|
| Thread: The Spirituality Thread |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
posted March 13, 2005 06:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Conan, I understand what you say about religion and
spirituality. There are those who have left traditions
behind, only to find they missed something. My family
were leftists, idealists, and never practiced religion
at all. In some ways, they gave me a chance to decide
from my own experience where to go with my life, without
being encumbered by any way of thought pushed on me
from birth. And there is a need for spiritual thinking
that provides a clear insight into our being without
being constricted by thought that is small and
contracted as religion can be whether its fundamentalistic or not.
Nice to see someone understands me (not that the others don't, it's just that no one has ever said exactly what I was thinking)
What happened to you is exactly how I plan to raise my little girl. It's nice to know that someone that has grown up in such an environment is still doing ok! I guess you never know the consequences of your actions on your kids until it's too late.
Even if I will not raise her in religious beleifs, I have decided to teach her my self, in an un-biased (as much as possible way) matter. I will teach her what religion is, what the bible and other sacred texts are and if she feels she wants to get baptised, I will support her dicision, because it will have been her dicision.
I firmly beleive I am good enough as a parent to make teach her what religion is without imposing it on her. My morals are good and my values are in the right place (at least I think), so the values tought by religious beleifs will not be missed either.
In any case, I will teach her spirituality and religion as 2 distinct subjects, like math and chemistry.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2005 07:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
When you cant kill the messege, kill the messenger.
Or smth along those lines was it?
Isn't it the medium is the message? In this case, its
not so much what you say but who is saying it that counts.
So behind all that scientific empirical stuff lies a rather
bright young guy who hasn't quite learned it all yet  .
Quote:
Even if I will not raise her in religious beleifs, I have decided to teach her my self, in an un-biased (as much as possible way) matter. I will teach her what religion is, what the bible and other sacred texts are and if she feels she wants to get baptised, I will support her dicision, because it will have been her dicision.
I firmly beleive I am good enough as a parent to make teach her what religion is without imposing it on her. My morals are good and my values are in the right place (at least I think), so the values tought by religious beleifs will not be missed either.
In any case, I will teach her spirituality and religion as 2 distinct subjects, like math and chemistry.
I believe you are also. Children learn more from their
parents then they do from any org. You are there as the
foundation of your daughters character is being formed,
most importantly on the great love you have for her. That
is a good place to start. AS she grows and finds her own way, things change, but not that love.
____________
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 26, 2005 04:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I tried to go outside politics for this very reason by talking about spirituality ... let's just say it didn't go too far.
I guess spirituality is not a popular issue, which is what I wanted to find out in a way....
Well, I wouldn't say "unpopular", but spirituality is for many people a personal issue, that's hard to talk about.
I, as an example, find it hard to put words on my spiritual emotions, and to concretisise the rather abstract and metaphysical elements of my "faith". In addition, I find personal faith to be just that: personal. If they don't wanna talk much about it, or if they find it hard to do so, they of course shouldn't. Also, I personally consider spirituality to be something one shouldn't flaunt about, as in opposition to one's political opinions.
But all of this is of course just my view on stuff.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 26, 2005 04:30 PM |
|
Edited By: Conan on 26 May 2005
|
Thanks!
I agree that this might be an issue that people have a hard time discussing. I also agree that "If they don't wanna talk much about it, or if they find it hard to do so, they of course shouldn't." And perhaps this thread died because of that very reason, which is enough for me.
What I don't agree with is the fact that spirituality shouldn't be something to flaunt about like political opinions: first, I don't flaunt my political opinions, I discuss them in a respectful manner. And I think discussion about spirituality should be done the same way. And I think that is the problem. With the discussions we've (I'm not reffering to you and me here) been having, one might think that his views on spirituality will be laughed at or shot down just as we do with political discussions. I wish to tell these people that this thread was created in order for the members to talk about what spirituality means to them, something with which no one can disagree with: If spirituality for me is a donkey, then so be it; no one can argue with what a donkey means to me.
