HEAVEN ON A BARBED STICK (Exploring the Bio-edge Book 9)
Contents:
I didn't need to go into the history or politics of why we were going to war. But the Cold War seems to have returned, and both Russia and China are powerful rivals flexing their military muscles and challenging the United States all over the world. But it's not just ideological: All that needs to be explained to properly set up the story. Rapid changes in technology makes the stories more complex as well.
Writing about bomber technology is straighforward and simple to describe for me. But changes in computers, electronics, space, cyber, and the Internet, and how all these shape the battlefield, takes time to research and describe in a novel. I like the tech stuff, but I have to remember that folks read novels for entertainment, not necessarily for information.
It's more complex, but I like the challenge. I love doing research into new technology and then thinking about how that new stuff might affect a future conflict--and make the result entertaining and thought-provoking at the same time. That challenge is why I became an author! Dale Brown My advice to aspiring writers: If you enjoy what you're writing you'll be more likely to finish it, rewrite …more My advice to aspiring writers: If you enjoy what you're writing you'll be more likely to finish it, rewrite and improve it, and market it when the time comes.
It's tempting to try to write a novel about vampires, secret societies, or zombies because we see them every day in movies or TV. And it's true that certain themes have a life cycle. But if you don't care about those subjects, you'll run out of steam before the book is finished, or it's more likely that it won't be your best possible work because you have no interest in the subject.
I have been asked many times to write novels about secret societies and as a Western European history major, that's a subject I enjoy. I have lots of ideas for novels about areas other than near-future war. But I like writing about high-tech military conflicts and geopolitics, so that's what I'll keep doing. In fact, wizened one, aren't you just about the only guy out there writing military techno-thrillers these days? At worst, if I did a crappy job on yet another zombie story, I'd be accused of trying to copycat the market and falling flat on my face doing so.
But if you are really excited about your subject and your story, go for it. Not saying I don't have a "Fifty Shades of Grey" in me, but for now I'll stick with military techno-thrillers Also, nothing says a military techno-thriller has to be set in the near-future Magnetic field sensors can enhance applications that require efficient electric energy management. Improving magnetic field sensors below the picoTesla range could enable a technique to measure brain activity at room temperature Researchers in Eindhoven have developed a new type of low-energy, nanoscale laser that shines in all directions.
The key to its omnidirectional light emission is the introduction of something that is usually highly undesirable A pair of researchers, one with the Public University of Navarre, the other with the University of Bristol, has developed a system of holographic acoustic tweezers that can be used to manipulate multiple objects simultaneously In order to evaluate a material's ability to withstand the high-radiation environment inside a nuclear reactor, researchers have traditionally used a method known as "cook and look," meaning the material is exposed to high Please sign in to add a comment.
Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Theorists apply loop quantum gravity theory to black hole May 31, Phys. Assessing the promise of gallium oxide as an ultrawide bandgap semiconductor December 18, In microelectronic devices, the bandgap is a major factor determining the electrical conductivity of the underlying materials. Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank. I gotta see their math. I was just talking about this sort of model yesterday and the day before. I think this is potentially better relativity both at the cosmic level and the local level because it introduces a mechanism to relate mass to space itself via a mediating particle, which is something relativity doesn't do.
I got some critics from Ira and another guy about the Michelson Morley experiment and such. I don't see any reason an "fluid" model can't still work to tie gravity and space together in a single mediating substance or set of substances.
Related Stories
I will read the paper a little now and some later if there is no pay wall. We have to get rid of the big bang because it implies physics is not god. Same with the anthropic principle. How you are today Cher and where you at, huh? I'm still fine and dandy again me, thanks for asking. I gotta see their math.. Skippy that has never slowed you down before. Usually you just make up something that sounds like a person with a mental condition playing at being the scientist. Why now you have to see some maths, what's different with this one? Its exact form is not important to our argument however, except that it is non-zero and spread out over the range of the observable universe.
This follows from the requirement of causality; even if matter exists beyond the horizon, it will have no effect on what is inside the horizon, including the wavefunction. This still implies no model would ever suffice for the entire universe, but only that which is within our light horizon, which means that the guy on "Science" and "Big Think" was still correct.
