a universe of determinism, but it is God who uses and rules all things directly
or indirectly. God, himself, doesn't play with chance on an equal level with his own powers of determinism,
but rather he uses chance and totally controls it for his own purposes and ends.]
The following passages from the Bible support and confirm the idea of determinism:
Eccl. 3:1-8, Isaiah 45:9-12, John 6:65-66, 19:10-11, Romans 9:18-21.
But why does being ethical still matter? Read the following parable...
Once there was a king who summoned two young men before him. The first man he turned into
his future succesor, while the second man he turned into the kingdom's executioner. Over the years,
the executioner killed many hundreds of men, by order of the king; while, the king's future successor walked
in the ways of piety and mercy. When the king was soon to retire from his occupation of being
king, he summoned both men before him.
The king told the future successor to succeed him as king, while the executioner was to die. Now the executioner,
when he heard this, became furious and demanded to know why he was going to be put to death when all
of his duties were ordered by the king. The king replied: "I know you could not lift one finger without my
leave. But since you polluted yourself with such foul acts, you must perish, so the kingdom, in turn,
will not be polluted by your nefarious past and character."
[Determinism or not, the moral of this parable is to do many good works in life to
survive God's future wrath.]
The following Logic of Determinism vs. The Uncertainty Principle
is based on Part Three's Logic of Absolute Time vs. Relativity
If we need to calculate the universe,
And if we can calculate Determinism,
We do not need The Uncertainty Principle.
But we need to calculate the universe,
And we cannot calculate Determinism, (since we are finite, and not infinite, in nature),
Therefore we need The Uncertainty Principle (and therefore Quantum Theory).
Note: Therefore a Unified Field Theory may be impossible to figure out, since
the field of Quantum Theory will always be incomplete, and Determinism is impossible
to figure out unless you
are God himself.
3. ON THE ETHER
On the Ether and Cause and Effect
The philosopher David Hume suggests that since we cannot sense the middle part of
causality that it does not exist, meaning: all
science is false. (Although, he once hinted, contrary to his dogmatism, that everything needs a cause.)
But what do we know about cause and effect? We know that it functions in
time with before and after, that we can sense the before and after but not what comes between them.
The middle part of cause and effect is left anonymous. Therefore, I think there must exist a higher force
between cause and effect that we cannot experience with sense perception as human beings.
And yet it is unseen like one of Plato's divine forms.
It must exist for a cause to produce an effect. This middle part of cause and effect
is what I believe is called ether. I think no cause and effect can happen within our universe without ether.
Now I believe ether runs normally in our universe, according to the laws of physics, mathematics,
reason, logic, biology and all other sciences: except during miracles.
The latter is when the ether is either withheld from a cause and effect, or forms an alternate effect,
Therefore, ether is either divinely permitted or divinely not permitted. Ether is the higher, unseen force of
God's determinism. Hume was puzzled at the unknown medium that could bridge the gap between
cause and effect. That gap is bridged by ether.
More on Ether and Miracles
I suppose if ether does not exist, and is not the bridge between cause and effect, then God would have to change
the laws of the universe everytime a miracle took place. God would also have to change those same laws back
to their original state; and, a miracle, like the Red Sea parting, might occur everyplace
there exists an ocean (or sea) during the time that miracle happened--or worse, a universal cataclysmic event
might take place because of opposing laws in conflict with one another. Ether,
which is a solution to this problem, would allow a temporary
miracle to happen, in an isolated place, anywhere and at anytime,
without changing and rechanging the laws of the physical universe
whenever (and wherever) there is need of a miracle somewhere. Plus, if ether exists, determinism could exist as well.
In a universe in which ether doesn't exist, determinism could not exist as well, because
(without ether) God would
be working at random forever--which is totally opposed to any sort of divine plan, omniscience,
or God's 100% (infinite) knowledge of the future. Meaning, fixed miracles can be pre-planned with ether
but not without ether, since a label of future date can be applied to every future ether miracle,
which cannot happen if God acts at random. See Eccl. 3:1-8 and John 9:1-7.
