The Qur'aan Cosmological Model

[Knight Of Shadows]

And when he does reply it is meaningless banter.

The fact is he claimed to have supported his equation when he has not. Now is that ignorance or just an out right lie?

maybe we should wait till he's finished before deciding that

The OP has clearly thought out these claims for sometime, but as soon as it is analyzed mathematically he goes AWOL.

duhh .. the guy said it's his research so he thought of it for sometime .. is that a problem ?

Exactly. It's easier to watch, than comprehend.

i like to form my opinion before i start to agree and disagree

unlike you bro we're not all " born with supernature ability to comprehend points before they are fully exposed "

so i'd rather wait till he's finished with his point before i make up my mind about it

[Rlyeh]

maybe we should wait till he's finished before deciding that

So you can't decide whether a false claim is a lie or not? lol.

How about if I told you I had a million dollars when I don't, is that a lie? Or do you need some time to think about that?

duhh .. the guy said it's his research so he thought of it for sometime .. is that a problem ?

Yeah, it's a bit problem when you make a claim you either can't or refuse to support. Further avoidance only makes the problem worse.

unlike you bro we're not all " born with supernature ability to comprehend points before they are fully exposed "

so i'd rather wait till he's finished with his point before i make up my mind about it

Algebra doesn't require any supernatural ability, but it does require an education. Edited November 14, 2012 by Rlyeh

[Knight Of Shadows]

So you can't decide whether a false claim is a lie or not? lol.

How about if I told you I had a million dollars when I don't, is that a lie? Or do you need some time to think about that?

the more you post the more i reliaze you not on level of this discussion .. no offense but that was halirious example

compared to topic at hand

when some one try to explain a pointview to me .. i take it all before i decide wheather i agree or disagree

if you told me you had million dollars and you are going to prove it .. i'll wait to see the prove

i won't dismiss or agree

Yeah, it's a bit problem when you make a claim you either can't or refuse to support. Further avoidance only makes the problem worse.

i don't see where he refused to support .. you on other hand rather dismissive .which i see as weakness in debates

that you simply dismiss the whole thing while the other side only said that he " WILL ' provide evidence , support .. etc etc

Algebra doesn't require any supernatural ability, but it does require an education.

well perhaps you should look back on the history of algebra .. and see who invented it

[Rlyeh]

the more you post the more i reliaze you not on level of this discussion .. no offense but that was halirious example

compared to topic at hand

when some one try to explain a pointview to me .. i take it all before i decide wheather i agree or disagree

Likewise, the more you post it's clear you don't comprehend what is being discussed.

The OP presented an equation, when questioned on the use he claimed he's already demonstrated it's use. The fact is he hasn't. When a practical usable equation was presented, he avoided it altogether.

Please tell me how long it takes for a false statement to become the truth by avoiding the issue?

if you told me you had million dollars and you are going to prove it .. i'll wait to see the prove

i won't dismiss or agree

Better yet I'll repeat it again and bold the keywords.

If I told you I had a million dollars when I don't, is that a lie?

i don't see where he refused to support .. you on other hand rather dismissive .which i see as weakness in debates

that you simply dismiss the whole thing while the other side only said that he " WILL ' provide evidence , support .. etc etc

Wrong. He said he did, he didn't. What part do you not understand?

well perhaps you should look back on the history of algebra .. and see who invented it

Non sequitur. Does the fact we use sumerian sexagesimal time keeping mean their theology is more credible? Edited November 14, 2012 by Rlyeh

[al-amiyr]

Likewise, the more you post it's clear you don't comprehend what is being discussed.

The OP presented an equation, when questioned on the use he claimed he's already demonstrated it's use. The fact is he hasn't.

Where did the OP say that he already demonstrated it's use? Where are your quotes? The reasoning reminds me of that part of an irrational number that has been discarded. If you do not then you no longer can be taken seriously.

[Beckys_Mom]

I was wondering what a UMer was. How humorous! It brought to mind this one.

There once was a fellow from Yuma

who told an elephant joke to a puma

Now his skeleton lies

under hot western skies

The Puma had no sense of huma

Put the arrows in a safe place;hope to dodge them tomorrow again.

