Dark Energy

[Doc Dutch]

I can see where you would think the term Universal is a loaded word.

I was using the word in the sense Thomas Jefferson used it in the declaration of independence > A self evident universal truth, at least from the perspective of humanity, not for the Andromeda galaxy or Alpha Centari.

Understood. IMO, Jefferson, being a man of his times, was speaking in more of a standard human egocentric view that people are the center of the Universe. After all, it's in the Bible.

Yes, I know Jefferson was a Deist, but he's writing a joint document of signers who were, primarily, Christian.

Tying this to the topic; obviously if life is found elsewhere in the Universe, much less another civilization, many religions are going to have to wrap their head around the fact their perceptions were wrong. It would be important to apply "universal" to truly universal and separate out what is only human.

https://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/2...-independence/

Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration, the great majority, perhaps all, identified themselves as Christians, and all but one were Protestants. Four were either present or former ministers, and a number of the signers were the sons of clergy. At least half of them had studied “divinity” at their various universities. The denominations breakdown runs as follows: 32 of the signers, well over half, were Episcopalians, or Anglicans, the old state Church of England. There were 13 Congregationalists, 12 were Presbyterians. There were two Quakers, two Unitarians, and one Roman Catholic.

[Cypress]

Understood. IMO, Jefferson, being a man of his times, was speaking in more of a standard human egocentric view that people are the center of the Universe. After all, it's in the Bible.

Yes, I know Jefferson was a Deist, but he's writing a joint document of signers who were, primarily, Christian.

Tying this to the topic; obviously if life is found elsewhere in the Universe, much less another civilization, many religions are going to have to wrap their head around the fact their perceptions were wrong. It would be important to apply "universal" to truly universal and separate out what is only human.

https://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/2...-independence/

thanks

According to the dictionary definition, universal is a word perfectly acceptable when applying a truth applicable across the cosmos, or when just talking about something which is broadly embraced by humanity.

One just has to be careful in identifying the context used.

Jefferson was just riffing of the great Enlightenment thinkers, who were inspired to find universal truths and principles, whether scientific, or whether it was something shared by humanity.

That was the great Enlightenment Age project.

Cynicism about the possibility of universal (moral-ethical) first principles was a later 19th century and post-modernist trend.

[Melchizedek = Michael]

Dark energy might be neither particle nor field

Everything else in the universe is either a particle or field. Dark energy behaves as neither, and it may be a property inherent to space itself.

.. there is no evidence that dark energy is anything other than the most basic entity imaginable: a property that is uniformly inherent to space everywhere and at all times. This can come about in one of two different ways very easily:

The universe can possess a positive, non-zero cosmological constant, a term perfectly allowable in general relativity. It has to be very, very small, but when you put it in everywhere over the whole universe, it eventually comes to dominate.

It could be a quantum property of space: the zero-point energy of all the fields in the vacuum of space is not required to be zero but could take on some positive, non-zero value. What we often interpret as quantum fluctuations, or particle-antiparticle pairs popping in and out of existence, could be the cause behind dark energy.

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/dark-energy/

Spirit world aren't subject to the laws of Physics that control the physical universe.

[Doc Dutch]

thanks

According to the dictionary definition, universal is a word perfectly acceptable when applying a truth applicable across the cosmos, or when just talking about something which is broadly embraced by humanity.

One just has to be careful in identifying the context used.

Jefferson was just riffing of the great Enlightenment thinkers, who were inspired to find universal truths and principles, whether scientific, or whether it was something shared by humanity.

That was the great Enlightenment Age project.

Cynicism about the possibility of universal (moral-ethical) first principles was a later 19th century and post-modernist trend.

Human hubris and egocentricity was well known by Galileo.

Agreed on the context of use, especially when overlapping topics. There's the Universe and all it is and then there's our puny perceptions of it.

Something I've posted about before is the mind-boggling size of our own solar system much less trying to comprehend the size of the Universe. On a 1/10 Billionth scale, the Sun is about the size of a grapefruit and the Earth is about the size of this "o". The Moon about the size of the period at the end of the sentence and about 3 inches away. Jupiter is over 400 feet further away with Alpha Centauri about 2,500 miles away. https://www.jeffreybennett.com/model...-solar-system/

Grains of sand held by a string of gravity that, on that scale, amazes me by how thin it is. Much less how a grain of sand can attract a rock the size of a mountain to destroy it. Context is, indeed, everything hence my being a bit anal about the use of the word "universal".

