Social Imagination ~ What of Invisible Terrestrial Entities?

What is on the horizon in the social imagination? In the quantum analysis, we want to and have to address this question. First, the quantum analysis looks at reality in its only imaginable state - social. We look at reality as data in a program because that is what it is. It is also as we have stated before a social reality 'construct/program' as it is the only reality we (as data) can know in this created construct we call the universe. What we know or even feel, and certainly think is all there is to here and now, as well as what we agree came before here and now in this here and now social construct.

Its not complicated. Its data as in information that we receive and share. It is interesting to wonder why we imagine certain things in this here and now though we have no real experience with them; i.e. aliens as in extraterrestrial entities and now even possibly terrestrial entities. Following the cosmological argument for an absolute being ~ the Creator ~ of this social construct (we call the universe which is in a state of entropy, as it is a corrupt construct program) we understand that all ideas we have and or imagine to have come from a source that imprints such ideas in us.

The problem is this entropic state or condition we are in.  The problem being is that corrupt information has entered in and it too is a source for ideas. We have to decide which data imagined and or real to us is the correct version and which is the corrupted version. Can we know the correct version? A good question. If we have been imprinted with the correct version from the beginning as a default mode then it remains throughout even though it can be somewhat corrupt.

The basic original coding in the smallest amount provides enough of the original information that the creator can give the command to be saved; and if there were any upgrades made as a patch (Jesus Christ 'data'   inserted patch) regarding the default mode data in order that it become usable or compatible in a corrupt running program working toward a final upgrade or rather reboot of the construct, then we can expect to innately understand comprehend the differences though difficult to sustain in all data encounters and sharing.

The drive in us remains and that is to return to the original program which we know exists outside of this corrupted program though invisible to us by the corruption. How do we know? It is realized in our desire to understand this construct and imagine if this is all there is. Now, is that what Thunder Energies has been motivated by?


*Thunder Energies have discovered what they call terrestrial entities.

"This is an exciting discovery.  We do not know what these entities are; they're completely invisible to our eyes, our binoculars, or traditional Galileo telescopes, but these objects are fully visible in cameras attached to our Santilli telescope," stated Dr. Ruggero Santilli, CEO Thunder Energies Corp.

If it all sounds like a stretch of the social imagination, it is and it is not.We might even imagine and or consider that extraterrestrial entities are the same as the invisible terrestrial entities who have made data contacts through actual date interaction and or extraction. Again, there is a slight danger to be mindful of and that is whether or not the information is coming from the actual original program and the Creator or another created entity that considers itself the creator.

Thunder Energies Corporation is a breakthrough technology company featuring three cutting edge technologies in the fields of optics, nuclear physics and fuel combustion.  Thunder Energies is led by Dr. Ruggero Santilli, CEO and Chief Science Officer and Dr. George Gaines, President & COO.  Dr. Santilli is a former faculty at MIT, Harvard and other leading institutions around the world.


And, how should we embrace the idea (given data) that the Kingdom within? It means that the original data is still available as a default mode. In this way, we can be saved/rebooted!

http://www.reuters.com/article/santilli-telescope-idUSnPnbbDplN+89+PRN20160120

Great Minds are Not by Accident

 "When the solution is simple, God is answering. Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind. God does not play dice".


What do Albert Einstein, Issac Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus have in common? They all had a great mind. Not man made, God made. Albert Einstein never denied a Creator, he just said God was not personal. He did not think God would be interested in man's thoughts and actions.  Issac Newton was not an atheist, he contemplated God as a masterful Creator. Galileo was a pious Roman Catholic and Copernicus considered himself to be inspired by God.


Their thinking follow the ontological argument for the existence of God. This defense for the God comes in the realization that no idea concerning man's existence in a grand universe just comes to man's mind. Any idea we have that has at its core the desire to understand the universe and man's place in it, comes to us because there is an absolute source for that information. If we were just a random cosmic event resulting in consciousness then we would not be inquisitive minds. What for? All information we have would be innate and acted upon; leaving no reason to inquire about it. We would just be like plants or simple animals. In a simple state of existence, there is no need to inquire about life or the universe. That kind of contemplation comes from a mind that is not evolved but created.