I loved that one..lol I gather you love to write poems ?

Lol, I miss JVE

I wasn't thinking if him to be honest.. but now that you mention it, I guess it fits lol

You have got to send that to Sakari. He will love it.

I have one for you...

There is a UMer, who loves to post

He tells it how it is, and rarely will boast

His posts are fine, I'd say he is well spoken

He enters many threads, with his mind open

A challenge is fine

He will reply on time

He goes by the name - Seeker79

Anyhoo.. I enjoyed that.. It is fun to make up short poems. but I am sure it is derailing...and so I'll stop at that..

Apologies for the poem derailment.. it was just a side bit of fun ..

Edited November 14, 2012 by Beckys_Mom

[White Crane Feather]

I loved that one..lol I gather you love to write poems ?

I wasn't thinking if him to be honest.. but now that you mention it, I guess it fits lol

I have one for you...

There is a UMer, who loves to post

He tells it how it is, and rarely will boast

His posts are fine, I'd say he is well spoken

He enters many threads, with his mind open

A challenge is fine

He will reply on time

He goes by the name - Seeker79

Anyhoo.. I enjoyed that.. It is fun to make up short poems. but I am sure it is derailing...and so I'll stop at that..

Apologies for the poem derailment.. it was just a side bit of fun ..

I  know this lady who is the mom of Becky 

No matter how smart I think I am, she always checks me. 

She has this incredible wit that can make you feel like a twit 

And her avatar and mind is dam sexy .  

[al-amiyr]

I loved that one..lol I gather you love to write poems ?

I wasn't thinking if him to be honest.. but now that you mention it, I guess it fits lol

I have one for you...

There is a UMer, who loves to post

He tells it how it is, and rarely will boast

His posts are fine, I'd say he is well spoken

He enters many threads, with his mind open

A challenge is fine

He will reply on time

He goes by the name - Seeker79

Anyhoo.. I enjoyed that.. It is fun to make up short poems. but I am sure it is derailing...and so I'll stop at that..

Apologies for the poem derailment.. it was just a side bit of fun ..

I know this lady who is the mom of Becky

No matter how smart I think I am, she always checks me.

She has this incredible wit that can make you feel like a twit

And her avatar and mind is dam sexy .

I loved that one..lol I gather you love to write poems ?

I wasn't thinking if him to be honest.. but now that you mention it, I guess it fits lol

I have one for you...

There is a UMer, who loves to post

He tells it how it is, and rarely will boast

His posts are fine, I'd say he is well spoken

He enters many threads, with his mind open

A challenge is fine

He will reply on time

He goes by the name - Seeker79

Anyhoo.. I enjoyed that.. It is fun to make up short poems. but I am sure it is derailing...and so I'll stop at that..

Apologies for the poem derailment.. it was just a side bit of fun ..

I know this lady who is the mom of Becky

No matter how smart I think I am, she always checks me.

She has this incredible wit that can make you feel like a twit

And her avatar and mind is dam sexy .

ForUM

1)- My latest theory. If there is no laughter then there is no after.

2)- Agreed

[Beckys_Mom]

I know this lady who is the mom of Becky

No matter how smart I think I am, she always checks me.

She has this incredible wit that can make you feel like a twit

And her avatar and mind is dam sexy .

Brilliant and funny... I guess there is a poet in all of us lol

al-amyir.. you started this with one poem... and now look lol

[al-amiyr]

Brilliant and funny... I guess there is a poet in all of us lol

al-amyir.. you started this with one poem... and now look lol

No regrets! Its good to observe dimensional laughter.

[Beckys_Mom]

No regrets! Its good to observe dimensional laughter.

Indeed, it sure lightens the mood..

One for you...

al-amiyr, is new to the forum, but he is not shy

He posts his work, and welcomes your questions of why?

His heart is in the right place

With his presence, he shows grace

With his humour and fun, he gives it a good try..

Edited November 14, 2012 by Beckys_Mom

[al-amiyr]

Indeed, it sure lightens the mood..

One for you...

al-amiyr, is new to the forum, but he is not shy

He posts his work, and welcomes your questions of why?

