Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

'What do you know about 'The Urantia Papers'?'


Luis Marco
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Do you know if these are the same as  Dyson spheres, Will?

A planetary size Dyson sphere would probably be as detectable as a planet. 

 

They're not Dyson spheres. They're worlds that are created in ways completely dissimilar to worlds that have evolved into existence. A few are the size of the earth but most are as big or many times larger than our sun. They also are clustered with their satellite worlds orbiting in procession in the same orbit. These worlds function as headquarters worlds and capitals of the various sectors or divisions of the inhabited systems and increase in size as the systems of worlds increase in jurisdiction.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Timothy said:

Take a photo of your bowel movements each day for a year.

I’m sure that some will resemble or imitate things. You might see some significance in it.

But is comes to a point when you have to **** *ask yourself: Is it something profound or is it all just crap.

How would you know they were my bowel movements ?

ie if you tend to disbelieve I cant prove anything to you, but i KNOW it is my own crap.

Ie I have concrete evidences but I cant transfer them and their context to you 

 IMO Everything in life is profound

Sorry, I missed your point. Yes humans tend to see patterns and shapes which are random and create an ordered perception of them  Apparently this is an evolved cognitive abilty which promotes survival behaviours 

Id missed this because I don't do it. That might be because I cant see images in my mind  and thus cant reorder shapes into a mental image.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

They're not Dyson spheres. They're worlds that are created in ways completely dissimilar to worlds that have evolved into existence. A few are the size of the earth but most are as big or many times larger than our sun. They also are clustered with their satellite worlds orbiting in procession in the same orbit. These worlds function as headquarters worlds and capitals of the various sectors or divisions of the inhabited systems and increase in size as the systems of worlds increase in jurisdiction.

 

 

A Dyson sphere is a constructed world.  Sounds like these are also constructed by advanced beings. I'll have to read up more on them 

It is a logical process to construct habitable worlds in one goldilocks zone in order  to centralise  political and economic governance, rather than have to spread the headquarters out over several systems  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

They're not Dyson spheres. They're worlds that are created in ways completely dissimilar to worlds that have evolved into existence. A few are the size of the earth but most are as big or many times larger than our sun. They also are clustered with their satellite worlds orbiting in procession in the same orbit. These worlds function as headquarters worlds and capitals of the various sectors or divisions of the inhabited systems and increase in size as the systems of worlds increase in jurisdiction.

 

 

So Magrathea then?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

How would you know they were my bowel movements ?

ie if you tend to disbelieve I cant prove anything to you, but i KNOW it is my own crap.

Ie I have concrete evidences but I cant transfer them and their context to you 

 IMO Everything in life is profound

Sorry, I missed your point. Yes humans tend to see patterns and shapes which are random and create an ordered perception of them  Apparently this is an evolved cognitive abilty which promotes survival behaviours 

Id missed this because I don't do it. That might be because I cant see images in my mind  and thus cant reorder shapes into a mental image.  

I’m just saying that if a works was created based on current knowledge and claiming to have future knowledge, it is likely that there will be some correct predictions.

The issue with UB is that there is nothing in it that could not have been predicted/made up/based on knowledge at the time.

Edit: And there are not enough correct things and too many incorrect things in it for it to be considered anything more than a hoax/work of fiction.

Edited by Timothy
Edit.
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

A Dyson sphere is a constructed world.  Sounds like these are also constructed by advanced beings. I'll have to read up more on them 

It is a logical process to construct habitable worlds in one goldilocks zone in order  to centralise  political and economic governance, rather than have to spread the headquarters out over several systems  

 

You can read something of what the papers say about the various worlds of space here.

Architectural Worlds. These are the worlds which are built according to plans and specifications for some special purpose

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Sounds like these are also constructed by advanced beings. 

 

Here's the link to where the architectural worlds are described.

"While each superuniverse government presides near the center of the evolutionary universes of its space segment, it occupies a world made to order and is peopled by accredited personalities. These headquarters worlds are architectural spheres, space bodies specifically constructed for their special purpose.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Here's the link to where the architectural worlds are described.

Any non-UB links to support what you said earlier about science supporting the UB?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Any non-UB links to support what you said earlier about science supporting the UB?

