Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Thu Jan 20, 2022 10:21 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Here's the final script for test-driving in Chicago later this month:

Video 4D (part 1) Ancient Orvonton (Oct 13 2019, 5.5 MB)
Video 4D (part 2) Issues Arising (Oct 13 2019, 5.2 MB)

The first part steps through a very literal rendering of Orvonton, the grand universe, and how the Milky Way fits in. The second shows how cosmologists came to assume a Big Bang, and presents the Urantia Book's alternative. Together, these two scripts form the 7th and final part of my attempted video introduction to the Urantia Book.

If anyone can think of things to add or remove, please let me know :idea:

with thanks!
Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 1007
maybe some mention of cyclic models preferred by einstein and others but didnt meet the scientific/mortal timebound mind frame that insists everything must have a beginning and an end? not critical to the points you're making though....just a bit of the history that interests me.

i've only read the second paper on the big bang nigel...it's really good but appears to be missing some content in the last couple of pages in the file uploaded though...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Makalu wrote:
maybe some mention of cyclic models preferred by einstein and others but didnt meet the scientific/mortal timebound mind frame that insists everything must have a beginning and an end? not critical to the points you're making though....just a bit of the history that interests me.

i've only read the second paper on the big bang nigel... it's really good but appears to be missing some content in the last couple of pages in the file uploaded though...

Thanks Makalu -- good idea about pointing to exisiting cyclic models. Original version had 20 minutes on work by Penrose, Steinhardt & Turok, etc. Current script is what's left after trying to squeeze 5-hour original into 45 mins :?

Regarding "missing content" from those last few pages, over the next two weeks I'll be working on ways to wrap up the presentation. This version is for non-expert UB students, gathered for a general discussion of scientific issues provoked by the Urantia Book. Next version will be for a general YouTube audience, which will serve as springboard into the technical model underlying current handwaving.

For a more general UB audience, the first part may be of interest. This is my attempt to show that a literal rendering of some UB ideas can hang together quite well :shock:

Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Latest versions:

Video 4D (part 1) Ancient Orvonton (Oct 20 2019, 5.5 MB)
Video 4D (part 2) Issues Arising (Oct 20 2019, 5.2 MB)

Here's a link to a folder with the original animated PowerPoints, if anyone wants to step through the movie :D

Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 987
Hi Nigel,

That's nicely put together. The interesting observation and visualization of the sort-of teardrop shaped area of each superuniverse heading towards Paradise is something I've pondered too. There would seem to be not just a circular force exhibited by Paradise gravity but some type of linear one also. But the revelators don't describe that, do they?

We do see many examples in the sky of very elongated galaxies. Is that only because we view them from an angle or are there galaxies which are known to be elongated rather than circular? Any departure from a circular revolution would demand some force to pull very, very hard from a fixed point in space (ie., Paradise or some other gigantic force in the Outer Space zones).

I can't subscribe to the idea that there are 9 other galaxies of similar size to The Milky Way galaxy that comprise Orvonton. The primary reason is that we see none of them and the revelators tell us:

Quote:
15:3.4 (167.20) Of the ten major divisions of Orvonton, eight have been roughly identified by Urantian astronomers. The other two are difficult of separate recognition because you are obliged to view these phenomena from the inside. If you could look upon the superuniverse of Orvonton from a position far-distant in space, you would immediately recognize the ten major sectors of the seventh galaxy.


So that essentially means that The Milky Way must be very much extended and elongated apparently than currently believed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Riktare wrote:
I can't subscribe to the idea that there are 9 other galaxies of similar size to The Milky Way galaxy that comprise Orvonton. The primary reason is that we see none of them and the revelators tell us:

Quote:
15:3.4 (167.20) Of the ten major divisions of Orvonton, eight have been roughly identified by Urantian astronomers. The other two are difficult of separate recognition because you are obliged to view these phenomena from the inside. If you could look upon the superuniverse of Orvonton from a position far-distant in space, you would immediately recognize the ten major sectors of the seventh galaxy.


So that essentially means that The Milky Way must be very much extended and elongated apparently than currently believed.

Hi Riktare -- thanks for those comments!

