Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Fri May 17, 2024 9:29 pm +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 1015
I think physicists of the day are slowly coming to grips with the "undifferentiated force blanket of all space".

James Clerk Maxwell started the trend (with a proverbial bang) when he produced the series of equations that describe the response of the "undifferentiated force blanket of all space" to the presence and movement of charged particles.
But those equations are a bit crude in several ways:

1. They only describe charged particles
2. Unless they are cast in Quaternion Form, ("SU2" for you specialists), they don't properly account for the micro revolutions or "spin" of elementary particles
3. They don't specifically describe how to deal with receiver motion

Quantum Mechanics attempts to remedy points 1 & 2. Special Relativity has royally botched up and confused point 3. There is a reason that the revelators have described popular efforts regarding point 3 as "dabblings".
However, QM is developing and continually adds "Quantum Fields" to the catalog of things that describe the response of the "undifferentiated force blanket of all space". The weakness of today's QM, though, is that a coherent and unified understanding of how each quantum field relates to the whole picture is entirely missing while many unrealistic or misleading concepts are introduced (such as wave collapse).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:14 am +0000
Posts: 367
Riktare wrote:
I think physicists of the day are slowly coming to grips with the "undifferentiated force blanket of all space".

Quantum Mechanics attempts to remedy points 1 & 2. Special Relativity has royally botched up and confused point 3. There is a reason that the revelators have described popular efforts regarding point 3 as "dabblings".
.


Loved the reference to "dabblings" hahaha

I am thinking of the old adage that "in order to discover new lands one must be willing to lose sight of the shore" and as overwhelming evidence points to the necessity of rethinking nearly everything I applaud any efforts to reject old doctrines and dogmas. I saw the following article this morning.. of course anything we see on-line needs to be taken with a block of salt but it is encouraging to see people willing to challenge the scientific status quo

https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/astronomy/giant-structure-space-universe/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 1015
pethuel wrote:
Loved the reference to "dabblings" hahaha

I am thinking of the old adage that "in order to discover new lands one must be willing to lose sight of the shore" and as overwhelming evidence points to the necessity of rethinking nearly everything I applaud any efforts to reject old doctrines and dogmas. I saw the following article this morning.. of course anything we see on-line needs to be taken with a block of salt but it is encouraging to see people willing to challenge the scientific status quo


The strange thing about point 3 (in regard to the revelators' comment) is that all of the literature needed to fully understand the situation is available to those who search. One might need to "read between the lines" of what has been printed a bit, as well as exercise a bit of realistic thinking to a further depth than is taught by the present educational system. But it's all there, waiting to be brought to full public attention.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:14 am +0000
Posts: 367
Riktare wrote:
pethuel wrote:
Loved the reference to "dabblings" hahaha

I am thinking of the old adage that "in order to discover new lands one must be willing to lose sight of the shore" and as overwhelming evidence points to the necessity of rethinking nearly everything I applaud any efforts to reject old doctrines and dogmas. I saw the following article this morning.. of course anything we see on-line needs to be taken with a block of salt but it is encouraging to see people willing to challenge the scientific status quo


The strange thing about point 3 (in regard to the revelators' comment) is that all of the literature needed to fully understand the situation is available to those who search. One might need to "read between the lines" of what has been printed a bit, as well as exercise a bit of realistic thinking to a further depth than is taught by the present educational system. But it's all there, waiting to be brought to full public attention.


That is good news! When I see articles like the one above regarding "giant structures" one can only hope that other similar discoveries are verified by official outlets and it will be obvious to all that there are not only more advanced civilizations, but that there is an entire universal administration in operation under the guidance of the loving Creator of all things.

Why is it so difficult to research these things, why does one have to pick and shovel their way through Google payola listings in order to put 2 and 2 together and arrive at the logical solution?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:14 am +0000
Posts: 367
Continuing on in Paper 42, I am continuing with this study for my own benefit, it helps me understand more clearly when I dissect these quotes and hopefully someone else will benefit in some way

2. UNIVERSAL NONSPIRITUAL ENERGY SYSTEMS
(Physical Energies)
42:2.1 It is indeed difficult to find suitable words in the English language whereby to designate and wherewith to describe the various levels of force and energy—physical, mindal, or spiritual. These narratives cannot altogether follow your accepted definitions of force, energy, and power. There is such paucity of language that we must use these terms in multiple meanings. In this paper, for example, the word energy is used to denote all phases and forms of phenomenal motion, action, and potential, while force is applied to the pregravity, and power to the postgravity, stages of energy.

42:2.2 I will, however, endeavor to lessen conceptual confusion by suggesting the advisability of adopting the following classification for cosmic force, emergent energy, and universe power—physical energy:

Me: I totally missed these definitions, and I did suffer conceptual confusion as a result.

42:2.3 1. Space potency. This is the unquestioned free space presence of the Unqualified Absolute. The extension of this concept connotes the universe force-space potential inherent in the functional totality of the Unqualified Absolute, while the intension of this concept implies the totality of cosmic reality—universes—which emanated eternitywise from the never-beginning, never-ending, never-moving, never-changing Isle of Paradise.

Me: I have never seen the word "intension" used before, defined as the internal content of a concept.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 1015
pethuel wrote:
Me: I have never seen the word "intension" used before, defined as the internal content of a concept.


Domino Derval: "What sharp little eyes you have."
James Bond 007: "Wait to you get to my teeth 8) " (The film "Thunderball" 1965)

Me: Aha! I never noticed that wording. It is a bit unusual and therefore hard to understand just what is being expressed.

Spontaneously, it would appear to be a misspelling of intention, but that is almost certainly not the case.

It appears that the usage of "intension" is employed to search back towards the original cause or design of the aspect being discussed.
At least that is my immediate interpretation.

Very subtle and sophisticated the revelators certainly are.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: Google [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group