 

Regarding the elliptical shape of the universe described in the papers.....

 

"The Giant Arc was discovered in data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.

 

"If astronomers continue to identify such large structures in the Universe, it may mean we need to have a good think about the Cosmological Principle.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/there-appears-to-be-a-giant-arc-of-galaxies-in-the-distant-universe

 

 

gianr-arc_600.webp

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Regarding the elliptical shape of the universe described in the papers.....

 

"The Giant Arc was discovered in data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.

"If astronomers continue to identify such large structures in the Universe, it may mean we need to have a good think about the Cosmological Principle.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/there-appears-to-be-a-giant-arc-of-galaxies-in-the-distant-universe

 

 

That doesn't at all indicate an elliptical shape of the universe.

For a better perspective, here's the actual photo. 

 

970px-TGQVwoiXcgkg3A6zZt2sFd-970-80.jpg(

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That doesn't at all indicate an elliptical shape of the universe.

For a better perspective, here's the actual photo. 

 

970px-TGQVwoiXcgkg3A6zZt2sFd-970-80.jpg(

 

Then why are scientists saying something like this:

 

"If astronomers continue to identify such large structures in the Universe, it may mean we need to have a good think about the Cosmological Principle.

 

The JWST will undoubtedly be involved in continuing to identify many more things regarding the arched shape of the universe. As well as discovering many other unexpected things. 

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Then why are scientists saying something like this:

"If astronomers continue to identify such large structures in the Universe, it may mean we need to have a good think about the Cosmological Principle.

 

 

Because the spatial distribution is wider than it should be. They shouldn't form a structure when everything else around it is random, as in the actual photo. 

If anything it argues against a centre because it shows the universe is not expanding at a uniform rate, thats why it's special. If there was a centre, everything would be uniform and corresponding to that arc. 

Because it's an arc doesn't mean it around something. I expect that is where you are misinterpreting the observation. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Timothy said:

I’m just saying that if a works was created based on current knowledge and claiming to have future knowledge, it is likely that there will be some correct predictions.

The issue with UB is that there is nothing in it that could not have been predicted/made up/based on knowledge at the time.

Edit: And there are not enough correct things and too many incorrect things in it for it to be considered anything more than a hoax/work of fiction.

In part I agree

There is little (but not nothing) new in the UB

However, as I've posted earlier, it is not a science or history book, but a philosophical or theological  piece of work

From what is known of it i think it came from  one man who had dreams or visions while i na trnce First he related these orally and then the y began tobe wriiten down 

Were these just lucid dreams? 

Were  they hallucinations caused by some form of mental illness?  

Were the y the result of contact with the universal/cosmic consciousness?

I  don't know and there is really no way to find out. 

They are very well by someone with a good theological knowledge, some scientific knowldge of the time,  and  written by someone with a good education in language and literacy. Thus they are quite entertaining as creative   writing, if nothing else.

My personal opinion is that,  whatever else is true or false,  the authors mistook visions/descriptions  etc.   of  a different, advanced, civilization on a distant planet, for earth's past history.  

However, like most such books, they do also offer a different  basis for faith belief and spiritual understanding.

Thus, the y will appeal to some who are not fully satisfied with existing religions  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Because the spatial distribution is wider than it should be. They shouldn't form a structure when everything else around it is random, as in the actual photo. 

If anything it argues against a centre because it shows the universe is not expanding at a uniform rate, thats why it's special. If there was a centre, everything would be uniform and corresponding to that arc. 

Because it's an arc doesn't mean it around something. I expect that is where you are misinterpreting the observation. 

 

But the points of light that make up the arc are quasars. Which are galaxies that are the furthest distance from us.

The other points of light that surround the arc in the photo image are closer by. Perhaps a lot closer by, which goes to figure that they're not on the same path as those far distant quasars. Which are situated in the outskirts of space.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

 

You can read something of what the papers say about the various worlds of space here.

Architectural Worlds. These are the worlds which are built according to plans and specifications for some special purpose

 

 

Yes, it sounds  (from the link) as if these are the only intelligently built objects of planetary size.

Dyson spheres and Dyson rings would be like that 

Theoretically, humans may eventually  build one  in our solar system when we reach a stage 1 or 2 system civilization  but i suspect we will be out and about exploring the galay rather than needing to consolidate within our system .

It would certainly be an efficient way to structure  the headquarters for a multi- system governing body, although I suspect transport and communications will be so advanced that physical proximity won't be required (again this seems a bit like a writer trapped in early 20th century concepts of centralised government, where Goyt's are located  in purpose built centres or hubs like Canberra, or even Washington DC    

 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a11098/dyson-sphere/

 

Dyson sphere[edit]

Main article: Dyson sphere

In 1960 Dyson wrote a short paper for the journal Science titled "Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation".[62] In it he speculated that a technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilization might surround its native star with artificial structures to maximize the capture of the star's energy. Eventually the civilization would enclose the star, intercepting electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths from visible light downward and radiating waste heat outward as infrared radiation. One method of searching for extraterrestrial civilizations would be to look for large objects radiating in the infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum.

One should expect that, within a few thousand years of its entering the stage of industrial development, any intelligent species should be found occupying an artificial biosphere which surrounds its parent star.

— Davis 1978

Dyson conceived that such structures would be clouds of asteroid-sized space habitats, though science fiction writers have preferred a solid structure: either way, such an artifact is often called a Dyson sphere, although Dyson used the term "shell". Dyson said that he used the term "artificial biosphere" in the article to mean a habitat, not a shape. The general concept of such an energy-transferring shell had been advanced decades earlier by author Olaf Stapledon in his 1937 novel Star Maker, a source Dyson credited publicly.[63][b]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson

 

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Will Due said:

But the points of light that make up the arc are quasars. Which are galaxies that are the furthest distance from us.

The other points of light that surround the arc in the photo image are closer by. Perhaps a lot closer by which goes to figure that they're not on the same path as those far distant quasars. Which are situated in the outskirts of space.

Not as far as GN-z11 which doesn't fall into any elliptical pattern. It should if the galaxy had a centre. It's much further away. 

That's the actual cosmological conundrum. Why aren't they uniform? 

There are even bigger structures like the Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall. If there's a centre why don't they line up? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Not as far as GN-z11 which doesn't fall into any elliptical pattern. It should if the galaxy had a centre. It's much further away. 

That's the actual cosmological conundrum. Why aren't they uniform? 

There are even bigger structures like the Hercules–Corona Borealis Great Wall. If there's a centre why don't they line up? 

 

It's because from our vantage point, what's observable is distorted by the various motions of the layered sectors or zones of pervaded space.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Will Due said:

It's because from our vantage point, what's observable is distorted by the various motions of the layered sectors or zones of pervaded space.

Will.

GN-z11 is 32 billion light years away. The great arc is 9.2 billion. We can see past it already. The Great Arc, and other cosmological structures don't line up, if anything they have random centre pulling and pushing on them to create the oddities they are. That's why they are a mystery. They should be uniform with space. They don't seem to be. 

Again, if anything, they are proof the universe doesn't have a centre. 

The JWST is looking at exoplanets. How do you think that would help with the idea of a universe centre? That's not it's function.

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Will.

GN-z11 is 32 billion light years away. The great arc is 9.2 billion. We can see past it already. The Great Arc, and other cosmological structures don't line up, if anything they have random centre pulling and pushing on them to create the oddities they are. That's why they are a mystery. They should be uniform with space. They don't seem to be. 

Again, if anything, they are proof the universe doesn't have a centre. 

The JWST is looking at exoplanets. How do you think that would help with the idea of a universe centre? That's not it's function.

 

Yes I agree "they have random centre pulling and pushing on them to create the oddities they are." Which causes astronomical distortion. That's what I was trying to say. There are so many different center points of linear gravity acting on things, besides the absolute gravity of the center of the universe, that until we discover better how the universe is structured, we just won't know for sure what we're looking at.

Let's wait and see what they do with the JWST. I'm pretty sure they'll be looking at more things than just exoplanets.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

In part I agree

There is little (but not nothing) new in the UB

However, as I've posted earlier, it is not a science or history book, but a philosophical or theological  piece of work

From what is known of it i think it came from  one man who had dreams or visions while i na trnce First he related these orally and then the y began tobe wriiten down 

Were these just lucid dreams? 