As you'll see in the animated version, once we allow for the possibility that the seven superuniverse "spokes" of the grand universe "wheel" (15:0.1) all lie in the same plane, and that their component major sector spirals (which we "would immediately recognize", 15:3.4) are likewise co-planar, then allow for Orvonton (not the Milky Way) to be "very much extended and elongated" ("length far greater than the breadth", 15:3.2), and then add the fact that these seven superuniverse "spokes" are acted upon by tidal forces mediated by Paradise-Havona, then... (referrring to slides 51-52 of Part A), once those spiral sectors are tilted 90 degrees, and dropped down into the plane of the Milky Way, how would astronomers detect such "vanishingly faint echos" lurking directly behind the "dense diameter of the [foreground] Milky Way" (32:2.11) ?

This ESO movie gives an idea of the problem astronomers face. That video zooms into a region 5.7 degrees below that "dense diameter". What if they were to zoom not 5.7 degrees BELOW, but right INTO the midplane? I try to make this issue clear in the animated version.

Of course (as you rightly point out) the glitch in my speculation is their statement: "eight have been roughly identified" (15:3.4). However, given that they also state that many of their "statements regarding the physical sciences" (101:4.2) will in fact "stand in need of revision", can I ask you to try a thought experiment?

Try leaving out that one statement ("eight have been roughly identified"), and take a fresh look.

As you know, most other (classical, spacetime) alternatives fare much worse :biggrin:

Looking forward to your thoughts!
Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 987
Some spontaneous thoughts are occurring: The "Dark Gravity Bodies" that encircle Havona might have a powerful effect on the superuniverses and might account for an elongation, pulling all nearby matter towards them.

Another effect might be the procession of pervaded space from Paradise which might very well make our reckoning of long distances invalid, along with our view of astronomical geometry. But it hardly seems likely that we could develop a suitable concept of how a geometry of space respiration works and how that might affect our perceptions of distance and directions.

To go along with your suggestion that there might be a strict plane that all 7 superuniverses lie on, we are told that:

Quote:
11:8.9 (126.5) Paradise is the absolute source and the eternal focal point of all energy-matter in the universe of universes. The Unqualified Absolute is the revealer, regulator, and repository of that which has Paradise as its source and origin. The universal presence of the Unqualified Absolute seems to be equivalent to the concept of a potential infinity of gravity extension, an elastic tension of Paradise presence. This concept aids us in grasping the fact that everything is drawn inward towards Paradise. The illustration is crude but nonetheless helpful. It also explains why gravity always acts preferentially in the plane perpendicular to the mass, a phenomenon indicative of the differential dimensions of Paradise and the surrounding creations.


On the other hand, such a plane might be equally as "ragged" as the periphery of The Grand Universe. Nearby visible galaxies that seem to lie on a plane, such as the "Council of Giants" occupy only very approximately a plane, don't you agree? Most seem to lie within, say, 10 million light years of a super-galactic plane. Still, it may be an important observation.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Here's the (much-adjusted!) script presented in Chicago on November 2:

Part 4D (A): Orvonton (part 1 of 2, Nov 1, 2019)
Part 4D (B): Issues (part 2 of 2, Nov 1, 2019)

As before, the first part ("Orvonton") steps through a very literal rendering of Orvonton, the grand universe, and how the Milky Way might fit in.

The second part ("Issues") shows how cosmologists came to assume a Big Bang, and presents the Urantia Book's alternative.

To get a feel for how the script goes, here's a rough video that steps through the slides: Test drive (Nov 2)

Sadly, that video mostly shows the narrator trying to flip through 120 pages of script, rather than the animated visuals; but it does give an idea of the ideas.

Before starting to record this as the missing final video in that series, I'd really appreciate if anyone can point out things which are wrong, inconsistent, could be expressed better, or should be left out.

thanks!
Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Dear Friends,

In anticipation of the upcoming launch of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), here's a link to the final part in that "Cosmology" series of videos (PlayList). Please excuse the length; for future reference, I wanted to keep the story of Orvonton together with issues faced by current cosmology.

On smaller screens, video is best viewed at 720p. For big screen TVs, the full 1080p version looks good... but the file is over is 4 GB.

YouTube video: Ancient Orvonton, and a young cosmic web?

Script (1st half): Ancient Orvonton (Nov 15 2021)
Script (2nd half): Issues (Nov 15 2021)

Nigel


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:03 am +0000
Posts: 2364
Location: US
nnunn wrote:
Dear Friends,

In anticipation of the upcoming launch of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), here's a link to the final part in that "Cosmology" series of videos (PlayList). Please excuse the length; for future reference, I wanted to keep the story of Orvonton together with issues faced by current cosmology.

