TED Conversations

Carlos Marquez

This conversation is closed.

How can God exist beyond space and time?

I'm trying to make sense of this "existence" outside space and time. How can something , anything exist yet not exist in space-time? Something completely disconnected from length, width, height, or point in time....
Is this a "truth" that is beyond human comprehension? For maybe this may be one the "truths" that escapes the human intellect. However there are also non-sense statements that require filtering, I believe that existence beyond space and time is one statement that requires filtering.
Does God pops in and out of existence along with virtual particles? Or is God tightly curled up( about a Planck length?) in one or more dimensions of a Calabi-Yau manifold? Or is this existence as useful as the Cosmic Peanut Butter Theory?
Asking if it's possible means nothing, however. The question to ask is, what makes anyone say this? What is the evidence for such assertions? Show me how does anyone got to this statement.
Please as you deploy your arguments don't conflate suppositions with explanations, for these are not interchangeable. Just because it can be imagined, does not make it valid, or even explanatory.
And no scripture as proof.("Behold, heaven and the highest heavens cannot contain Thee... (1 Kings 8:27)) etc, Please and thank you.
Keep the mental contortions civil & courteous, even artful which is always cool. Let's learn from each other!

"You're everywhere and no where, baby
That's where you're at"
Hi Ho Silver Lining

Share:

Closing Statement from Carlos Marquez

The operational word in my question was "how" could god or anything exists beyond space and time?, And the core answer after the often heated exchanges is that some folks believe such a fantastic particular possible yet unable to render a demonstrable explanation -why?- because it is impossible.
The incredible thing is that folks believe dogmas as such without questioning. Is similar to lets say slavery or interracial marriage or the prohibition, many in power used (still do ) the Bible to back up such views and today-thanks in a big part by Secular Humanism- are not active policies in our country. Many a Christian believed that all above mentioned stances were correct just as god exist beyond space and time.

I think that as a whole mankind is evolving away from dogmas into new horizons, faith based or divinely revealed knowledge will take a backseat to reason based knowledge. And for that process there is a demonstrable "How".

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • J R

    • 0
    Aug 4 2013: The point being made here is related to a watchmaker a universe made by design, all within is related to life, most think that darwin and dawkins have the upper hand on the orign of life, thats the reason for posting my views , beside from darwins own account below.What we must not lose faith in is that Darwin’s notion of natural selection fails to explain the origin of life whilst giving an explanation for the origin of the species which are two separate important facts that have to be interpreted correctly; one must then be made aware of the twisted interpretation and differentials made by those intent on expressing such with verbal shadows.

    A Statement made as follows by Charles Darwin himself in his letter to Asa Gray, an American biologist which was written in 1861 and sent to him two years after the publication of The Origin of the Species.
    "The eye to this day gives me a cold shudder."

    Denton expresses his thoughts in writing concerning Darwin’s troubled statement regarding the complexity of the eye:
    "It is easy to sympathize with Darwin. Such feelings have probably occurred to most biologists at times, for to common sense it does indeed appear absurd to propose that chance could have thrown together devices of such complexity and ingenuity that they appear to represent the very epitome of perfection.... Aside from any quantitative considerations, it seems intuitively impossible that such self-evident brilliance in the execution of design could ever have occasionally hit on a relatively ingenious adaptive end, it seems inconceivable that it could have reached so many ends of such surpassing ‘perfection.
    • thumb
      Aug 4 2013: John,
      Darwin's Theory of evolution by Natural Selection does not explain the origin of life as you post" most think that darwin and dawkins have the upper hand on the orign of life, ".

      Maybe this might help you: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01

      Just stating that the universe was created is a vacuous statement.

      Thanks
      • J R

        • 0
        Aug 4 2013: vacuous statements are made by theoretical scientists and absorbed by those who believe them, most of space related science is made up of nothing less otherwise the phenomena like black holes dark matter dark flow dark energy would not exist ? the list is endless , the universe has been portrayed and understood due to scientific misinformation and has been made too complex, why ? because its theory of gravity has lead them there ? I can explain the universe without gravity and that means everything, the origin of the galaxies the expansion of the universe, black holes you name it including how the sun shines and even the effects of gravity at the atomic level not forgetting the origin of life ? may TED will call me and then I will send them my book .
        Ok Carlos its been great to read everyones views here but we do have alternatives and I do not want to blow my own trumpet here , it always leads to abuse hence why I wrote my book as an allternative , good luck in your understanding mate , you will know when you are sure of your opinions I guarrantee you.
        • thumb
          Aug 4 2013: John,
          WOW! you state that:
          " I can explain the universe without gravity and that means everything, the origin of the galaxies the expansion of the universe, black holes you name it including how the sun shines and even the effects of gravity at the atomic level not forgetting the origin of life ? may TED will call me and then I will send them my book ."
          That's tall order! would you please share as to where we may read your white papers?

          Thanks
      • J R

        • 0
        Aug 4 2013: Been here before carlos with those wanting to disprove my alternatives, had my arguements on forums which is why I wrote my book, and nope not putting a link here to it, search my name on amazon if you like , I dont impose or imply that I am correct, just have alternatives and feel that its a very complex issue to dislodge scientific beliefs.
        Maybe Ted will call me is what I meant to state, and before you go any further I have gone as far as putting in for a complex call for proposal on the ERC website on the topic fusion , so mate yes am serious with my alternatives, check out the global research methods used for fusion , totally never going to work and definately not how our sun shines. Carlos I wish you well with your inquisitive mind , dont give up and hope what I have answered you which helps you ponder alternative avenues, we are here to put forth ideas not arguements of who is right or wrong.
        • thumb
          Aug 4 2013: John,

          Tossing ideas back & back that is cool! Content & context-substance- and stand back and watch the fireworks!

          Thanks
      • J R

        • 0
        Aug 5 2013: How wrong you are carlos, you obviously do not like being cornered, that is not what sharing ideas is about, ideas are put here for others to take into consideration, nobody can change a self opinionated individual, science is based on such dogmatic principals, why have a physics degree when one disagrees ? hence one places ideas here for others to consider, thats the only way one can change scientific views, I stated a while ago that my opinions can at times come across as offensive to those who stand by their scientific beliefs, its obviously showing and I havent even started yet, but little light is left , passing my ideas and sit back is that not what this forum is about ? you stated fireworks I ? am still here answering you, have you not answered my above alternatives yet ? no you wont will you ? but you will remember these alternatives point made , cant change others opinions only offer alternatives ok.
        • thumb
          Aug 5 2013: John,
          Well established Scientific theories are not "changed" in TED forums, via legislation, Talk Radio or cable news.
          Hard nose Science is done the old fashion way -in the Lab- .IMO is Intellectually laziness to do otherwise.

          I don't seek to "convert" anyone-there's plenty folks already doing that- I ask questions-

          Thanks
    • thumb
      Aug 5 2013: what does darwin say immediately after that quote?
      • thumb
        Aug 5 2013: Obey,
        Your Biology is better than mine, can you shed some light please?


        Thanks,
    • thumb
      Aug 5 2013: i agree there is no well established scientific explanation to get from chemistry to biology, to the self replicating molecules.

      but we have all the building blocks naturally available.

      and not knowing is not evidence of magical agency.


      this assumption of magical agency to fill gaps is similar to assuming gods, spirits, demons resonsible for diease, earthquakes, the

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.