Now some may quote Genesis 18:14 and say God can do
anything. That is true, God can do anything. But many times God sends various angels to perform
miracles in the universe. And it would make more sense if an angel altered an ether's effect,
or stopped an ether to produce an effect, or both,
than if that angel had power to alter the laws of the universe in any fashion he wished. The above may
also be true concerning the Christ. See The Koran 3:49.
The Logic of the Ether Medium of Cause and Effect
If cause and effect doesn't work,
There is no need for a medium between cause and effect.
But the cause and effect of science works,
Therefore, the medium (of ether) is needed for the cause and effect of science to work.
And since cause and effect works inside of science because of the ether,
Cause and effect works outside of science because of the ether.
David Hume inadvertantly proves that God exists
If Hume's hint is correct about a medium to cause and effect,
Then he is wrong about God not existing.
But Hume's hint is correct about a medium to cause and effect,
Therefore, God must exist.
For the medium of cause and effect can only be a divine ether.
And for there to exist a divine ether,
There must also exist a divine God.
The Problem of solving The Unified Field Theory
Column (A) ----------------- Column (B)
Determinism---------------The Uncertainty Principle (& Freewill)
Ether in Causality---------No Ether in Causality
*Column (A) is composed of complete theories which cannot be proven by a finite being's observation.
**Column (B) is composed of incomplete theories which can be proven by a finite being's observation.
(Although, having no Ether in Causality cannot really be proven.)
***However, the gut feeling (and logic) of the wise, who believe in God, say Column (A) is how the universe is truly run,
and Column (B) is how the universe seems to run but is not really run that way.
But since it is impossible for us finite beings to figure out Column (A), Column (B) will most likely
always be valid to mankind--i.e. except for the rejection of ether.
****By the way, the Michelson-Morley experiment cannot refute my idea of ether, since my ether is
invisible and non-corporeal. (Of course, there exists only one corporeal aspect of ether and that is
Jesus Christ.--see below titled: 'The Unmoved Mover and Ether').
Summary of above:
1) The cause and effect of science works through higher probability. Hume's belief that we cannot sense
a causal connection, in any cause and effect, is true. The causal connection, therefore, must be a
higher Platonic form based on Plato's forms. This Platonic form is called ether.
2) The ether both validates every cause and effect and is recollected after the "witnessed" effect
of every cause takes place. However, the ether cannot be sensed.
3) It would be ridiculous if there would be no causal connection (meaning no ether) between
cause and effect events for two reasons: 1) miracles would occur in the universe without reference to the
laws of physics and the proper order of linear events,
and, 2) the exceptions to every event could not occur without an alteration or
warping of physics laws: which could not occur without ether.
The Unmoved Mover and Ether
Since God is the only Unmoved Mover (or First Cause), the Second Cause must have been the WORD (or
the only perfect
Ether): i.e. Jesus Christ (The Way, The Truth and The Life)--see John 1:3.
For The Koran says: God says the word 'Be' and something is created.
I think Genesis 1:2 speaks about the ether-wind, or Second Cause of existence.
The first thing created by God through Ether, that created thing being: light, was done
through the Word of God (or ether), so light was created in Genesis 1:3.
So the pattern of the creation of light seems to
follow this sequence:
First Cause ----> Second Cause ----> Effect.
God -----------> Ether/Word -------> Light.
Note: Remember, Jesus is not light but the true light, just as he is not bread but the true bread.
(This logic is analogous to Plato's Forms.)
4. EXTRA ARGUMENTS
Stoic Logic on God's Existence
If creation exists, a Creator must also exist.
But creation does exist, therefore there must exist a Creator.
If a Creator exists, creation must also exist.
But creation does exist, therefore a Creator must also exist.
The Ontological Argument Rethought
1. If God is that which nothing greater can exist,
And if he exists solely in the mind,
Then God is really that which something greater can exist,
And is not that which nothing greater can exist.