On smaller screens, video is best viewed at 720p. For big screen TVs, the full 1080p version looks good... but the file is over is 4 GB.

YouTube video: Ancient Orvonton, and a young cosmic web?

Script (1st half): Ancient Orvonton (Nov 15 2021)
Script (2nd half): Issues (Nov 15 2021)

Nigel


Thanks a trillion, Nigel. Much appreciate your graphics with voice-over, and the dot connections between evolved and revealed astrophysics. Definitely 'something interesting' notwithstanding its super-arcane hyper-obscurity to the cosmically challenged :)

.

_________________
Richard E Warren


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 987
Great work Nigel! The videos are becoming increasingly clear and explanatory and the newer additions are very meaningful and suggestive.

I still can't subscribe (in the least) to the idea of 9 additional galaxies, in effect, comprising Orvonton for the reason I commented on earlier. There is no way the revelators would have deliberately misled us with a very plain statement about astronomer's identification of the 8 major sectors, and then regard that statement as something that needs to be retracted. Neither is there a need for the 9 additional galaxies. The Milky Way may very well be extended in length such that we simply can't see that extension as it would be behind the zone of avoidance. Apparently, each coupled pair of spiral arms is regarded as a major sector in my opinion, with the Magellanic clouds likely being one or two major sectors themselves.

Your presentation inspired me to study again the book "Regular Complex Polytopes" by H. S. M. Coxeter. I'm not a geometer and the going is tough since they use specialized mathematical terminology. But I feel the material there can very likely be used to work out and describe how ultimatons can be arranged to fit within an electron or other particles. One interesting thing is that symmetric structures tend to have multiples of 12 vertices (the vertices would be where an ultimaton would lie). However, there are 2 generating groups that can generate structures with 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81 or 100 vertices. One group has the designation p[4]2 where p can be 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10. Unitary groups, where quaternions are invoked, are used heavily in the book so I believe the book's geometric approach fits very well and naturally into the physical aspects of subatomic particles.

P.S. The revelators give us the registry number of our planet. It is about 5.7 trillion if I remember correctly. That seems to mean that one minus that number is how many inhabited planets had already been created before our planet. So each superuniverse now has likely just a bit less than a trillion inhabited planets. That's quite an enormous number!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:14 pm +0000
Posts: 136
Hi Riktare,

With regard to 15:3.4 and 41:3.10,
UB 15:3.4 wrote:
"Of the ten major divisions of Orvonton, eight have been roughly identified by Urantian astronomers." (15:3.4)

UB 41:3.10 wrote:
"Better methods of space measurement and improved telescopic technique will sometime more fully disclose the ten grand divisions of the superuniverse of Orvonton; you will at least recognize eight of these immense sectors as enormous and fairly symmetrical star clusters." (41:3.10)

the only indication I can find in the literature is a diagram following page 381 in this 1912 paper by Eddington (see page 15 of the pdf). To help organize the spectral data in his 2-way "star drifts", he divided the "dense diameter" of the Milky Way into 8 divisions. Note that it was Eddington who championed the idea of those "star drifts" (15:3.13).

PS: the arrangement of spirals depicted in the video would not be due to gravity (either linear or absolute), but rather due to the puissant motion of organized whorls of ultimata (11:8.6, 42:2.13). Recall the "iceberg-in-a-flow" analogy from time 39:48.

PPS: looks like the (infrared-optimized) JWST is safely on its way ?!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 987
Thanks for those references. Eddington's paper is interesting, if I understand basically what he is showing. It seems to me the diagram is showing that nearby stars have a preferred traveling (or drift) velocity that depends on their traveling direction when viewed from the Earth. Each of those 8 banded regions tag a velocity range for the stars much like elevation lines on a topographic map, right? Or is it rather the star's position rather than traveling direction that he maps to longitude and latitude?

The correlation between velocity and direction is remarkably consistent. Is that an after effect of the dissolution of the Andronova nebula I wonder? What else would lead to that type of pattern?

So far so good with the Webb telescope. But it will be a long and very complicated process to unfold its lens and other components and then calibrate it from what I hear.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

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