THE QUESTION OF ALL QUESTIONS. THE COSMOS. AND SCIENCE AND WHAT IT DOESN'T KNOW. In The absence of that which is not, that which is, is not. The nothing something of the All that created everything.

I'm kinda getting ahead of myself here with that statement but it looms large in this dialogue and has big implications with the subject matter and will be just about all I'll have to say here with some additions and is liteally the crux of it all. Stay tuned!

I should first say here I'm not any kind of authority on the subject matter or an expert in any way or pretend to be so this will be short ha! and circueitous and round about and cursory, in a way, for your sake and mine. With that in mind but I have some ideas about it and feelings I'd like to share and it's peaked my interest. But I just know there's more to what we don't know but we can know more than we know.

LIFE. Since time began, Man has pondered and asked the great perennial questions about life and existence and The Heavens and its part and role in it and their role in and for him. As curious and seeking beings as we are many of us have questions about ourselves in the big picture and in the scheme of things and about what we know or see around us contemplating the reason for it and how we figure into it all and how we may figure it all out, or some of it, if that's even possible.

The great thinker and scientist and physicist Albert Einstein said: "The most incomprehensible thing about the Universe is that we can comprehend it at all"

But we hope to add to, and hopefully not subtracting from, its creative role and grand possibilities or to experience it in some way for ourselves maybe in life-bettering or maybe even life altering ways so we can be direct participants and beneficiaries of its wonder and offerings. We wonder and ask how it all came to be and the deeper questions like just what is all this about and what are we doing here, and why. I'm sure it's crossed some people's minds, and, why not.

This is probably not the most pressing or urgent or even the most important thing some or most people possibly care to think about or try to figure out or contemplate in the day, normally, but it's important in its own right and life anyway causes many or most to eventually do that as human kind is ever in search for itself among the stars and in its voyages and sojerns (sojourns) to the outer reaches of the cosmos and ever inching closer to knowing more about its beginning and it's end of the never ending beginning of the never ending ending, or, at the precipice of being unkown.

We do wonder though if there is an answer out there to something so basic and fundamental as who are we, what's up there, and are we involved that you may assume or imagine we shouldn't think longer than a second about it since Life anywhere is Life as One and everywhere and the wonder of its reason for being is shared as One.. It's something so profound and striking and one of curiosity in its possible answer and its implication(s) it can't be missed on us, or, it is. But we seem to just have to figure it out or arrive at an answer if we are to come to an answer about ourselves and life itself and finally realize it's a pretty BIG deal.

In our common understandings about life it just seems a given and common understanding and thinking that it just happens and maybe will always happen as we live it and as we govern and live our lives in it, but it can be said it hangs precariously on the edges of sustainability and its health and well being. But for the inquisitor, or possible doubter, it strains a simple explanation but that could only be it. Then the complex rules it and so too the Truth of its understanding and the answer seems lost, because if the complicated rules the simple you get confusion about the clarity and insight of the straight and narrow and the straight forward but profound.

If you can believe it the answer is already out there, and, here, and, in us. WE are IT and everything. But the right question is still missing. In this communique I'd like to offer some thoughts of mine on the matter and also higher perspectives on it off the beaten path of common thought and belief and assumption and even common dialogue and what some believe in their narrow field of vision or staid or camp understanding even in their fields of choice.

Life as it is is, as it is, and we are as it is and all creation is as it is and will always be. Notwithstanding, I guess, if you come from a religious or non-religious background or upbringing the concept of Life or creation is something maybe hard to appreciate or to Truly grasp, especially if your belief contains different perspectives or even definite considerations and rigid and non negotiable beliefs on creation and Life and the very beginning of life itself, but also in the fast, rough and tumble, and sometimes indifferent world we inhabit where our attention span for the real world is almost nil that to think much on it or consider it too deeply or seriously or Truthfully in the normal course and functions and preedilections of the 'day in the life' and in the span of our lives would seem a challenge and so not discovering, then, real answers to valid and relevant and important questions as we may experience them not just as we come to believe them not realizing too there's more to them if we would take their cues and be open to their their insights and revelations and higher knowledge.

One thing's for sure about Life; It's all around up high, and down below, and It's alive and moving and thriving and as fast and as sure as we are on it moving along with it more than we or anyone or anything can begin to Truly know. And we hope to get it right even though it will always be a challenge. Thank God for that. But we hope to fall into the good in it and that of course starts with us and that everyday is as good, not worse, and maybe even better or greater, than the day before it.