Even a "Theory of Everything" can't actually model "Everything". In other words, we interpret the quantum condensate as made up of these gravitons, and described by a macroscopic wavefunction. That is a small particle. The reality of the James Webb telescope's infrared capability to see through the sacred Primordial Gas Cloud has finally begun. So, what will Cosmology Science of the future look like without a BB? As engineer, i see the Big Bang as an impulse response h t of a system initial Black box. What did have the black box inside? Well, if it had been empty, the impulse just had passed through wit no change May be i will analyze it after i die.
This implies that the laws of thermodynamics as we know them are slightly flawed and need corrections. For the record, this actually does not produce an infinite monkey history of the universe, as we can readily demonstrate strings of infinite numbers which nevertheless provably do not contain all possibilities. This is slightly relevant because it still means the universe has one history, or more generally each universe if there is more than one has one history.
It means that Entropy is somehow a form of order at the cosmic level even though it appears to be disorder locally. This I had suspected already anyway. They will need computer models to understand much of anything beyond our common experience and intuition, because visualizing these corrections is pretty freaking hard. Can it predict future threshold events, such as reionization or the appearance of all-new particles or entity-properties as local energy levels change?
This also appears to be a mathematical proof that it's possible for things to exist outside the universe, and that it's possible for infinite reality to exist, which is two key points atheists don't get; the "Who made God" question is actually answered by these equations, in that an infinite Being can in fact exist without cause.
Also, I should suggest that a formula showing past infinitude does not necessarily mean that an infinite past actually exists, it simply shows that if it did exist it would have those properties. You can imagine running a finite clock backwards infinitely, but that doesn't make the operation valid.
The assumption of constant laws is axiomatic, and does not necessarily hold philosophically true for a sub-set of reality, but only for the fundamental. So the equation cannot describe the entirety of reality, but only the observable universe, though it can imply that there may or may not be things beyond what it can describe.
You're missing the idea that the new theories or models do not automatically make it factual and "the word" of science, and other model is wrong. When we don't know how something works with an extremely high confidence level, all we can do is keep building models, proposing theories, etc. The authors of this study likely would not make the claim that their model is "right" and singularity models are "wrong" but instead they present it as a POSSIBLE explanation.
You have made other comments that show you need to try and have more of an open mind. You commented on another article, "If, in an ideal environment earth , life only began once in 4. It is basic Science philosophy that extrapolation can act as a guide to discovery, new physics, etc. Extrapolating our Laws of Physics into the far past and to energy densities far from what we know doesn't make such fiction valuable.
I have a noticed a couple of 'red flag' comments - indicating a abundance of noise without any light.
I suggest if you hear any of that in a thread, you ignore the comment entirely, its almost certainly rubbish. If it can't, even in principle, be measured, then it ain't physics. If you think you can visualize a 10 or 26 dimensional universe or an infinite dimensional quantum universe I welcome you to try! The theist argue that everything comes from something, therefore there -must- be a God, which gives rise to the question, "who made God? The whole question is a response to the inherent contradiction in the definition of God as the necessary first cause.
If you contend that something doesn't need to be caused by anything to exist, you actually destroy the theist argument; God as a creator, or creation itself as a single event, is no longer necessary for things to exist. Unless you explain why God would be the only thing that can exist without a cause, everything can exist without God. Not sure how you come to that conclusion Most of us on phys. Not sure how the use of math and modeling makes a case for the existence of a God. And as far as the lack of "hearing" anything from another world that deniers claim A parallel earth could be down the street just light years away and we wouldn't hear it yet.
Now think about a parallel earth orbiting a star that is ,, light years away still fairly close Something tells me dinosaurs weren't broadcasting RF. Isn't gravity mediated by the curvature of space? Doesn't the Earth move around the sun because the sun curves space in such a way that the earth can stay in orbit? Are we finally witnessing the death throes of the Huge Bang Fantasy?? LaViolette is way ahead with his etheric fluid model, where space is composed of a multitude of undetectable sub-quantum particles which, under proper diffusive conditions, ignite into a self-sustaining, propagating, transformation reaction that we label a sub-atomic particle.
