That is the energy I am speaking of physical quantity. Matter, and objects with firm boundaries, everything that is three dimensional and it includes everything that we can see, hear, feel, taste or smell. It includes our bodies, the wind, the earth, water, gases, animals, microbes, molecules, everything.
I would guess you have a LOT of faith considering all the rationalizing you are trying to do with the simple statements that Einstein made of being religious.
Later in life in a speech delivered in Berlin, he gave this illuminating account of himself:
Although I am a typical loner in daily life, my consciousness of belonging to the invisible community of those who strive for truth, beauty, and justice has preserved me from feeling isolated. The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavour in art and science. He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious. To me it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that is there. 5
Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. 17
Yes, that sounds like an enormous problem. You might want to think about becoming celebate. Totally give up dating altogether in this lifetime. It's a very terrible situation to be loved by e-mail. Not tolerable.
In particle physics, an elementary particle is a particle of which other, larger particles are composed. For example, atoms are made up of smaller particles known as electrons, protons, and neutrons. The proton and neutron, in turn, are composed of more elementary particles known as quarks.
The Universe if made up of both solid particles and waves. We're taught that particles were the building blocks of all the solid objects in the world. For example, we learned that the very smallest units of matter, such as the electron in an atom, were particles. Similarly, wer were taught that waves-- such as sound and light waves --were nonsolid. There was never confusion between the two; particles were particles and waves were waves.
Physicists then discovered that a subatomic particle is part of what is known as a wave packet. Although waves of energy are typically continuous with equally spaces peaks and troughs, a wave packet is a concentration of energy.
There are two questions we might ask about the particle in this wave packet. 1. Where is it, and 2. what is its momentum? Physicists discovered that you can ask one of these questions but not both. For example, once you ask, "Where is it?" it becomes a particle. If you ask "What is its momentum?" you have decided that movement is the critical factor. Therefore you must be talking about a wave.
Turns out it is both particle and wave simultaneously. Imagine that you have a closed box that contains a wave-particle, a cat, a lever, and a bowl of cat food with a loose lid. If the wave -particle becomes a particle, it will trip the lever, which will flip the lid off the bowl of food, and the cat will eat. If the wave-particle becomes a wave, the lid stays on the food. If we open the box (thereby making an observation), we will see either an empty bowl of cat food (and a happy cat) or a full bowl (and a hungry cat). It all depends on the type of observation we make. Now, here's the part that boggles the mind: Before we look in the box and make an observation, the bowl is 'both' empty and full, and the cat is 'simultaneously' fed and hungry. At that moment, both possibilities exist at the same time. It is the observation alone that turns possibility into reality.
Certainly if we are to believe in God, there would be a distinct and certain order in life and it would also apply to the science or chemistry of all life possibilities. Where there are no explanation in mathematics there are chaos theories, correct?
You may be talking about many aspects of religion but if differ with you in that spirituality is about always seeking to remember what is already known. Those who are seeking are always getting glimpses of information that prove it to themselves internally, in which case we feel a great satisfaction and are at peace while we continue on with our search.
Yes, I believe we slithered out of the oceans and evolved into what we are today. But, I also believe we have always had a consciousness equal to a 'soul' that is an offshoot of God.
As for the parables in the Bible, I would equate them to fables. A fable differs from a parable in that the latter excludes animals, plants, inanimate objects, and forces of nature as actors that assume speech and other powers of humankind. Each offers moral teaching.
quiescent Forum Posts (1,199)
)
RE: EVOLUTION: FACT OR FICTION?