ABEL\'S UNIVERSE (General)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, November 16, 2011, 17:21 (4565 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

So now we have a list of points that we can question, argue, and refine. All of these quotes are straight from the horses mouth so-to-speak. So, without further ado

1: I don't hold with the theory of abiogenesis regardless of the level of entropy, though I gladly concede that it would be more like in a low entropy environment. However, saying that it would be 'more likely' is still not saying that it could/would happen regardless of the amount of time available, much less in the time that has been allotted.(i.e. since the big bang)

2: You seem to be contradicting yourself. You claim that life originated in a dark matter/energy environment, under different entropy levels, and under different stress factors, and yet you insist that the life forms were not only material, but cellular, and evolving in much the same way that we do in response to their selective pressures. Dark matter/energy interacting with regular matter is a rare thing, relatively speaking. How do you explain the discrepancies?

3: You claim that there is "50 times more dark matter in the universe than we even suspect" based on your calculations. First, the statement is self-contradicting. If you have calculated fifty times the amount, then you certainly suspect that there is fifty times the amount. Regardless, please provide some more information, such as a write up of your calculations. We have some very talented mathematicians on this site that I am sure would be happy to take a look. What are you using as the basis for your calculations?

4: If you define dark matter as Temporally saturated matter, and conventional matter as temporally polarized matter, and space as 'suspended in time', then you are implying that time is a tangible quality/quantity that can saturate, polarize, and suspend. Could you please confirm or clarify that? Also, if time is qualitative and quantitative, could you please give some insight into what the the actual qualities and quanta are?

5: If "In the beginning there was only darkness and time", are you again giving time a quantitative value? What about darkness?

6: You mention a much larger universe. Specifically: "But far away in this unfathomable vastness of darkness and time another much vaster universe spun. Eventually the gravity of that universe reached ours, causing it to move."

This is what I refer to as "Passing the buck." What that means is, unable to come up with a reasonable hypothesis based on things that we know exist, you invent something that we can not observe as the trigger for your hypothetical start up. In this case, it was another universe that started the engine on ours, but leaves us with many many many more questions such as: Where is the other universe? Can we detect it's effects? If it started us, how the hell did it get started?(which incidentally implies yet another, even vaster universe kick started the one that kick started ours. And so on and so on and so on to infinity.) You might as well say "God did it", because your explanation has nor more explanatory power than that.

7: I'm not even going to touch the temporal speed limit idea until you answer whether or not time is a physical quantity.

8: You contradict the early universe being nothing but "darkness and time" inside a much vaster universe when you say later that, "In the beginning, the universe was purely quantum in nature." Can you clear up the discrepancy?

9: This statement: "Every action and reaction was digital, either yes or no. Things only happen in exact places, at exact times, in exact fashions or they don't happen at all" is at best, superfluous. Things only happen now, in the material world, in digital terms. They either happen, or they don't. They either are, or they are not. While things may be perceived in degrees of motion, the reality is that what is perceived is a infinite progression from one static state to the next.

10: At first you claim that life originated in dark matter/energy. Later, you change your story to include gas giants and stardust which are most assuredly not made of dark matter/energy. Can you explain the discrepancy?

11: You are correct in your statement that life in a high entropy environment requires greater resources in order to maintain life. However, I can not see that simple statement as justification for most of the rest of your conjectures.

12: So you do believe in abiogenesis, that life can arise spontaneously from chance. You simply do not feel it could happen on Earth or in the material plane of existence. Is that correct?

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.