Like sound wave propagation in air, photon reaction propagation is limited by the ultimate transformation reaction speed set by characteristics of the local diffusive medium. And since disturbances of the transforming medium extend well in advance of and into the surrounding medium from the moving photon reaction, the double-slit experiment is easily explained. Sigh yet another who can not understand that atheism does not require an explanation of how it all began or a requirement to prove that God does not exist.
The burden of proof for the existence of God lays completely on the shoulders of the theist. If I am to play a game where the eternal disposition of my "soul" is at stake I will get the rules of the game directly from the game master, not some middleman with his or her own agenda. Until that day comes I will live my life the way I choose to and my choices do not require me to convince you that I am right about what I believe. I've yet to understand how space can expand relativistically, if the speed of light doesn't increase to match.
Of course, if it did, there would be no doppler effect to explain redshift, since redshift requires the light to take longer to reach the receiver and thus be redshifted. When I point this out, the usual response is "the light is just being carried along by the expansion. So there is supposed to be expanding space, based on the redshift of intergalactic light and we know this because we can compare it to stable units of measure, based on the speed of the exact same light???
Of course, every time observations refute this theory, some enormous new force of nature is proposed and accepted. We accept gravity is "equivalent" to acceleration, but the surface of the planet isn't rushing out to keep us stuck to it. Couldn't there be some optical effect, "equivalent" to recession, causing redshift. As an optical effect, the reason we appear at the center would be quite logical. If it compounded on itself, it would explain why this expansion curves parabolically and so no need for dark energy.
Similar authors to follow
Also the CMBR would simply be light from ever more distant sources, shifted completely off the visible spectrum and so be the solution to Olber's paradox. Or we can stick to inflation, dark energy and multiverses. I can only wonder if another generation of cosmologists will chase after that goose, or will they wise up and push the reset button. Suggesting space is composed of theoretical particles is 11 steps backwards. This theory is seeking to replace one current theory of the universe. If, as mentioned in the article, it fits with current observations and gets rid of the uncomfortable truth that the entire theory breaks down at the beginning with the big bang, it is truly a step forward.
The current model of the universe fits well with some observations, as did Newtonian Physics, but just like Newton, there were many areas Einstein did not understand or have the ability to observe. Its only a matter of time before a new theory supersedes it. The drawing is probably incorrect. In all likelihood, the explosion and expansion would be isotropic and thus should be represented by an expanding sphere. The problem with the Big Bang is that it begs the question "What was there before it? Personally, I favor a cyclic universe which undergoes periodic expansions, followed by contractions, followed by a singularity state Big Bang , and then repeats ad infinitum.
It is difficult to prove this as there is no "memory" across a Big Bang event. I believe Hawking postulated something like this in one of his earlier works. The Big Bang and subsequent collapse have strong implications for anyone who believes that consciousness preceded substance. Not talking God, just consciousness. If indeed spirit evolves through multiple incarnations in the apparent physical universe, then if the universe finally collapses, all the spiritual advances of billions of lifetimes get wiped out.
As child Alvy says in Annie Hall, if the universe is doomed "What's the point? Again, if consciousness preceded substance, then the Big Bang start point is a problem, because consciousness is eternal. No big bang, no problem. I like this new theory and am rooting for it. Indeed, in the s and s he made contact with both J. Krishnamurti and the Dalai Lama whose teachings helped shape his work" -I suspect religious philo voodoo mysticism. Not talking God, just consciousness Consciousness is the favored substitute du jour for the soul. It is as fantastical as is god. Well, isn't it the same thing which ancient texts of hinduism says en.
When things get too dense and the calculations begin to fall apart I don't think you just throw up your hands and say "Well, the universe existed forever" and go home for the day. That's just not a solution worth accepting. This is absolutely fascinating! I have always been a fan of the multiverse theory. The equation will have to predict CMB though, let's just wait and see. Is it completely wiped out? Do we all start again as amoebas or less? Our Universe is a larger version of a galactic polar jet. It's not the Big Bang; it's the Big Ongoing. Dark energy is dark matter continuously emitted into the Universal jet.
