35 replies to this topic

[TMPikachu]

-- Well actually, as Stephen Hawking has put it, asking what was before the big bang is like asking what is north of the north pole! Space and Time did not exist before the big bang - there was no arrow of time prior to the big bang. But perhaps this is what you mean by "To say there is a beggining to time is as ridiculous as to say that there is a beggining to space, since there is no distinction betwen time and space in a 4 dimenstional space time."


I'm going to start a thread soon posting all the cosmologies/cosmogonies of the classical period very soon, in case anyone is interested.

I'd ask him "what's north of the north pole before the Earth was formed?"

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

There is a myth that space is static, while time is not. There is the hymn that "Time, like an ever-flowing stream" The metaphysical convictions which lie behind these words are common to most of humanity. Yet they have paradoxes. If time flows, then it must be flowing at a certain rate. Rates of flow are always with respect to time. So if time flows, it must be flowing with respect to itself. But nothing can flow with respect to itself. So the conclusion is that time doesn't flow. So it doesn't have a real direction. It is just as static as space. The movement of time is but an illusion. Time can be converted to space. This is the light speed. 1 second of time = roughly 300,000 square kilometer of space.

However, the theory that space is expanding in the Friedman model, which means that it must be more compressed in the past give the theory that there was a singularity when R=0.
This is neglecting the pressure of the universe. Normally if a substance is compressed, a pressure builds up to prevent further compression. It might be expected that in the cosmological case such a pressure would prevent the indefinite shrinkage of the universe as R = 0 is approached.
In general relativity, pressure is also a source of gravitation. Yet paradoxically, gravity also creates pressure, which means that the closer it gets, the more it should shrink to R=0.

However, a different model is proposed by Bondi and Gold. Which speculated that if the universe appeared the same from place to place, perhaps it also stayed the same from time to time. In that case the universe as a whole would not really change at all. Naturally, it must constinue to expand at the same rate. The expansion would reduce the density of galaxies in the universe, so to make the expansion consistent with the proposed lack of time evolution. New galaxies are constantly being formed to fill the gaps left by te recession of the existing ones.The material which goes to make up these galaxies is continually created, so there is no big bang. Matters enter universe all the time. The overall behaviour of this unchanging universe is therefore not static, but a steady state, with individual stars and galaxies evolving through their life cycles and decaying, and newly created matters always forming up to boost the population of young stars. Thus the universe has no beggining and no end.

[Borjigin Ayurbarwada]

The Bondi and Gold theory has its problems, since the creating rate is alot slower than the decaying rate. This theory has thus been abandoned.

Then there is the oscillating universe theory. Also based on Friedman's model, but with additional assumption that the universe survives its encounter with the singularities at both temporal extremities. The end of its cycles of expansion, the universe would reach a very high density state and bounce out into a subsequent cycle of expansion and recontraction similar to the first and continue the process indefinitely.

[mohistManiac]

I think it would help if we take another example. Try finding the European knight equivalent in China. You won't. I'll explain. In Europe knights and nobles are used interchangeably because a knight was rather also a land owner and his occupation was loyalty and subservience in battle to the landlord over him. But nobles trained in deadly arts in China differed from those in Europe because they were expected to master their intellectual skills much more than swordsmanship because the real role to which they apply was in court to deal with a range of issues that widely encompasses everything the human resources on their lands could be encouraged to do. These people were better known as Shi class nobles or You Xia (knight errants) because their mindsets were not locked to the hereditary land grants but were only limited by the ideas they generate either to the approval or disapproval of peers forming their network. Now as for a Chinese equivalent in angels you have to find what the Chinese would consider to be heavenly warriors or perhaps some being walking a path of divine providence. Again you will only find something heavily modified on the whole. For example someone like The Monkey King would be like Satan since he was a creation of natural Dao forces or in other words created by "God" but yet like Satan shares his disdain of the heavenly authority. The contrast here is Satan was a favorite that gets cast out of heaven while the Monkey King whom didn't belong in heavenly court gets many chances to prove his worth before finally redeeming himself by the tale's end. Wukong had to train himself to master his supernatural skills while Satan was simply endowed with all his gifts so naturally a difference which occurs between Chinese and European angels is that Chinese angels must come from a path of learning and cultivation.

[General_Zhaoyun]

Alright, in closest definition of "angel" in Christianity and Hebrews, angels are messengers of god.

In Taoism or Chinese mythology, the closest equivalent to 'angel' are the fairy-lady (仙女）. However, the Taoist pantheon was modelled after the Chinese bureaucracy with Jade Emperor at the top and below him are the generals, celestial beings, immortals and fair-ladies.

For the Chinese buddhism, the closest equivalent to "angel" is that of Bodhisattva (e.g. Guanyin), who was said to have 33 forms of reincarnation. The Guanyin can be reborn into the human world and to help sentient beings relieve their sufferings. However, a Bodhisattva, though may well be the disciple of Buddha, is not actually a messenger of Buddha. In Buddhism, so long as the teaching of Buddha (known as Dharma) exist, there will be Buddhism to save the sentient beings. Otherwise, you also have the future Buddha, Maitreya, who is now residing in Tushita heaven, and will be reborn into the human world, if one day the Buddha's teaching is lost in the world.

[mohistManiac]

Angels aren't just messengers. They have roles to play like maintaining the wholesomeness of God by fighting against Satan. They should very much like to interfere with human affairs but this would normally contradict with God's plan of free will in humans. Therefore angels have been reduced to mere messenger status.

Christianity with angels is very much a historical development out of the chaotic tragedies of feudal Europe where the concept of Satan and his multitude of demonic minions can certainly be derived. The militaristic and political economic affairs of the age would likely dictate that unappreciative nature of serfs for landowners, such as merely thinking too much about the oppressive bond of serfdom would have been no less than worshiping the devil. A person whose mind is filled with thoughts of dissent is comparable to Satan it caused him to become defiant against the regulating nature of holy heaven and God.

If there ever was a time when affairs in China could have became radically canonized into religion or popular mythology it would have been during the Shang period or Warring States period when warring and sacrificial rites were regarded to have reached the maximum degree in China.