Could God make a rock so heavy that even He can't lift it?
Here's my reply.According to my theory of energism, it would depend on a number of factors.
Gods and rocks are formed of the same thing. Energy. Rocks are just densely packed balls of energy, with a defined purpose of being a rock. God is a being comprised of free floating energy, given form by the belief of people who believe in a god. So, in a way, God created all rocks, though rocks are, in a way, God.
Planets are just really large rocks. But would energy moving a planet be considered lifting? The center of our solar system is exerting an infinitesimal pull of gravity on it's orbiting satellites. Would an energetic force moving a planet away from the center of the solar system count? How much would it have to move, in order to count as a lift?
Of course, you'd have to have something giving energy the impetus to perform this action. Enough people would have to be visualizing energy lifting the heaviest rock in existence. Are there enough people who could work together to visualize this outcome?
Then you have to take into consideration the amount of available energy. Is there enough around us to do that? There might be enough in the Universe as a whole, but how long would it take for all of that energy to get here? It may be that it would take multiple generations of people visualizing that common goal to have enough energy coalesce here.
Then there is the “jinx” factor. Would there be enough people, with enough will, to overcome the inevitable people who would thoroughly believe that this outcome is impossible?
Now, we must also think of the possible consequences of this. What would happen if this planet were a central nexus of that much energy? Energy creates heat. The amount of energy needed could incinerate the planet. Also, what if some of the energy was pulled from our sun? If enough of the sun's energy was convinced to abandon it's purpose in being a sun, and joined in the “rock lifting” project, our sun might become unstable. It might not have enough energy to be the kind of star that provides our planet with the heat and light it needs to be a life sustaining planet.
Then again, since all things are made of energy, an asteroid is, in part, God. An asteroid hitting our planet would move it. It might not be much, but it would move.
So, while it might be possible, it's not probable. It depends on what you consider lifting, and whether you consider something like an asteroid shifting a planet 'lifting.'
Your blog just erased a very good point... I saved half of it because it told me it was too long but the rest is lost... ugh. I have some work to do so I'll come back to this.
ReplyDeleteHmm.. I think it's possible ONLY if God divides by zero, first.
ReplyDeleteSeriously though, there are even more factors to look at, in my opinion. If we take the Big Bang Theory and the accompanying theory of universal expansion, then everything in the universe is already moving. To create a weight that is, in essence, unmovable, you would probably have to delve into string theory and manipulate spacetime in order to create something that stays in one place on a tapestry that is by its very nature constantly moving in all directions. That in and of itself is a HUGE amount of energy to overcome.
Additionally, is God making the weight out of an already existing weight.. or no.. huge epiphany just now, but it only works if you adhere to Newtonian physics. Here me out.
The main laws we're looking at are bodies at rest and motion, and action/reaction.
If we accept that the universe is constantly expanding, then anything created in that spacetime is moving as well. Such a thing will continue to move unless stopped. In order to move or stop something, you have to exert an exact opposite force upon a surface or other object. Now, if we accept that God can create infinite mass/energy, then we can presume that god could theoretically stop this universe cold in its tracks. See, if the universe is expanding in all dimensions simeltaneously, then it stands to reason that in order to get a single infinite object to halt completely, you would have to extend an infiniy amount of force against the universe, all of spacetime)TOWARDS the object in order to keep said object from moxing along any axis or timeframe. Now, while this could be theoretically possible by God, I belive that the suddent stop of everything in the universe, and the absolute halting of spacetime, would completely shear the universe asunder. Gone would be all of God's creations, and in essence, God itself, as I feel that the two are intrinsicaly linked. So yea.. God could do it. at the expense of all of creation.
Wow.. I have a lot of typos when I get going.
ReplyDelete@ Rick: Well, there are a ton of things I haven't expanded upon, in regards to how Energism works, as I see it. :) It would take me days!
ReplyDeleteAs for the expansion of the Universe, I believe there is already a slowly building opposing force. It may be so slow that human science has yet to detect it, but I think that there is a gravitational force working on slowing things down, and pulling them back in. Maybe that is what the Apocolyps truly will be. The moment when the outward rush is overwhelmed by the Universe's center of gravity.
God cannot create mass or energy. God is made of energy, the same as everything else. Energy itself is a finite substance. What changes is energy's shape and purpose.
The shape and form of God and God's creations might no longer exist in the forms as we know it today, but they wouldn't be truly gone. Energy itself would still be there. It may find itself dispersed in an even blanket again, but it's nature is such that it would begin to coalesce back into atoms/elements/rocks/planets/stars/etc.. Imagine a star after a supernova. You get a nebula, comprised of specks of the substance that was once the star. Those specks don't just stay out there ina nebual cloud forever. They start to cling together. New stars/asteroids/etc. are formed. The Big Bang is just a repeating even, on the largest scale possible, of a supernova.
I can't, for some reason, put the words together the way I already had so I'm just going to copy and paste what I copied when it told me I could only have 4096 characters or less.
