What god did Einstein believe in?

As possible as anything else, I'm sure, but I can't personally mentally imagine a boundary with nothing outside of it or a moment with nothing before and after it.
The scientific hypothesis I tend to favor is that it's pointless to think of something outside the universe. The universe is all there is. It is the space between the galaxies of the universe that is stretching, the universe as a whole is not expanding into any preexisting space.

Time is relativistic. Our souped up chimpanzee brains perceive an arrow of time. But to a photon, time doesn't exist because it is travelling at the speed of light. So in principle, I don't have a problem imagining that my perception of time is not necessarily objectively true for all conditions.
 
The scientific hypothesis I tend to favor is that it's pointless to think of something outside the universe. The universe is all there is. It is the space between the galaxies of the universe that is stretching, the universe as a whole is not expanding into any preexisting space.

Time is relativistic. Our souped up chimpanzee brains perceive an arrow of time. But to a photon, time doesn't exist because it is travelling at the speed of light. So in principle, I don't have a problem imagining that my perception of time is not necessarily objectively true for all conditions.
You need to break on through to the Other side!
 
Time is relativistic.



Time as measured in units of measurement is of necessity relativistic.
However, the concept of something before and after everything is independent of units of measurement,
at least in the way my perception of a mind is working.

Yet, before and after alone are still relativistic by definition.

As a geriatric, my intellectual curiosity is rapidly waning,
yet I can be moved to think about this stuff when you post about it!

Thinking that the universe is all that there is is precisely why I think that it's infinite.
If it's not infinite, there would be something outside of it, in which case it would not be a UNIverse.

What I DON'T understand is why the speed of light is regarded as a limitation on time.
I think that it theoretically is--
they don't teach that in either accounting or labor relations courses--
but we don't know for sure that something can't happen faster than that, do we?
 
Last edited:

What god did Einstein believe in, anyway?​

Einstein “was a pantheist who maintained certain Jewish traditions,” and he preferred to be called an agnostic and disliked militant atheists.
"I want to know God’s thoughts,” Albert Einstein once said. “The rest are mere details.” True quote. But what did Einstein mean by “God”?​

He was raised a Jew, and likely believed in the God of Abraham . . . at least for a while. So folk like to claim him as one of their “own.” But then, so do atheists.

In truth, Einstein was likely at neither extreme, according to this new article at Big Think. The article cites a 1936 letter a sixth-grade girl wrote to Einstein, asking, “Do scientists pray, and what do they pray for?”

In his reply, Einstein wrote, “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is surely quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.”

Scholars generally agree that the theoretical physicist was an actual pantheist, believing that God is “in everything,” or that all is “at one with God.” In particular, as Einstein once told a rabbi, “I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.”

Big Think concludes that Einstein “was a pantheist who maintained certain Jewish traditions,” and that he “preferred to be called an agnostic and disliked militant atheists.


Einstein was a Jew! One of YHWH's Chosen People!
 
Time as measured in units of measurement is of necessity relativistic.
However, the concept of something before and after everything is independent of units of measurement,
at least in the way my perception of a mind is working.

Yet, before and after alone are still relativistic by definition.

As a geriatric, my intellectual curiosity is rapidly waning,
yet I can be moved to think about this stuff when you post about it!
If scientists are correct that an arrow of time is an result of entropy and motion, then time is an emergent property of our universe. Time is not a fundamental physical universal principle. So when the universe originated, there is no fundamental principle that says time had to extend into the past before the origin point.
Thinking that the universe is all that there is is precisely why I think that it's infinite.
If it's not infinite, there would be something outside of it, in which case it would not be a UNIverse.
Energy and matter will curve space, so it's possible you can never reach the boundaries of the universe to find out what's on the other side. Nothing exists but the universe itself, and if you set off traveling in one direction, you would end up right back at where you started trillions of years later.