In all likelihood, you are right. However, this picture allows one to label epochs and not have other quadrants of the sphere confusing the visualization and type. Big Bang for dummies Or maybe you dont. And if you think they arent then you dont know what you are talking about.
Dennett's main argument is that the various properties attributed to qualia by philosophers—qualia are supposed to be incorrigible, ineffable, private, directly accessible and so on—are incompatible, so the notion of qualia is incoherent. The non-existence of qualia would mean that there is no hard problem of consciousness, and "philosophical zombies", which are supposed to act like a human in every way while somehow lacking qualia, cannot exist.
Mass and energy lasts forever, although they can convert. As they exist today, they always did in one way or another.
Saying that the universe is so and so old is like pulling a rabbit from a hat If the universe has no beginning, and the time it has existed is infinite, then, Shouldn't we already have reach a state of thermal equilibrium second law of thermodynamics? Or am I wrong? I don't know how many have followed my complaints about the Big Bang Theory or how corrections to make the trajectories of the physically visible universe work through dark matter and energy are philosophically counter-intuitive even if mathematically effective. While the illustration is trying to use 2 dimensions to illustrate a 4 dimensional problem I still have a problem with that "expansion" period and am more of the mind that the "change of state" from a prior universe is probably more closely on track.
While a lot of energy had to be injected into the universe for the immense distances and speeds to be obtained it does not therefore infer that it was injected at a point. Perhaps the theory of black holes representing a hole into another universe is correct and that the energy in this is coming from a "lower division universe" into ours via many many "black holes" of theirs.
So do we look for the energy sieves? Tell us more about it The certainty of the universe having a beginning that involves a big bang may be in doubt, but the certainty that is argument will have no end, is certain. Before jumping on the bandwagon, it would be helpful to remember this is a pure guess. The math is simply window dressing to the pure guess. OK but who said gravity can work in hyper-dimensions?
Oh its an assumption Well I will stick with observation and observation clearly indicates that gravity is a gauge phenomena, not a quantum phenomena. Sorry but my previous post was for a different article, for some reason it ended up here, but the article I wanted to post is actually closed to posting now. Not sure how this is measurable. Also, it suggests we live in a potential universe Which makes no sense.
Ofrahs Jewish Book Club on www.farmersmarketmusic.com
This goes well with my theory that OUR universe is just other side of event horizon of black hole. And other theory that dark matters are universe in different dimension where we are only connected by gravity. Always fascinated by the big bang, very small and hot and having everything in it needed to make the universe, how does that happen? What is before that and where is that from?
Think about it, it is mind boggling that there is no beginning and no end. For the big bang, at least we have sort of a beginning. As usual this is extremely interesting yet even in a fairly low tech article I get lost in the jargon and concepts so I have to approach it from an intuitive or philosophical level. But what comes to mind is aside from the mathematical calculations, much of what we understand seems to come from ever more sensitive technical devices. I hope and wonder if mankind can exist long enough to understand and produce such inventions to point us in a definitive direction of the "theory of everything.
A university press release on fringe science that shouldn't have been posted without critical review. Two problems stand out: The problem with Bohm theory is that it isn't relativistic. This is also problematic: That has never been true, since it necessitates extrapolating GR into the Planck regime where it breaks down. The big Bang is the beginning of the human race universe , what is beyond that i think our physics cant answer that question for now unless we understand what is dark matter.
I've never understood sciences need to believe in systems that are least flawed. Just because we can our current understanding of the universe to measure it doesn't makes those measurements correct. It's obvious the big bang theory is flawed because is doesn't explain time before the singularity. I like your approach: I hope you continue to develop this newish theory. I'm not bent to dark matter.
Not sure your result that the Universe does not have an age. That gives me doubt. But doubt and proof resolving this is the foundation of physics and all science.
I really like what you are doing. Um, if the universe is infinitely old then why hasn't all the hydrogen been burned? Sir Fred Hoyle knows. As WG said, fun to watch! Very many nuts of woo as expected, even creationist antiscience trolls which should stick to their magic sites of voodoo. Or is it woo doo - they do fancy magic agencies making life out of clay!? But also some lucid and even contextual points for once: Darwin responded to that question nearly 2 centuries ago: Everyone interested in astrobiology should know this. This is science fiction and not science. More evidence points to the Big Bang Theory than away from it.
