Spoken into Existence - August 3, 2008 - End Notes

August 3, 2008

Printable/viewable PDF format for browsers that do not support Greek character

End Notes

Spoken into Existence

In his on-line excerpt from Chapter One of Our Undiscovered Universe, Terrance Witt writes, “The conservation of energy is the cornerstone of modern physics, yet is blatantly violated by a universal origin from nothing – ex nihilo.” He describes four explanations for this violation: vacuum fluctuations, conservation of energy was not in effect, approximation, and eternal energy (periodic universal renewal), but he gives little credence to each, going on instead to say that while speculation about why the conservation of energy might be violated is entertaining, the universe exists now and no violation of energy conservation has ever been observed (14). He then unequivocally states (emphasis his), “At no moment in the universe’s history has energy conservation been violated in any way – not a billion years ago, not a trillion years ago, never. It is the quantification of existence. Like immense size, energy conservation is a vital universal characteristic” (15)—and with this shot fired not over the bow of the Big Bang Theory but directly into its boiler room, Witt sets forth Null Physics as the best explanation of why and how the universe exists.

Only one problem, the recently photographed echo of the Big Bang shows the rift in the fabric of heaven that opened to create the bottomless pit in which all-that-has-been-made has existed for much longer than Christian Creationists care to admit.

If the universe is not expanding, a claim made by Null Physics, and if the appearance of galaxies accelerating away from our own Milky Way galaxy stems from the decay of luminescence, then the passing away of the world (1 John 2:17) is being seen and photographed, with this passing away occurring at a much faster rate than the world’s coming into existence.

I don’t know what to make of Null Physics. Although I have read all of Witt’s chapter excerpts, I haven’t purchased his book—and I will probably wait to purchase it until it is available used at a deeply discounted price. In his chapter excerpts, however, is a novel presentation of an old idea: the world has always been. This idea is central to most aboriginal thought, presented through story instead of being presented mathematically. So Witt, with intelligence and considerable sophistication, follows a long history of shamans that sought to explain the otherwise unexplainable. In his chapter excerpts, his logic seems impressive. And I certainly understand why he would not wait to publish until after peer review, for he is in a position similar to my own: to whom would I submit my theological writings for peer review? Certainly not to someone credentialed by Christian orthodoxy for I argue that Christian orthodoxy is the result of long-term heresy, not the arbitrator of sound doctrine.

If reality—those things that appear “real” because they can be photographed and measured—consists of observable nothingness, and if the conservation of energy is a descriptive characteristic of this universe, and if rotational torque of points of potential (these points having zero radius) produce the apparently solidity of matter, giving energy measurable mass, then what Null Physics mathematically describes has significance, for Witt unknowingly describes the breath of the Logos [Ò 8`(@H] speaking all that is into existence. Yes, what Null Physics describes is the uttered words of the Logos made observable by “this one [@ÞJ@H] who was with the Theon [JÎ< 2,`<] in the beginning” (John 1:2) spinning a story into existence.

Jesus spoke to His disciples only in figures of speech (i.e., figurative language) because the words of this world mimetically describe the things of this world. They can only metaphorically describe the things of God. And when those things that are “real” serve as metaphors for the “non-real” things of God, an interesting juxtaposition occurs: in this age of mass communications, we are familiar with the White House Press Secretary spinning some event so as to put the best face onto a story. The phrase /spinning a story/ has become part of late 20^th and early 21^st Century jargon, and the phrase conveys the sense of not just turning a story around to defuse criticism, but of creating a new context in which to perceive the phenomenon described by the story.

Creation of a new context for a story constitutes creating a new reality and is therefore analogous to the Logos speaking the universe into existence, for this real world is the “new context” in which the story of an anointed cherub’s rebellion against the Most High is told. This real world has been spun into existence in a manner analogous to a White House Press Secretary spinning a story, taking the story down to a lower level where the unexplainable can be justified.

What Witt does in Null Physics is to eloquently show how nothing “real” can be perceived as our reality, and for this Christendom will be indebted to him if Null Physics withstands scrutiny.

Time can be written as a function of gravity, a force produced by the concentration of rotational vectors of points of potential—a force produced by “spin.” Thus, where there is no “spin” there is no gravity, and by extension, no time or passage of time. In heaven, there was no spin, no falsity, no darkness, no lawlessness until iniquity was found in that anointed cherub; therefore, heaven is without mass, gravity, or the passage of time. What is will always be for the moment remains forever. There is no luminescence decay, no decay of any sort, for “decay” requires the passage of time. Decay requires “spin.”

Without the passage of time, all things that have life must function as one organism to prevent paradoxical gridlock. Lawlessness is opposed to “obedience” of law. Since the foundational construct of Christendom is (or should be) typological exegesis, Christendom was in its beginning built on the idea that the “real” things of this world reveal the “non-real” things of heaven, with this construct expressed by the Apostle Paul writing that the visible things of this world reveal the invisible things of God (Rom 1:18–20) and that the physical things of this world precede the spiritual things of God (1 Cor 15:46).