For one, I've had great pleasure in reading Shiva's posts. But the fact of the matter is that spirituality is different for each of us and the purpose of this thread was to underline these differences and talk openly about them on an impersonnal level (online) where most of us don't really know each other. I actually thought that people would be more open to this since it was not a person asking them in their face.
Ah well.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 26, 2005 10:17 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I agree that this might be an issue that people have a hard time discussing. I also agree that "If they don't wanna talk much about it, or if they find it hard to do so, they of course shouldn't." And perhaps this thread died because of that very reason, which is enough for me.
But if they want to, it is probably healthy. Also, there's no disguising the fact that many people are interested in both their own and other people's spiritual faith. Many people are also "searching", and want to hear about what other people think, to see if that's something they can agree with, and adapt to their of faith.
The beauty of (post-)modern belief: There's no pre-set dogmas, no infallibleprinciples that other people have pressed upon you. You are free to choose for yourself.
Quote:
What I don't agree with is the fact that spirituality shouldn't be something to flaunt about like political opinions: first, I don't flaunt my political opinions, I discuss them in a respectful manner. And I think discussion about spirituality should be done the same way. And I think that is the problem. With the discussions we've (I'm not reffering to you and me here) been having, one might think that his views on spirituality will be laughed at or shot down just as we do with political discussions. I wish to tell these people that this thread was created in order for the members to talk about what spirituality means to them, something with which no one can disagree with: If spirituality for me is a donkey, then so be it; no one can argue with what a donkey means to me.
Ah, first of all, I apology for the use of the word "flaunt". It is, of course, too strong a word to apply here, since no one in this thread, at least, have been flaunting anything. It is in any case hard to flaunt stuff in such a selective medium as the Internet discussion boards despite everything is.
Also, I don't think the mentioned word, "flaunt", is applicable to my comment on political opinions. People who flaunt are annoying, while people who simply make a stand, which was what I really meant, are people who should be admired, almost no matter what their opinions are.
Good point with the donkey metaphor, Conan. 
I coulnd't agree more with your point of view there.
Quote:
For one, I've had great pleasure in reading Shiva's posts. But the fact of the matter is that spirituality is different for each of us and the purpose of this thread was to underline these differences and talk openly about them on an impersonnal level (online) where most of us don't really know each other. I actually thought that people would be more open to this since it was not a person asking them in their face.
Ah well.
Major point.
Well, since I've resurrected this thread, I might as well try to type out my own approach to spirituality and faith. It's the first time, though, that I try to put it into written words, so it might be a little awkward...
My spiritual faith is something I have tried to develop myself. Although it is put together by lots and lots of stuff I know about other religions, it is still unique to me, at least to my knowledge. But so is perhaps all faith? I do not really think religion can be anything but subjective.
So, anyway, back to my own faith.
I used to be an atheist, later I became an agnostic, which I guess I in many ways still am. So the issue of a deity in my faith is somewhat ambiguous. On one hand, I believe in free will, of course. There's no fate that in a haphazard manner guides us through life - of course, a haphazard fate isn't really a fate. The lack of fate also makes my religion (as I have come to call it) immune to prophecy: All statements about the future, that are not backed by scientific evidence or at least stong indications, must be considered to be nothing but guesses.
As for the nature of the God, I have clearer thoughts. Like I said, I used to be an atheist, and later an agnostic, but today, I am horrenously confused, in a way. You see, last summer, I sat in the sun, reading The Narnia Chronicles (for any uninformed persons, Narnia was written by Lewis to act as a kind of missionary for his Catholic faith amongst children), while looking at the birds, bees, flowers, trees, sea, mountains, and general nature around me. I had just a week before this read a book about evolution, creation and stuff like that, so my mind was pondering stuff like that; religion and science. I think I was coming to the conclusion that evolution made God obsolete, when suddenly, a bumble bee landed by my hand, with its hind legs covered in sacks of pollen.
And I was suddenly struck by a thought: How is it that the bumble bee has evolved these tiny spikes at its hind legs that make it useful to flowers? And why has flowers got nectar that makes them attractive to bugs, like the bumble bees? Gone were all thoughts of atheism. I had a new conclusion to all my pondering: Something is governing evolution!