This includes the Biblical account of Creation which all these atheist wackos are really trying to undermine with all their malarkey about dark energy, dark matter, gravitons, the Higgs Boson and all the other modern day physics non-sense. Hey, hey, hey there In the BB it all came into existence in a flash of an explosion the same as Creation. Physicists expect everything to be quantum physics at its basis. Gravitons is what you get out of gravity when you quantize it same as every other field.
However, those gravitons only show that GR is compatible with QP, not that the theory is complete. Existence itself is infinite. The Big Bang is a remarkable point in time but pondering why anything exists at and HOW everything exists is truly and ultimately inexplicable. What happens is that the universe comes out of a cold, rapid expanding state inflation , whereupon the inflation field potential energy gets converted to heat Hot Big Bang.
Inflation may or may not be eternal backwards, we can't tell yet, but since the inflationary multiverse the most likely configuration has always been expanding it has no equilibrium to attain. Exactly correct, something came out of nothing and impacted with something which created the big bang. Be it internally or externally is unknown, however since we can assume it was of a bigger whole before it expanded, we can assume it had eternity to prepare for it.
That is a good enough solution, since physics makes sense but its absence does not, you can't for example make a distribution on anything else than events. Sorry, I can't help you, you don't make any sense. Maybe you should start study physics? It usually helps to understand the issues before asking questions or commenting on known science. One gets the distinct impression that no one has a clue. Cosmology seems a horrible was of time. Even if we arrived at the correct account what went down- what would we do with it?
Sit there and stare at it like a nice painting a wall? Posted by the Uncle Ira bot-voting troll and village idiot to Returners: This Ira-bot idiot hasn't yet realized that in his own case that same sentence could be truncated to read Usually you just make up something that sounds like a person with a mental condition So where does that leave this Ira Moron? Yep, you guessed it, folks Poor useless Internet Moron Uncle-bot. I'm probably the least qualified here to give an opinion Other time one gets a whiff of BS I keep on coming back This is the most important of all subjects I wonder if their model can be applied to the singularity inside black holes.
I would imagine, for consistency, that black holes would also lose their singularity, which might allow the inside of them to be modeled and evolved through time. So if ya don't buy into the big bang - why buy into the creation theory? Readers here need to know the purpose this article was written, to put the scientific community on notice that they need to begin weaning themselves off BB because it is so close to Creation.
There is a small horde of astrophysicists who are just beginning to sound the alarm bells that the James Webb telescope with its infrared spectrometry, will in just a few years hence take a mask off a universe heretofore unimagined. Cosmology will go through a rebirth when the JWT takes pictures of galaxies on the other side of that Primordial gas.
It is mind boggling, to say the least! Enough to make you mental! I think the "big bang" did happen and is responsible for life on this planet, and changes that took place on other planets within this solar system and was with the explosion of a planet, in it. Works for me perfectly as it just makes sense to me, and is consistent with Buddhist cosmology and insights. I am that I am, therefore so was the universe, if you believe in a God or whatever the Supreme Being is, then the universe had no beginning, it always was! Very difficult for the human mind to comprehend this because we can't conceive of a "no beginning".
If you were a Supreme being explaining to your creations how they were made children always ask where babies come from , and intellectually the Supreme was as far separated from his creations as we are from lab mice, how would YOU explain the Universe's beginning.. Let there be light, separating the heavens from the firmament etc makes a lot more sense as a way we would explain it to first graders doesn't it? Its a massive oversimplification of an unfathomable answer.
We didnt see it start, we won't see it end, and we have already missed a lot of the best parts. Math and physics continue to refine by degrees how close we are to a "True" answer. The real truth is realizing that the rabbit hole really does not have a bottom, only levels, and a door that goes down -when you find the key. But the truth is, the evidence against Big Bang existed from its very beginning - even his co-author Edwin Hubble was aware of it.
