156. Treasure in Heaven...taking it with you, tithers , tippers and tightwads

This is a cute precis on Treasure in Heaven

From a website on Treasure in Heaven: www.trbc.org

OUR STEWARDSHIP MONTH THEME

"GIVING: AT A HIGHER LEVEL"


TODAY'S MESSAGE
"LAYING UP TREASURE IN HEAVEN"

Jim Elliot said "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."

TEXT: Matthew 6:19-21, "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: 20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: 21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

What is "treasure in Heaven"?

According to Randy Alcorn in his book "The Treasure Principle", treasure in Heaven is:

(1) Power, Luke 19:15-17, "And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. 16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. 17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities."

(2) Possessions, Matthew 19:21, "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

(3) Pleasures, Psalm 16:11, "Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore."

Heaven's Wall Street Pays 10,000%

Matthew 19:29, "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life."

Our Attitude Towards Money Reveals The Genuineness Of Our Relationship To Christ

Luke 19:8-9, "And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. 9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham."

YOU WILL NEVER SEE A HEARSE PULLING A U-HAUL

When John D. Rockefeller died, someone asked John D.'s accountant, "How much did Mr. Rockefeller leave?" "He left it all" was the answer.

Psalm 49:16-17, "Be not thou afraid when one is made rich, when the glory of his house is increased; 17 For when he dieth he shall carry nothing away: his glory shall not descend after him."

BOTTOM LINE

"You cannot take it with you, but, thank God, you can send it on ahead."

Matthew 6:20, "But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal."

JESUS - THE WORLD'S BEST ADVISOR

As a Christian we have inside knowledge of an eventual worldwide upheaval caused by Christ's second coming. This is the ultimate insider trading tip. Earth's currency will become worthless when Christ returns; or when God calls you home in death, whichever comes first. Unlike Martha Stewart or Hillary Clinton, I can give you this inside tip and neither of us will go to jail as most inside traders today should. .

The imminent war with Iraq has the stock market very jittery. If the NASDAQ investors had known in advance that the dot.com bust was coming, many of them could have made millions, or even billions.

THE SECOND COMING IS CERTAIN

Jesus is coming. This is for sure!!! Remember, "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." Remember, "You cannot take it with you, but, thank God, you can send it on ahead." Remember, Matthew 6:20, "But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal."

"THE TREASURE PRINCIPLE"

Randy Alcorn, in his new book, "The Treasure Principle", lists six keys to understanding "The Treasure Principle":

Key #1: "God owns everything. I am his money manager."

We are the managers of the assets God has entrusted - not given - to us.

Key #2: "My heart always goes where I put my money".

Watch what happens when you reallocate your money from temporal things to eternal things.

Key #3: "Heaven, not earth, is my home."

We are citizens of "a better country--- a heavenly one".

Hebrews 11:16.

Key #4: "I should live not for the dot but for the line".

From the dot our present life on earth extends a line that goes on forever, which is eternity in Heaven.

Key #5: "Giving is the only antidote to materialism".

Giving is a joyful surrender to a greater person and a greater agenda. It dethrones me and exalts Him.

Key #6: "God prospers me not to raise my standard of living, but to raise my standard of giving".

God gives us more money than we need so we can give generously.

HOW DO I BEGIN GIVING TO GOD?

First, you only have five things to give to God:

Time, talent, treasure, temple and testimony.

What is your present level of giving?

There are three kinds of givers to God - tithers, tippers and tightwads.

Among tithers, all give at least 10% of their total income to Christ. This is the basic requirement of a tither. Many tithers give far beyond the 10% beginning level.

Jesus said more about money than almost any other topic. He warned us of the dangers of materialism. In Matthew 6:24, He reminded us that no one can serve two masters. You cannot serve God and mammon,

Only tithers are guaranteed God's provision.

Deuteronomy 8:18, "But thou shalt remember the LORD thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers, as it is this day."

LEARNING THE PROPER USE OF MONEY.
Money is a gift from God and the ability to make money is part of God's plan for the human race. God told Adam and Eve to till the ground and subdue the earth. This "cultural mandate" is part of God's purpose for our lives. We are to develop the earth's resources to the glory of God. We are not to misuse those resources, nor are we to neglect them.

WHY EVERY BELIEVER SHOULD TITHE.

(1) Revival cannot be experienced in the New Testament Church unless good stewardship is practiced.

(2) Tithing is Biblical.

Tithing was commanded and practiced:

(a) Before the Law of Moses: Genesis 14:20 "And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all."

(b) Under the Law of Moses: Leviticus 27:30 "And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD'S: it is holy unto the LORD."

Malachi 3:8-10 "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it."

© During the life and ministry of Christ: Matthew 23:23

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

(d) During the Church Age: Hebrews 7:5-8 " And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better. And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth."


(3) Tithing is Christian.

Because:

(a) It is based on obedience. John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep commandments..."

(b) Tithing is on the Basic Checklist for Victorious Christian Living-- Bible study, prayer, church attendance, water baptism, witnessing and tithing.

© Tithing puts God first. Matt. 6:33.

(d) Tithing brings blessings to others and the tither.

(e) Tithing brings joy to the tither's life.

(f) Tithing helps bring souls to Christ.

155. Hope : a chance to edit wikipedia

Here is an extract from WIKIPEDIA. It gives the ability to contribute to the definition ourselves.
Readers like missus R, Rahab et al, have previously expressed dissatisfaction with the dedfinition of various WIKI stuff, so how about we fix this one up?

Enter thoughts on the comments page


'''Hope''' is one of the three [[theological virtue]]s in Christian tradition. Hope being a combination of the desire for something and expectation of receiving it, the virtue is hoping for Divine union and so eternal happiness. Like all virtues, it arises from the will, not the passions.

Hope is opposed to the sins of [[despair]] and [[presumption]]; refraining from them is adhering to the ''negative precept'' of hope. The ''positive precept'' is required when exercising some duties, as in prayer or penance.

Some forms of [[Quietism (Christian philosophy)|Quietism]] have denied that a human being should desire anything whatsoever to such an extent that they denied that hope was a virtue.

Hope is also the driving factor in human [[emotion]] that lets what some might view as impossible human action to be accomplished



Editing Hope (virtue)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As you are not currently logged in, your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history. While you are free to edit without logging in, registering for your own account will conceal your IP address and provide you with many other benefits.


Content must not violate any copyright and must be verifiable. You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL.
Edit summary:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)
Insert: – — … ° ≈ ± − × ÷ ← → · § Sign your name: --~~~~
Wiki markup: [] [[]] {{}} [[Category:]] #REDIRECT[[]]
Symbols: ~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • # ¹ ² ³ ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ‘ “ ’ ” ¢ $ € £ ¥
Characters: Á á Ć ć É é Í í Ĺ ĺ Ń ń Ó ó Ŕ ŕ Ś ś Ú ú Ý ý Ź ź À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù  â Ĉ ĉ Ê ê Ĝ ĝ Ĥ ĥ Î î Ĵ ĵ Ô ô Ŝ ŝ Û û Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü Ÿ ÿ ß Ã ã Ẽ ẽ Ĩ ĩ Ñ ñ Õ õ Ũ ũ Ỹ ỹ Ç ç Ģ ģ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ Đ đ Ů ů Ǎ ǎ Č č Ď ď Ě ě Ǐ ǐ Ľ ľ Ň ň Ǒ ǒ Ř ř Š š Ť ť Ǔ ǔ Ž ž Ā ā Ē ē Ī ī Ō ō Ū ū Ȳ ȳ Ǣ ǣ ǖ ǘ ǚ ǜ Ă ă Ĕ ĕ Ğ ğ Ĭ ĭ Ŏ ŏ Ŭ ŭ Ċ ċ Ė ė Ġ ġ İ ı Ż ż Ą ą Ę ę Į į Ǫ ǫ Ų ų Ḍ ḍ Ḥ ḥ Ḷ ḷ Ḹ ḹ Ṃ ṃ Ṇ ṇ Ṛ ṛ Ṝ ṝ Ṣ ṣ Ṭ ṭ Ł ł Ő ő Ű ű Ŀ ŀ Ħ ħ Ð ð Þ þ Œ œ Æ æ Ø ø Å å Ə ə • {{Latinx|}}
Greek: Α α Β β Γ γ Δ δ Ε ε Ζ ζ Η η Θ θ Ι ι Κ κ Λ λ Μ μ Ν ν Ξ ξ Ο ο Π π Ρ ρ Σ σ ς Τ τ Υ υ Φ φ Χ χ Ψ ψ Ω ω • {{Polytonic|}} (polytonic list)
Cyrillic: А а Б б В в Г г Ґ ґ Ѓ ѓ Д д Ђ ђ Е е Ё ё Є є Ж ж З з Ѕ ѕ И и І і Ї ї Й й Ј ј К к Ќ ќ Л л Љ љ М м Н н Њ њ О о П п Р р С с Т т Ћ ћ У у Ў ў Ф ф Х х Ц ц Ч ч Џ џ Ш ш Щ щ Ъ ъ Ы ы Ь ь Э э Ю ю Я я
IPA: t̪ d̪ ʈ ɖ ɟ ɡ ɢ ʡ ʔ ɸ ʃ ʒ ɕ ʑ ʂ ʐ ʝ ɣ ʁ ʕ ʜ ʢ ɦ ɱ ɳ ɲ ŋ ɴ ʋ ɹ ɻ ɰ ʙ ʀ ɾ ɽ ɫ ɬ ɮ ɺ ɭ ʎ ʟ ɥ ʍ ɧ ɓ ɗ ʄ ɠ ʛ ʘ ǀ ǃ ǂ ǁ ɨ ʉ ɯ ɪ ʏ ʊ ɘ ɵ ɤ ə ɚ ɛ ɜ ɝ ɞ ʌ ɔ ɐ ɶ ɑ ɒ ʰ ʷ ʲ ˠ ˤ ⁿ ˡ ˈ ˌ ː ˑ ̪ • {{IPA|}}
Your changes will be visible immediately.
For testing, please use the sandbox instead.
On talk pages, please sign your comment by typing four tildes (~~~~).
Please note:
If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it.
Only public domain resources can be copied without permission—this does not include most web pages.
See our policies and guidelines for more information on editing.