2. But God is that which nothing greater can exist.
Meaning, God cannot be that which something greater can exist.
So God cannot just exist solely in the mind.
Therefore, God must exist in reality as well.
The Subjective Three Parts of Human Prayer
(1) Prayer ----> (2) Ether ----> (3) Effect
You may believe that all three parts of prayer are ordained by God. Or you may believe that perhaps
the human prayer part is only partially ordained since it requires some human
effort. The truth is that it depends
on one's subjective experience. In God's mind, or in his own subjective (and objective) experience,
all three parts are
ordained by his infinite mind. But in our very own subjective experience, ether and effect are ordained by
God--for they are not up to our choice; however, praying (or not praying) are up to our freewill or choice.
An infinite mind can understand its own subjective viewpoint and any human subjective viewpoint, but a
finite mind can only understand its own subjective viewpoint. A finite mind cannot understand God's own
subjective/objective viewpoint since God's mind is infinite.
So although you may think you are stuck thinking:
God controls all,
so why should I even try to pray....
It is just as equally in our power to think (and to act on):
God controls all,
so I will pray....
Subjective freewill gives us the choice to chose either sloth and pride in the former,
or industry and humility in the latter.
What is the definition of Ether?
1. Ether is the invisible gate between cause and effect that normally stays open for a cause to produce its intended effect--just as
long as that effect is not an impossible one.
2. An ether can be closed or replaced by another gate (or ether) by God or one of his servants.
3. The greatest ether is Jesus Christ. Via veritas.
On Existentialism and Prayer
1. I think that we humans have freewill because we are subject to the present and have finite minds.
Therefore, since our subjective experience is finite, we have the ability to chose our actions
in the present. Einstein
believed in the idea of determinism. But determinism can only exist in God's all powerful infinite mind.
So since God has an infinite mind, determinism exists. But since we humans have a finite mind,
we have freewill. It is the relativity of our finite human experience to time's present
that allows us to have freewill. But it is also
the relativity of God's infinite objective experience to all time as a single whole
that has created determinism. Meaning, both determinism and freewill exist at the same time and are
separated by two very different types of mind.
2. But my idea of existentialism is different from both the traditional monotheistic existentialism and the atheistic
existentialism. I believe that both: essence precedes existence (in God's infinite mind), and that
existence precedes essence (in our finite minds). So they both exist at the same time, just as
God's determinism and man's freewill exist at the same time. We cannot understand both determinism and freewill
existing at the same time because we are finite beings subject to time's present and our own subjectivity.
In the same way, we cannot understand how both essence precedes existence and existence precedes
essence at the same time.
3. I also want to point out that (existentialist or not) the monotheist will have the advantage over the atheist because of
his appeal to God's infinite mind and power. The atheistic existentialist
has no such appeal. This magnifies the power of praying over not praying.
4. And because God is the only First Cause (or First Mover), he is the only one capable
of essence preceding existence both in his own nature and in his creation. And although essence precedes existence in
the creator's design for us, our finite minds can only fully grasp that existence precedes essence.
A Clockwork Universe vs. Divine Dominion: The Difference between
Spinoza's idea of God and Benjamin Franklin's idea of God
Spinoza believed that God made the universe and all of its physical laws
and then quit all of his intervention. In biblical terms, Spinoza's bible began at
Genesis 1:1 and ended at Genesis 2:3. While on the other hand, Franklin's bible starts at Genesis 1:1
and continues on past Revelation 22:21. Meaning, God is still active and will always be active in
guiding the universe and mankind within it. I choose to believe that Franklin's idea of God
is more realistic and makes more sense. If I am not mistaken, Spinoza believes, instead, that
the universe is completely
worthless to God.
5. ON RELATIVITY AND PERSPECTIVE
A) On Perspective
I apprehend that there exists a very large number of perspectives on how
the universe is viewed. All perspectives are relative except for God's objective perspective;
however, there only exists one infinite being
and that infinite being is God. Everything else, or all other things, are finite. So really the first most largest
division of experience has got to be the separation of God's determinism (or objective perspective)
from everything else's subjective perspective and freedom of choice.