What I DON'T understand is why the speed of light is regarded as a limitation on time.
I think that it theoretically is--
they don't teach that in either accounting or labor relations courses--
but we don't know for sure that something can't happen faster than that, do we?
The speed limit of light only applies to matter and energy. Space can expand at any speed it wants, that's why distant parts of the universe are receding from us faster than the speed of light, and we will never see it because the light cannot overcome the recession speed to reach us.

The reason relativity works as a theory is because the speed of light is perfectly constant for everyone, no matter how fast they are going. It's because of this fact that for anything moving at high speeds space and time have to warp themselves (i.e., time slows down, distances decrease) in order to maintain the constancy of the speed of light c for that observer. The Lorentz equation tells us that for anything that travels at the speed of light time stops. So from the perspective of a photon the beginning of the universe and today occurred instantaneously.
 
If scientists are correct that an arrow of time is an result of entropy and motion, then time is an emergent property of our universe. Time is not a fundamental physical universal principle. So when the universe originated, there is no fundamental principle that says time had to extend into the past before the origin point.

Energy and matter will curve space, so it's possible you can never reach the boundaries of the universe to find out what's on the other side. Nothing exists but the universe itself, and if you set off traveling in one direction, you would end up right back at where you started trillions of years later.


The speed limit of light only applies to matter and energy. Space can expand at any speed it wants, that's why distant parts of the universe are receding from us faster than the speed of light, and we will never see it because the light cannot overcome the recession speed to reach us.

The reason relativity works as a theory is because the speed of light is perfectly constant for everyone, no matter how fast they are going. It's because of this fact that for anything moving at high speeds space and time have to warp themselves (i.e., time slows down, distances decrease) in order to maintain the constancy of the speed of light c for that observer. The Lorentz equation tells us that for anything that travels at the speed of light time stops. So from the perspective of a photon the beginning of the universe and today occurred instantaneously.
Spirit world isn't subject to the Laws of Physics.
 
Spirit world isn't subject to the Laws of Physics.
I think a reasonable inference is that the universal mathematical laws of physics represent some kind of rational agency underlying the origin of the universe.

I have not been able to convince myself that universal mathematical rationality just randomly popped into existence by chance.
 
Time as measured in units of measurement is of necessity relativistic.
However, the concept of something before and after everything is independent of units of measurement,
at least in the way my perception of a mind is working.

Yet, before and after alone are still relativistic by definition.

As a geriatric, my intellectual curiosity is rapidly waning,
yet I can be moved to think about this stuff when you post about it!

Thinking that the universe is all that there is is precisely why I think that it's infinite.
If it's not infinite, there would be something outside of it, in which case it would not be a UNIverse.

What I DON'T understand is why the speed of light is regarded as a limitation on time.
I think that it theoretically is--
they don't teach that in either accounting or labor relations courses--
but we don't know for sure that something can't happen faster than that, do we?
it's his position that its pointless to think of something outside the universe.

that's the funniest shit I've read all year.
 
I have not been able to convince myself that universal mathematical rationality just randomly popped into existence by chance.
Very interestingly put, C.

For you, it's something of which you cannot convince yourself.
For me, when somehow moved to contemplate the subject,
that which you cannot believe is the first explanation that pops into my head.

Is it because I cannot imagine an alternate way for it to happen
whereas you not only have the imagination to do so,
but that which you do imagine seems most logical to you?
 
I think a reasonable inference is that the universal mathematical laws of physics represent some kind of rational agency underlying the origin of the universe.

I have not been able to convince myself that universal mathematical rationality just randomly popped into existence by chance.
Didn't "pop into existence by chance"! The Physical universe is a reaction to Satan entering YHWH Space during Satan's rebellion. Causing the Big Bang. Everything since then is exactly how you understand the Physical universe. A Spiritual event caused the creation of the Physical universe.
 
Didn't "pop into existence by chance"! The Physical universe is a reaction to Satan entering YHWH Space during Satan's rebellion. Causing the Big Bang. Everything since then is exactly how you understand the Physical universe. A Spiritual event caused the creation of the Physical universe.
YHWH Space?
 