His heart is in the right place

With his presence, he shows grace

With his humour and fun, he gives it a good try..

ForUM

New theory to be released soon: The Sharp Shooter Cosmic Model

[White Crane Feather]

You claim a vacuum existed before the singularity? Your visualising a tiny fireball in a vacuum exploding and expanding? The vacuum you refer to is a rich structure of fluctuating energy, so sub atomic particles don't just appear from nothing their a result of fluctuating energy in the vacuum, thus constituting to matter. Time, space and matter were all condensed in to a singularity. Upon expansion time, space (vacuum) and matter came into existence.

What empirical data and observations combined with physics etc show that the universe began, this is fact, the theories which refer to possible physical causes which created the singularity have no basis of proof where as the beginning of the universe is established fact.

No I'm not. Pure facts my friend. You are makeing a huge leap here. There is a reason that vacuum energy is called virtual. Unless hawking radiation is prooven correct ( which it is not, the LHC has yet to create mini black holes) it dosnt necessarily manifest.

Our data that says the universe began is simply based on our observations of expansion of visible matter and some temperature readings from COBE.

Yes visible matter. Non of that data says anything about about the vacuum itself.

You are visualizing some sort of fabric that matter is ridding upon. This is the fault of common depictions of space being bent like a rubber sheet. That is just a visualization. Until we know the nature of dark energy nothing can be said about the "fabric of space" and the expanding universe and how that relates to the vacuum and where it came from. When scientists say that all matter and energy came from the singularity, they are mostly talking about visable normal energy. There is no data, no evidence, nothing whatsoever to suggest that the vacuum itself came from the singularity other than this visualization of matter rideing on some kind of balloon. It's a useful analogy, but not necessarily an accurate reality of what is happening.

I would challenge you to find data other than opinion that says the vacuum originated in the singularity.

A good book to see where I am comeing from is

"the cosmic landscape" Lenord Susskind

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0316013331

Edited November 14, 2012 by Seeker79

[al-amiyr]

Must be read from post #1 #8 #9 #12 #19 #22 #23 #26 #27 #58 and #61

If you have not read the previous posts then you would not fully understand what is being said here.

Here is the nearest to perfection of of the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse (021:030). Every translation of this verse done so far are incorrect. I have studied this verse over a period of about thirty years and have studied the plus minus 70 Qur'aan translations done so far which ranges over a period of over two hundred years. I have discussed this verse with more than ten thousand persons during that period. I know all the rules of the Arabic language concerning it. And here is the translation.

- - -

"Have those who have disbelieved now not seen:-

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

And We made from al-maa' every living thing.

Will they now not believe?"

- - -

Let us now go forth to draw the first Space-Time diagram based upon the data extrapolated from the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse.

Qur'aan 021:030

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

As we have already seen that when the Qur'aan speaks about the samaawaat, then it refers to the whole realm of extraterrestrial space and everything it contains.So the data that we derive from the Qur'aan is that the Sun, the Moon, the Stars, the Galaxies, the Galactic Clusters,etc. and the Earth ('ard) were once a united mass that had collapsed from a previously separated state.

According to the data contained in the second Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse, which we shall analyze in a later post, this previously collapsed state was the result of a previously expanded universe that was brought down by ALLAAH in a spiraling formation that caused it to possess angular momentum. When it reached the state of maximum singular combination, with internal and external void, ALLAAH split the powerful rotating single entity apart and then blew into it the breath of life that cause it to undergo the great expansion that we have observed today.

According to the Qur'aan the universe did not originate from a big bang singularity. It began when the small and large 'burnt out' particles of the previously expanded and close to flat universe were brought into willing submission to be re-energized and rejuvenated to become a new creation.

The Qur'aan calls this a single Khalq or Creation - a collapse followed by an expansion and not an expansion followed by a collapse. See the delineation below.

The Qur'aan also states that the universe is in the democratic liberal state of run away expansion and shall go on ticking until it has reached maximum permitted expansion when it shall be halted by ALLAAH and when shall be The Final Hour which none shall be able to calculate or rather know other than him and him only.

The first Space-Time diagram based upon the data extrapolated from the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse.

