Physics and religion

Physics and religion are similar organisms with similar hierarchical bureaucracies which ensures that the practitioners, both professional doctors, exhibit the same professional behavior.

Item Newtonism Christianity
Book Newton’s Principia The Bible
Doctrine Atomic materialism (mass) Eucharist (trans-substantiation)
Faith Newton’s soul Christ’s soul
Miracle Cavendish experiment Biblical miracles
Saints Physics saints (e.g. Einstein) Biblical Saints
Revealer of truth Moses of Mechanics Moses of Commandments
Rules of conduct Laws for physicists Laws for humanity
Cosmogony Newtonian occult world Aristotelian/Christian
Practitioners Professionals employed by the school Professionals employed by the Church
Title of Practitioners Doctors of Philosophy Doctors of Theology
Constituency Non-professional believers Non-professional believers
Professional structure Hierarchical bureaucracy Hierarchical bureaucracy
Bureaucratic currency Authority Authority

The two profession also share similar professional code and similar educational hierarchy:

One thought on “Physics and religion

  1. Physics & Religion.

    ‘ The idea that the universe can be viewed as the compound
    of two basic orders, the implicate and the explicate, can be
    found in many other traditions.
    The Tibetan Buddhists call these two aspects the void and
    nonvoid. The nonvoid is the reality of visible objects. The
    void, like the implicate order, is the birthplace of all things
    in the universe, . . .
    . . . only the void is real and all forms in the objective world
    are illusory, . . . .
    The Hindus call the implicate level of reality Brahman.
    Brahman is formless but is the birthplace of all forms in
    visible reality, which appear out of it and then enfold back
    into it in endless flux.
    . . . consciousness is not only a subtler form of matter,
    but it is more fundamental than matter, and in the Hindu
    cosmology it is matter that has emerged from consciousness,
    and not the other way around. Or as the Vedas put it, the
    physical world is brought into being through both the
    ‘ veiling’ and ‘ projecting’ powers of consciousness.
    . . . the material universe is only a second- generation
    reality, a creation of veiled consciousness, the Hindus
    say that it is transitory and unreal, or ‘ maya’.
    . . .
    This same concept can be found in Judaic thought.
    . . . . in shamanistic thinking . . . . . .
    . . . . . .
    Like Bohm, who says that consciousness always has its
    source in the implicate, the aborigines believe that the
    true source of the mind is in the transcendent reality of
    the dreamtime. Normal people do not realize this and
    believe that their consciousness is in their bodies.
    . . . . .
    The Dogan people of the Sudan also believe that the
    physical world is the product of a deeper and more
    fundamental level of reality . . . . . .’
    === .
    Book / The Holographic Universe.
    Part 3 / 9. Pages 287 – 289.
    By Michael Talbot. /
    ==================== . . .
    My questions after reading this book.

    Is it possible that Physics confirmed and proved the
    Religion philosophy of life ?
    How is it possible to understand the Religion philosophy
    of life from modern Physics view?
    #
    My opinion.
    Fact.
    The detected material mass of the matter in the
    Universe is so small (the average density of all
    substance in the Universe is approximately
    p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that it cannot ‘close’ the
    Universe into sphere and therefore our Universe
    as whole is ‘open’, Endless Void / Nothingness /
    Vacuum : T=0K.
    Quantum Physics says the Vacuum is the birthplace
    of all ‘ virtual’ particles . Nobody knows what there are,
    but ‘the virtual particles’ change the Vacuum in a
    local places and create Nonvoid / Material / Gravity
    World with stars, planets and all another objects and
    subjects in the Universe.
    === .
    Without Eternal/ Infinite Void / Vacuum physics makes no sense.
    But as Paul Dirac said:
    ” The problem of the exact description of vacuum,
    in my opinion, is the basic problem now before physics.
    Really, if you can’t correctly describe the vacuum,
    how it is possible to expect a correct description
    of something more complex ? ”
    ==========.
    Best wishes.
    Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=23624&st=15

    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2547&st=105

    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548

    ================== . .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s