God The Father Almighty. The one you try to deny every day.
In a way. Einstein was a pantheist, sort of like an agnostic. He believed in some sort of god, but could not describe his character.
Your case is a sad case. I will not engage further in your white dogshit turd of a thread. You can bank that.
Stop denying God, dickweed.
He didn't.

He DID try to describe atheists as somehow 'militant'. He doesn't know what an atheist is.

Atheists don't necessarily believe in a god. They also don't necessarily believe there is no god or gods. They simply don't go there.
To an atheist, whether a god exists or not is moot.

Mathematics is completely atheistic. It doesn't care whether a god exists or not.
Science is completely atheistic. It doesn't care whether a god exists or not.
Logic is completely atheistic. It doesn't care whether a god exists or not.

Nothing about atheism precludes whether a god or gods exist or not. There is certainly nothing 'militant' about atheists.

Cypress describes the Church of No God (a fundamentalist style religion) as 'atheist'. An atheist has no religion at all.
 
I don't have a problem with voluntary euthanasia. But I think it brings up a host of problems, like people who stand to inherit a lot of money and property cynically convincing a vulnerable person to off themselves.
Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.
 
Thanks for chiming in.

There is no evidence of an infinite universe,
There is no known boundary of the universe. That is all the evidence needed.
and I'm not convinced that outside of abstract mathematical theory, infinity is even possible in physical reality.
Buzzword fallacies (abstract mathematical theory, physical reality). Infinity exists, Cyborg, even if you can't get yer head wrapped around it.
Even if there were an infinite universe, it doesn't prove that complex atomic matter and the mathematical laws of physics exist everywhere.
A model is not a proof. A theory is not a proof. Buzzword fallacies (laws of physics, complex atomic matter).
There's no rational explanation for why our observable universe couldn't have just been made of pure energy or plasma or void.
Except that it obviously isn't.
 
This thread has over 100 responses which is a success by JPP standards.

It's really funny how the Bible thumpers believe I am an atheist, while the militant atheists think I am a holy roller. :palm:
False dichotomy fallacy. Redefinition fallacy (atheism<->Church of No God). Buzzword fallacies (militant atheist, Bible thumper, atheist).
 
People can be convinced of anything. People were convinced that slavery or human sacrifice totally made sense.
And they still do, for those that practice these acts.
If the Nazis had won WW2 and taken over the world,
Not possible. The Nazi party were socialistsm, favoring fascism. Socialism produces no wealth. It only steals it.
It's why the Nazi military ran out of money and resources.
they could have used their totalitarian control of information to convince people the Jews were a genuine existential threat that had to be eliminated.
Unfortunately for the Nazis, such control is not possible. The truth wins out, and no government can stop it.
The reason we act morally outraged at the Holocaust is because we feel it was a violation of an objectively real and true standard of moral justice that transcends human opinion and human whim.
Having schizophrenic problems again? You are only one person..
 
The scientific hypothesis I tend to favor is that it's pointless to think of something outside the universe.
Buzzword fallacy (scientific hypothesis). There is no 'outside' to the Universe. There are no known boundaries.
The universe is all there is. It is the space between the galaxies of the universe that is stretching, the universe as a whole is not expanding into any preexisting space.
Space is not stretching. Space simply is. Just because YOU observe galaxies moving away from each other doesn't mean it's happening everywhere.

The Universe has no known boundary. What is 'expanding'?
Time is relativistic.
MEASUREMENT is relativistic. Time is not.
Our souped up chimpanzee brains perceive an arrow of time.
There is only one of you. Do not refer to yourself in plural.

Time is not an arrow.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics establishes an 'arrow of time', or a way to tell if time is moving 'backwards' through the use of a film or other recording. Entropy must always increase or stay the same. If you see entropy decreasing on a film, or video recording, you know that recording is being played backwards.

But to a photon, time doesn't exist
It certainly does!
because it is travelling at the speed of light.
A function of time.
So in principle, I don't have a problem imagining that my perception of time is not necessarily objectively true for all conditions.
You don't seem to have a perception of time, or an understanding of the laws of thermodynamics, or any concept of light.
 
Back
Top