All a Fairy World? (Supernatural)

[Greta]

Each star and planet is a god compared to us. Vast organised entity that sprout all manner of amazing things.

The human brain has 100 trillion connections, by some estimates a 1000 trillion. What does a star have? Mostly hydrogen, helium and trace amounts of other elements.
It does not qualify for the word entity in any sense.

A star has a whole lot more than that. The Sun is 99.86% the mass of the solar system. To get a sense of this, if you are 70kgs, 0.14% of you would be a gram. That makes the Earth (as us) part of the Sun's extended atmosphere, its effects.

Is one gram of your brain matter "the real you" while the rest is mostly just useless carbon, oxygen and water supporting tissue?

[BigBango]

The human brain has 100 trillion connections, by some estimates a 1000 trillion. What does a star have? Mostly hydrogen, helium and trace amounts of other elements.
It does not qualify for the word entity in any sense.

A star has a whole lot more than that. The Sun is 99.86% the mass of the solar system. To get a sense of this, if you are 70kgs, 0.14% of you would be a gram. That makes the Earth (as us) part of the Sun's extended atmosphere, its effects.

Is one gram of your brain matter "the real you" while the rest is mostly just useless carbon, oxygen and water supporting tissue?

Greta, lets get serious. The sun is only 99.86 of the "visible" mass of the solar system and the visible mass of the galaxy is only 10% of the mass of the galaxy. If you are a pan-psychic then you're looking for fairies in large mass objects or black holes is to the point. But I think the consensus here, I include you, is that Whitehead was wrong about asserting that the fundamental actualities giving rise to all things were tiny actual entities, living beings. He even considered electrodynamic waves as actual entities acting in a certain way. To discover the "fairies" we need to look at that other 90% of the mass of our galaxy.

As a galaxy ages two very significant things happen. The technology of its civilizations advance and the mass of its black hole center increases. Those asserted facts mean that a physics develops between the black hole centers of its surrounding galaxies. It is that physics, between visible black hole matter(event horizon), that spells the collapse of those galaxies. The advanced technology civilizations in all those galaxies escape the demise, or Big Crunch, by removing themselves and their eco-systems from their predicted center of collapse. These living civilizations then find themselves in in a world whose plasma cools into the remnants of its former world. That collapsed visible world is the world we know and is the world that those civilizations need to inhabit. They need to inhabit it because they need to reap its energy stores in order to continue their own anti entropic survival as the "fairies" in our world.

[Greta]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

[BigBango]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

As to your technical point, I think you are mistaken. If you have a reference to the science that establishes the sun as 99.86% of the actual mass of the solar system then I will eat turkey poop. To my retarded knowledge of these calculations, they were all done before we realized that something was wrong, because these mass estimates could not account for the rotational velocity of our galaxy around its black hole center. The actual mass of the galaxy was then seen to include some mysterious "dark matter" whose actual nature is yet to be determined. They really do not know whether or not dark matter is uniformly distributed among the solar systems of our galaxy, concentrated or simply outlying galactic mass. I would appreciate knowing the basis of your conclusions to the contrary.

"A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp" is true, however the black holes at the centers of galaxies accumulate the stars orbiting it that fail to use their technology to distance themselves from the center. As the galaxy ages its black hole center becomes a huge 1/4 or so of the mass of the galaxy. At the same time there are millions of other black holes in the galaxy that never amount to much.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying. No! What I am saying is exactly the opposite. Todays galaxies are HUGE compared to the size of pre BB galaxies. After all, those pre BB galaxies came apart when they collapsed and each one in our world is now simply a part of one of our molecules. Of course that is simply the accounting of the pre BB galactic centers collapsing into a Big Crunch plasma. The story of pre BB galactic civilizations is one of escaping the BC/BB and then returning to the cooled mess in order to harvest its energy for its own anti entropic "fairy" purposes.

To reap that harvest, these advanced civilizations cannot just use its advanced technology directly for that purpose. Their advanced technology only has direct power over the elements of their pre BB world. In this world they are midgets and they must use their advanced technology for simple things like making ionic bonds or breaking them. Subtle chemical nudging that, while subtle, can establish primitive life on a goldilocks planet.

[Greta]

Actually, BB, the Sun really does comprise 99.86% of the solar system's mass. Jupiter takes up about 70% of the remaining 0.14% and Saturn takes up about 60% of that remainder.

Did you try checking? If not, you should, because refuting on instinct and requiring sources without providing your own is poor form. If your source is strong enough, it will either make the point or force the other person to produce references in reply. If you made the effort to look it up, then you'd find that figure is distributed by NASA and common knowledge amongst astronomers.

[BigBango]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

Actually, BB, the Sun really does comprise 99.86% of the solar system's mass. Jupiter takes up about 70% of the remaining 0.14% and Saturn takes up about 60% of that remainder.

Did you try checking? If not, you should, because refuting on instinct and requiring sources without providing your own is poor form. If your source is strong enough, it will either make the point or force the other person to produce references in reply. If you made the effort to look it up, then you'd find that figure is distributed by NASA and common knowledge amongst astronomers.

Well I am having "turkey poop" for dinner tonight. "Back in the day", they did not know much about the distribution of dark matter but now they know about its distribution in space. I searched on "The amount of dark matter in our solar system". In summary, within the earth's orbit around the sun there is 2.3x10(12th) kg but the sun's mass is 2x10(30th) kg. The gravitational pull of the sun and planets are much larger than that of the dark matter. Therefore, we can almost ignore its effect our planets orbital speed.

However, in the Universe or our galaxy there is a different story. The density of dark matter near our galaxy's center is much greater than the density around our solar system. The farther a planetary system is from its galactic center the less is the density of dark matter.

Mea Culprit or Corpuscle or something.

[BigBango]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

I grant you your percentages but I do not accept your conclusions. The black holes at the center of most galaxy's are huge players in cosmology. They do dictate the physics that occurs between visible elements of the world.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

Exactly the opposite of what you are saying. The galaxies of our world are immensely larger than their predecessor galaxies because the collapsed galaxies of the pre BB world became the molecules of our world. The ancient sentient beings are not in SMBHs but adjacent to SMBHs. Dark matter escaped the BC/BB by means of their technological prowess. We have to accept "technology" as an important part of cosmic evolution.

[BigBango]

Greta, don't look for the fairies of this world in black holes, big or small. Sure we do not know what the insides of black holes consist of but they do not emanate anything we don't understand in good science. Of course they may transform mass from our world into other universes or carry what they subsume into a timeless eternity. Either way they do not act as proactive creators of the nature of conscious existence.

The root creators of the nature of consciousness, in our world, is the conscious civilizations of the pre BC/BB galaxies that distanced themselves from the point of the collapse of their black hole centers. They accomplished that because they had achieved the technological prowess to move their valued ecosystems to safety. The BB occurs, pure physics, and after the plasma cools the conscious technologically advanced micro galactic civilizations return to harvest what energy they can from the new remnants of their former world.

This story offers a description of the world from before the BB to after the BB that does not violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The alternative description, quantum fluctuations of nothingness, are huge violations of the 2nd law, in that they create order, not by decreasing the order of their environment, but by magically creating order out of nothing. Yes that could be the "fairies" we are seeking in this thread but let us not find fairies where they are not needed.

[BigBango]

Of course the problem with Tamminen's theory is that he has accepted fairies where they are not needed. The "subject" of our experience has metaphysical dimensions that need to be explicated in the nature of the world before the BC/BB and not simply attributed to inexplicable transcendental origins.

[BigBango]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

No I am not saying that there are beings in the middle of small black holes. Greta, are you saying that because the gravitational effect of our sun is so great that it overwhelms any possibility that ecosystems like we have on earth are never more than a solar dog turd? Yes our earthly ecosystems rely on the solar energy we receive from the sun, however the sun's energy is easily measurable while the earth's ecosystems may choose to move their planet into a more favorable orbit around their sun if they have the technology to accomplish that. An aging galaxy before the BC/BB could very well have had that option.

[Greta]

BB, a technical point. The Sun is not just 99.86% of the visible mass of the solar system but all of it, including energies, dust, dark matter and other ephemera. That makes us part of its emanations. If anything represents supernature to us, it's the Sun. Stars are truly intimidating, berserk entities, especially the larger ones. People talk about black holes awed tones, but only the supermassive ones are heavy hitters with their jets. A black hole compared to the star it was before supernova is a total wimp - far less massive, hot and radioactive.