To be continued inshaa allaah (if God had willed).

At this point we will have to sit back a little and reflect upon what was said so far. Read the above again for better understanding and for the coming debates.

1)- What is the Ratqan?

Look through the posts and see if you can find the definition. You must understand what is going on so far. Nothing is complicated. Remember these are not my interpretations of the meanings of the Arabic Qur'aanic words. They are as they are found in the great Arabic - English dictionary compiled by Dr Edward William Lane over 53 years prior to the discovery of the expansion of the universe by Edwin Hubble in 1929.

Remember what was said,

" Remember that this so far is still only the less than one percent of The Qur'aan Cosmological Model.

This QCM is going to answer all the questions posed and debated by the various respected posters of this forum. I take note of all of them. Some posters must just be patient and not make judgements ahead of its time. I hope that we can discuss this word (Ratqan) here in a little more detail. I await your response.

[Karlis]

At this point we will have to sit back a little and reflect upon what was said so far. Read the above again for better understanding and for the coming debates.

1)- What is the Ratqan?

Look through the posts and see if you can find the definition. You must understand what is going on so far. Nothing is complicated. Remember these are not my interpretations of the meanings of the Arabic Qur'aanic words. They are as they are found in the great Arabic - English dictionary compiled by Dr Edward William Lane over 53 years prior to the discovery of the expansion of the universe by Edwin Hubble in 1929.

Remember what was said,

This QCM is going to answer all the questions posed and debated by the various respected posters of this forum. I take note of all of them. Some posters must just be patient and not make judgements ahead of its time. I hope that we can discuss this word (Ratqan) here in a little more detail. I await your response.

al-amiyr, may I ask if the "Qur'aan Cosmological Model", and the diagram in your above post is your personal work? Or have you obtained this from another source?

[Mnemonix]

al-amiyr, may I ask if the "Qur'aan Cosmological Model", and the diagram in your above post is your personal work? Or have you obtained this from another source?

It's his personal work, if I read correctly...

Two articles up for debate I wrote for a local newspaper in 1991.I have expanded considerably upon them since that time. I have discussed the subject elsewhere and always receive from posters enlightening opinions. Hope to receive valuable comments here as well.

All this is my own work. From my own books that I am writing. I make them available without any copyright. There is no subject like this other than what I am presenting. I am hoping for good discussion from the members here. I can assure that there is absolutely no 2c. Plagiarism and copyright: . I hope that clarifies the concern.

Just... lending a hand...

Edited November 14, 2012 by Mnemonix

[Lion6969]

You're a broken record, Lion. It doesn't matter how many times I correct you, even with regard to my own opinion. You'll keep repeating the same falsehoods over and over as though it actually changes something.

Falsehoods? How? All the theories you refer to the ones dealing with what's beyond or before singularity are entirely baseless empirically, prove it otherwise if you don't agree!!!

And I predicted that you would say this as well.

Of course you did mystic Meg

I'll let the OP get back to his theories.

Totally agree there I want more from the OP, I was enjoying the read.

[Artaxerxes]

"Are the disbelievers unaware that the heavens and the earth were but one solid mass which We tore asunder, and that We made every living thing from water? Will they not have faith?"

Who is "We?" I thought God was One? Who is this "WE" it talks about?

Artaxerxes

[Mnemonix]

"Are the disbelievers unaware that the heavens and the earth were but one solid mass which We tore asunder, and that We made every living thing from water? Will they not have faith?"

Who is "We?" I thought God was One? Who is this "WE" it talks about?

Artaxerxes

The "we" used, is the kind used by royalty, apparently.

http://www.godallah.com/we_and_he.php

Edited November 14, 2012 by Mnemonix

[Lion6969]

"Are the disbelievers unaware that the heavens and the earth were but one solid mass which We tore asunder, and that We made every living thing from water? Will they not have faith?"

Who is "We?" I thought God was One? Who is this "WE" it talks about?

Artaxerxes

In English language it is known as the royal "WE"!

The queen of England refers to herself as "We", it's not plural it's the royal we.....still means only one god.

[Rlyeh]

Where did the OP say that he already demonstrated it's use? Where are your quotes?