154. Tonguetwistertwister : Lutheran creed

Ross Gasking : This is an extract from a Lutheran page being their central doctrine. While I admire the beliefs espoused by their Greg Boyd, I am not so sure about the traditional catholic stance. Any comments to help?








Home Page

The Three Ecumenical or Universal Creeds



The Apostles' Creed

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic* Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.

* catholic means "universal" and is not a reference to the Roman Catholic Church.



The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; who spake by the Prophets. And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.



The Athanasian Creed

Written against the Arians.

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

And the catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three Eternals, but one Eternal. As there are not three Uncreated nor three Incomprehensibles, but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.

The Father is made of none: neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before or after other; none is greater or less than another; But the whole three Persons are coeternal together, and coequal: so that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped. He, therefore, that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe faithfully the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right faith is, that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man of the substance of His mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood; Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but one Christ: One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking the manhood into God; One altogether; not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead; He ascended into heaven; He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty; from whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give an account of their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.

This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

151. Index in lieu de

Date Post Title
7/26/2006
Christus Victor
Extract from Lutheran site

7/25/2006
150. Crisis of Faith
Communication with Marianna

7/15/2006
149. HIRAETH
Ross Gasking : Genetic Memory and that Welsh feeling

7/15/2006
148. Beaconsfield Comedy
Ross Gasking playing with the Mayor

7/11/2006
147. Science and Hawking have lost their way
Ross Gasking : comment

7/10/2006
146. How much of me is me?
Ross Gasking

7/10/2006 Edit
What am I ?
Ross Draft

7/10/2006 Edit
145. Is Spirit faster than Light?
Ross Gasking

7/10/2006
144.
Ross Deleted

7/10/2006
143. When the sun stopped 4.
Ross Gasking

7/10/2006
142.When the sun stopped 3.
Ross Gasking

7/10/2006
141. When the sun stopped. 2.
Ross Gasking

7/10/2006
140. When the sun stopped 1.
Ross Gasking

7/04/2006
139. Numerology in the bible
Ross Gasking



7/04/2006 Edit
138. Number of Christ = 888
Ross View Delete
7/04/2006 Edit
137. Number of George Bush now : Dont phone.
Ross View Delete
7/04/2006 Edit
136. More numbers..a book about it
Ross View Delete
7/03/2006 Edit
135. Hits counter and Citroens
Ross View Delete
7/03/2006 Edit
134. Was Hitler working for God? Or are you?
Ross View Delete
7/03/2006 Edit
133. The end of the world as we know it
Ross View Delete
7/03/2006 Edit
132. The TREE of LIFE
Ross View Delete
7/02/2006 Edit
131. Speed of light and God. Keeping it simple..ish.
Ross View Delete
7/01/2006 Edit
130. More numbers of the beast and other Australians
Ross View Delete
6/30/2006 Edit
129. Omnipresence, how biblical is that word
Ross View Delete
6/30/2006 Edit
128. Left-handedness
Ross View Delete
6/29/2006 Edit
127. lukewarmness
Ross View Delete
6/29/2006 Edit
126. Why are we not interested?
Ross View Delete
6/28/2006 Edit
125. murphys law equation
Ross View Delete
6/26/2006 Edit
124. Poor Bill
Ross View Delete
6/26/2006 Edit
123. Is www = 666 in Hebrew?
Ross View Delete
6/26/2006 Edit
122. More time, no, less time
Ross View Delete
6/26/2006 Edit
121. Speed of light CAN be slowed
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
120. What is a hypocrite? And TV and Internet.
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
119. Why the sacrifice? What for?
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
118. Genie in the bottle
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
117. Devils, casting thereof. Meant to be funny.
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
116. Wikipedia : What is a black hole?
Ross View Delete
6/23/2006 Edit
115. Science and Gen 1
Ross View Delete
6/19/2006 Edit
114. Poem: I am a Christian
Ross View Delete
6/18/2006 Edit
113. Not complicated...this theology
Ross View Delete
6/17/2006 Edit
112.. Womens role in Eden
Ross View Delete
6/17/2006 Edit
111. Chief Joys
Ross View Delete
6/16/2006 Edit
110. Humility and entrails
Ross View Delete
6/14/2006 Edit
109. Busy signal
Ross View Delete
6/14/2006 Edit
108. Untrue Christians
Ross View Delete
6/14/2006 Edit
107. Fish
Ross View Delete
6/14/2006 Edit
106. They thought he was the gardener
Ross View Delete
6/13/2006 Edit
105. Holy Spirit or lesser spirits
Ross View Delete
6/12/2006 Edit
104. Questions
Ross View Delete
6/12/2006 Edit
103. Junk off another blogsite..its funny
Ross View Delete
6/12/2006 Edit
102. How many people believe in God?
Ross View Delete
6/12/2006 Edit
101. Time is elastic?
Ross View Delete
6/11/2006 Edit
100. There are two types of people in this world...
Ross View Delete
6/11/2006 Edit
99. The big battle
Ross View Delete
6/08/2006 Edit
98. Gods tool in the battle is Jesus
Ross View Delete
6/08/2006 Edit
97. Einstein again
Ross View Delete
6/08/2006 Edit
96. Time no more no more shall be...
Ross View Delete
6/08/2006 Edit
95. Fat Zero
Ross View Delete
6/07/2006 Edit
94. More on THE question
Ross View Delete
5/26/2006 Edit
93. Time Out
Ross View Delete
5/23/2006 Edit
92: Working this site
Ross View Delete
5/22/2006 Edit
91: Signs from God: the historic highway
Ross View Delete
5/22/2006 Edit
90: Time Perception
Ross View Delete
5/17/2006 Edit
89: Our mission
Ross View Delete
5/16/2006 Edit
88. Not Dr Seuss
Ross View Delete
5/16/2006 Edit
87. Boasting...a good thing?
Ross View Delete
5/16/2006 Edit
86. Education and the questions.
Ross View Delete
5/15/2006 Edit
85. Napoleon Bonaparte
Ross View Delete
5/14/2006 Edit
84 Question of the Century
Ross View Delete
5/14/2006 Edit
83. Dog / Dogs Concordance
Ross View Delete
5/13/2006 Edit
82. Science vs religion
Ross View Delete
5/12/2006 Edit
81. Preaching the Gospel, door to door
Ross View Delete
5/12/2006 Edit
injury and death... so far apart but only a hairbr...
Ross Draft Delete
5/11/2006 Edit
79. Science vs Intelligent Design
Ross View Delete
5/11/2006 Edit
78. Meekness is not weakness
Ross View Delete
5/11/2006 Edit
77. The Word and Consciousness
Ross View Delete
5/10/2006 Edit
76. Parable of Riff and all
Ross View Delete
5/10/2006 Edit
75. The science and religion of the dog, Ross's dog..
Ross View Delete
5/10/2006 Edit
74. submission of wives , and meekness
Ross View Delete
5/09/2006 Edit
73. E = mc2 update to massless energy
Ross View Delete
5/08/2006 Edit
72. Time ..the magazine, on Beaconsfield miners
Ross View Delete
5/08/2006 Edit
71. Live to be 180 years old
Ross View Delete
5/08/2006 Edit
70. Practice makes Perfect proven
Ross View Delete
5/08/2006 Edit
69.Time for a blonde joke and the dog
Ross View Delete
5/08/2006 Edit
68. National Geographic's Unanswered Science Questions
Ross View Delete
5/07/2006 Edit
67. E=mc2
Ross View Delete
5/07/2006 Edit
66. More on time
Ross View Delete
5/07/2006 Edit
65. Time...when did it begin?
Ross View Delete
5/06/2006 Edit
64. Taking it with you
Ross View Delete
5/06/2006 Edit
63. Yeah..write your own funeral
Ross View Delete
5/05/2006 Edit
62. Time before time
Ross View Delete
5/05/2006 Edit
61. How to resolve conflict
Ross View Delete
5/04/2006 Edit
60. Beware of the dog, and translations
Ross View Delete
5/04/2006 Edit
59. Geoffs dog is not really Einstein....is he?
Ross View Delete
5/04/2006 Edit
58. Chicken Feet Religion
Ross View Delete
5/03/2006 Edit
57. God vs Satan- the battle
Ross Draft Delete
5/03/2006 Edit
56. Measuring happiness to live longer
Ross View Delete
4/29/2006 Edit
55. enoch
Ross Draft Delete
4/28/2006 Edit
54. Death, and getting a Life
Ross View Delete
4/27/2006 Edit
53. Science of evil
Ross View Delete
4/27/2006 Edit
52. Poem to reflect our humility
Ross View Delete
4/27/2006 Edit
51. How to work this site
Ross View Delete
4/27/2006 Edit
50. Not really science nor religion
Ross View Delete
4/27/2006 Edit
49. Venus
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
48. 10 steps to sexual sin
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
47. Short testimonies
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
46. Previous Post leaves doubts
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
45. Science and Noah's flood
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
44. Scientists who believe in God
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
43. Evolution coexists
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
42. Some scientists are believers
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
41. No more dogs in heaven ..,.please
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
40. Arch angel
Ross View Delete
4/26/2006 Edit
39. Numbering the posts
Ross View Delete
4/25/2006 Edit
38. Science..black holes
Ross View Delete
4/25/2006 Edit
37. Fantastic wheelchair
Ross View Delete
4/25/2006 Edit
36. Meet Angelo
Ross View Delete
4/25/2006 Edit
35. Preaching the Gospel
Ross View Delete
4/25/2006 Edit
34. Official notice: This Is Not Spam
Ross View Delete
4/22/2006 Edit
33. Too many big words
Ross View Delete
4/22/2006 Edit
32. Why do I do Ross's dog stories?
Ross View Delete
4/22/2006 Edit
31. Belief: scripture or science
Ross View Delete
4/22/2006 Edit
30. What is loyalty?
Ross View Delete
4/22/2006 Edit
29. Why are we confused?
Ross View Delete
4/21/2006 Edit
28. Methuselah
Ross View Delete
4/21/2006 Edit
(Untitled Post)
Ross Draft Delete
4/21/2006 Edit
26. Long noses
Ross View Delete
4/18/2006 Edit
25. Ross's dog on google
Ross View Delete
4/18/2006 Edit
24. Southern hemisphere heaven and Ross's dog
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
23. How you know you are getting OLd
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
22. McDonalds
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
21. Earning points
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
20. Mathematically speaking
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
19. Speaking about Packer..
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
18. Where is Heaven?
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
17. Who cares ?
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
16. Who is unworthy and the dog
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
15. Ken's Recommended site
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
14. My journey
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
13. Retirement
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
12. Science vs. scripture
Ross View Delete
4/17/2006 Edit
11. Time and a family
Ross View Delete
4/14/2006 Edit
10. Ross's dog on those dreams
Ross View Delete
4/14/2006 Edit
9. Fairyland
Ross View Delete
4/14/2006 Edit
8. Poem : Opinions
Ross View Delete
4/13/2006 Edit
7. On Jesus Brethren
Ross View Delete
4/13/2006 Edit
6. Google Hits
Ross View Delete
4/13/2006 Edit
5. Love is not a four letter word
Ross View Delete
4/12/2006 Edit
4. Ross's dog on forgiveness
Ross View Delete
4/12/2006 Edit
3. Angels and Ross's dog
Ross View Delete
4/12/2006 Edit
2. Dimensions, levels, abilities, talents
Ross View Delete
4/12/2006 Edit
1. Mission Statement
Ross View Delete

150. Crisis of Faith

Ross Gasking:
On 24/07/2006, at 12:52 PM, professionalmom2004 wrote:

Hello,
I found this group while searching the web for information regarding
quantum mechanics and Christianity. I am having a "crisis of faith"
and I hope that some of you can shed some light on my dilemma.
I have been a Christian for 32 years (since age 8) Suffice it to say
that my head knowledge of Theology has many times caused conflict with
my heart knowledge of God. Having read and studied the Bible and
being an avid reader of science, I have recently been giving a lot of
thought and research time to the understanding of Quantum Mechanical
Theory and Christianity. I first became aware of the conflict when I
saw the movie " What the Bleep do we know?" and read the book as well.
In the end, all matter is energy, so no matter really exists, and
what we "see" as matter is really 'consciousness'. Somehow we are all
connected in this grand consciousness. This all seems to make perfect
sense to me until we begin thinking about "sin" and blood sacrifice,
and all the other moral precepts of our faith. In my opinion, Quantum
Mechanics PROVES the existence of God, but what about Jesus,
salvation, satan, hell and the rest? A God who created the universe
being concerned about whether I hold a grudge or not seems implausable
and in some ways, prideful. I just finished reading a wonderful book
called "The Science of God" by Gerald Schroeder which answered many
questions I had about evolution and scripture. In the book, he refers
to Kabbalh and some of it's principles. I began looking into that but
stopped when I read references to reincarnation. I find reincarnation
mutually exclusive to Christianity as we do not need a savior if we
are coming back to fix our mistakes in another life. I see all of the
miracles attributed to Jesus reasonable in light of quantum theory,
but the whole doctrine of "salvation" seems archaic and mythological
at best. Was Jesus "God's" "son"? How can pure energy or
consciousness have a "son"? Why do we need to have the whole
sacrifice thing? Couldn't a being who created the intricate universe
just "forgive" us? Which leads me to other questions of Cosmology and
Astronomy... It seems ridiculous (in a scientific sense) to believe
that we are the only sentient creatures in the universe... Is Jesus
their savior too?, or do they have their own savior?
I realize that these are a lot of questions for a "newbie", but can
anyone help me make sense out of all of this? I would appreciate any
help you can give me....I was really shocked that there was even such
a group as yours out there... I thought I was alone with all my
questions.... Nice to meet you---- Marianna in Jacksonville, FL

__._,_.___
Messag

25 July 2006 10:35:35 PM
To: religionandscience@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Bede's Library] Quantum Mechanics and our Christian Faith


Dear Friend, Marianna,

I like the concept that you find science proving the scripture:
but let me explain how I find the scripture proving science.
In fact I live by the maxim that if your science and your religion disagree, maybe you need to change your science.

The way I see it is:
The initial primordial energy is God.
God expanded 'under' creation, such that his energy is present in every atom of the muiltiverse.
This you believe as you have said, quantum science indicates the presence of God.
Further, in simple terms, I believe there is no place you can hide from God.
God is present in all his creation.
Further, all scripture needs to work at all levels (of intelligence)
Some of what I might say might seem simplistic: it needs to be....
other is from a scientific understanding.
Yet more is from scripture, tell me if you need references..I am trying to make this readable, in the first instance...

When God created MAN, men and women, he had a plan for them much different than how it panned out.
'Prior' to the creation of people, there was a heaven full of angelic beings which we call spiritual, I call 'other dimensional'.
Some of these developed in an evil direction, and were known as 'fallen angels'.
Satan was the chief of these.

Satan, thru the 'serpent', convinced Adam and Eve to get involved, to partake of the fruit, of good and evil.
This was available to them but forbidden by God, as was the tree of life, ( of immortality).
Some have said, what a pity Adam and Eve didnt partake of the tree of life first.It would have changed everything.
But that was forbidden too.

{ So I think he had a much higher purpose for men, and a much higher purpose for women.
Adam and Eves punishments were to do things which have become our way of life, and dear to us...
we men love to work the ground in our gardens and farms, you women love to look after family and husbands.
we have come to love our penalty; but it was not always to be: maybe women were to produce children for God ( as in Mary)
Maybe men were to walk with God in the garden while the animals under his domain did all the work, like the birds and the bees do today, only more so.
It tests the imagination to wonder what might have been, but John in Revelation had a vision of what it will be on the new earth... possibly as it might have been if not for Satan.}

Gods intentions of being their friend and god were frustrated by this.
From that moment Satan gained the control of MAN and man became his property. Man belonged to Satan, he is our natural father...( John 8.41..)
From then on the will of God was continually frustrated by Satan. Indeed Satan acted, God reacted. See the scriptures, you will find how sin so permeated the world, God repented that he had made it. Everything happened was caused by Satan, reacted to by God.

Sacrifices were made by men to atone for their sins.
Effectively they bought themselves out of debt by paying for their wrongs by giving their most precious property in lieu of themselves.
Who were they paying? They werent paying God.
He said ...what good is the blood of bulls and goats to me? I dont need to eat it.
God, thru man, was paying off Satan.

The only way God could buy back immortality for mankind was to pay with his own self. To sacrifice his own self.
So as an answer to the trickery of Satan, the supreme evil, he sold himself, the supreme good, to pay once and for all, for mans original and ongoing sin.
He became a man, this was an offshoot of himself therefore known as his son. But as it says in John he Jesus created the world. He is God.

God is multi dimensional, so many facets we cant imagine, so it is simple that God can be everywhere at once, be God and a human, know everything, can create at will, stuff up your computer, protect you, love you, whatever.

But after God produced himself as Christ and died as a sacrifice to end all sacrifices, as the payment for all sin, things changed.
And to WHOM IS THE PAYMENT MADE?
The payment is not made by God to God. That would achieve nothing.
The payment has to be at ARMS LENGTH.

The payment was to the opposite number, Satan.

From then on, God made the initiative, Satan reacted. Think about it, look at the scripture. There is an essay, post no.57 on that at
www.science-vs-religion-christian-view.blogspot.com , ( this site )

Now God is bringing Israel back together, he has a mechanism for regaining the immortality of man, and better still, he has paid such a price that even all the Gentiles can obtain immortality with him. Satan is on the back foot but he will accentuate evil in the world in a desperate attempt to regain the upper hand. Evil will be hard to resist, but God has paid the price already. Satan will not win the war for immortality of man. Eventually he will be beaten down and chained.

As far as other civilisations go, I dont have any beliefs. Some would say, does it matter?
Well yes, maybe it does. To the bothe civilisations at least, and to God. But we are not given any scripture on it.
But it would depend on whether Satan infiltrated Martians and Venusians or whatever, as to whether a price had to be paid for their redemption.
It would be hoped not.

Because Gods time is not our time ( another post on that site),time is not 2-dimensional in Gods realm, maybe more like spherical but without limits....we cant just say we hope God is a quick learner and the Earth debacle would not be repeated elsewhere.
It may be that it happened in an infinite number of places , even concurrently.
Maybe not.
It may be we are unique, and why not?
It may be, you are unique, and why not?
It may be, God wanted you to ask these questions, and I am sure I have to answer them, this is currently my lot.
I hope you can get in touch with me, any of you, and we can develop these thoughts.

Ross


Thank you Ross, that makes salvation a bit clearer. It makes sense that God had to "pay" Satan off... but why didn't he just destroy him after the Garden incident? Do you believe in a literal "tree of knowledge"? Thank you for your insights, I can go back to talking to Jesus again... I have missed him...

149. HIRAETH

HIRAETH : that Welsh genetic memory
From an article in THE AGE today I have become fascinated with Hiraeth:
I have sometimes talked about how we feel we belong in particular places, and not others.
On visiting England I felt magnetically drawn to Devon/Cornwall, which as it turned out many generations of my forbears came from.
On seeing footage from Trinidad/Tobago, I felt such an electric bond to the people.

It turns out 7 generations ago I had a West Indian princess as an ancestor.

When Geoff was in London, he thought his ancestors came from there...but no magnetism drew him; until he went to Wales and felt the electricity in a pub in Wales. It transpired nearly everyone in town there had Geoff's surname!

We call it GENETIC MEMORY. If you have these experiences, tell us about them by hitting the COMMENT button below please?

Here are some Internet comments on that Welsh concept they call HIRAETH. Dont ask me how to pronounce it. If you have it , youcan probably say it.
I'm having trouble even with the sp[elling thereof.:
*******
Here are some examples of Hiraeth:

"I too have fallen in love with Cymru and we try to return every year. When we have moments of American insanity and are overwhelmed with life here in the USA we long to go home to Wales. Ah, Hiraeth." - Bill Hebrank, Maryland, USA, Maryland

"Hiraeth - This is the word, the Welsh word that I have found that totally describes the essence of my longing, of my desire, of my hope to visit the shores that I know are 'home' although I have yet to walk upon them." - Dawn, Florida, USA, Florida

"We are Americans. My wife is of Welsh extraction, and through her so are our children. We have visited Wales. There is mystery in Wales. I am 100 per cent German and can lay no claim to Welsh heritage but I am very happy for my wife and children's sake, that they can." - Earl Newman, Michigan

"I am happy to be able to claim Welsh heritage. When I visited Wales a few years ago it felt like my spiritual home. As the US gets more and more crazy, it feels less like my home. Thank you for reminding me of my spiritual home. I hope to return one day." - Fern, Virginia

"I am with that word Hiraeth. I live within sight of Wales and I can only claim a second generation Welsh descent, but I can tell you where my heart lies and it is west... and one day I will follow my heart and the sunset." - Ian, Virginia

"Hiraeth to me is all the time I am in England I yearn to be in Wales. When we reach the sign saying Croeso i Cymru I know I am home and my heart soars to the places where my ancestors walked. As I have been researching family history for about 6 years now in Wales I have walked many places where my ancestors walked and it sends shivers down my spine. I believe it truly is a privilege to be born Welsh." - Sue in Suffolk, England

"Dweudwch, fawrion o wybodaeth O ba beth y gwnaethpwyd hiraeth A pha ddefnydd a roed ynddo Na darfyddo wrth ei wisgo.

(Tell me, you so great in wisdom, Of what is hiraeth made; Of what material is it Not to wear away when worn.)

Does dim gair yn Saesneg am "hiraeth" -- There is no word in English for hiraeth -- so goes the conventional wisdom.

Hiraeth is the sense of being so much a part of a place -- and the place, a part of you -- that you feel forever incomplete when separated from it.

On visiting Wales for the first time in 1987, attending the National Eisteddfod in Porthmadog, I felt I had come home to a land that affirmed a part of who I am that had been denied in America: my love of song, poetry, good fellowship, and truly belonging to a community. Hiraeth for Wales brought me back twice and led me to volunteer for ten years as a foreign propagandist and fund-raiser for the Welsh home rule and language restoration movements. My elder daughter was conceived at Nant Gwrtheyrn; this summer, she, her sister, and I will return together to see the land that is so much a part of their heritage." - Eric "ab Owain" Bowen, Washington

"The insane desire to purchase an airplane ticket as soon as I begin to listen to my Welsh CDs--especially the CD "Swansea Riot" by my friend Robin Campbell in Swansea. He gave me the CD last year when I was visiting there. At the first note, I am back in Wales walking the cliff top at Rhosili or lifting a pint of Brains. Hiraeth can be a dangerous condition with no known cure but a trip back to Cymru. " - Mona, Wisconsin

"Hiraeth (pronounced ‘hee-rah-y-th’) is a Welsh word which has no single-word equivalent in English. It implies a wistful longing, interwoven with homesickness, with overtones of happiness for fond memories of happy times that once were, tinged with sadness (even tears) because they are no more, plus an aching emptiness and some heartache too, all rolled together into a painfully deep, gut-wrenching yearning. That’s hiraeth! " - Bob Jones, Canada

"I have lived in New Zealand for 20yrs but always, always there is this pull from 12,000 miles away and it surely is the green green grass of home. My four children who now have children of their own talk about old friends and wonder where they are now.I have made the trip several times to see family and friends and there is always a welcome and a friendly greeting. New Zealand is a nation of sports fanatics especially rugby but even they are in awe when they here the voices at the old Arms Park and now the Millennium Stadium which I had the privilege to see when the world cup was played there several years ago.
The feeling I get when I cross the seven bridge and know I am on Welsh soil is indescribable - it is Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh I'm HOME and it will always be my home. " - Margaret and Children - Jeremy,Michael,Helene, Colin, New Zealand

"To me it is a longing to be in the Land of Song. I live in Florida and it is home but not the land of my birth, I hear the Welsh National Anthem or hear the spoken word of Welsh and I have this longing "Hiraeth" which is difficult to explain. " - Liz, Florida

"You can take the girl out of Wales , but you can't take the Welsh out of the girl......... I think that describes me to a T. I have been in Canada 18 years now. But, I still long for the green green grass of home. Infact, as I get older, the feeling of "Hiraeth" deepens. Even though I visit Cymru every year. I still want more. I miss the people , the places and all it's splendour. There is no doubt in my mind that one day I shall return............ and my Hiraeth will be gone that day" - Carys DeRudder, Ontario

"When I left Wales for the shores of New Zealand I thought I knew the meaning of Hiraeth, I was wrong! since being away I have discovered that Hiraeth is the very blood that flows through my veins, the very being that makes my soul and the "oneness" that bonds me to Wales.
Hiraeth is the very thing that one day will bring me home, home to Wales. " - Merlin Astley-Jones, New Zealand

Please send your definition to hiraeth@walesunited.com




******



Near Matches
Ignore Exact

Hiraeth

(idea) by Demeter (1.3 d) (print) ? 5 C!s Sun Sep 09 2001 at 9:13:25

Hiraeth they call it in Wales. It has been growing inside her for years.

She stands, her hands immersed to the wrist in warm, soapy water, looking out of the open window into the garden. Fantails flitter, just out of reach of the stalking grey shadow of the cat. The magnolia is beginning to shyly open its blush-tipped blooms, jasmine has started to scent the air, and, in a glorious splash of gold, daffodils nod.

It is a beautiful September day, and spring is making its presence felt.

But she misses the snowdrops and crocuses of home. Daffodils, to her, are the latecomers of spring, the nouveau-riche arrivistes in their gaudy, showy colours: beautiful, but vulgar beside the delicate fragility of their less ostentatious cousins.

Spring always comes too quickly here. One day there are gales and fog, and then suddenly gardens are alive with colour, and people are casting off their coats for shorts and T-shirts. There is no growing anticipation, no sense of a gradual turning of the seasons, just a back-flip and a bow, and everything is changed.

She has been here nearly ten years.

She was so positive before they came, looking forward to the space and the solitude, the luxury of having room to breathe and spread out; something she knew she would never be able to have in England. She remembered the conversations with her friends and her family.

"It'll be permanent," she had said. "It's too big a step to be anything else. We have to go, knowing that it will work, and that we have to make it work, because there isn't any easy way back."

When they had called her brave, she had smiled and told them that home was people, not places, and that since Martin and the children were going with her she was taking her home, so where did the bravery come in? She had hugged her tearful mother and said "Just wait until you visit us. You'll understand then, I promise."

She had really believed it too. There was no doubt in her mind that New Zealand was the right place for children to grow up - safer and freer than England, lacking the hazards of heavy traffic and the cities of close-clustered people where the density of the population made it so much more likely you would come across the one in a hundred who wished others harm.

When they stepped off the plane into a sun-soaked November dawn, she had been utterly convinced that they had made the right decision. They had been greeted by Martin's sister, Andrea, who had settled here when she married a Kiwi, five years ago, and driven the several hours to their rural farmhouse in a comfortable van where their new family, Andrea's in-laws, were waiting to welcome them. They had been wrapped in friendliness and hustled to comfortable beds to sleep off the rigours of a journey that had taken them half way around the world.

There was no difficulty settling. Within a week they had found a school in the closest city for seven-year-old Dominic and five-year-old Amelia, and a house to rent in a leafy suburb within easy walking distance of it. They decided to enjoy the summer holiday with the children before seeking work, since they had sufficient savings, and deserved a break after a long, hard-working lead-up to emigration.

Martin found a job the day the children returned to school, as a senior accountant at the city hospital, and she was employed two days later, as an editor in a publishing company. Of course, they hadn't expected any trouble, with their qualifications, but it was pleasant to see their confidence warranted.

And so, it had all seemed perfect.

The children quickly found friends, and while Dominic discovered a taste for rugby and the outdoorsiness of the lifestyle, Amelia's prettiness and bubbly personality swiftly ensconced her at the centre of an admiring clique.

And the adults? Martin loved work, finding it much less pressured than his job back in the UK. Fewer hassles, more appreciation, recognition and, soon, promotion. He got involved with several sports clubs, and generally, was having a whale of a time. She found her job challenging and stimulating, and was quickly given new responsibilities. It was VERY hard work though, and when she got home she was shattered. A 'net connection provided her relaxation, as she unwound with usenet, and quickly became a personality on a couple of newsgroups.

Over time, they found the perfect house to buy, in a small village just out of the city. Huge, and gracious, with large grounds and a view of mountains, it was the home they had always dreamed of. Her parents visited, wholeheartedly endorsed the decision, seeing the life that the family had built in New Zealand, and comparing it with the one they had been living in England.

After five years, Martin received another promotion, to national financial manager, and she started her own business as a freelance editor. It was work that she had always loved, and she started with a large contract for a series of children's books.

That was when the rot started to set in, she thinks, as she starts to rinse the glasses.

The new job took Martin away from home, often, whereas her office was in the house, and she was there all the time. She loved the setting, the freedom it gave her to work the hours she chose, but she was lonely.

She found IRC, a channel related to one of the newsgroups that she was most prolific on. While Martin travelled, and the kids slept over at friends houses, or brought the friends back to sleep at home, she spent her time chatting with perhaps the most invigorating social group she had ever encountered.

Primarily British, they were witty, and clever, daring to discuss the most contentious of topics, arguing from all sides, but always in a civilised manner. She struck up friendships with several of them, chatting in query, and found that she was telling them more about herself, and learning more about them, than she had ever revealed or listened to in real life friendships.

She was a warm woman, patient and caring, and she became very popular.

That alone would have been enough to throw her off balance. She had always been liked, but popularity had eluded her, reserved for the pretty and the sporty and the vivacious, not the intelligent, serious, ordinary-looking ones.

Some, she became very close to. It was a pleasant way to stave off loneliness.

It was time for the family's first visit back to the UK, planned long ago to happen after five years in their new home, timed to coincide with her brother's wedding. She told her new friends about it, and arranged to take some time during the holiday to meet them.

They flew in to Heathrow, to be met by her parents. They spent a week there, helping with wedding arrangements, met up with her old friends, and she realised how far she had gone away from them. It was lovely to see them, but no wrench to move on. She delighted in the countryside, and the beauty of a British autumn, comparing it to the evergreens of New Zealand, and feeling a pang of regret that there was no equivalent of this riot of russet and gold at home. She smiled, realising that it seemed home had come to mean something new.

They attended the wedding ceremony, and then leaving the children to be spoiled by their grandparents, Martin went to visit college friends she had never known, and she went to visit 'net friends she had never met.

And it was wonderful. For a fortnight she partied. People put themselves out to meet her, and their friendship was just as warm in person as it had been in text, she was hugged, she laughed and sang and drank and felt loved. She had fun. At the end of the first week, Martin joined her, and they collected the children and went off to another meeting, arranged just for her, before returning to spend a final week with her family.

It was a fabulous holiday, and they all went home feeling great.

She puts the glasses in the cupboard and cleans down the bench, checking the clock. Amelia is on a half day from school, she'll be home soon.

It took several months for her to become discontented. First she rode the high, chats frequently referring to things done, people met and sights seen. She could see faces now, in the text, hear voices, feel virtual hugs.

Martin took another job. Better, a higher salary, and more travelling. It was more pressured and left him tired and short tempered at the end of the week, but her work had dropped off sharply when the collapse of the tiger economies made people more cautious about how they spent their budgets, so the extra income was welcome.

As her time in England grew more distant, online chat turned to plans rather than pasts, and she began to feel a loss at not being with her friends for their various meetings. Knowing exactly what she was missing made the missing of it more real and immediate.

Then one of her closest friends made a suggestion in query. The company he worked for had an opening, a directorship. It was the sort of job she had never dreamed would be open to her, but more than being open, it was offered. On a plate. Hers if she wanted it. Hers if she would move back home.

Martin and the kids refused flatly to consider the idea. With regret, she turned the offer down, and prepared to get on with life, understanding their point. Dominic was selected for the national under-fourteens rugby team, and she almost burst with pride. Amelia won the regional science prize. Martin took up marathon running and trained hard, quickly making a show in the veteran men's competition.

She, looking at the quality of the books being sent to her to edit, began to write her own.

But resentment she didn't know she had began to grow, its roots digging into her subconscious before it blossomed into her awareness. As the children relied on her less, being home seldom, she grew unsettled. As Martin spent time training for the latest marathon instead of going out with her as they had used to, she grew angry. As inspiration deserted her, and paying work became sparser, she grew depressed.

Her new friends, her 'net friends, talked to her and kept her from thoughts of suicide, and she found herself wishing more every day to be sharing their physical presence as well as their thoughts.

When the publishing house that she was doing most of her work for went bust, owing her for more than eight months of work, she booked a plane ticket and announced she was going away, for a month, before she grew mad. She looked at the stricken faces of her family, aching with love for them, but desperate to get away from the place they kept her.

She turns on the ring under a pot of soup, pours herself a coffee, and lights a cigarette.

Martin made her promise to come back. He said he'd be lost without her, told her the kids needed her. She knew it was true, and had enough caring left inside her to agree.

She was met not by parents when she got off the plane the second time, but by a man, the closest of those new friends she met for the first time eighteen months ago. He took her to lunch, where several more of them were waiting. That night, as she and the man sat over whisky, the others gone, he took her hand, and said she could stay here with him, forever if she chose. She looked at his face, so serious, and listened while he told her he loved her.

He led her up the stairs, showed her two rooms, and said it was her choice whether she stayed in the one with the single bed, or joined him in the double.

She chose the single, and cried herself to sleep. She heard the man crying too, next door.

When she woke in the morning, he had left breakfast and gone to work. There was a note telling her about the arrangements for the evening, when they were going to a meet.

She called Martin in New Zealand, then went shopping, buying gifts to take back for the family, and gifts for those she would meet tonight. She went back to the man's house, undressed, and slipped into the double bed.

When he found her there, later, she explained that this was not a promise, but an interlude, and for a moment, she thought he would turn away.

They both wept again when she left, at the end of the month. She knew she would never dare to come back again.

Amelia brings her daffodils from the garden. They make her cage pretty, but no less a cage. Hiraeth they call it in Wales, the longing for home.

148. Beaconsfield Comedy

From: ross@8i.com
Subject: BEACONSFIELD GOLD MINE : 1st draft. Tasmanian edition
Date: 15 July 2006 12:01:24 AM
To: bulletinletters@acpmagazines.com.au
Cc: letters@theage.com.au

G'day everyone, and LADIES and GENTLEMEN,
Nice to see all o' ya on a cold night like this. I spose youse all know why I'm here, right?
Barry astd me ta talk to youse 'bout the mine.

Barry, Barry Easter as youse all know, he's OUR MAYOR. The old grey mayor o' Beaconsfield, I always like to call him.
Well, strickly speakin', Wes' Tamar.
THE OL' GREY MARE A' WEST TAMAR COUNCIL.

See, Bas ol' boy, he says, says he to me yes'dy, Ross ol bloke, youse both 'ave got 3 'ouses 'ere in Beacy right, he says? So youse pay 3 lotsa rates.
Two, anyway , I says. 2 o' the ' ouses is on the one title. So 2 lotsa rates, I says.
Good , he says. So we are gunna give you this citizenship award for bein' a very special Tasmanian. We's gunna give ya this SECOND HEAD.
And he passes me this wooden head on a stick. See? It looks like me other one but its on a stick. And I c'n stick it down me colla' like so an' it looks like I got 2 heads see, like a REAL PROVERBIAL TASMANIAN.
But he goes , like , this second 'ead, its removable like, cause we knows ya both live on the mainland, the north island as someone said th'other day...
So we put it on a stick,like. Hope youse all like it, Ross.
Does me wife get one too? I says
Na, he goes, jus' the main ratepayer. Man o' th' 'ouse, like.
Mmm. yep. I c'n do that, I says, with a sudden feeling of having Importance at Home.
Now that, thats a NEW feeling.
But thats another story for another day.
So 'ere I am , guys, 'oldin' up this 'ere stick to indicate to youse not only am I 'ead o' me own 'ouse, but I've bin given this award for bein' 2 Tasmanians in one, even when I'm a mainlander.
(pause for laughs)

Anyways, I'm 'ere to talk about the mine.
The Beaconsfield gold mine, and its future in your "eart and mine, an' in th'earts of the people o'
Bea-cons-field:
There's lotsa mineshafts around Bea-cons-field, as y'all know: /
And as you also know, not everyone from 'roun' 'ere tells ya when they discovers a old mineshaft,do they?
You dont get to 'ear about as many as what gets discovered do you?
Cos not ev'ryone as discovers an old mineshaft gets back to tell the story.Do they, right?
Not if'n they've fallen in , right, thought I' d better explain thet one see, me mum never unnerstood me jokes so she said, an' so did most ev'ryone else, I should label me jokes, see?
So, thet wassa JOKE
(pause for possible laugh)

Not like ol' Brant an' Toddy, right?
And talkin' 'bout Brant an' Toddy, right, youse is probly aware thet thet mine o' our'n is 'bout a killometer deep, right? And where youse all dug out Brant an' Toddy was on the 925 meter level, right? A right MIRACLE, according to the BEA-CONS-FIELD UNITING CHURCH, right?

Well, remember thet. If youse remember nuthin' else tonight, frienz, remember this:
Brant and Toddy walked out into the daylight from the 925 meter level. After absolutely hell on earth for an eternity in anyone's language, perticly the good Lords language. And youse all know thet thet mine is roight below The Uniting Church o' beewhatever Bea-cons-field, don't youse!
But that, good folks, is also another story f'r anudder day.

Youse all know, around the world the developed nations is using NUCLEAR power.

Don't ask me what they do with it, but they use it. Probly its an alternative to bottle gas or sumpin.
Anyway, doesn' matter, what matters isn theys usin' NUCLEAR POWER.
And as youse all know, its not safe. Oh , the NUCLEAR POWER,s safe, its th'idiots what provide its the problem.

They use the POWER, but they ain't got no place to dump the spent waste. No Recycle bins if youse knows what I mean. Nowhere to stick the stuff which only gets like, half used up chemically like, and theys got noplace, no recycle bin to stick the other 'alf which is gunna be proactive for another 50 or so MILLION YEARS.

Now regardless of what the good Barry Easter the Honourable MayoraBeacy said to me, or what the honourable whatserface from the Honourable Unitin' Churcha Beacy says, this is not a Commercial.

And no matter whether youse all saw David Kochy and Mr Ninepins an' Jennifer Fallutin' Keyte 'ere, I says, this is not a Commercial. Mainly 'cos they none of 'em are paying me , right?
All the budget, they said, went to Brant and whats 'is name, they " gave at the office' if youse all know what I mean.
Anyway, to ruin a good story, sorry, to get on with it, I have to tell youse all about me STUDY trip OVERSEAS LAST YEAR.
As youse all know, normal people, like us Taswegians, we use WATER to generate our power.
It's clean. There's plenty of it. And it's free. And besides, what's really important, IT"S ALL UPHILL from us.
Also it tastes good, it's not worth anything, and its self replenishing. The Uniting Church have a word for it, but I cant remember it. Like self- replenishing.
Anyway, as I said, youse is familiar with WATER POWER GENERATION.
We Taswegians with both one head or two is the GENERATION of WATER GENERATORS.
We has our place in this world, this present evil world. I heard thet at th'Unitin' Church too.
But thet's another story fer anudder day too, like.

Well, over on the mainland, in Victoria they uses hot air from coal. They useta say it was from Kennet, now it's more o' a Bracksy think like, anyway...
In France where I went, where they really speak French an' all, they , like they can't even understand the Queen's English, them frogs uses NUCLEAR POWER:
In FRANCE where I went, you go on these VERY FAST TRAINS, in Tasmania youse don't have real trains loike the Frenchies do, I mean REALLY FAST TRAINS. TGV's the frogs call 'em.
Stands for something what I can't remember but being theb FROGS it's probly rude...

Anyways when youse are all on these TGV VERY FAST TRAINS travelling at 300 killometersanhour, nearly as fast as a JUMBO JET what we don"t have in Launnie yet but they've been in VICTORIA on the MAINLAND for like 4o years, they travel at 1000 killometersanhour on the way to FRANCE but they don't go direct to FRANCE they go through LONDON or DUBAI or whatever but that's anudder story
(pause f'r laughter)
And in RUSHA. They use NUCLEAR POWER in RUSHA. Like its goin' outa fashion.

( laughs)
( laugh histerically yourself , like, if no-one else laughs)

An' in CZECH REPUBLIC!!!
Now to get to the enda this story, like Barry EASTERBUNNY'S asked me to tell youse all, I just gotta get youse to picture this border between RUSHA and CZECH REPUBLIC.
Its sorta like between New South Whales and Victoria, except there ain't no river.
More like the border between New South Whales an' Queensland, except its stacked with SHIPPING CONTAINERS. Like the Tasmanian Railway Workshops used to be like afore they, the TASMANIAN PARLIAMENT, pulled the trains orfa the lines.

So youse get the picture, right?

Well, these Ruskis and these Checkers, they's got nowhere to recycle their waste NUCLEAR product what's left over from their high faluti' NUCLEAR HALF REACTORS what's gunna stay active for the next 50 MILLION years, and our KIDS next 50 MILLION years, and THEIR KIDS next 50 MILLION years, if youse all know what I mean.

This NUCLEAR REACTIVE POWER WASTE IS BEIN" STORED IN THEM SHIPPING CONTAINERS ON THE RUSSIAN FRONT. ON THE CHECK BORDER.

See what I mean, Barry's RECYCLE BINS make sense if you think about it don't it, and we Taswegians is a thinkin' race.
Paul whatsisface called AUSTRALIA, the CLEVER COUNTRY!
Did youse all know thet?
And TASMANIANS is AUSTRALIANS too, really, in the big picture.
We really is.

So yousa all seen them shipping containers right?
Theres shipping containers does two things, right?
They sits round on docks, and they goes rusty, right?
Well these SHIPPING CONTAINERS on the CHESKY RUSSIAN FRONT is sittin on the ground, and goin' rusty, like we said.
FULLA ROTTEN REEKIN FILTHY NUCLEAR HALF WASTE to see our children an' our children's children an' all the Ruski's an ' the Cheski's children through for 50 MILLION YEARS.
So.
SO ? you says?
We don't have nothin'to worry about, so long as they don't bring them intermediaries to Australia. Or Tasmania. We've kept them refurottengees outa this place fer the last 50 million years we can keep 'em out another!
But people like me who owns 3 houses in Tasmania to rent to the PUBLIC, and Barry Easter the MAYOR, we have what we call a SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.
We want to help these poor unfortunate people who have to use NUCLEAR POWER because they don't have FREE WATER. What's uphill from them...

The Parliament of THE CZECH REPUBLIC, they have decided, and this is fair dinkum , they have decided they need somewhere to stick their waste by the year 2030.

Fair dinkum. Youse can read all about it on the Internet.
On BROADBAND anyway. " Cause most people here in Beacy, we suffer under Telstra's President Bush plan and maybe can't wait long enough to download that stuff, but let me assure you felloew NORTHERN TASMANIANS , even if youse don't all have HONARY BARRY EASTER BUNNY HEADS that this is a true thing:

THE CHESKI PARLIAMENT have decreed that by 2030 they will have a place to recycle, no, I tell a lie, they will have a place to stick their half used uranium yellow cake that isn't in cake tins..

(pause for laughter)

No, they are going to BURY IT.

The CHESKI PARLIAMENT of CZECH REPUBLIC have decreed 5 possible places to bury their URANIUM YELLOW CAKE.....

One o' these is ROHOZNA where I spent some days with my friend who actually has a house in CHESKI, but there are 5 ROHOZNAS in CZECH, so I don't know if it's the same ROHOZNA or not, but , do you know, over there in greater EUROPE, you wouldn't believe it but they are all absolute NIMBYS.........NOT IN MY BACKYARD THANKYOU.
Have you heard that expression before? Its very EURO. Just the latest expression, oh, about 20 years ago?
The latest saying.
Except since they don't speak English over there they probly have some other GOBBLEDEGOOK expression that we civilised TASMANIANS wouldn't understand.

Anyways, what they plan is, that the CHESKI guvmint is gunna dig a hole halfa mile deep, to store their NUCLEAR WASTE

No wheelie bins there, Barry Easter. Just a big longdrop.
Like, our West Tamar Council climbed outa that hole at least 10 years ago right?

( expect more laughter)

Remember thet song by thet 3-legged Rough Harris fella , about the REDBACK on the toilet SUITE? I lo-o-oved thet song. Wonder if he sang it to THE QUEEN while he was painting her face this year over there in ENGLAND?
But thet's anudder story fer anudder time like, if youse gets me drift.
Anyways, these CHESKIS has it all worked out.
And anyways two, THE CZECH REPUBLIC is small bikkies. What they gunna do is dig this hole halfamile deep, and bury the stuff!

But I ask you, how does thet help?

How does thet help the Ruskis who hev gone broke and have their teeming yellow millions with their teeming yellow cake with the teeming half-life of 50 million years?
How does that help, when Barry Easter the MAYOR of WEST TAMAR COUNCIL in NORTHERN TASMANIA and me, ROSS, and you, the people of BEA-CONS-FIELD HAVE A SOCIAL RESPONSOIBILITY?
Say, does anyone here have a metric converter, I lost mine shorten, sorry shortly after we got decimal currency in 1960 something.
And there's another name destined for another time..Mr Bill Shorten, but sadly for him I think it's in the past...

(maybe more laughter if you hev Liberal Voters in Beaconsfield...check..)

Anyways. .. to the besta my superior UNEDUCATED mind, like the DISCIPLES OF THE UNITING CHURCH OF BEA-CONS-FIELD I always say ,
"UNLEARNED AND IGNORANT MEN",
alla us here , meself included, I fergot what I was gunna say.

( pause to sip and think)

YES I know, if youse all get a metric CONVERTER , youse will find that HALFAMILE, that's 2640 feet deep in ENGLISH, is approximately roughly EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to 925 meters.

( pause for effect of shock: SILENCE)

LADIES and GENTLEMEN,, I GIVE YOU BEACONSFIELD.!!!!!

******

147. Science and Hawking have lost their way

THiS iS rEallY IMPORTant. Here is the gist of a circular I just got from edge.org .
Stephen Hawking and 20 odd other eminent scientists agree they are losing headway . There is more to learn about creation than they can get their collective heads around... and want to talk about extra dimensions and miracles.
Why dont they just read this site??/ www.science-vs-religion-christian-view.blogspot.com
Geoff and Merv, you might find this confronting?


Quote:

Right now we're floundering. We're floundering, in a lot of different areas."



*****


Home
About Edge
Features
Edge Editions
Press
Edge Search
Edge 188 — July 10, 2006
(5,060 words)



I invited a group of cosmologists, experimentalists, theorists, and particle physicists and cosmologists. Stephen Hawking came; we had three Nobel laureates, Gerard 'tHooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek; well-known cosmologists and physicists such as Jim Peebles at Princeton, Alan Guth at MIT, Kip Thorne at Caltech, Lisa Randall at Harvard; experimentalists, such as Barry Barish of LIGO, the gravitational wave observatory; we had observational cosmologists, people looking at the cosmic microwave background; we had Maria Spiropulu from CERN, who's working on the Large Hadron Collider — which a decade ago people wouldn't have thought it was a probe of gravity, but now due to recent work in the possibility of extra dimensions it might be.

THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO
A Talk with Lawrence Krauss



Edge Video Broadband | Modem

[continue...]



[6.25.06]

Q & A With Jaron Lanier
By Harvey Blume

EVER SINCE musician, writer, and technological visionary Jaron Lanier coined the term ''virtual reality" in the early 1980s, and headed up efforts to implement the idea, he's been a member of the digerati in excellent standing. But he's an anxious member, known to raise alarms about just those big ideas and grand ambitions of the computer revolution that happen to excite the most enthusiasm among his peers. That was the case with his contrarian essay, ''One Half of a Manifesto," in 2000. He's done it again in a new piece, ''Digital Maoism," which has roiled the Internet since it was posted at edge.org on May 30.

In ''One Half of a Manifesto," Lanier attacked what he dubbed ''cybernetic totalism," an overweening intellectual synthesis in which mind, brain, life itself, and the entire physical universe are viewed as machines of a kind, controlled by processes not unlike those driving a computer. This digital-age ''dogma," he argued, got a boost from the era's new and ''overwhelmingly powerful technologies," which also obscured the dangers inherent in totalist thinking. People who would steer clear of Marxism, for example, might fall for an even more grandiose world view if it had digital cachet.

[...continue]


GOOD MORNING LOWCOUNTRY
[6.22.06]

Dangerous Ideas

Copernicus' dangerous idea, rejected by the Catholic Church, had seven parts: 1) There is no one center in the universe 2) The Earth's center is not the center of the universe 3) The center of the universe is near the sun 4) The distance from the Earth to the sun is imperceptible compared with the distance to the stars 5) The rotation of the Earth accounts for the apparent daily rotation of the stars 6) The apparent annual cycle of movements of the sun is caused by the Earth revolving around the sun, and 7) The apparent retrograde motion of the planets is caused by the motion of the Earth, from which one observes. ...

In January, GMLc mentioned Edge Foundation Inc., an online group of scholars and scientists, and its annual Big Question. Answers to last year's Big Question, 'What do you believe but cannot prove?' have been published this year in book form. ... The 2006 question was 'What is your dangerous idea?'

[...continue]


I invited a group of cosmologists, experimentalists, theorists, and particle physicists and cosmologists. Stephen Hawking came; we had three Nobel laureates, Gerard 'tHooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek; well-known cosmologists and physicists such as Jim Peebles at Princeton, Alan Guth at MIT, Kip Thorne at Caltech, Lisa Randall at Harvard; experimentalists, such as Barry Barish of LIGO, the gravitational wave observatory; we had observational cosmologists, people looking at the cosmic microwave background; we had Maria Spiropulu from CERN, who's working on the Large Hadron Collider — which a decade ago people wouldn't have thought it was a probe of gravity, but now due to recent work in the possibility of extra dimensions it might be.

THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO
A Talk with Lawrence Krauss




Edge Video Broadband | Modem

Introduction

Physicist/cosmologist Lawrence Krauss, who recently was featured on Edge ("How Do You Fed-ex the Pope?"), recently convened a physics conference on St. Thomas, which included an all-star cast of cutting-edge theorists and physicists.



Stephen Hawking, David Gross, Kip Thorne, Lisa Randall Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking on the way to Atlantis Submarine


Frank Wilczek, Betsy Devine, and Alan Guth Krauss scuba diving to meet Atlantis Submarine
The topic of the meeting was "Confronting Gravity." Krauss intended to have "a meeting where people would look forward to the key issues facing fundamental physics and cosmology". They could meet, discuss, relax on the beach, and take a trip to the nearby private island retreat of the science philanthropist Jeffrey Epstein, who funded the event.

For Krauss, what came out of the conference was the over-riding issue that "there appears to be energy of empty space that isn't zero! This flies in the face of all conventional wisdom in theoretical particle physics. It is the most profound shift in thinking, perhaps the most profound puzzle, in the latter half of the 20th century. And it may be the first half of the 21st century, or maybe go all the way to the 22nd century. Because, unfortunately, I happen to think we won't be able to rely on experiment to resolve this problem."

"It's not clear to me", he says, "that the landscape idea will be anything but impotent. Ultimately it might lead to interesting suggestions about things, but real progress will occur when we actually have new ideas. If string theory is the right direction, and I'm willing to argue that it might be, even if there's just no evidence that it is right now, then a new idea that tells us a fundamental principle for how to turn that formalism to a theory will give us a direction that will turn into something fruitful. Right now we're floundering. We're floundering, in a lot of different areas."

Other physicists, whether present at the conference or not, will no doubt feel diiferently. Edge looks forward to their comments.

—JB

LAWRENCE M. KRAUSS, a physicist/cosmologist, is the Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics and chairman of the Physics Department of Case Western Reserve University. He is the author of The Fifth Essence, Quintessence, Fear of Physics, The Physics of Star Trek, Beyond Star Trek, Atom, and Hiding in the Mirror.

LAWRENCE KRAUSS 'S Edge Bio Page

THE ENERGY OF EMPTY SPACE THAT ISN'T ZERO

[LAWRENCE KRAUSS:] I just returned from the Virgin Islands, from a delightful event — a conference in St. Thomas — that I organized with 21 physicists. I like small events, and I got to hand-pick the people. The topic of the meeting was "Confronting Gravity. " I wanted to have a meeting where people would look forward to the key issues facing fundamental physics and cosmology. And if you think about it they all revolve in one way or another around gravity. Someone at the meeting said, well, you know, don't we understand gravity? Things fall. But really, many of the key ideas that right now are at the forefront of particle physics cosmology, relate to our lack of understanding of how to accommodate gravity and quantum mechanics.

I invited a group of cosmologists, experimentalists, theorists, and particle physicists and cosmologists. Stephen Hawking came; we had three Nobel laureates, Gerard 'tHooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek; well-known cosmologists and physicists such as Jim Peebles at Princeton, Alan Guth at MIT, Kip Thorne at Caltech, Lisa Randall at Harvard; experimentalists, such as Barry Barish of LIGO, the gravitational wave observatory; we had observational cosmologists, people looking at the cosmic microwave background; we had Maria Spiropulu from CERN, who's working on the Large Hadron Collider — which a decade ago people wouldn't have thought it was a probe of gravity, but now due to recent work in the possibility of extra dimensions it might be.

I wanted to have a series of sessions where we would, each of us, try and speak somewhat provocatively about what each person was thinking about, what the key issues are, and then have a lot of open time for discussion. And so the meeting was devoted with a lot of open time for discussion, a lot of individual time for discussion, as well as some fun things like going down in a submarine, which we did. It was a delightful event, where we defied gravity by having buoyancy, I guess.

I came away from this meeting realizing that the search for gravitational waves may be the next frontier. For a long time I pooh-poohed it in my mind, because it was clear it's going to be a long time before we could ever detect them if they're there, and it wasn't clear to me what we'd learn — except that they exist. But one of the key worries I have as a cosmologist right now is that we have these ideas and these parameters and every experiment is consistent with this picture, and yet nothing points to the fundamental physics beneath it.

It's been very frustrating for particle physicists, and some people might say it's led to sensory deprivation, which has resulted in hallucination otherwise known as string theory. And that could be true. But in cosmology what we're having now is this cockamamie universe. We've discovered a tremendous amount. We've discovered the universe is flat, which most of us theorists thought we knew in advance, because it's the only beautiful universe. But why is it flat? It's full of not just dark matter, but this crazy stuff called dark energy, that no one understands. This was an amazing discovery in 1998 or so.

What's happened since then is every single experiment agrees with this picture without adding insight into where it comes from. Similarly all the data is consistent with ideas from inflation and everything is consistent with the simplest predictions of that, but not in a way that you can necessarily falsify it. Everything is consistent with this dark energy that looks like a cosmological constant; which tells us nothing.

It's a little subtle, but I'll try and explain it.

We've got this weird antigravity in the universe, which is making the expansion of the universe accelerate. Now: if you plug in the equations of general relativity, the only thing that can 'anti-gravitate' is the energy of nothing. Now: this has been a problem in physics since I've been a graduate student. It was such a severe problem we never talked about it. When you apply quantum mechanics and special relativity, empty space inevitably has energy. The problem is, way too much energy. It has 120 orders of magnitude more energy than is contained in everything we see!

Now that is the worst prediction in all of physics. You might say, if that's such a bad prediction, then how do we know empty space can have energy? The answer is, we know empty space isn't empty, because it's full of these virtual particles that pop in and out of existence, and we know that because if you try and calculate the energy level in a hydrogen atom, and you don't include those virtual particles, you get a wrong answer. One of the greatest developments in physics in the 20th century was to realize that when you incorporate special relativity in quantum mechanics you have virtual particles that can pop in and out of existence, and they change the nature of a hydrogen atom, because a hydrogen atom isn't just a proton and electron.

That's the wrong picture, because every now and then you have an electron positron pair that pops into existence. And the electron is going to want to hang around near the proton because it's oppositely charged, the positron is going to be pushed out to the outskirts of the atom, and while they're there they change the charged distribution in the atom in a very small, but calculable, way. Feynman and others calculated that effect, which allows us to get agreement between theory and observation at the level of nine decimal places. It's the best prediction in all of science. There's no other place in science where, from fundamental principles, you can calculate a number and compare it to an experiment at nine decimal places like that.

But then when we ask, if they're there, how much should they contribute to the energy in the universe, we come up with the worst prediction in physics. it says if empty space has so much energy we shouldn't be here. And physicists like me, theoretical physicists, knew they had the answer. They didn't know how to get there. It reminds me or the Sidney Harris cartoon where you've got this big equation, and the answer, and the middle step says "And then a miracle occurs". And then one scientist says to another, "I think you have to be a little more specific at this step right here".

The answer had to be zero. The energy of empty space had to be precisely zero. Why? Because you've got these virtual particles that are apparently contributing huge amounts of energy, you can imagine in physics, how underlying symmetries in nature can produce exact cancellations — that happens all the time. Symmetries produce two numbers that are exactly equal and opposite because somewhere there's an underlying mathematical symmetry of equations. So that you can understand how symmetries could somehow cause an exact cancellation of the energy of empty space.

There appears to be energy of empty space that isn't zero! This flies in the face of all conventional wisdom in theoretical particle physics. It is the most profound shift in thinking, perhaps the most profound puzzle, in the latter half of the 20th century. And it may be the first half of the 21st century, or maybe go all the way to the 22nd century. Because, unfortunately, I happen to think we won't be able to rely on experiment to resolve this problem.

But what you couldn't understand was how to cancel a number to a hundred and twenty decimal places and leave something finite left over. You can't take two numbers that are very large and expect them to almost exactly cancel leaving something that's 120 orders of magnitude smaller left over. And that's what would be required to have an energy that was comparable with the observational upper limits on the energy of empty space.

We knew the answer. There was a symmetry and the number had to be exactly zero. Well, what have we discovered? There appears to be this energy of empty space that isn't zero! This flies in the face of all conventional wisdom in theoretical particle physics. It is the most profound shift in thinking, perhaps the most profound puzzle, in the latter half of the 20th century. And it may be the first half of the 21st century, or maybe go all the way to the 22nd century. Because, unfortunately, I happen to think we won't be able to rely on experiment to resolve this problem. When we look out at the universe, if this dark energy is something that isn't quite an energy of empty space but its just something that's pretending to be that, we might measure that it's changing over time.