Einstein leaned toward Baruch Spinoza's view of an impersonal God Creator; i.e. that if a circle had a God, it would be a circle. It would not know God as this Creator God would be impersonal toward its creation. Man thus has a God that is like him. Why would that God be impersonal if He is like us and we are like him. That's illogical. We would have a relationship with Him simple by fact that we inquire about Him. A circle does not inquire about being a circle. But, if it did, the same reason would apply. Of course, it would.

How could any man with the desire to understand who he is and the universe not be in a relationship with his Creator? The ontological argument follows... ideas, thoughts about who we are come from a desire to know the Creator as we were created in His image. As all information or idea's that concern knowing more about the universe and man's place in it comes from the source of that information ~ God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth of all things seen and unseen.

Did you know that everything we see is part of a vast ocean of infinitesimally small subatomic particles? Under certain condition, these subatomic structures also take on the properties of invisible waves. What is incredible is that these waves or particles which make up all matter cause that matter to blink into existence by being observed by us = the experimenter. With that in mind, how can we understand let alone know what reality is? In view of quantum mechanics, the level of reality is beyond all human consciousness..

With that said, what we can only know is what we agree on. If there is no absolute creator, we cannot agree on anything. What for? Everyone would be right and no body would be right just by observing but what would they be observing, as no one could agree. No one could decide or agree on what they were observing unless we first agree that there is an observable universe that we can agree on exists. Even if we don't recognize our Creator in this moment of agreeing, we are essentially agreeing because we agree that we can agree. In Him that we live and breathe and have our being ~ Acts 17:28.

According to Spinoza, given an impersonal god and that each of us would have our "god" we would certainly be able to understand what we are and what the universe is about. How could that be since strangely this god would not care to know us and so why would we want to even think about him let alone agree on anything we see or observe by ourself or with anyone? We can only agree or even want to agree when we think we are like minded and agree in why and or how we are or can be like minded. In saying that is possible, we would have to first agree we are like minded because there is an absolute entity that created the universe and man in his image. Otherwise, we would not agree on anything. We able to agree because we are created beings and are able to have a relationship with our Creator. Like minded people, have the same Creator, this allows them to agree on what what is observed. That is why, there is more consistent solid agreement about the universe among like minded scientists than there is among unlike minded scientists.

As for Spinoza, we could follow up and say that scientists came from science. Therefore, a God created being came from God.  Each imagining what they came from based on what they are. Right? If someone imagines they are from science how is that any different than imagining one is from God. Einstein said that imagination is greater than knowledge. In this case, both are equal. However, for those that imagine science as their 'religion' sadly for them science finishes and or changes whereas God is the same today, yesterday and tomorrow.

People have misunderstood Albert Einstein when he said he does not believe in a personal God. Likely, his view was that God is not any man's or one man's but every man's. And, every man has a right to understand that God ~ the Creator of all things, seen and unseen in/of Heaven and Earth, through the pursuit of knowledge using man's God given mind!

"The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness".
( Albert Einstein - The Merging of Spirit and Science)

Get with the Program~ God is the Creator of all Things Seen and Unseen!

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun" ~ Ecclesiastes 1:9


Some argue that science proves man's existence. Really? Science is always changing depending on agreement among 'scientists' at the time of their observations in the time of their 'presence on earth' as in existence in a time frame - history. Some argue that math and its equations which seem to remain throughout history prove man's existence. Really? Equations do appear to have a longer shelf life but essentially are only developed formulas by man for his own boasting and prideful quest in trying to prove his/her way the existence of a higher reality or for his/her trying to understand what is already running in the background and why. Some argue that God is wishful thinking. Really? I will agree wishing that there is a creator and knowing that there is a Creator are 2 different mindsets. 

Being a doctor of Sociology and having written on the social imagination, I conclude that anyone who can wish for and imagine a higher being as the Creator who created all things seen and unseen has a greater social imagination than anyone who prefers to imagine numbers and letters in a man made configuration as the base for all social reality. And, BTW, where is the social aspect of our being in numbers/letters? Those kinds of numerical imaginations belong to a few not the many. Jesus Christ came for the many (as we were created in His image)! As for the 'elite' mathematicians or scientists who think that they are either God or are a greater man than God because of their reasoning are fooling themselves and will likely discover their destiny lies in their own Blackhole.