Now, to the question: What is this entity that "governs evolution"? To be frank, I have no idea. I have been considering some kind of Mother Earth spirit that dwells in everything that lives, and although my critical senses have been protesting to such metaphysical nonesense, I have as good as adopted this view. Thus, all life is sacred to me. The only afterlife we experience, is that the elements of out bodies pass back into the cycle of life; in a way, we achieve eternal life, as the components that are now part of us, will be part of other living things later, when we are dead and rotted. This is in a way my version of the "immortality of body" that's being preached in Christianity, although I feel that my version is slightly more realistic, since I don't talk about bodily ressurection and all that creepy zombie stuff that the Chrstians are so fond of...
As a direct consequense of this, as I have said, I consider all life to be sacred. Of course, this makes my life as sacred as the lives of cows, and since I am, technically and through the help of various tools, above cows in the food chain, I don't see anything wrong with eating them. In the same way, I don't see anything wrong with tigers eating people. But killing things for fun, isn't something my religion is positive to, to put it lightly. My religion is thus pacifistic, as I define war as killing for fun, or at least for none-too-good reasons. Although both absolute and relativistic approaches to interpretation of this principle have their problems, I lean more towards the relativist side, as I am very sceptical, to say the least, to absolute truths. "Only Siths deal with absolute truths."
So, to give an example, waging war against Nazi Germany would have been OK with me, as long as it was motivated by the "right" motives, namely to save the lives of the people killed by the Nazi murder and war machines. Of course, if the Nazis had been "Tereists" instead, this clearly wouldn't have happened.
That's basically it; any comments would be recieved with sincere gratitude.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 02:43 PM |
|
|
uhhh .... thinking .... processing... .....
Wow Terje, that was the exact kind of post I was looking for when I made this thread. I must thank you for reviving it. It was truly a pleasure to read that post. It's soo interesting to read someone else's point of view, especially someone half way accross the globe. Absolutely fascinating. Thanks also for feeding my brain.
Comments? yes Questions actually. I was wondering why you use the term "religion"? Did it just happen out of the blue, or is there a specific reason? Why not "spirituality" or "view of life" or something rather?
The part you are at in your life about questionning, is very productive. You can acheive great insights by questionning. Do not let it end. I question my spirituality every time I get the chance - the only reason it works for me is because time and time again it holds up to my questions. Of course, I tweak it now and then, only to adapt it to new information, new facts. But then, that's the beauty, isn't it? that one's faith is not set in stone?
I'm also happy to hear you've evolved in some way when you talked about the bumble bee. Seek these moments even more and stop to think of them. I like the way you do it since it's the same as me: going back to nature. Every time I go in the woods, if I am careful, I always come out with something new. Listening to what surrounds us is the key, to what happens ... in our everyday life they do happen, but we are so cought up in real life situations that we cannot take the time to appreciate their significance. In the forest, by yourself, you have the time to think about the message that is being given to you, like the bumble bee one.
In any case Terje, thanks for sharing it with us. Perhaps now that you've wrote it down and thought of it, you've discovered something new or at least have it in your mind more often. This will enable you to have more of these learning oppertunities. This thread, now that I think of it, it great for having people think of these things and be aware.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 07:17 PM |
|
|
Thanks for those absolutely remarkable words, Conan.
I couldn't agree more. Both questioning your own ideals, taking the time to walk on your own in the forest and listening to our environment are important stuff to do.
Quote:
Comments? yes Questions actually. I was wondering why you use the term "religion"? Did it just happen out of the blue, or is there a specific reason? Why not "spirituality" or "view of life" or something rather?
Well, the phrase "religion", as antagonistic I may feel towards it, was actually the appropriate word last summer, when all of these thoughts suddenly fell into my head.
As you may or may not know, a religion requires some kind of rituals in order to be an actual religion: No rituals, no religion. And originally, I was planning to make some kinds of rituals, if only very simple ones, like perhaps meditating in nature, and stuff like that.