Insights into these deeper and profound questions and possible answers to these larger than life topics I believe can be reached and assertained but this only through the willingness of the mind absent doubt or trepidation or any controlling factors to side with supported beliefs and maybe erroneous ideas not foreign only to their own Truths then real ideas based on knowing more can lead to higher reflections about them and a real confidence you do know more. Otherwise other ways or methods can often be too clouded over by judgement or even contentment or satisfaction when everything else is dismissed or frustration or anything in between on the surface of the extreme where the Truth is not because it doesn't need to be.

It's left to philosophers or higher or esoteric thinkers to try to figure some of it out or at least hammer out some sticking points and possibilities more abstract in nature but also pointed towards the Truth, or at least to get a pretty good grasp or handle on it, not necessarily to answer it in a patently kind of way but also not necessarily left to strickly linear thinkers or thinking and maybe even everyday Jane or Joe on every street corner USA.

So already suggested here are the obvious questions: What is the meaning of life? Why are we here? How did we get here? And how did it all start and where did it or we come from? Just What is Life? and Who is Life or what is not Life?

I guess you have to start there to even begin there.

The great Chinese philosopher and sage Confucius said,"He who cannot describe the problem will never find the solution to that problem."

I should say first I'm not the highest authority on this topic or even an authority on this heady subject area for sure or pretend to be so this will be short, but I have a pretty good idea of some sort of what I think is some sort of"answer" or something close to it or a cursory explanation of a sort, if you will, about it and I think you, or many, do also. I like science. It fascinates me as I have often looked up at the sky in wonder and awe and appreciation no matter that it's not my field of comprehensive study or know-how or really my thing, or, using an old saying, my bag:)

Since this is a science based thing I do intend to be more circueitous and so maybe round-about here or not that specific for my sake for sure than attacking science too directly or hope to in hopes of being more accurate than not and be more direct when i can or should be in the best way I know how. I also tap into my higher mind like I do in my more philosophical and divine and holy thoughts and messages. It opens up and gives good insights and knowledge about many things even about this.

There seems in some areas of science on Life and what actually exists and how it came into existance a sort of disconnect or a separating of Truth from the reality of Life and dispensations about it that are unusual and counter intuitive as even a casual observation or simplistic view would tell you all you need to know as for instance Life being conscious and aware of itself, or not, and opinions about" "inert" matter that seem rigid and static and insentient or not "alive" or if they are conscious or not conscious or if they are "feeling," or not at all.

The irony or strange or perplexing chasm is science knows what is alive and moving, changing, evolving, sentient, happening, advancing, being, all the time probably more than most, but may not or will not call it "Life" or "The Living" or "animate and will not say that it is even "being or doing anything ." I heard one scientist say, for example, that one astrological planet is dead implying it's inanimate and insentient. In other words lifeless and non feeling. In the cosmos, there is nothing inert or dead, lifeless or non feeling. Nothing. I'd like to offer some words and lyics here from one of the poets of music England Dan & John Ford Coley in their song Love Is The Answer:

Are we alive, or just a dying planet?

What are the chances?

Ask the man in your heart for the answers.

Nothing in the Universe in my view is dead and not doing something. I know science really knows this but you can't find it everywhere in the field nevertheless it knows more than it doesn't know or than it might want to admit. If you can imagine weather patterns and temperature and atmoshere changes and the like are alive and thriving lends more to the validity of this than not.

But everything is alive and conscious and animate and being something all the time if it has form and function and purpose or else it simply wouldn't be at all. Nothing's really dead even though it may not be "alive". Things "die" but not if they're still living, and they can only be living since nothing really dies just recycles. Consider we are made of the stuff of the moons and stars and all celestial things that change and "die off" but don't stop completely existing just moving on, this would have to be True of it, and us. What would be left is its next potential. What would also have to be True is that they are still living and changing and evolving and moving on and becoming as we are; newly made.

Everything that exists is alive and has a function and has a purpose; and because it is, and it does, does anything exist that is dead? If planets, for example, were inanimate or insentient, or not alive, they wouldn't be aware or change. If we're made of the same stuff as the stars and the celestial bodies and have a basic, low level consciousness in our cells then the cosmos would have to, too, and it would also be alive and working and not inanimate but feeling and can understand because not to would be the most unnatural thing about them.

Everything that exists and has a purpose is alive and can't cease being just like we can't. Nothing that is, and nothing that is not dead to its purpose and its reason for being is dead to it's purpose and/or to its reason for Being and can't be separated from this and it's basic and inalienable Truth and can't be inanimate or insentient. Purpose is alive and sentient, otherwise you wouldn't know what to do or that you should do it or anything at all and otherwise it wouldn't exist. If purpose came from no purpose or anything like that at all that would mean it birthed itself outside of the original creator or source of that purpose and that just couldn't be and would deny what believed in it so. And if we are purpose only of ourselves in the human context of things that would mean we created ourselves and we couldn't have done that without a creator of the created or creation.