A bit of a short memory? I asked if you had an example of using the equation, your reply

Yes! I have made a thread " The Qur'aan Lexicographical Model:". Have a look at it.

The reasoning reminds me of that part of an irrational number that has been discarded. If you do not then you no longer can be taken seriously.

And if you need to be reminded of your credibility (or lack there of), just look at this thread. The only people advocating your "theory" are those who lack understanding of basic algebra. Edited November 14, 2012 by Rlyeh

[al-amiyr]

al-amiyr, may I ask if the "Qur'aan Cosmological Model", and the diagram in your above post is your personal work? Or have you obtained this from another source?

Yes everything about the Qur'aan Cosmological Model is my own work. I started it when I was sixteen years old in 1981 and I have been at it for about thirty one years. I probably read about a thousand books and investigated about 100 branches of knowledge to investigate these two verses of the Qur'aan. All the drawings that I am presenting here have been done by me. As Mnemonix stated and gave a helping hand so it is. I quote him again.

It's his personal work, if I read correctly...

Two articles up for debate I wrote for a local newspaper in 1991.I have expanded considerably upon them since that time. I have discussed the subject elsewhere and always receive from posters enlightening opinions. Hope to receive valuable comments here as well.

All this is my own work. From my own books that I am writing. I make them available without any copyright. There is no subject like this other than what I am presenting. I am hoping for good discussion from the members here. I can assure that there is absolutely no 2c. Plagiarism and copyright: . I hope that clarifies the concern.

Just... lending a hand...

Thanks Mnemonix. The hand was helpful.

[Mnemonix]

Thanks Mnemonix. The hand was helpful.

Anytime, brother.

[Lion6969]

No I'm not. Pure facts my friend. You are makeing a huge leap here. There is a reason that vacuum energy is called virtual. Unless hawking radiation is prooven correct ( which it is not, the LHC has yet to create mini black holes) it dosnt necessarily manifest.

Our data that says the universe began is simply based on our observations of expansion of visible matter and some temperature readings from COBE.

Yes visible matter. Non of that data says anything about about the vacuum itself.

You are visualizing some sort of fabric that matter is ridding upon. This is the fault of common depictions of space being bent like a rubber sheet. That is just a visualization. Until we know the nature of dark energy nothing can be said about the "fabric of space" and the expanding universe and how that relates to the vacuum and where it came from. When scientists say that all matter and energy came from the singularity, they are mostly talking about visable normal energy. There is no data, no evidence, nothing whatsoever to suggest that the vacuum itself came from the singularity other than this visualization of matter rideing on some kind of balloon. It's a useful analogy, but not necessarily an accurate reality of what is happening.

I would challenge you to find data other than opinion that says the vacuum originated in the singularity.

A good book to see where I am comeing from is

"the cosmic landscape" Lenord Susskind

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0316013331

I'm gonna keep it simple, established facts are that through observations and other collected data we know the universe began, it started with a singularity appearing which expanded. These are established facts discovered in the 20th century. The Quran gives this detail and more, some of which is still be to be discovered.

Now based on the established on the facts, anything proposing a cause even god, is dealing with metaphysical aspects which has no empirical proof, therefore can only be reasoned for.

Based on established facts and according to hawkings and others I quoted, say that time, space, sum of all matter began with expansion of the singularity, prior to this nothing existed. Nothing meaning, we dont know what was before or what caused it, nothing logically cannot be the cause, because from nothing we get nothing.

Now to the vacuum, there was no vacuum prior to singularity, the vacuum space time matter all came into existence at the bigbang. You see scientists have been desperately trying to prove that matter can arise from nothing, although everything contrary in science, observation, causality, and experience show otherwise. The holy grail for them was the vacuum which was deemed to closest thing to nothing if not nothing. They found that sub atomic particles came into existence and disappeared. Where did they come from and go, they proposed that this evidence that something can come from nothing! However this was then destroyed when they realised that vacuum is not nothing, it's a rich structure of fluctuating energy (ie consisting of matter whether visible or not, ie sub atomic which is still matter), from which these particles came into existence and vanished with the fluctuations. So for anyone to propose that matter existed in form of a vacuum within which a singularity appeared or caused it to appear is a logical fallacy, cause the sum of all matter is the universe, the vacuum is a part of it and came into existence too, to suggest otherwise is to suggest that universe created itself, another fallacy, how can something exist and not exist at the same time? Plus it would suggest that there is a physical plane beyond the singularity, if so then we should be able to reach it so to speak, our physics would not breakdown at singularity as there would be another physical plane they would function on therefore observable.

Hence why I am saying that I make an argument based on established facts, the counter are all theories which are good in their own right but lack proof and breakdown when philosophically and critically analysed.

[al-amiyr]

.

I am still hoping that there will be some posters who will answer the question that I have asked earlier so that we could proceed knowing that we are still on the right track. For now just ask questions relating to the subject.

You can refer back to the following posts to post #1 #8 #9 #12 #19 #22 #23 #26 #27 #58 and #61

Here is the question that I asked earlier.

At this point we will have to sit back a little and reflect upon what was said so far. Read the above again for better understanding and for the coming debates.

1)- What is the Ratqan?

Look through the posts and see if you can find the definition. You must understand what is going on so far. Nothing is complicated. Remember these are not my interpretations of the meanings of the Arabic Qur'aanic words. They are as they are found in the great Arabic - English dictionary compiled by Dr Edward William Lane over 53 years prior to the discovery of the expansion of the universe by Edwin Hubble in 1929.

Remember what was said,

This QCM is going to answer all the questions posed and debated by the various respected posters of this forum. I take note of all of them. Some posters must just be patient and not make judgements ahead of its time. I hope that we can discuss this word (Ratqan) here in a little more detail. I await your response.

Read the following again. It is important. It is the first QCM verse that will take us into the Qur'aan Cosmological model. Its understanding is important.

Must be read from post #1 #8 #9 #12 #19 #22 #23 #26 #27 #58 and #61

If you have not read the previous posts then you would not fully understand what is being said here.

Here is the nearest to perfection of of the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse (021:030). Every translation of this verse done so far are incorrect. I have studied this verse over a period of about thirty years and have studied the plus minus 70 Qur'aan translations done so far which ranges over a period of over two hundred years. I have discussed this verse with more than ten thousand persons during that period. I know all the rules of the Arabic language concerning it. And here is the translation.

- - -

"Have those who have disbelieved now not seen:-

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

And We made from al-maa' every living thing.

Will they now not believe?"

- - -

Let us now go forth to draw the first Space-Time diagram based upon the data extrapolated from the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse.

Qur'aan 021:030

that the samaawaat and the ‘arD

(1)- were both Ratqan

(2)- and so We Fataq them both again.

As we have already seen that when the Qur'aan speaks about the samaawaat, then it refers to the whole realm of extraterrestrial space and everything it contains.So the data that we derive from the Qur'aan is that the Sun, the Moon, the Stars, the Galaxies, the Galactic Clusters,etc. and the Earth ('ard) were once a united mass that had collapsed from a previously separated state.

According to the data contained in the second Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse, which we shall analyze in a later post, this previously collapsed state was the result of a previously expanded universe that was brought down by ALLAAH in a spiraling formation that caused it to possess angular momentum. When it reached the state of maximum singular combination, with internal and external void, ALLAAH split the powerful rotating single entity apart and then blew into it the breath of life that cause it to undergo the great expansion that we have observed today.

According to the Qur'aan the universe did not originate from a big bang singularity. It began when the small and large 'burnt out' particles of the previously expanded and close to flat universe were brought into willing submission to be re-energized and rejuvenated to become a new creation.

The Qur'aan calls this a single Khalq or Creation - a collapse followed by an expansion and not an expansion followed by a collapse. See the delineation below.

The Qur'aan also states that the universe is in the democratic liberal state of run away expansion and shall go on ticking until it has reached maximum permitted expansion when it shall be halted by ALLAAH and when shall be The Final Hour which none shall be able to calculate or rather know other than him and him only.

The first Space-Time diagram based upon the data extrapolated from the first Qur'aan Cosmological Model verse.

To be continued inshaa allaah (if God had willed).