02-24-2011, 07:38 AM
(02-23-2011, 06:50 PM)Confused Wrote:(02-23-2011, 02:53 PM)cosmicgiant Wrote: ...no Big Bang required...
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for the post. Is it possible for you to explain why the model negates the need for the 'Big Bang'? Just made me curious when I read that bit.
Hi Confused,
Well the way I see it, if we accept that everything we see is 'made' out of truth then we should also acknowledge that truth doesn't really need 'time' to 'expand'. It might take us time to draw a diagram of expanded truth, but that which we are drawing essentially permanently exists since it is a purely theoretical (for lack of a better word) construct/object.
This model would support the idea of a Universe that has always existed. We could also see how time would be an illusion of sorts in this model. Our experience of time, as individual entities, could merely be God/truth looking at itself and saying, "well I could see myself like this, or like this, or like this...". Another way of thinking of it would be like truth looking at itself and noting that "truth x eqauls truth y, which is also equal to truth z, which is also equal to truth 'x equals y'..."
So these activities of truth/God looking at itself create the illusion of time or movement, but one can also see how such 'activity' doesn't really need to 'occur' as such, or rather truth exists in such a way that all such 'activities' are permanently occurring.
I hope this sort of makes sense.
Cheers,
Ryan