Thanks but it’s still mind boggling. If you ever have a chance to do it, track down one of these 1/10billionth scale Solar System models. It’s about half a mile long but the Earth is only about 43 feet from a grapefruit-sized Sun.

There are exhibits in Corpus Christi, Houston, DC, Kansas City: http://voyagesolarsystem.org/communi...washington-dc/

http://voyagesolarsystem.org/wp-cont...1-1024x169.png

[Doc Dutch]

Spirit world aren't subject to the laws of Psychics that control the physical universe.

So goes the theory.

[Cypress]

Human hubris and egocentricity was well known by Galileo.

Agreed on the context of use, especially when overlapping topics. There's the Universe and all it is and then there's our puny perceptions of it.

Something I've posted about before is the mind-boggling size of our own solar system much less trying to comprehend the size of the Universe. On a 1/10 Billionth scale, the Sun is about the size of a grapefruit and the Earth is about the size of this "o". The Moon about the size of the period at the end of the sentence and about 3 inches away. Jupiter is over 400 feet further away with Alpha Centauri about 2,500 miles away. https://www.jeffreybennett.com/model...-solar-system/

Grains of sand held by a string of gravity that, on that scale, amazes me by how thin it is. Much less how a grain of sand can attract a rock the size of a mountain to destroy it. Context is, indeed, everything hence my being a bit anal about the use of the word "universal".

It is really cool.

In some ways I believe a true scientist looks upon the universe with a sense of awe and quasi-reverence in a way that even a devout bible thumper doesn't.

[AProudLefty]

Everything has to complement each other.

[Doc Dutch]

It is really cool.

In some ways I believe a true scientist looks upon the universe with a sense of awe and quasi-reverence in a way that even a devout bible thumper doesn't.

Agreed. A scientist can look in but likes to look out, but the Bible thumper only looks in...and refuses to ever look out.

Why Bible thumpers don't see studying the Universe as divine work is a mystery to me.

[AProudLefty]

Agreed. A scientist can look in but likes to look out, but the Bible thumper only looks in...and refuses to ever look out.

Why Bible thumpers don't see studying the Universe as divine work is a mystery to me.

Which Bible thumpers? Usually they preach that shit for money and control. Private jets, yachts and all that shit.

[Cypress]

Agreed. A scientist can look in but likes to look out, but the Bible thumper only looks in...and refuses to ever look out.

Why Bible thumpers don't see studying the Universe as divine work is a mystery to me.

for sure

My sense is that having a working knowledge of cosmology, general relativity, quantum mechanics gives one a sense of awe about the cosmos in a way that Genesis and Exodus really don't.

I think Issac Newton and Albert Einstein both felt this way.

[Doc Dutch]

Which Bible thumpers? Usually they preach that shit for money and control. Private jets, yachts and all that shit.

Bible thumpers who aren't on television.

[Cypress]

Spirit world aren't subject to the laws of Physics that control the physical universe.

I do not even like the word laws, because it implies permanent and immutable.

Only mathematical theorems are immutable and a offer glimpse into ultimate knowledge.

Scientific theories are provisional and subject to revision or change.

[AProudLefty]

Bible thumpers who aren't on television.

Those people? I can think of reasons (I was one myself).

Afraid that your God (the brand of God at least) doesn't exist.
Afraid that you might be wrong on a lot of things.
Afraid that the Earth might be billions years old.
Afraid that we did evolve (assuming there was no alien involvement as per Genesis).
You name more.

[Doc Dutch]

Those people? I can think of reasons (I was one myself).

Afraid that your God (the brand of God at least) doesn't exist.
Afraid that you might be wrong on a lot of things.
Afraid that the Earth might be billions years old.
Afraid that we did evolve (assuming there was no alien involvement as per Genesis).
You name more.

The common thread there is fear.

[AProudLefty]

The common thread there is fear.

Bingo.