But deep down, I am really an Anarchist. And rituals tastes too much of organised religion and churches (in other words: authority and hierarchy) for my taste, so I ditched them. Today, the only "rules" I have lain upon myself, is that I have a duty to help tiny crawling creatures out of harms way; not stepping on or destroying plants without good reason, and things like that. So it takes my a long time to walk somewhere after rain has fallen, since I have to stop and lift earthworms and snails off of the pavement all the time.
Speaking of rituals, have you ever read "The Satanic Bible" by Anton Szandor LaVey? I started reading it last autumn, and although I didn't finish it, and despite it's semi-nazi views on life, it did have some points that I consider to be valid. Like Man's relationship to rituals. LaVey and the Church Of Satan claims that Man needs rituals. We need rituals, because, and I quote: "People need ritual, with symbols such as those you can find in baseball games or church services and wars, as vehicles for expending emotions they can't release or even understand on their own."
Of course, LaVey didn't much like the "sterile" and "pointless" rituals of the Christian churches, and his ramblings are at best amusing, but mainly annoying. In spite of this, I suspects that he may have a point.
There are, as most people would agree, more between Earth and Heaven than we know. Most of these phenomena may be explainable through physics and sciences, but what about those that cannot? Personally, I believe that these phenomena that according to science should be impossible, are just phenomena that science has yet to discover the reasons behind. And, these phenomena may just as well have to do with the more hidden parts of the human psyche as with anything else.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 08:09 PM |
|
|
No...! My post disappeared!
Argh.
The important bits:
Terje, have you ever looked into the Gaia Theory/Hypothesis? From my sketchy knowledge, it discusses Life on Earth as a kind of super-organism, changing the non-organic world to suit itself, and self-regulating. It looks like something you might relate to, especially with the inter-connectedness and such.
Question regarding immortality-through-recycling: This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. To me, decay is the second death. Since all evidence of the self disappears, in what way is organic recycling immortality?
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 08:37 PM |
|
|
Quote:
No...! My post disappeared!
Argh.
The important bits:
Terje, have you ever looked into the Gaia Theory/Hypothesis? From my sketchy knowledge, it discusses Life on Earth as a kind of super-organism, changing the non-organic world to suit itself, and self-regulating. It looks like something you might relate to, especially with the inter-connectedness and such.
Hmm. First of all, I gotta say that I love Wiki.
However, from what I learned from the wiki article about Gaia Theory, I can say that it's definitely similar to my beliefs, especially the more moderate forms, but the radical Gaians seems to me to miss their mark some. After all, they claim that this Gaia entity regulates the climte on Earth. Sounds plausible enough so far, since the organisms of the Earth affect the climate through gases they release and such.
But a major objecting to theories such as this one is of course that Earth's climate are heavily influenced by extraterrestrial "events", such as the planet's orbit around the sun; the amount of tilt on Earth's spinning axis; the relative distances between and positions of the other planets; and whatnot.
But the rest of the theory sounds like something I can believe in.
Quote:
Question regarding immortality-through-recycling: This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. To me, decay is the second death. Since all evidence of the self disappears, in what way is organic recycling immortality?
Ah, I may have phrased myself somewhat clumsily here. I didn't mean literal immortality; I was simply trying to say that the recycling can be seen as a parallell to Christianity's immortality-of-body, and that this is the only kind of immortality and/or reincarnation I can bring myself to believe in.
When it comes to reincarnation/immortality of the "self", I can only say that I percieve the "self" to be nothing but an intricate combination of organic circuits and electrical impulses, so that's not really an issue for me. Death is after all a natural thing; one cannot pretend to be a worshipper of nature and still long for an afterlife beyond what your body components will "experience"...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:26 PM |
|
|
The Stuff That Firefox Ate, Newly Remastered!
Quote:
I was simply trying to say that the recycling can be seen as a parallell to Christianity's immortality-of-body, and that this is the only kind of immortality and/or reincarnation I can bring myself to believe in.
Ah, that makes more sense.