Are you saying that there's ancient sentient beings in the middle of SMBHs and that today's galaxies are much smaller, having been partially eaten by the SMBHs? Not sure what you're saying.

No I am not saying that there are beings in the middle of small black holes. Greta, are you saying that because the gravitational effect of our sun is so great that it overwhelms any possibility that ecosystems like we have on earth are never more than a solar dog turd? Yes our earthly ecosystems rely on the solar energy we receive from the sun, however the sun's energy is easily measurable while the earth's ecosystems may choose to move their planet into a more favorable orbit around their sun if they have the technology to accomplish that. An aging galaxy before the BC/BB could very well have had that option.

No, I am saying that our categorisation is anthropocentric, not ontic. That much should be obvious.

[BigBango]

No, I am saying that our categorisation is anthropocentric, not ontic. That much should be obvious.

I am not exactly sure what you mean by that. My guess is that you find it acceptable to find magic in all the objects of our world at this level of existence and that we need not "invent" deeper ontic categories.

If that is true then I do disagree with you. To my credit the deeper ontic categories that I "invent" are, at the least, very anthropomorphic.

[Consul]

Greta, don't look for the fairies of this world in black holes, big or small. Sure we do not know what the insides of black holes consist of but they do not emanate anything we don't understand in good science. Of course they may transform mass from our world into other universes or carry what they subsume into a timeless eternity. Either way they do not act as proactive creators of the nature of conscious existence.

A black hole isn't literally a hole. It's a collapsed celestial body with an extreme mass in a (comparatively) small volume.

Some say—key term "singularity"—that the mass of a black hole becomes infinite and its volume becomes zero, but the idea of a physical quantity becoming infinite and the idea of a volume of a shrinking body becoming zero are illogical.

Sometimes the term "black hole" is used to refer not only to the supermassive collapsed body or the region of space occupied by it, but to the larger region of space (including the region occupied by the collapsed body) whose boundary is the so-called event horizon, i.e. "the surface in space at which the gravitational field reaches its critical value. Events occurring within this horizon (i.e. in the interior of the black hole) cannot be observed from outside." (Oxford Dictionary of Physics)

[BigBango]

Greta, don't look for the fairies of this world in black holes, big or small. Sure we do not know what the insides of black holes consist of but they do not emanate anything we don't understand in good science. Of course they may transform mass from our world into other universes or carry what they subsume into a timeless eternity. Either way they do not act as proactive creators of the nature of conscious existence.

A black hole isn't literally a hole. It's a collapsed celestial body with an extreme mass in a (comparatively) small volume.

Some say—key term "singularity"—that the mass of a black hole becomes infinite and its volume becomes zero, but the idea of a physical quantity becoming infinite and the idea of a volume of a shrinking body becoming zero are illogical.

Sometimes the term "black hole" is used to refer not only to the supermassive collapsed body or the region of space occupied by it, but to the larger region of space (including the region occupied by the collapsed body) whose boundary is the so-called event horizon, i.e. "the surface in space at which the gravitational field reaches its critical value. Events occurring within this horizon (i.e. in the interior of the black hole) cannot be observed from outside." (Oxford Dictionary of Physics)

Good post Consul. Yes the "key term" is "singularity". Of course that is because black holes have a point within which Einstein's theory of General Relativity comes up with division by zero. However between good scientists like Hawking and others and direct observations of the "event horizon" we have good competing theories about the effects of black holes in our world. That is why I conclude that black holes are not the source of consciousness or fairies of any kind in our world, maybe in some other universe.

Greta is turning a lack of absolutely complete knowledge into some Pandora's box that will explain the wonders of our world when it is opened.

[Consul]

Good post Consul. Yes the "key term" is "singularity". Of course that is because black holes have a point within which Einstein's theory of General Relativity comes up with division by zero. However between good scientists like Hawking and others and direct observations of the "event horizon" we have good competing theories about the effects of black holes in our world. That is why I conclude that black holes are not the source of consciousness or fairies of any kind in our world, maybe in some other universe.
Greta is turning a lack of absolutely complete knowledge into some Pandora's box that will explain the wonders of our world when it is opened.

Singularities and Black Holes: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spac ... ularities/