Cosmologists have for years been trying to figure out how to beat back the methodology of Creationists adopting many of the principle tenets of BB. They see their opportunity with the JWT, that it will discover that the vaunted Primordial Gas Cloud is not what they have assumed it to be, the edge of the universe. I don't know if anyone has mentioned it but: Since we can visibly see objects losing heat energy faster than it can be gained, wouldn't that still mean that at some point a massive amount of energy had to be inserted into the universe?
I know people love looking into the past for the answers about our now, but in this case I think pondering about the future would be more helpful.
What happens after all the energy in the universe is back at 0? Does this paper even comment on entropy at all? It is truly miraculous how God used only a finite amount of time to create a past infinite universe. So this model is compatible with our interpretation of red shift SR's reciprocal time dilation makes it unnecessary to correct red shift for any time dilation effects.
It will not be compatible with our interpretation of red shift if we use directional time dilation from Lorentz's Absolute Transformation. In that case all of our cosmological measurements will require significant corrections. I think it's about time we nailed down whether reciprocal time dilation is in fact operant over cosmological distances. Or any distances, for that matter.
Thus far experiments demonstrate that time dilation is real; but except for GPS, they don't tease out the difference between reciprocal time dilation and directional time dilation. And for GPS, directional time dilation is the only solution that yields accurate geopositions. Matter keeps on transforming and trans-mutating from "one form" to another.
It never did occur to me that there was a beginning to our universe. It seemed obvious that after a certain amount of time less then billion years that gravity would pull together enough mass to create a big bang, probably happening many times. I said less then billion years because protons can only last that long. I have not done the math for what happens to properties without the 'drag' factor. Glad to see the demise of Big Bang an irrational hypothetical construct without scientific rationale since the mass at this event would have to be infinitely large to account for the cosmic debris, aka galaxies and who would push the button?
Far more rational is relying on supernatural explanations such as formation from void or nothingness at infinity past, not natural scientific explanations that fail to explain humanly unknowable pre Bang events. God created things in such a way that only those who truly seek him WILL find him, so we can believe whatever we want to believe - it's called free will. But a being that lives outside of our reality, who creates our reality, seems more feasible to me than matter creating itself from nothing.
There has to be some intelligence there to "think" it into existence. Matter has no intellect - it simply is. When something IS created, it's done in a lab, by intelligent beings - US. And even then, it's only a rearranging of atoms that already existed in another form. I'm always bothered by things like this. Since time began with the Big Bang, the concept of 'before the Big Bang' is nonsense. There was no 'before'; you can't have a series without time. Therefore, you can only have events happening post-bang. It's about at this point that my head explodes from trying to wrap my brain around the article.
Science needs another English tense. I've been saying this for years. I have the rest figured out too, just waiting for everyone to catch up to me. Well, if the universe has no beginning, the attempts by scientists working to prove this have no end. Fair's fair, I guess. IF "with big IF" this theory happens to be true with no beginning and end of universe. The backwards extrapolation to a singularity using relativity dates back to the original Big Bang notion, which has long since been replaced by the much improved idea of cosmic inflation.
Einstein's equations work well for the present, future and the past, but only back to the point where extreme conditions cannot be explained by relativity, and thus require quantum interpretation. The possible complexity of the quantum concept of inflation also includes the premise of a multiverse, and the probability of infinite extensions into both past and future.
Current cosmological discussions don't even mention a singularity. Proves it's real to me Just means it's always been there, tickin' away Everything IN the universe was created by it, not something outside of it Big Bang cosmology is incomplete. General relativity is an approximation of space and time -- singularities described by GR should not be part of a valid model of the universe.
Believe what you will, quantum gravity or an act of God, but the BB model as it exists must be wrong. All answers in http: BTW, the world isn't flat and the earth revolves around the sun too. Phil our posts have crossed in etherland- wasn't 4 u. At the risk of being very basic I suspect that most other posters here are too. So we look around us and everything we see begins, grows then dies. When 2 items crash into each other something else begins. We see change all around us and that's where the problem is. We infer that everything has a beginning and an end or at least changes to something else.