Then we would know that the actual energy of empty space is really zero but this is some cockamamie thing that's pretending to be energy of empty space. And many people have hoped they'd see that is because then you wouldn't need quantum gravity, which is a theory we don't yet have, to understand this apparent dark energy. Indeed, one of the biggest failures of string theory's many failures, I think, is it never successfully addressed this cosmological constant problem. You'd think if you had a theory of quantum gravity, it would explain precisely what the energy of empty space should be. And we don't have any other theory that addresses that problem either! But if this thing really isn't vacuum energy, then it's something else, then you might be able to find out what it is, and learn and do physics without having to understand quantum gravity.

The problem is, when we actually look out, every measure we've made right now is completely consistent with a constant energy in the universe over cosmological time. And that's consistent with the cosmological constant, with vacuum energy. So if you make the measurement that it's consistent with that, you learn nothing. Because it doesn't tell you that it is vacuum energy, because there could be other things that could mimic it. The only observation that would tell you, give you positive information is if you could measure it was changing over time. Then you'd know it wasn't vacuum energy.

All if we keep measuring this quantity better and better and better, it is quite possible that we will find out it looks more and more like a vacuum energy, and we're going to learn nothing. And the only way to resolve this problem will be to have a theory. And theories are a lot harder to come by than experiments. Good ideas are few and far between. And what we're really going to need is a good idea, and it may require an understanding of quantum gravity, or it may require that you throw up your hands, which is what we're learning that a lot of people are willing to do. In the Virgin Islands we had a session on the anthropic principle, and what is surprising is how many physicists have really said, you know, maybe the answer is an anthropic one. Twenty years ago if you'd asked physicists if they would hope that one day we'll have a theory that tells us why the universe is the way it is, you would have heard a resounding 'Yes'. They would all say 'that's why I got into physics'.

They might paraphrase Einstein, who said, while referring to God but not really meaning God, that the question that really interested him is did God have any choice in the creation of the universe. What he really meant by that was, is there only one consistent set of laws that works. If you changed one — if you twiddled one aspect of physical reality — would it all fall apart? Or are there lots of possible viable physical realities?

Twenty years ago most physicists would have said, on the basis of 450 years of science, that they believed that there's only one allowed law of nature that works, that ultimately we might discover fundamental symmetries and mathematical principles that cause the nature to be the way it is, because it's always worked that way.

So that is the way science has worked. But now because of this energy of empty space — which is so inexplicable that if it really is an energy of empty space, the value of that number is so ridiculous that it's driven people to think that maybe, maybe it's an accident of our environment, that physics is an environmental science — that certain fundamental constants in nature may just be accidents, and there may be many different universes, in which the laws of physics are different, and the reasons those constants have the values they have might be — in our universe — might be because we're there to observe them.

This is not intelligent design; it's the opposite of intelligent design. It's a kind of cosmic natural selection. The qualities we have exist because we can survive in this environment. That's natural selection, right? If we couldn't survive we wouldn't be around. Well, it's the same with the universe. We live in a universe — in this universe — we've evolved in this universe, because this universe is conducive to life. There may be other universes that aren't conducive to life, and lo and behold there isn't life in them. That's the kind of cosmic natural selection.

We're allowed to presume anything; the key question is, is it a scientific question to presume there are other universes? That's something we were looking at in the meeting as well. I wrote a piece where I argued that is a disservice to evolutionary theory to call string theory a theory, for example. Because it's clearly not a theory in the same sense that evolutionary theory is, or that quantum electrodynamics is, because those are robust theories that make rigorous predictions that can be falsified. And string theory is just a formalism now that one day might be a theory. And when I'm lecturing, talking about science, people say to me, evolution is just a theory, I say, in science theory means a different thing, and they say, what do you mean? Look at string theory, how can you falsify that? It's no worse than intelligent design.

I do think there are huge differences between string theory and intelligent design. People who are doing string theory are earnest scientists who are trying to come up with ideas that are viable. People who are doing intelligent design aren't doing any of that. But the question is, is it falsifiable? And do we do a disservice to real theories by calling hypotheses or formalisms theories? Is a multiverse — in one form or another — science?

In my sarcastic moments I've argued that the reason that some string theorists have latched onto the landscape idea so much is that since string theory doesn't make any predictions, it's good to have a universe where you can't make any predictions. But less sarcastically, if you try and do science with idea, you can try and do real science and calculate probabilities. But whatever you do, you find that all you get is suggestive arguments. Because if you don't have an underlying theory, you never know.

I say, well, what's the probability of our universe having a vacuum energy if it is allowed to vary over different universes? Then I come up with some result which is interesting, and Steven Weinberg was one of the first people to point out, that if the value of the energy of empty space was much greater than it is, then galaxies wouldn't have formed, and astronomers wouldn't have formed, so that gave the anthropic argument that, well, maybe that's why it is what it is — it can't be much more.

But the problem is, you don't know if that's the only quantity that's varying! Maybe there are other quantities that are varying. Whatever you're doing is always a kind of ad hoc suggestive thing at best. You can debate it, but it doesn't lead very far. It's not clear to me that the landscape idea will be anything but impotent. Ultimately it might lead to interesting suggestions about things, but real progress will occur when we actually have new ideas. If string theory is the right direction, and I'm willing to argue that it might be, even if there's just no evidence that it is right now, then a new idea that tells us a fundamental principle for how to turn that formalism to a theory will give us a direction that will turn into something fruitful. Right now we're floundering. We're floundering, in a lot of different areas.

As a theorist, when I go to meetings I often get much more out of the experimental talks. Because I often know what's going on in theory, or at least I like to think I do. I was profoundly affected by the experimental talks. In principle, we are now able to be sensitive to gravitational waves that might change a meter stick that's three kilometers long by a length equal to less than the size of atom!. It's just amazing that we have the technology to do that. While that is not actually detecting any gravitational waves, there's no technological obstructions, to going to the advanced stage. Gravitational waves may be indeed allow us a probe that might take us beyond our current state of having observations that don't lead anywhere. I was very impressed with these findings.

At the same time, that we had a talk from Eric Adelberger at the University of Washington, who's been trying to measure Newton's Law on small scales. You might think, who would want to measure Newton's Law on small scales? But one of the suggestions for extra dimensions is that on small scales and gravity has a different behavior. There has been some tantalizing evidence that went through the rumor mills that had suggested that in these experiments in Seattle they were seeing evidence for deviations from Newton's Theory. And Attleburger talked about some beautiful experiments. As a theorist, I'm just always amazed they can even do these experiments. And gave some new results, there are some tentative new results, which of course are not a surprise to me, that suggest that there is as yet no evidence for a deviation from Newton's Theory.

Many of the papers in particle physics over the last five to seven years have been involved with the idea of extra dimensions of one sort or another. And while it's a fascinating idea, but I have to say, it's looking to me like it's not yet leading anywhere. The experimental evidence against it is combining with what I see as a theoretical diffusion — a breaking off into lots of parts. That's happened with string theory. I can see it happening with extra-dimensional arguments. We're seeing that the developments from this idea which has captured the imaginations of many physicists, hasn't been compelling.

Right now it's clear that what we really need is some good new ideas. Fundamental physics is really at kind of a crossroads. The observations have just told us that the universe is crazy, but hasn't told us what direction the universe is crazy in. The theories have been incredibly complex and elaborate, but haven't yet made any compelling inroads. That can either be viewed as depressing or exciting. For young physicists it's exciting in the sense that it means that the field is ripe for something new.

The great hope for particle physics, which may be a great hope for quantum gravity, is the next large particle accelerator. We've gone 30 years without a fundamentally new accelerator that can probe a totally new regime of the sub-atomic world. We would have had it if our legislators had not been so myopic. It's amazing to think that if they hadn't killed the superconducting Super Collider it would have been already been running for ten years.

The Large Hadron Collider is going to come on-line next year. And one of two things could happen: It could either reveal a fascinating new window on the universe and a whole new set of phenomena that will validate or refute the current prevailing ideas in theoretical particle physics, supersymmetry etc, or it might see absolutely nothing. I'm not sure which I'm rooting for. But it is at least a hope, finally, that we may get an empirical handle that will at least constrain the wild speculation that theorists like me might make.

Such a handle comes out of the impact of the recent cosmic microwave background (CMB) studies on Inflation Theory. I read in the New York Times that Alan Guth was smiling, and Alan Guth was sitting next to me at the conference when I handed him the article. He was smiling, but he always smiles, so I didn't know what to make much of it, but I think that the results that came out of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) studies were twofold.

Indeed, as the Times suggested, they validate the notions of inflation. But I think that's just journalists searching for a story. Because if you look at what quantitatively has come out of the new results they're exactly consistent with the old results. Which also validate inflation. They reduce the error bars a little bit, by a factor of two. I don't know if that is astounding. But what is intriguing to me is that while everything is consistent with the simplest models, there's one area where there's a puzzle. On the largest scales, when we look out at the universe, there doesn't seem to be enough structure — not as much as inflation would predict. Now the question is, is that a statistical fluke?

That is, we live in one universe, so we're a sample of one. With a sample of one, you have what is called a large sample variance. And maybe this just means we're lucky, that we just happen to live in a universe where the number's smaller than you'd predict. But when you look at CMB map, you also see that the structure that is observed, is in fact, in a weird way, correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. Is this Copernicus coming back to haunt us? That's crazy. We're looking out at the whole universe. There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun — the plane of the earth around the sun — the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe.

The new results are either telling us that all of science is wrong and we're the center of the universe, or maybe the data is imply incorrect, or maybe it's telling us there's something weird about the microwave background results and that maybe, maybe there's something wrong with our theories on the larger scales. And of course as a theorist I'm certainly hoping it's the latter, because I want theory to be wrong, not right, because if it's wrong there's still work left for the rest of us.

John Brockman, Editor and Publisher
Russell Weinberger, Associate Publisher
contact: editor@edge.org
Copyright © 2006 By Edge Foundation, Inc
All Rights Reserved.

|Top|