Needless to say Life is simply that which lives and moves and changes and evolve as do we, all of it, up and down the spectrum and, up there. Nothing's static. We're not static. We're not inert. We're not unconscious. We definitely are alive. And we move! Even a rock is going so fast that why it's still! Wrap your head around that. That's why it's still. Imagine that. It's NOT dead! It is happening and doing something and BIG TIME!

Any scientist worth his micron or mega telescope or flask or their cosmic smarts can tell you it is not static or dead or nonmoving or non-changing or a non-happening thing to say the least, at all. It is happening and doing something, and BIG TIME! Everything from rocks, RBCs, to crystals and the like have activity and motion and a form of consciousness and information sharing and some even have healing capabilities.

Do the molecules in a rock have desire? I would think so. Could it be solid because of it if it didn't? Because it is and because it does have desire does that mean it feels and understands on some level and is not lifeless? How about RBCs? Do they desire or feel or understand their role and functions as they carry them out seamlessly? They are made of chemicals as is all of Life everywhere so they have to feel and comprehend that they are and are being something. Even our basic cells have a simple consciousness in this same regard and light. Crystals, like rocks, have this state and communicate and are used for healing purposes.

It's impossible for something that lives not to be alive and to understand. God didn't create what is inanimate or non "speaking". God is eternal life and the Life, The living, the feeling, the voice, The Being, and the creation of all understanding and speaking, and, of all BEING.

In science you can't guess the Truth because it can seem a false calculation or a pretty big gamble or tricky guess, I guess, which has its merits, because it can make you wrong, or seem wrong, especially when its search for Truth is a one way street making its Truth the only possible Truth and its own way to it. There are others out that might be the right one but it doesn't matter if you've already found it. but So, you have to do what is familiar or safe ground and just what you do which is keep what you believe in and what you got. But when guessing or assumming opens up other possibilities and greater and higher assumptions and turns into clarity of insight and True sight and higher understanding and perception, it comes to more accurate realizations or findings and tends to be a more accurate and reliable approach and one centered on, and aiming for, The Truth, or it has to. And then, you got something.

Science, however, has to assume greater than itself if it's to find or know itself and to know more since outside it there is greater but it is a part of it. For its intent and purposes science aims to know greater of the physical and less of the ethereal or non physical for the most part and to validate itself and its field and what it knows and what it will that assuming, postulating, contemplating, or guessing anything else is fleeting or unreliable, or subject to severe and condemning criticism or review and is just not what it does. they do. This is because it can't bear the fruit of the real or agreed Truth when in fact it can only in the right hands and in the right minds and the right open hearts. But I believe they are more open to know more and more capable to rise above the fray and to do that ground-breaking research for those ground-breaking findings to really WOW people and themselves and their colleagues they're just keeping taps on it and 'hush-hush';)

I also think science can get too into the facts because they can't guess the Truth, or, what it believes it is, so it has to assume their safe assumptions and the second reality and have to condition the Truth for "The Truth" to be known and to be kind to their reality and for their conjectures and assumptions that could inform and appease them. It seems to resist a higher source so it can never get it and will keep scratching its head. If you can't think beyond the manifest or the mortal you'll never Truly know it or the creator and the infinite or the eternal and what was created from it as the creation of the All.

The great philosopher Plato student of Socrates said, "I'm trying to think. Don't bother me with the facts." His student Aristotle, said, It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." And he also said, "Our problem is not that we aim too high and miss, but that we aim too low and hit." But the writer Robertson Davies said, "The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend."

The Science and electrical and trail blazing and technology genius Nikola Tesla said:

"The scientists from Franklin to Morse were clear thinkers and did not produce erroneous theories. The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think too deeply and be quite insane." You just know he was a heavy hitter in the realm of higher thinking and elevated perspective even in the area of philosophy.

Jesus says when science stops being as much theory--based in their science as much as using more innocent perception and good old fashioned honesty as in what you see is what is actually there, in the findings or postulations, looking at things as what they are instead of what they should or what they have to be, they will arrive at what they're really looking for, and you could assume, "The Truth" and everyone will benefit and it could be called a True benefit and True science and just a good thing. What's hard for science still it seems is doing more than that being theory-based and centered, especially if it doesn't leave room for anything Truly out there like the ethereal or esoteric or otherworldly mysterious.

Einstein said:

"The most beautiful thing we can experience, or experience we can have, is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion and sits at the cradle and is the source of all True art and science. He to whom the emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand wrapped in awe, is as good as dead --- his eyes are closed. The insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms --- this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of True religiousness."

As you can see Albert Einstein not only was super smart but also super wise and quite the philosopher, I've come to find out and realize in other quotes of his. It's pretty amazing.