ReplyDeleteI'm not too worried about the consequences of such an act (moving the infinitely dense object) only because our existence is minute in comparison to the galaxy... let alone the universe. The energies needed to move infinitely dense material would be in it's own energy so I doubt there would be any kind of cataclysmic "incineration" of anything. Take any infinitely dense particle for instance... to move it you would have to use an equal but opposite energy. Another particle of any density would do because, although infinitely condensed, it's still just a single particle. You should think more along the lines of the spiritual implications of the question for those of us NOT well synced with nature. You and I both know that Bill Hicks was "right" (approximately) when he said "Today boy on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death; life is only a dream and we are the imagination of ourselves." but for 99.999999999% of people out there the Bible is reality. Being told how to live by the rich and powerful is reality. Not just a ride or subjective experience of one's self (individually, globally, and universally). Some people sit back and wonder how people can figure out these things not realizing they do it too. Everyone feels the energies but no one wants to believe it's real. But it's not. So the dichotomy scares them into being led to the abattoir by the sheep herders of life. This paradox was first asked me in Stephen Hawking's "A brief history Of Time" and I thought it should be known because of the implications I mentioned. Life's just a ride or site seeing tour through the psyche. Through the only energies we know. The ones that make up everything in existence. Although some people embrace the dichotomies. Yin Yang and karma are examples of that yet we all get so caught up in the frugality of everyday life we forget that we're not here for buying walmart out, following politics or religion, buying that dream house, or landing that enslavement with decent pay. I think we're here to work together to explore space, both inner and outer, together without all this war, famine, and degradation. We need to throw out the monetary system and start using an open source model for our economy. But that's neither here nor there.
I can't, for some reason, put the words together the way I already had so I'm just going to copy and paste what I copied when it told me I could only have 4096 characters or less.
ReplyDeleteI'm not too worried about the consequences of such an act (moving the infinitely dense object) only because our existence is minute in comparison to the galaxy... let alone the universe. The energies needed to move infinitely dense material would be in it's own energy so I doubt there would be any kind of cataclysmic "incineration" of anything. Take any infinitely dense particle for instance... to move it you would have to use an equal but opposite energy. Another particle of any density would do because, although infinitely condensed, it's still just a single particle. You should think more along the lines of the spiritual implications of the question for those of us NOT well synced with nature. You and I both know that Bill Hicks was "right" (approximately) when he said "Today boy on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death; life is only a dream and we are the imagination of ourselves." but for 99.999999999% of people out there the Bible is reality. Being told how to live by the rich and powerful is reality. Not just a ride or subjective experience of one's self (individually, globally, and universally). Some people sit back and wonder how people can figure out these things not realizing they do it too. Everyone feels the energies but no one wants to believe it's real. But it's not. So the dichotomy scares them into being led to the abattoir by the sheep herders of life. This paradox was first asked me in Stephen Hawking's "A brief history Of Time" and I thought it should be known because of the implications I mentioned. Life's just a ride or site seeing tour through the psyche. Through the only energies we know. The ones that make up everything in existence. Although some people embrace the dichotomies. Yin Yang and karma are examples of that yet we all get so caught up in the frugality of everyday life we forget that we're not here for buying walmart out, following politics or religion, buying that dream house, or landing that enslavement with decent pay. I think we're here to work together to explore space, both inner and outer, together without all this war, famine, and degradation. We need to throw out the monetary system and start using an open source model for our economy. But that's neither here nor there.
Your blog pisses me off. http://www.carbonbasedesign.com/blog/?p=225
ReplyDeletelol. it is not my blog, but Googles blogging site :) Don't blame me for the stupid comment limits, that aren't really comment limits.
ReplyDeleteIn a perfect world, your vision and my vision would collide and everything would be great. But that would be boring, I guess. Maybe energy likes drama. Maybe our planet is energy's Deep Thought/reality TV show/ internet drama-fest.
Our planet might just be energy's MMORPG. But energy has no concept of time, as it's existence is endless. It can tweak and play and shuffle things around just to see what happens. If the "game" gets flooded with avatars trying to exploit the loopholes, with no regards to the long term, thus causing a massive crash that somehow destroys the whole "program," so what? The computer, ie. Earth, is still there, and it is as much fun for energy to create the game as it is to play it. If we human wipe ourselves out, taking all the NPCs (animals) and realms (planetary topography) out with it, energy will just reformat the Earth and start coding all over again. Maybe whatever is coded will be completely different from the program running currently.
Rocks aren't compressed energy. Rocks are matter. Matter is defined as anything that has mass and takes up volume. Energy is the amount of work that can be performed by a force. You can't, for example, compress thermal energy and get a rock. You can't compress nuclear energy and get a 1957 Chevy Bel Air. I think you're transposing the word particle for the word energy. I guess that would change your original thesis. If a god and a rock are composed of the same thing then they are both composed of particles. Doesn't sound as snazzy though.
ReplyDeleteYojimbo: You are looking too far up the chain. Particles are formed from energy. Energy has substance, it is just even more minute than the particles already "discovered" by science.
ReplyDeleteBut, you are right, in that gods and rocks are both comprised of particles. It's just a matter (haha, ha, ha... anyway) of how densely packed they are.