Then there's the God v Science question.

Swimming anadromously for two years:

I’m fully aware that there is no rational necessity, place for theism. I don’t have the ‘thing’ that did something before there was anything; there has always been something. I haven’t encountered a theist yet who can deal with eternity. And many postmodern non-science atheists can’t either. Nature, being is eternal, driven by the instability of absolute nothingness, non-being. If null then !null. Like dark energy, the density of meaningless order as an opposite of entropy, or should I say the density of negative entropy, negentropy, is constant for infinity and from eternity and beyond.

Which doesn’t invalidate an intentional ground of being of natural unstable absolute nothingness per se, but Occam does: God explains nothing but the posit that the instability necessitates intention, at the cost of infinitely more complexity. And no on the other hand, I don’t fall in to the trap of invoking an infinite multiverse to explain fine tuning. I don’t accept the latter at all. Nature self tunes until proven otherwise.

But I desire transcendence of nature, despite it being utterly unimaginable, because of the incarnational claim of Jesus, despite that being easily naturally explicable even with good will; that he was as historic as it’s naturally possible to be and believed everything He said as did his followers.

So I just need to grow up that little bit more?

What is this, “the density of meaningless order as an opposite of entropy”?

And what do you mean by “deal with eternity”? Why is that important? What would dealing with it look like? Since you say “many” can’t, then there must be some who can, or have?

I had the same questions pop up in my mind reading that.

This one also confuses me.
The only thing I see driving nature is the fundamental reality of time marching ever forward.

Evolution = change over time

The density, level of negative entropy (order as opposed to disorder?) must be constant? No matter… how many spacetime bubbles arise, negentropy is inexhaustible.

Eternity (of nature) is the factiest fact there is. Nothing changes. I have never encountered a theist who can deal with that. They all seem to have to have, need a beginning to their story. There are no end, is no beginning, of beginnings.

I guess. If you’re lost in space somewhere. But we are creatures of this planet Earth. There was a beginning and there are many chapters with beginnings and endings, while the over arching nature of Earth continues through all its changes.

Excuse me, but again, this is what I’d define as an example of being lost within one’s mindscape and losing sight of the Physical Reality from which nature flows.
There is a very clear divide between mind/thoughts/consciousness and the brain/body/environment reality all living creatures are stuck with.

“Human Mindscape ~ Physical Reality divide”

Step one to appreciating our human condition.

Okay, not sure what your ellipses mean, and not sure that entropy applies outside of the spacetime we are in, but let’s proceed with that premise. I thought you were, or are advancing some sort of science/faith magesterium, something about the two co-existing, but you say you have never met a theist who can handle eternity. That was a deal breaker for me. I didn’t “handle” eternity, but I came to peace with not knowing how to experience, and being not so good at conceptualizing it.

How’s that going for you?

I gained that (in)sight with eternity.

Later: it has a hard pitiless glare that all Christians apart from the existential avoid.

The same! It’s just a matter of accepting it as a bottom line. The ellipses are for the plays on words, sorry. So entropy only applies in spacetime? Is dark energy (expanding spacetime) negentropy also in spacetime?

4 d later: energy extends spacetime so dark energy must along with it, but oscillatingly acceleratingly so.

I’ve never heard any descriptions of energy of any kind in the quantum background. That thing that Krauss calls “nothing”.

Hmmmmm. The quantum background being the quanta that come in to being from the deepest kind of absolutely nothing? How many of these to a big bang? One? Where quantum gravity swamps, pre-empts general relativity making singularity impossible? I suppose I’ve been subconsciously, unexaminedly thinking of background quanta as openings, channels for negentropy. Erroneously, unnecessarily. But how do we get from minimal quanta of existence to pre-inflation, Planck epoch big bangs? Unless the minimal quanta actually define the big bangs? I dunno. Especially if the net energy has always been zero… nothing became more complex… nothing; everything cancels out.

Neither do I. Nobody does. Do they?

1 Like

Aye, our passions enslave our reason one way and the other.

moved to science sub-forum

Maybe Bohm does. He appears to be talking there in @write4u’s quote about infinite, eternal negentropy; the energy of the primal quantum background as we discussed: