Understanding Universe and YHWH

 

Content

The name of God in this text

There are many words for God. Muslim say Allah, Christians say God, Zoroastrian say Ahura Mazda. I choosed to use the tetragrammaton in latin script YHWH, the one Moses got revealed. The name YHWH with its story and its interpretations, adds to the mistery and greatness of the Creator, in my opinion. Please read about the tetragrammaton in Internet to know more.

The Witness of Jehovah uses the tetragrammaton. But I want to emphasize, that I am not a witness of Jehovah even if I read them and respect their knowledge and efforts to find the truth. As said before elsewhere, I am a pluralist.

About the body of YHWH in the mass ordo January 14.

At the Catholic mass January 14, 1 Corinthians 6 was read:  “15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself ?  …. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; “ (Source: https://www.biblegateway.com )

At every mass Mathew 26,26-29: 26 is read:  “While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat, this is my body“. (Source: https://www.biblegateway.com 

I have been thinking a lot about this “this is my body”  If the bread is body of YHWH, may the whole Universe be the body of YHW as the Zoroastrians believe?

What is YHWH? 

This is like asking “Who is Michelangelo?” For me

 this is an image of Michelangelo.Bildresultat för michelangelo

In a analogous approach, for me  

The Building Blocks of the Universe are the body or an image of YHWH

(Image source: David Tong, Professor of Theoretical Physics, Fellow of Trinity College lecture in “Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNVQfWC_evg minute 33)

mankind-  an image of YHWH

We all   are built up with quantum fields:  the electron and the quark fields among others. In Genesis 1:27 we read: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them” This verse led me into the  hypothesis of mine that YHWH is maybe describable as matter and force fields, fields we can not see but percieve. I come back to this issue later in this article.

 

 

Trying to describe the body of YHWH with one equation

Scientists are trying to describe the Universe (the body of  YHWH) with equations like this one :

(Image source: David Tong, Professor of Theoretical Physics, Fellow of Trinity College lecture in “Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe”

Th equaion is also describe at www.preposterousuniverse.com

Zoroastrians view of the body of YHWH

“God created both the invisible and invisible worlds from Himself”  (Source: http://www.hinduwebsite.com )

There are remarkable similarities

  1. Invisible but perceivable

Compare how we perceive magnetism, gravitational  and electric fields

and think about how we perceive YHWH .

We can not see these fields nor can we see YHWH but we or at least some thinks that they can perceive YHWH .

2 difficult to understand or explain

Like David Tong said in the lecture above: “There is awful lot we haven´t understood of this equation (the theory of everything)

In the same way there is an awful lot we do not understood about YHWH.

The Tao of Physics

I am back thinking about this book from Fritjof Capra how scientists find answers studying religious views.

Like Scientists are looking closer to sacred books, so maybe believers should study the Creation of YHWH to better understand YHWH. Read more about this in http://www.kinberg.net/science-without-religion/

YHWH created Adam as an image of itself

I talked about this subject above memtioning Genesis 1:27. Studying psychology maybe helps us understand YHWH better too?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the search of Luca to abiogenesis.

Content

Willy depicted  in page 18 of his book, the theory that the origin of live on earth came from bacteria spores from space transported with metheors. He read an article about a metheor in France, with a typical organic smell (formaledhyde?) , Today we know that several aminoacids have been found on metheors so today many theories about origin of life are based on the the knowledge that key molecules building up proteins and DNA may have come from space and that these molecules may have helped a so called chemical evolution on earth where dead materia came alive as reproducing RNA.

But about the main creation  theories, the Cairn Smith heterotroph hypothesis, the Oparin Haldane and RNA-world hypothesis“The first thing that may be said about theories on the origin of life is that none satisfy the criteria of a scientific theory. There were no human observers of the origin of life, and it is impossible to reenact the process. If such a process did occur, it could have left no fossil record or history. There is no way to observe or test any postulated evolutionary origin of life. All such theories are mere postulates, all related laboratory experiments are mere exercises in organic chemistry.” (Source: icr.org, an institute that argues that only God could have created cells)

In https://mygrandfather.wordpress.com/2017/10/20/looking-of-luca-step-7/ I told about latest discovery, endosymbiosis, how a procaryote cell, engulfing a bacteria, got a RNA mithocondria.

I have found two new articles about the building of the first cells, the so called primordial cell or the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA). One article is published in the Scientific American August 2017 and the other in a German magazine, Geo kompakt 23.

A land based volcanic origin theory –  Forming of protocells in hydrothermal pools

August 2017

The  theory described in Scienrific America, tells that complex molecules (aminoacids and others) came to earth from space and falling down with rain, accumulated in hot geiser areas where periods of wet and dry alternated. The high concentration of these monomer molecules led to the forming of  polymers. These scientists argue against the creation in the Ocean hydrothermal vent field because the building molecule blocks there, are highly diluted in the Sea and therefore can never form complex structures. There hypothesis is that the first life (forming of protocells) was seen in hydrohermal pools near active vocanoes,  Tests have been made in Kamtchakta small boiling springs and laboratory. In 3.5 billion year old geyserite in Australia they have found minuscule bubbles, products of biological organisms. The source are the research of Martin Van Kranendonk,  Tara Djokic (Australian center of Astrobiology, and David Deamer (Department of biomolecular engineering at the  University of California, co author with Szowstak of “The origins of life” and “First life”) 
Read more in the magazine

Jack Szostak supports this theory as RNA wont remain stable if there is  longer time of heat. (Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAZTiWZU6Cc&t=444s minute 32) 

 A Ocean based volcanic origin theory  –  Forming of procells in pores in deep Ocean vells.

One other theory, written about in the German GEO kompakt n 23 takes the hydrothermal vent theory a step further. Complex molecules are concentrated and primordial cells are built inside tiny pores with ironsulfide walls, as show in this image.

( Scanned from the German GEO kompakt n 23, page 39 )

Water, ammonia, methane, hydrogen gas, sulfure and phospor molecules, are the basic molecules to buildsugar, aminoacid and nucleic acid molecules.

these monomers form polymers, short protein and RNA chains. 

Fatty acids form a membrane in the pore wall and later

four types of primordial cells are created in these pores:

bacteria, procaryote cells and basic virus forms.

( Scanned from the German GEO kompakt n 23, page 41 )

( Scanned from the German GEO kompakt n 23, page 43 )

All biological cells are membrane-bound compartments. The pore fulfills the essential function of creating an internal environment within which genetic materials can reside and metabolic activities can take place without being lost to the environment. 

The article share just one source, that is the Springer book written by Horst Rauchfuß “Chemische Evolution und der Ursprung des Leben.” . I decided not to buy this book as it is hard for me to read German.  I am happy to have found this German magazine with its nice illustrations.  I fell I can rely on it. To support this incredible theory ( or postulate) scientists have been able to create protocells in labs.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/researchers-build-model-protocell-capable-copying-dna

This video from Liz Bloomfield is a good resumé of the creation theories and basic parts needed for an origin of life.

Only God Could Have Made Cells

For me this sounds like

“The storch comes with your sister

when your childrens are not mature enough to understand the true story. Creationist seems not to understand why the Bible is filled with metaphores and forget that time in the Bible is relative. A psalm mention this. In the Quran, time relativity is obvious (See 70:4).  Creationists always refer to modern cells when they argue against naturalist scintific  views.

As Jack Szostak reminds us in this video about protocell memranes, the archeobacteria must have been rudimental, almost like virus. They must have had very simple membranes with simple fatty acids without selective proteins in it, and the reproducing RNA ribosomes may not have had proteins incorporated.

This Nova video tells about Miller experimentabout the oldest signs of life, stromatolites and much more. Look eg from  minute 18.

 

 

kinberg.net