Even at the Q level we collide 'particles' to produce other states. That, of course, doesn't make it right. I view the BB as state that produced by another immediate prior state which had probable result states so that in a strange way both types theory can be correct which is not that different to what Losik posted about BB not completely wrong Perhaps a complex form of Markov Chain?
Too simplistic I guess! Always has been, in some form or another. Kicking around on a piece of ground in your home town Waiting for someone or something to show you the way. The whole question is a response to the inherent contradiction in theist argument" Asking the question "who made God" actually seems to miss the theist argument from first cause. Theists in this are arguing that everything within the universe seems to follow this pattern of causes where nothing arises from nothing.
So there would seem to be something outside of the universe, and so outside the laws of the universe, that could act on it as a first cause. A thing outside the universe and its laws that can act on it are attributes of what people have always called God. To move from this to a Christian god is something else, but that isn't what this argument was designed to do. So, the question "then who made god" seems to miss the point that it is claiming something has to exist outside the laws that govern the universe - like the law maker.
Wow, so many crackpot arugments here. But I just want to understand what on earth is being proposed here. Are they saying that there was just no singularity or are they saying the whole picture of the Universe expanding from hot, dense matter is wrong as if it expanded from a very hot, dense state, that is still a lot like a "Big Bang" even if there is no singularity? As for the theist worldview it doesn't really matter: Ancients' views Journal of Cosmology , Vol 9, He argued that the universe as a whole was ungenerated as well as indestructible.
I'm saying that for last 20 years Anybody remember Calabi Yau Manifold? Here's a video- https: ReGo Now, take that and imagine it with even just a thousand more variable strings. What do you get? An approximation of how our Universe might look from the outside And as far as the "something from nothing" dogmatics - why not "nothing from something"? It's what we all seem to be chasing While "something" has existence, "nothing" does not. So in effect if "nothing" existed it would have no time and no duration - it would be over in less than an instant.
The "existence of nothing" is a contradition in terms - and by extension "existence" is a tautology.
Nothing is like "zero" - it's an abstract. Whereas "something" is not an abstract. So linking these two causally makes very little sense to me In effect this means that there is no alternative state to "something" existing what the "something" manifests as is an entirely different problem. No beginning and no end, back to the steady state model, but then how to explain the light from most everything in the universe being red shifted? They've revived the aether theory again without telling us? Looks like new ways of retelling some of the oldest theories of the universe.
Quite funny comapring to 13th century St. I am a dreamer. For a dreamer is one who can only find his way by moonlight, and his punishment is that he sees. A Homestead-Style Dream for Libraries. The book winner will be announced on Friday. If this is the first you have read about A Homestead Style Dream, visit this post here.
In pioneering days on the Oregon coast, people often shared their books by bringing them to the closest lighthouse. There, on seagull serenaded Sunday afternoons, farmers and fisherman brought their picnic baskets and buckets of milk or brew to sit at the edge of the Pacific. We're celebrating my turning 70 and the 25th birthday of Homestead.
That's what homesteading and life are about. Winston Churchill once said that "Planning is essential but plans are useless. But we have a plan anyway. For the next six months we will have a different opport. Here's the poem I wrote for her. It could be a poem for many of the women I've come to know in history Her words are a great opening for the launch of my latest. It doesn't stay nicely tucked inside just one person's mind.
Even unspoken, it can affect entire families, sometimes for generations. At its heart, that's the lesson of "The Memory Weaver,. A little bit about the book: When my older sister was very ill and later passed away she said when going through a hard time you can't concentrate long enough to read an entire book. Hence these short pieces meant to bring nurture. Completed during a difficult time of personal loss and transition, the words in this book are meant to comfort anyone experiencing change and to support them through word pictures of natural images such as flowers and rivers, woven baskets and.
Legend, Lore or Literal? Like Rebecca, I love discovering the story within the story. Researching Native American history is especially challenging. I hope you enjoy my friend Rebecca's words about her latest novel. A great read for history buffs! Be sure to participate in her generous giveaway, it's at the very end of the post. As a historical fiction author, I love when my rese. The Persistence of Memory. One of the nice things about a book trailer compared to a movie trailer is that you can watch it over and over just to listen to the music if nothing more….