Were  they hallucinations caused by some form of mental illness?  

Were the y the result of contact with the universal/cosmic consciousness?

I  don't know and there is really no way to find out. 

They are very well by someone with a good theological knowledge, some scientific knowldge of the time,  and  written by someone with a good education in language and literacy. Thus they are quite entertaining as creative   writing, if nothing else.

My personal opinion is that,  whatever else is true or false,  the authors mistook visions/descriptions  etc.   of  a different, advanced, civilization on a distant planet, for earth's past history.  

However, like most such books, they do also offer a different  basis for faith belief and spiritual understanding.

Thus, the y will appeal to some who are not fully satisfied with existing religions  

i think it came from  one man who had dreams or visions
 

I would posit that it was the work of a very intelligent and intellectual man/women or a group of people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

Yes I agree

No you don't will. Read on.

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

"they have random centre pulling and pushing on them to create the oddities they are."

Not a random centre. Where did you get that from? Their own random centres well within the universe. It's not distortion. Opposing structures. 

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

Which causes astronomical distortion.

Seeing back to GN-z11 provides a wide enough field of view to dismiss the distorting you are imagining.

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

That's what I was trying to say. There are so many different center points of linear gravity acting on things, besides the absolute gravity of the center of the universe, that until we discover better how the universe is structured, we just won't know for sure what we're looking at.

It's only one fifteenth of the observable universe. If it was revolving around a centre we would be able to see the centre too. Hubble would be able to see it.

That's the pont of invoking GN-z11. It completely disproves the idea of the arc being shaped by the centre of the universe. It's within no matter how you look at it because we can see far enough past the great arc to recognise that. 

Again that's why it's an anomaly. It's too big for gravity to hold that formation. Which means the universe would be way to big for gravity to he acting on it as a whole. Gravity isn't strong enough for the solar system idea if the universe that you are describing. 

Everything about the arc refutes the idea of the universe having a centre.

1 hour ago, Will Due said:

Let's wait and see what they do with the JWST. I'm pretty sure they'll be looking at more things than just exoplanets.

Stars too. Early ones.

It's concentrating on a single patch of at a time too. It's not looking at the entire universe at once. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

How would you know they were my bowel movements ?

So many straight lines, so little time.

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry, i meant is not here: As far as i know, your concern is not even mentioned in the playlist i shared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Where did you get that from? 

 

It's what you said. I quoted you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Last first

No. it's not all in my imagination, although my mind interprets ALL experiences, just as everyone's does'

An imaginary being can't physically affect the world, nor can it   physically save lives.

No that is not the premise a t all

Each person's mind is different, thus every person will interpret an experience individually.

When a woman speaks to you. you interpret what the y are saying.  Another pesron might read a difernt understanding into the same words 

this works for ALL human communication, including with "gods"

Incidentally, "worth" has nothing do with contact.

I dont know the basis for contact but it might be whether a person n is willing and able to act on what the entity is asking 

(This can involve great personal cost and sacrifice, along with the rewards0 

It might just be that t the human is willing to listen.  

Just because YOU  have no evidence doesn't mean none exists.

I have as much  evidence for the existence of this being as I do for anything else. 

I'm pretty good with language 

I saw a "flaw"  in the original post  Ie  a religion which is  100 years old is no longer a late comer.

It has been around longer than hundreds of more recent ones 

Hammer's main point was the explosion of new faiths in the last 200 years, which is correct,  but Urantia is not new /a late comer,  within that 200 years  

Nonetheless, the poster may have been saying something i didn't pick upon.  I haven't had that explained to me yet 

MW, the imaginary friend that saves you is your amygdala, it is the brains innate hardwiring that is geared towards survival, fight, flight or freeze. 
Let’s use a bunny to illustrate this: so a little bunny pops out of her little burrow and she sees a fox, but the fox doesn’t see her so her amygdala sends a signal and tells her to freeze, same bunny is spotted by the fox and her amygdala tells her to run (flight) ruh roh the little bunny is overtaken by the fox and her amygdala is telling her to fight for her life. 

 

1EBE80AB-6EAC-45CE-8D7C-2D09A81BAF54.jpeg

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • This topic was locked and unlocked
  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.