You see, there is no new thing under the sun in a looping corrupt program. If we don't embrace the upgrade (Jesus Christ), we cannot be saved. Any physicist and computer programmer knows that all that is created is a duplicate of the original or an innovation which as such also has to have an original idea or product or data as in information. Acting on copied information as true information is not the end of the world... so to speak. It is possible as any copy is indoctrinated with the memories of the original; the only glitch is that it may think it is the original but it is not. That can be both positive and negative in terms of salvage. This is the problem for man in this corrupt reality. Again, the problem for salvation is that in thinking we are the original in this corrupted state, there is a tendency to assume being 'original' and thus have no need of a creator. Because, the original and the Creator are the same... the Creator gives to the creation something of itself - created in the image of the Creator. We were of and with the Creator before the fall or error entered in.

As an amazingly incredibly created AI program (created in the image of the Creator), all we need to have in order to be saved is the knowledge that there is a Creator of an original program of which we belong to and that alone is enough to give the command to save us. In accepting that we are of the original and of it, the Creator, though maybe copies, can retain the essential default mode of our being. And, that is what any programmer needs to have in order to reboot.

In my social quantum analysis, I like to look at what drives people's and 'scientists' imagination. This is the greater quest. Albert Einstein said, "I want to know the thoughts of God.... I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details".

Most people don't know that Albert Einstein did believe in a God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, Albert Einstein view on atheism. He said:

“I’m not an atheist and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.”

Knowledge of God is the mind’s greatest good: its greatest virtue is to know God ~ Baruch Spinoza.

Does Evil Exist? ~ An Argument by Albert Einstein

Deposing the Atheist.

Does evil exist?

There was a university professor who challenged his students with this question. Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, he did!"

"God created everything? The professor asked.

"Yes sir", the student replied.

The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil since evil exists, and according to the principal that our works define who we are then God is evil". The student became quiet before such an answer. The professor was quite pleased with himself and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth.

Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question professor?"

"Of course", replied the professor.

The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"

"What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.

The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."

The student continued, "Professor, does darkness exist?"

The professor responded, "Of course it does."

The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."

Finally the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"

Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course as I have already said. We see it every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down.

The young man's name — Albert Einstein.

 

From things Unseen Come Things that Are!

All things come from what is unseen... What is seen is not made out of what is visible. Hebrews 11. Some argue that the universe is just there so why discuss how it came to be. The same argument can be made for man, he just is. It is interesting for the social scientist then to observe why man seeks to understand the universe and his place in it.  Other sciences also pursue understanding the universe and from such pursuits we have established theory and equations which we consider to be truths or at least until other truths come along. Why does man want to find the 'truth' about what he is and is not?  The most interesting in pursuit of truth is that in social interaction determines what is true. All we can ever know is what we socially agree on. And, yet though much agreement seems to conclude that the universe just is and man just is... its appears such agreement is not enough in man's social imagination.

“What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived”— the things God has prepared for those who love him— these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us.This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words" ~ 2 Corinthians 2:9-13.

The Experience of Time is Really Living!

Time, space and matter came into existence simultaneously... as in created at the same time.

Did you know that time is a physical property and responds to physical properties? Time varies according to mass, gravity, and acceleration. We were taught that time is linear. This is because of the way in which we experience time, as a straight line  as a sequence of events. That is largely due to the fact that our finite universe is in a state of decay or entropy.

We also live in more than just a 3 dimensional space. How do we know this? We know because if we were to bend the straight line of 'time', we realize that time bends because it is a physical property and it responds to physical properties all of which give time a dimensional aspect which causes 'space'; given that, a straight line is no longer a true experience of time.

A time and space experience, for example, would be if you were to watch a parade you would see a band, a float or a procession of people go by one after the other. And, that would be your experience of the parade in time sequence. However, imagine how much different that same parade would look if you were standing on top of a building. You would see the entire parade all at once. Which is more exciting for you? I like the idea of seeing the parade bit by bit because of the expectation and thrill of seeing the next in line. Perhaps, that is why we see life that way. Could we see life from a higher viewpoint? I suppose we could, but we might not like the whole picture.

Information comes at us bit by bit and not all at once for the same reason. If we had all information at once how could we process each moment as separate and understand its relationship to other moments. Time in this world has many applications for us socially. Time teaches patience, its anticipation, its expectations with just reward along with rites of passage and longevity, its about the amount of time spent or wasted, as well as the healing aspect of time passing, moment by moment.

Could we imagine being a social actor without time. Albert Einstein said that people like us 'scientists' know that time is a persistent illusion. But if it has physical properties then how could it be an illusion. I think he meant that our vantage point is part of the problem in what seems to be the totality of reality just as I illustrated using the parade scenario. Yet, without time, where/what are we?