Quote:
When it comes to reincarnation/immortality of the "self", I can only say that I percieve the "self" to be nothing but an intricate combination of organic circuits and electrical impulses, so that's not really an issue for me. Death is after all a natural thing; one cannot pretend to be a worshipper of nature and still long for an afterlife beyond what your body components will "experience"...
Hmm, I go a bit further. Since the body doesn't go poof upon death, I see no reason to think the soul (spirit/conciousness) does, either. Then again, I'm not a strict materialist.
In my understanding -- a disclaimer to be applied to the rest of this post  -- any living being is composed of a bit of the material realm (body) and a bit of the spiritual (soul). Through life, these two pieces develop, change, and influence one another, constructing a distinct entity/pattern. That's the "self," for lack of a better term. Death separates the parts out again. What's left is a body no longer connected to spirit but bearing its impression, and a soul no longer connected to material but bearing its impression. Decay is the process that erases those impressions and returns the material-stuff and the soul-stuff to the state they were in before life occurred at all. Once the distinct impressions are gone from both pieces, the "self" is truly dead.
For afterlife, I think of the state/behavior of souls after separation from the body but before dissolution. Mostly, that's because consciousness seems to be more of a spirit thing than a material thing.
And I agree with you, or LeVey, about ritual. It's for humans' benefit only. That benefit is not to be laughed at, though. Rituals and symbols are not the point of religion/spirituality; they're the tools to get to the point. If they're not serving their purpose, they can and should be ditched.
~~~~~~
Further comments (running off an immortality train of thought)-- anything constructed must deconstruct. The entire universe is constructed. I have major issues with "omni" theories of divinity for many reasons, but one of them is eternity. Anything resembling personal divinity is within creation, and that all falls apart in the end. On the same note, anything eternal must therefore be pure and is therefore outside the universe as we know it and is therefore utterly useless. <snip theology>
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
On the same note, anything eternal must therefore be pure and is therefore outside the universe as we know it and is therefore utterly useless.
But isn't the universe infinite? If so, then how can anything be outside of it?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:37 PM |
|
|
Despite what science says, I do not beleive the universe to be infinite. But it's not finite eiher. I beleive at this point in our existance, humans cannot comprehend this issue.
...but that's just me.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:41 PM |
|
|
Well, of cousre even the concept of "infinity" is incomprehensible to us humans, since we are almost dependant on beginnings and ends; we simply do not go well with things that was created from nothing and doesn't end. (Funny though, that the creation and apocalyptic myths of many religions contains parts of these concepts - perhaps it is our inability to comprehand that makes us conect it to the divine?)
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:48 PM |
|
|
Terje, you hit the nail on the head: What humans do not understand, they make up silly resonnings that people blindly follow instead of saying "I don't know".
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But isn't the universe infinite? If so, then how can anything be outside of it?
Science says the universe is infinite? What happened to the expanding universe? The universe is all we can possibly know, but isn't there a limited amount of stuff in it, a limited diameter, a limited amount of time it's been around, etc.?
Anyway, if the universe is infinite, then the aformentioned "eternal" cannot exist, period. If it is finite, then the aforementioned "eternal" is permanently outside our contact range. Either way, the result is the same -- no "eternal" being for us.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Leo_Lion
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The 5th Element & 6th Sense!
|
posted May 27, 2005 09:53 PM |
|
|
To give you guys an example that combines two elements mentionned in Terje's Post, I had an experience of death many years ago in a forest that changed my life forever.
I was at my dad & uncles' hunting camp one weekend and while the "licensed hunters" went out looking for moose with their powerful rifles, I, who did not have a hunting license, went out for a walk (carrying a shotgun...shhhh, don't tell the government! ).
Anyways, I made my way to the end of a trail after an hour of walking and turned back towards camp because I wasn't interested in crossing a mucky swamp. Along the way there & back, I saw a few birds cheerfully chirping & flying about freely. Some squirrels were burying their precious nuts in the forest floor, as sunlight danced across shadows cast by towering pine trees, whose fresh scents were carried to my nose by a gentle breeze.
I felt at one with nature and was overcome by a feeling of peace and serenity. It was amazing...
