Science & Philosophy. Religion & Physics. XXIc.


Can we concretely know something about the God ?
Is it possible to explain religion with the help of the
physical and mathematical theorems?
Yes. It is possible.
Because to create the all material world the God
could only working in an absolute reference system
and only under physical and mathematical laws.

The Old Philosophical Problem.

The dispute on the divisibility of a particle has been conducted from ancient times.
There were two opposing views:

  1. a particle can be divided infinitely,
  2. the division of a particle comes to an end when it reaches the ultimate particle
    They began by splitting a body into finer and finer parts: to molecules,
    molecule to atoms, atoms to electrons, protons and neutrons.
    Then they constructed accelerators. They began see if protons and neutrons
    could be divided into other elementary particles and in the process,
    creating so many particles that it is even difficult to list them.
    But physicists do not believe that there is a true initial particle.
    In listening to their explanation of the situation in the microcosm, one is reminded of a madhouse. Only there is it possible to learn that the part is more than whole.
    When physicists began to study the macrocosm, they were sure that
    in using the formulas, equations and laws they relieved the
    consciousness of man from prejudice. Therefore the physics was considered
    an ally of common sense. But when they began to study the microcosm,
    they began to complain of paradoxical devices. Then physics became an enemy
    of common sense.
    Can physics be paradoxical? Can nature be paradoxical? Is it the
    laws of nature or the thinking of the physicist?
    A Simple example.
    From the time of Newton–Huygens, the dualism of light was known
    and debated. To set the question:
    If we ask how can the wave become a particle, the question will be paradoxical.
    But if we ask how the particle can create waves, the question will be logical.
    For over 300 years there has been no one that formulated such a question.

The tree is covered with a lot of leaves.
The leaves rustle, speak, argue among themselves.
But shouldn’t they know that the roots feed them?
Physicists behave as leaves.
They rustle, speak, argue among themselves.
But they forget the roots of science, namely that we build the base
of a science on abstract ideas.
The base of the classical mechanics is constructed on abstract
Separate absolute space and abstract separate absolute time of Newton.
The base of thermodynamics is constructed on the abstract
ideal gas theory.
The base of the theory of radiation is constructed on
the abstract black body theory.
The base of SRT is constructed on the abstract theory
of four-dimensional space theory.
On this abstract base, physicists build a concrete building of
science and are surprised when they discover paradoxes in it.
But in nature there are no paradoxes observed.
Something is not in order with logical thinking.
It is necessary to stop, look back and
to reconsider the abstract base of science.
But everyone is in a hurry to try to understand reality,
and they create new abstraction. It is a way to “mad infinity”.
Therefore we live in the world of abstraction, of paradoxes,
in the Orwell,s world.
How to break off this circuit of abstraction?


What inhale Life in the formulas and in the equations ?
What must be present in a body to make it alive ?

The answer.
Soul. Quantum of Light.

If you have time and desire, I ask you to visit my site
Best wishes.

developing abstract ideas is a process.
You start to see that 1+1=1.9,… and you realize we misdefined 1,… or there’s a negative somewhere.

the idea of creation is supported when all else fails. cause and effect isn’t portrayed. Energy is caused by an action reflected through matter. Space and time are the cause reflected through matter (matter is the variable that controls space and time). Yet what action is it? There should be a clue. Space and time are two arrays of strengths,… where when one gets bigger, the other gets smaller. Unless big and small are subjective to something else.

A weird idea. can we use energy to contain the effects of other energy? It would be wanting to radiate out, but we might be containing it so that it may radiate out according to some other reflection of action.

God, Particles and Antiparticles.

As everyone knows, GOD has created ALL.
But to create this ALL – GOD could only working in an absolute reference system
and only under physical and mathematical laws.
Now let us consider that the absolute reference system is the cosmic
microwave background radiation T = 2,7K. What particles can be in this system?
Dirac said - “antiparticles”.
Quantum physics - " virtual particles ".
Astrophysics - " latent, invisible particles “, “dark- mass”.
This “dark- mass” is supposed to comprise 90 % (and more) of the matter in the Universe.
Does anybody in the world know if the “dark- mass”,” virtual particles ",
“antiparticles” have volume?
No, they do not.
Hence - they are flat, invisible ghosts.
How can these flat, virtual ghost can turn in real particles?
There are two points of view:

  1. with the help of " Mechanism Higgsa ".
  2. under influence of “spin”.
    There are two kinds of spin:
    a) Spin of Planck h.
    b) Spin of Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck ħ= h /2.
    These two kinds of “spin” created two various kinds of movement.
    Therefore, if we understand, it is the " Mechanism Higgsa ", that is the “spin”,
    we shall understand how GOD could create ALL.
    We shall then understand the interrelation between the Science and Religion.

every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

there are four quadrants from zero (x/y axis.)