Here are two verses of scripture I wish to prove valid:
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies.
Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to
go down about a whole day. *
The Koran 35:13
He causeth the night to enter in upon the day, and the day to enter in upon the night; and He hath given
laws to the sun and to the moon, so that each journeyeth to its appointed goal: This is God your Lord: All
power is His: But the gods whom ye call on beside Him have no power over the husk of a date stone! **
* scripture taken from The King James Bible (public domain)
** scripture taken from The Koran (translated by John Rodwell: public domain)
C) Scripture's Geocentric Theory vs. Science's Heliocentric Theory
1. I believe both scriptural and scientific theories are true since both are subjective viewpoints.
2. Only God knows the ultimate third (or true objective) viewpoint concerning that mentioned above.
We finite beings have no objective viewpoint either way.
3. Here is my logic:
If Relativity is true,
Then the theory that the Sun revolves around the Earth is true as well.
But Relativity is true,
So the Sun revolves around the Earth as well.
D) In a Relative Cosmos, all things are equal except for one's viewpoint in the universe...
1. From an 'relative viewpoint' it makes just as much sense that the Sun orbits the Earth and that the
Earth orbits the Sun. Meaning, both geocentric and heliocentric viewpoints are true.
2. But from our own geocentric or 'Earth-relative-viewpoint' it makes more probable sense
that the Sun orbits the Earth.
3. After all, when we calculate time and the seasons of the year, we are using a geocentric calculation
4. The Earth centered universe must be true, especially if you live on Earth,
unless you too believe in God and therefore Absolute Time and Space.
However, atheists refuse to believe in God and therefore cannot believe in Absolute Time and
Space--if there exists no center of the universe. For there
can only be one objective viewpoint by one infinite being--if there exists no center of the universe.
For those who believe in Relativity, it is just as valid to believe in
the Earth as the center of the universe (or geocentric theory: if you live on Earth) and to also believe in
the heliocentric theory as well--if you live on the Sun.
[What I am getting at is that just as time is relative (throughout the universe), physical perspective
is also relative throughout the universe--and must be if you believe in Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
Plus, Relativity, concerning physical perspective,
must be used by men even if God exists, since man will never have an infinite mind.
However, if there exists a center of the universe, 'absolute time' may exist, which is not dependent
on God's existence--except that God created the universe.]
E) You can also look at it this way:
If there exists a center of the universe,
There can exist Isaac Newton's 'absolute time' for us finite beings,
Since all time in the universe can be based on the center of the universe,
Just as all time on Earth is based on Greenwich mean time.
Likewise, if there exists no center of the universe,
Then, according to Relativity (which is the only option left for man to figure out time),
Any object we stand on can be equally considered to be the center of the universe,
Since any object can equally have its own objective viewpoint.
So, if you live on Earth, the geocentric theory can be true,
But the geocentric theory is not true (for you) if you live on the planet Mercury,
Or on another non-Earth planet etc..
So if God exists, or if there exists a center of the universe,
Then Isaac Newton's 'absolute time' exists.
For 'absolute time' either exists in God's mind or at the center of the universe (or both).
And if God exists, so does Isaac Newton's 'determinism'--for God controls all things.
However, there exists a problem if the center of the universe only exists in God's mind:
We would have no frame of reference of time or place since our minds are finite,
And since God's mind is infinite,
Only he does not need Relativity to judge time or place in the universe.
Plus, if men do not know if a center of the universe exists or not,
Or the mathematics of the center of the universe,
Men must base time and place on relativity.
The relativity of perspective:
When you are on the earth, it looks like the sun circles it. When you are on the sun, it looks like the earth circles it.
When you are on the planet Venus, it looks like both the sun and earth circle it.
Meaning, the center of the universe is relative.
It is impossible to believe the earth revolves around the sun, and not vice versa, unless someone imagines one's frame of
reference outside the earth's spherical zone and somewhere else inside the solar system: e.g. hovering
away from the earth in the direction of the sun.