But not in the theater. See You in Sisters. For some reason this year, I'm teaching at a number of conferences and workshops. I began writing after reading tons of books about writing. Some of it must have seeped into my fingers as I began writing stories that got critical acclaim despite not knowing what I was doing.
Somehow the stories flowed and readers found them. Not long after the second and third books, I got asked to teach. I resisted but eventually, shaking in my boots, really, I offered workshops on silencing negative voices re. Readers, this is an update from the church which I traveled to Burundi with. A personal update will be in March's Story Sparks. Hopefully you are a subscriber! If not, you can go here to be added to the list.
This photo is the hut that was built for First Presbyterian as a sign of our friendship with this village of Ndava. This is from friend Dick Rauscher's Stonyhill Nuggets. I really appreciated what he had to say. Thought you might too. I read an article a while back on what it takes to change your life. It was a helpful article, but it missed several important insights that need to be understood if we want to change our life and begin living the life we've been dreaming about living.
The first important insight came to me as a result of years working with cl. Seizing moments within disappointment. Modern sense of "to frustrate expectations" late 15c. The thing is, I hat. The two researchers - Dr. Bob Zybach and Janet Meranda - who brought Letitia's story to me will make presentations; signed copies of A Light in the Wilderness will be available for purchase along with other of my books.
The museum staff has been marvelous in adapting and I am so grateful. Last week you might have read about my longing to be intentional with sending out mail to arrive at your front door or mail box. With the release of A Light In the Wilderness approaching rapidly, I wanted to take an opportunity to send you a little something by snail mail and on line now and in the future. Not only are you able to subscribe to my new snail mailing list, but as a little incentive, there is a giveaway and a Thank you, a "Sneak Peek" link to Chapter 1 o.
I know, it's been ages since my mom let me write on my blog. So much has happened though! We got to visit my dad at the hospital in November. The nurses are really nice to us. They step over us when they're checking these long pasta-like things that go to my dad's arm. Caesar fits on the bed but I don't so I sprawl on the floor. My mom says it's much nicer having us there than stuck at home pulling toys out of the box and crossing out legs until she gets home to let us out!
My dad is doing. Boy, has it been awhile since my mom has let me post on my own blog! But she's been busy and just hasn't taken much time to stop and smell the roses. I think the cactus is a little confused too since it didn't put out at Christmas time. But here it is May and wow, it's a beauty! Since I posted last my dad has had three back surgeries and been really sick but his body is working now, not more. I've never had a pal like PurrBall PB before. When we lived on the ranch, PB stayed outside in a really nice house that my dad's kids built for him out of an old stereo speaker.
They insulated it and roofed it and PB loved it though he'd sneak in as often as he could to hang out inside the house when I was there. But mostly he'd do what he's doing in this picture which is climb up onto my back and sleep. When we left the ranch, my parents decided to.
I have been reading Sandman Slim novels since they came out. Hopefully you are a subscriber! Positive Kirkus Despite the title, readers will find little about Harvey Milk himself But while she may escape unscathed, her actions often wreak devastating collateral damage. One Wild Bird at a Time. I realized then that the Universe has always existed a skewed form of Zeno's Paradox. Substance abuse amounts to bog-standard, excessive alcohol usage.
Happy Birthday to Me! My mom has not allowed me at the computer for months! But today is my birthday and she couldn't keep me away. I'm six years old which of course is 42 in dog years. Still living at home Anyway, she bought me this "thing. I'm considering what to do with it in this top picture. Here you can see I've decided it's worth chewing. It's made in Oregon whatever it is New things happening at our house! Remember when I told you about the zappy wire thing my mom put around the back 40 as she calls it.
It had little white flags to show us where to stay to avoid the zapping ping. The white flags are almost all gone now but Caesar and I know that the "painful ping" is still there if we get too close. For the past many months, when my mom wanted to go for a walk with us off the back forty, she put us in the car, backed the. Here he is trying to keep my mom from working. It seems the only way to get her to close a book when she's researching is to cover it with our bodies. As soon as Caesar wakes up we're going to have a party.