Is it ironic or prophetic that spin doctors today spin stories to produce a differing reality from the one in which the story was initially received? Did James Carville’s “spinning” of the former President Clinton’s blue dress incident produce a differing reality from that of a predatory politician using his power and position to take sexual advantage of a White House intern? Carville certainly tried to shift responsibility away from the former President and onto the intern; he tried to make the incident fit into his projected reality of hundred dollar bills being dragged through trailer courts as sausages might be dragged through a dog kennel. He tried to create a reality in which all of the women with whom the former President had sexual contact were trailer trash, the dogs of society, and not trustworthy enough to be believed. And Satan has tried to take the reality into which he will be cast to have fire eventually come out from his belly (Ezek 28:18–19)—the reality into which he has already been cast and burned up—and position himself as its god and messiah. He is presently the prince of this world, a predator seeking to devour whomever he can. And from pulpits around this world, theological James Carvilles attempt to spin this Adversary into the prince of righteousness every Sunday morning, and they have considerable success doing so. After all, James Carville is very good at what he does.

In what is perhaps a characteristic of Greek thought, the Apostle Paul loved equivocation, the use of the same linguistic icon for multiple objects, shifting between linguistic objects with no linguistic clue given that a shift has occurred. In the same way he used “law,” I am here using “spin”: to spin a story has a related but differing assignment of meaning to /spin/ than is given to spin when referring to electrons, quarks, or glueons. Nevertheless as a press secretary spins a story to produce a differing context for the story and by extension a differing reality, the Logos spoke into existence all that is, giving spin to His uttered breath to produce a differing reality, one in which His words are “real,” in that they are observable and measurable.

We human beings are, by extension, nothing more than the trailer trash that James Carville tried to make us into in his attempt to take heat off the former President—we are composed of rotating points, all of zero radius, arranged in such a way that we are “real” to each other. We can really hurt ourselves when kicking “real” stones. And we briefly revisit the philosophy of Bishop Berkeley (dod 1753), whom Dr. Samuel Johnson sought to refute by kicking a stone: the new creature or new self that is a son of God born of spirit dwells in the tent of flesh of the old man or old self. And as the old self was invisible in this world and knowable only through it animating the tent of flesh, the new self is equally invisible and non-real. But there is no claim that this new self is from this world—the claim is specifically that it has come from heaven. Thus, the old self was also non-real and not photographable in this world. Yet it was this old self that argued for or against perceiving the world through experience. In all cases, that which makes a human being “human” is not physical.

That the Logos spoke all-that-is into existence is not refutable by empirical evidence, for the “evidence” itself supports the alleged existence of things. No “real” evidence exists nor can exist to reject the premise that God created the universe; thus, materialistic inquiry is halted at the event horizon of the Big Bang. But Null Physics, by challenging the concept that “things” have a beginning or a birth, seeks to sidestep this event horizon, and through the conservation of energy, seeks to establish a universe without beginning or end. It seeks to mathematically refute not only present astrophysical theories of a sudden creation, but biblical creation, which a few scientists still take seriously. However, in its reliance upon conservation of energy, it opens the door to the energy historically and presently being spun into the apparent solidity of matter coming from the utterances of the Logos, in His capacity as the Spokesman or Helpmate for the Most High in a manner analogous to how my wife delivers my words to the world via the internet. She serves as my secretary and press secretary in a manner similar to how Aaron delivered Moses’ words. And in consideration of what the first Adam said of Eve, she and I are one flesh, made one through the sanctity of marriage.

This concept of two being one is central to understanding the mysteries of God, for God through His Son created the world (Heb 1:2). This is what John tells disciples: “All things were made through him [Ò 8`(@H], and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). It was not the Father [JÎ< 2,`<] that created all that has been made, but the Logos, the one who stood beside the Most High (cf. Zech 13:7; Matt 26:31) before He entered His creation to be born of Mary as His only begotten Son (John 3:16), becoming the beloved Son of the Father when the divine breath of the Father descended upon Him as a dove (Matt 3:16–16). Therefore, the claim of Scripture is that the Most High created the world through the Son, and created the world by the Son uttering the words of the Most High, with the Son spinning these words delivered via His equally divine breath (Rom 8:9, 11), the Holy Spirit that King David had with him (Ps 51:11), the Holy Spirit Abraham had when aspiration was added to his name, transforming Abram into Abraham.

Is it that my words, uttered aloud or silently, spun into electrical pulses that enter the ether-like world of cyberspace (they change realities only to emerge as spinning electrons at some point in the future), are recoverable because they have been spun into another dimension? They travel through time as energy pulses. We have grown so accustomed to words traveling across dimensions that we don’t think about non-real thoughts being transformed into “real” modulations of breath then into electrical pulses then into grooves on “real” hard drives then back into electrical pulses before being seen as luminescence on a “real” glass plate, transparent to the eye. My non-real thoughts become “real” through spinning.

As Null Physics is subjected to increased scrutiny, the means by which the Logos spun His words into mass and matter will, most likely, be mathematically described—Terrance Witt, in daring to tackle the Big Bang Theory and in making bold claims for his work, might have unknowingly described what he set out to disprove. He might have described a sudden creation that has no event horizon but only the unremarkable transition from non-real to real through the words of the Logos being spun into existence.

* * *

* * * * *

[ Archived End Notes ] [ Home ]