If we think about time as information, we might resolve to say that time has no mass. Yet, how could that be if we just said that it has physical properties and responds to physical properties? Think of time as the soft ware inside a hardware = the finite created universe.  The finite universe is what allows time to exist and have physical property. This outside casing or hardware has mass but the essentially quality of time is like software 'coded information', it has no mass.

Time is information. Can then information have physical property as a bulk of data. Can we change information? Now, that is a good question. Well, to repent means to rethink the information at hand. How much are we able to rethink? How broad is our imagination? Can we rethink and stop time's progression... as we experience it? Could we stop death? If we stopped death we would stop living. You see, we live in a bit by bit reality but in bulk data and living in the bulk of information is perhaps more living rather than is the individual on the building, we live a social life; thus, we are truly alive.

Could we live and not die if we just stop seeing a straight line? Perhaps, that was the demonstration by Jesus Christ through resurrection.

The Quantum Imagination of Imagining the Creator!

OCTA ~ Apologetic Arguments

• Ontological Argument for a Creator - Nothing greater can be Imagined 
• Cosmological Argument for a Creator - The Law of Cause and Effect.
• Teleological Argument for a Creator - Design requires a Designer
• Anthropological Argument for a Creator - Morality serves a Higher Purpose 

Imagining our reality is what we do. There is no other reality than the one we imagine. There is no need to consider a multiverse either for it would serve no purpose here and now. In fact, simply by imagining it we would be the same individual in everyone. If 'spooky action a distance' or non locality works here...  it works in the multiverse.  If we were to stack up all the multiverses, we would find that they are one and the same. 

Our imagining a Creator would never stop in any universe. Because, as created beings we can imagine being creators and we have an innate desire to create. Thus, as such we understand that all created things ponder the same question - who is the creator and can I know him. 

Imagining a Creator in any universe follows the first three arguments: the Ontological, the Cosmological and Teleological arguments. As we are able to contemplate this or even to think at all about a universe we can assume that any created being is also able to contemplate the universe as it was created. And, in order to even contemplate a universe let alone a multiverse, we have to conclude that it was created. 

Simply by experiencing a reality, a social reality we are experiencing the very nature of creation. Because, we imagine anything at all, we realize that is only possible through social entanglement, an act of being caused or 'brought together' to be interacting particles ....instantly created along with time, space and matter'. 

How to give evidence for that other than the above arguments? Firstly, the laws of thermodynamics are enough. Yet, let's look at a philosophical argument using 'abstract' terms or are they? Ideas and concepts are caused, created. They just don't exist by chance. Concepts that man holds with great esteem like human life, or justice and freedom. In an random event scenario, we might argue that those ideas would not necessarily need to exist. If we argue that they do or can exist, then we have no random event... imagining a random event is not a random event as we would be actually creating it. Not imagining such abstract concepts such as these makes no sense to us as we could not imagine anything that would supplant them. 

Can we know the Creator of Heaven and Earth of all things and unseen? If we can imagine Him, we can know Him as much as it is possible to know an absolute omnipotent non created entity. How is that possible, God being a non-created entity. If we wish never to fall down a rabbit hole, then we must accept that there is only so much that we can imagine in this world and about its 'our' Creator.  

If you were an ant, and I stood over you. How much knowledge of me would you have and the power I had in my foot over your life? Why would I refrain from stomping down? Here we have the Anthropological argument. Yes, some people would stomp down and do. Does that mean a Creator does not exist? No, it means that in this created world 'univserse' we have a choice we have free will given by the Creator. 

How is it possible that there is an ant and why do I see it? As creations we recognize other created beings and things. I am there and so is the ant. Perhaps, if I were in a higher dimension, I could understand more about myself and the ant and more about what was above or over and around me. If I were atop a tall building, I could understand much more about the building than approaching the corner of the same building. In that approach, I cannot know every ting about the building or even what is on the other side but I somehow assume that there is and or would be. 

It is the trust in what's around the corner, over and above that keeps everything in a state of imagination, as I imagine, and in that I imagining, I imagine the Creator and the Creator's imagination with it being the greatest of all. Could we ever know that kind of imagination? I suppose once we leave this hologram, and move to a higher one, we will surely know more than we know now in this imaged one.