The earth circles the sun,
If you have the sun's perspective.
And the sun circles the earth,
If you have the earth's perspective.
Note: Some may comment that on any planet that you are on, making it the center of the universe,
'retrograde motion' of other planets in that same solar system will only happen in the solar system
your planetary center of the universe belongs in. Well, I say that just makes your center of the
universe all the more distinguished from the rest!
Some may still believe in the heliocentric theory so what is my point to all this?
I am trying to make the point that since we are finite beings: time, place, and space are all relative to us in the universe.
If only an infinite being (meaning God) can fully understand 'determinism' and 'absolute space and time',
then we finite beings can only fully understand 'freewill' and 'relativity'--these last two being the opposites of the former two.
[So a ‘unified field theory' can only be figured out by God who is infinite, and ‘quantum physics' will never be complete to us men,
since we men are finite creatures and only have finite minds.]
So what was Albert Einstein trying to figure out 100 years ago concerning the Unified Field Theory?
Einstein might have known that only an infinite God could figure out the Unified Field Theory. So I think Einstein was trying to figure out
the Unified Field Theory regardless of the limits of his finite mind. Einstein tried to play God but failed.
Although it could be considered noble to imitate God in knowledge, excluding the Garden of Eden story in Genesis,
what Einstein was doing was impossible.
Man is a wretched creature...
1) Man's mind and experiences are finite.
2) At his greatest intellectual summit, man can only judge by higher probability.
3) Man cannot plumb or figure out the depths of determinism. He can only fully understand freewill.
4) A Unified Field Theory is impossible for man to discover or understand.
5) Man cannot perceive the medium (or ether) between cause and effect.
6) Man's time and place in this universe can only be ascertained through relativity.
7) It is easier for man to conceive that his existence precedes his essence than for him
to conceive his essence precedes his existence.
Conclusion: Through God and the Christ we are saved from being destroyed by such wretched corruption.
On the Holy Trinity and The Koran
If the Holy Trinity is true, our finite minds cannot fully comprehend three persons in one God.
Our finite minds can only understand God (or God the Father), Jesus Christ (the Messiah), and the Holy Spirit
as individuals. It would take an infinite mind to fully understand the Holy Trinity. So the Koran's monotheism
and Christian doctrine (on the Holy Trinity), both can be true at the same time. The Koran has man's perspective on God,
while the Holy Trinity is God's divine understanding on himself, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.
Against Heisenberg's Quantum Egg
For arguments sake, if God cannot visually detect where a particle is (e.g an electron) and its velocity at the same time, then
that doesn't mean God does not know where (and how fast) that particle is going. The reason is because God has an infinite mind.
God's infinite mind knows where everything is at anytime. Some may comment that God can see both the velocity and position of
a particle simultaneously because his eyes are 10,000x brighter than the sun. That's probably true but my argument is that God
doesn't need to see that particle precisely to know exactly where it is while moving. So God would know where a particle is (and its speed)
100% exactly in space whether he could accurately observe it or not. And only God has this capability. So chance is a factor since
we are finite beings, but it is not for God who has 100% knowledge of all events because only he has an infinite mind.
Meaning, both determinism and freewill (& chance) exists and are only separated by the type of mind: one infinite and the rest finite.
Since we know of no center of the universe, the Earth for us is the center of the universe. However, it is only when we calculate,
for things in outer space, beyond Earth's atmosphere (like the orbital path of the Earth or Mars), that the heliocentric viewpoint dominates the
geocentric viewpoint. Not until then though. Plus, once the solar system is left behind, the center of the Milky Way takes precedence.
But once the galaxy is left behind, what takes precedence if there is no center of the universe? Every point in space would
[E.g. For if I were Joshua fighting against my enemies, then the geocentric viewpoint is true for me. It is only when I go to heaven, leaving the
Earth beneath me, that the heliocentric viewpoint takes precedence over the geocentric viewpoint. But even the heliocentric viewpoint
makes no sense outside of the solar system.]