If anti matter and electrons are exact opposites mathmatically.
It seems protons and neutrons are exact opposites litterally. (they by nature attract or repel,… while electrons spread evenly amongst them)

Don’t opposites attract? unless they are on exact opposite side of the x/y zero(matter and anti-matter)???

we don’t exist in two dimensions


make the graph a cube,… and find most all the same truths,… right?

if you create an electron from nothing,… you’d have to create it’s mathmatical / litteral opposite. Electrons spread evenly along the matter it’s attracted to,… dictated by molecular resistance to flow,… and atomic density’s ability to hold more electrons. Yet anti-matter doesn’t do any of these. But seems to do an opposite of sorts.

How do you define anything but by it’s actions.

we don’t exist in three dimensions either

and no, the “truths” are not exactly the same


How do we know Imp?

I have studied string theory, which they suppose dimensions in 8, 10, 11, 12 … dependent upon school of theory.

Who is right, and how does one go about proving multidimensional-multiplanar reality?

well, we live in at least 4… including time…

more than that? perhaps…

but certainly not less


I still have issues with time, and using it as a dimensional representation. Of course, that is an altogether different subject.

Then of course, it brings in the topic where both you and I have the same question:

A universe that expands, into what?

Of course this thread brings in the creation origin contentions, big bang, initial matter/antimatter, matter energy displacement, light properties …
I’ll shut up now, or I’ll just keep going.

I think the infinite model is correct. For every conclusion, there is a corrollary, and nothing can be finitely reduced. (speaking of pure physicality).

Many of physics consider, that: " The Physics is first of all Vacuum. "
P. Dirac wrote:
" Тhe problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem worth now before physics.
Really, if you can’t correctly describe vacuum,
how is it possible to expect for the correct description anything more complex? ".
It is completely correct.
In Vacuum physics have groped true and the
condition of infinite / eternal Vacuum characterized
with one simple physical parameter T=0K.
The philosophy of science begins from T=0K .
The physics begins from T=0K.
The religion begins from T=0K .
The origin of Existence begins from T=0K .

socratus, you touch on alot of big points. i like the thought behind alot of this stuff you say.but i’m not with quantum physics.

i think it’s a good move to not throw god out the door on science.i also strongly disagree with the foundations of(most of) our modern our clock based on the sumarian’s six digit math system or the roman calender.

do you hop between PhysiOrg and Mind-X?

i also belive science and religion should co-exist and if they don’t one of them or both is being unreasonable!!!

string theories were developed because we cannot see down to the smallest level of energy. And we cannot explain how energy can be self contained. So to explain this,… they have sugjested that the forth demension of reality wraps energy back into itself. It’s just an explination for an action. like the drawings of gravity wells. Or the picture of wave lengths. These ideas are apart from what actually is happening,… stiffeling you from figuring out why.

dot,…in action in three demensional world = line.
line,…in action in three demensional world = plane
plane,… in action in three demensional world = cube.
cube,… in action in three demensional world =

It seems to me that gravity is a one dementional energy emiting from a source,… and disipating evenly by the same rule of, “doubling the size and quadruple the volume”, yet in reverse. So this says to me that this energy actually comes from matter. Now matter in liquid has different effects as the same matter in gas. So is it really all on a sub atomic level as one part of a nucleus does one action.

“What is your flash, Khayyam?
Tent where for overnight’s stop,
As a wandering shah, the spirit did a stop”.
/ Omar al-Khayyam. /

The doctrine of a personal God could never be refuted by science.

Dear Drift.
If there is such a thing as God, as so many of us have been told,
then where and what is it?
But our knowledge of God and the human being are still in its infancy.
However the science purifies the religion and our
logical knowledge of the droos.

Oh man…

"One thing I have learned in a long life:
that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike -

  • and yet it is the most precious thing we have."
    / Einstein /

The quantum physics approves, that in the beginning God has created
" virtual particles ".
Astrophysics approve, that in the beginning the God has created " latent mass ",
"invisible particles ".
From them the God has created everything.
But nobody knows, what is " virtual particles ",
what is " latent mass ", " invisible particles ".
It is very strange situation.