Then, as I continued to walk back to the camp, a partridge landed in the middle of the trail, half-a-dozen meters ahead of me, and started to strut around like a peacock. My father had said that if I saw one, I could use the shotgun to "take it down" since I wasn't licensed to join them in the moose hunt. Not wanting to feel "left out" or get back to camp "empty handed", I raised my weapon, aimed, and fired! 
I'll never forget what happened next for as long as I live. I knew that I had hit the bird, as anyone else could have with a shotgun from close range, because it stumbled and then slumped over onto it's side. And as it laid down to die, I swear to God that it took my heart with it! 
My soul wailed in pain, agony, and sadness...not only in having witnessed a beautiful creature's death, but more so, for having been responsible for it's demise.
What had started as a wonderful afternoon, where I communed with nature, had instantly become a spiritual nightmare!
At that moment, I vowed never again to kill something for "sport" or for "pleasure", as my soul simply couldn't handle the pain, nor the burden of responsibility.
Now that I look back on that experience, I am marvelled by the way that "a particular set of circumstances" was able to create "a unique situation" that brought me to act in "a certain fashion" and how through all of this, I learned a life-long lesson on respecting all living things! Truly amazing...
By the way, that bird tasted damn good!
____________
*The end to no beginning...
*Take care, Leo
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 10:08 PM |
|
|
Leo, they say true hunters always become overwhelmed by melancholy after killing their prey, when they realize that they have just killed a beautiful living creature. Lisence or no, I say you're the "real thing".
Khaelo: Ah, yea, the expanding universe. You must excuse if my information is a little outdated; I haven't had my hands on a decent scientific magazine I would be able to understand since I was 16.
But the way I see it, the expanding universe isn't necessarily an antithesis to the infinite universe. The universe can still expand, while being infinite at the same time. That it is infinite means that it doesn't have any boundaries, yes? Then there's nothing wrong with it expanding only in a different way. It's not it's boundaries that are expanding, as it has none, but rather the distance between the universe's components - i.e. its stars and planets, but also its atoms, electrons and quarks.
EDIT: Is this off-topic?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 10:10 PM |
|
|
I was going to say that Terje, even if the universe expands, it has to expand into something to fill, right?
What I'd like to know is what is there before the universe fills it... empty space? But empty space is something....
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 10:21 PM |
|
|
The analogy I read was that the expanding universe is like a balloon. If the galaxies are little dots on the surface of the balloon, than as the balloon is blown up, each galaxy sees all the other galaxies going away. Translate this analogy into a 3-D "surface" and a 4-D "balloon," and you supposedly have the answer to the "what is the universe expanding into?" question. And if you do understand that, you've gotten your head around more cosmology than I could.
There is spirituality to be found in science.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted May 27, 2005 10:21 PM |
|
|
Oh man, thinking about this makes me so dizzy, I almost start to think that I'm high or something.
Ok. Expanding.
It should, indeed, expand into something even if it is infinite. But what? My only suggestion is that it kinda expands into itself. After all, there exists nothing outside of the universe, so there's literally nothing there for it to expand into.
I'll now try to translate the images I have of all this in my head into words, but I doubt that it will be a successful attempt:
Now, my mind is totally unable to comprehend the concept of infinity (hence the dizzyness), but still: The universe is infinite. Its components are moving away from each other. Thus the "diametre" of the universe should be increasing in length. However, since the universe is infinite, it has no diametre. Now, the closest thing my mind is possible to come to a concept of infinity, is the circle; however in this case, it's a circle that extends in all directions and never ends. Making it more like an infinite ball, if you understand (I hardly do so myself ). It's on this that I base my statement about it "expanding into itself", since that's the only way I can imagine a circle (or an infinite ball) to expand at all.
Damn. Here is where my brain goes kaput.
EDIT: It appears that this is kinda similar to what Khaelo posted while I was typing...
EDIT2: w00t! I actually understood the analogy! It all makes sense now, at least partially. And Khaelo: Not only is there spirituality to be found in theoretical and abstract science; there's healthy drugs as well! 
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
| |
|
|