Does gravity pull or does space push?
Isaac Newton believed gravity pulls, but Albert Einstein believed space pushes. But as far as the latter force,
if space pushes then what pushes space? It can only be the ether-wind that pushes space. For if you say there exists no ether-wind,
but that objects fall downwards over the curvature of space, isn't that the same thing as saying that gravity pulls downwards
creating the fall? Therefore
an ether-wind must exist.
David Hume believes there exists five senses, and any idea that we do not trace back to sense experience is a false idea.
E.g. we do not sense a causal connection with a cause-effect, so science is bogus, since science is made up of cause-effect.
He also says we cannot sense God, so he thought God was a made up idea. But Hume doesn't include a sixth sense of the soul.
Our sixth sense has most likely detected the Platonic Forms. It has detected God's presence.
And it also has detected the causal connection between cause-effect which I call ether.
Some may ask how we can detect an operation of the soul? I believe the soul transmits its knowledge to the mind through the emotions.
E.g. if you internally feel calm and peaceful after attending a church service, it is proof you have experienced the peace-giving presence of God.
The ether is also detected by our soul when we can emotionally swear a cause has produced an effect.
Quantum Theory Finis.
1) The mysteries of Quantum Theory are endless for mankind.
2)The Koran says that for everything in the cosmos there exists a finite number. [The Koran Chapter 13.]
3) Only God has an infinite mind.
4) The implication for this is that, for our finite minds,
Quantum Theory is endless.
5) And that only God understands the Unified Field Theory.
6) Meaning Quantum Theory is never ending for physics research.
7) There is a big difference between never ending (or endless) and the infinite.
8) Never ending means the continual addition of a finite number--while the infinite is the final number to all numbers. Only
an infinite mind can house such a number. Meaning, only God can.
Note: Einstein, in his later years, embraced Newtonian physics (and dropped Relativity)
because he wanted to believe in his heart that the Unified Field Theory was discoverable by man.
If you believe that Quantum Physics Theory and Relativity are the limits to mankind's approach to physics, then it must be that
only an infinite mind can discover The Unified Field Theory. Meaning only God can.
The Lun yu
Confucius believed time had a beginning; therefore he believed time was finite. See Book 12 Passage 7 of The Analects.
In response to Matthew 24:36
On the infinite Mind. We who read scripture can assume that Jesus has had a divine, immortal body since his passion and death. The creator himself has a divine, immortal body. Jesus even has a throne in heaven like the creator has a throne in heaven--which we can gather from scripture. We may also confidently gather from scripture that Jesus has a superior mind to all of the holy angels (and creatures) in heaven. But Matthew 24:36 proves that Jesus does not have an infinite Mind like the creator has. In fact, no one has an infinite Mind like God the creator.
In response to Romans 9:15-20, 11:33-34
On Freewill and God's will. God's infinite mind has created infinite Determinism over the universe and over all of creation. But just as our finite minds could never count to the number 'the infinite' (even if our minds counted endlessly, for all eternity), we could never grasp or understand infinite Determinism. So our finite existence has finite Freewill--which is maximum Freewill for all of us finite beings.
On Cause and Effect and Ether
1. A cause and effect rate is based on the rate of time between every cause and its effect.
2. The rate of time between every cause and its effect is based on every object (macro or micro) that transforms (or moves) from every cause to produce its intended effect.
3. The combination of such objects that transforms (or moves) themselves from their cause to their effect, and the time this takes is generically what we term or call ether.
4. Ether is that middle part between cause and effect that was a mystery to the philosopher David Hume. He did not know of the medium between cause and effect.
5. Every ether that is not observed (or experienced by the other senses) is still classified as ether.
6. Association, the psychological term based on human experiences, is the false term given to every ether that is not observed or sensed. So cause and effect is a true extraordinary thing in the universe and so is ether.
All texts are copyrighted by Michael Llenos 2015-2017