He cuts through the staid and common and given, and I would have to say in some circles, dry and stubborn aspects of, "science only, please," type of thinking and strongnly held beliefs that don't change or evolve much from what or where they are, I really admire and appreciate it.

Einstein also said, "Information is not knowledge. The only source of knowledge is experience. You need experience to gain wisdom." The measure of intelligence is the ability to change. He also says, "The True sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination", adding, "I believe in intuition and imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces and encircles the world stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution. It is, strictly speaking, a real factor in scientific research." This makes sense because how can you really know anything if you don't imagine or postulate a possibility or some idea about it first not just go to some staid preconceived belief or idea and don't move from it at all even though you believe it.

In fact, since it's said science is heavily geared towards theory-based beliefs which is less than what it is but more a camoflaged sort of imagined or postulated belief system but one that makes itself too definite and too staid and so can miss the mark on True and valuable findings and greater imaginnings. A more open minded approach to research and knowledge could lead to findings unparalled in modern rearch, but this, at best, it seems, comes later.

Nikola Tesla said, "Intuition is something that transcends knowledge. We have, undoubtedly, certain finer fibers that enable us to perceive Truths when logical deduction, or any other willful effort of the brain, is futile," This is wisdom of the highest order from a very smart man. Science is good at one thing. But it's more; ALOT more. These statements transcend normal thinking and are great insights to higher Truths.

So how did it all start? Well, here is where we have to tighten our seat belts, straighten our firmly or strongly held beliefs and notions, keep our egos in check, and take a deep breath, because It'll be a bumpy ride because the concept of God, or a God, or a source, will come up, or will have to. How could it not, really. But the concept of God or a higher power inevitably comes up and in many circles and to many minds It's a thorny and sticky and albeit a frustrating and confusing idea or subject I'd say even a stubborn one either way. But that doesn't have to be. I have to say, too, defining God boxes in and diminishes and minimizes God as not the all of more than everything and as the creator beyond and more than the creation beyond the created.

If you can't measure and weigh or calculate God have you found him. or not found him, but assume and reason he can't be where he is he's not by not knowing where and if he is you can't or won't find if you can't? Or if you can only measure and weigh and calculate God have you then found him? Yes. But if you can't or find God only in this way does God stop existing or in any other way? Defining God boxes in and diminishes and minimizes God and denies and doesn't consider what it actually is instead what it is thought to or has to be but not as the all of more than everything and as the creator beyond and more than the creation beyond the created.

In science if you don't somewhat go into the philosophical or Godly you'll never really arrive at the answers or figure out what came before all that you can't figure out or know. If you don't or can't say what or who God is any conversation about it or anything or about existence will probably be useless and thrown out out of hand because what you believe or feel will be the Truth even if you don't really know or because it will be based on either the refusal to know, or the inability or non desire to imagine and so lifeless in understanding and to the living despite it.

Life is what Lives. Life is awareness. It's that which is aware of itself in the presence of another and by what it is not. And because of what it is not it will be itself even though it will be a part of all that is. If you only try to figure out the greater questions or the greater meanings of life from just where you are and what's there you'll always wonder what else and how come not more and you will be beyond the grasp of what's beyond it or where you were before it and not likely to consider much if anything else, because you just won't be able to which will or could make you question all of it and make your questions untenable and answers unreachable and rendered useless.

But interestingly with the right mind on the matter and an openess to True thought and more perfect perception you can find or understand or come to know the greater because of what laid before you of the lesser but integral and part of the All.

God didn't start existence off with the dry concept of matter as we know it, or as it is, with the dry world so to speak even though that's what manifested. He started it in and from his entire Being and all he was and is and more and in his imagination and idea or ideas about it first. Then what would be, would be, and so the manifestation and result or creation of that. Before God was God he was more than everything being The All but couldn't know it or be it unless he became it and all that would ever be, and more. And that's us, and all that is. But there's one thing God can't do and that is be God without us. That's why we helped creator create and be creator and helped ourselves for the physical and experiential expression of her unbriddled and magnanimous magnifigance and glory.

Black holes. The Event Horizon. Dark matter, Antimatter. Adamantine particles (Paticles of infinity, first light of creation, The God Particle, the irreducible foundation of creation). The Singularity. Believe me. I didn't study these things just know a bit about them, but these places and things, or, no place/no things, are simply creator BEFORE creation and creator. Or, if your're Spiritual, and if you will, God before God before creation. In other words BEINGNESS and potential before manifestation and actualization and the event/no event before, during, and after "The Horizon" of the reality and existance of God or whatever or whomever you may call her. In other words Beingness before everythingness after nothingness. It is the potential before the intended creation and manifesting reality of thought and creative and divine imagination. It's Being at its finest and greatest and Truest. They are, in a way, the same thing; the beginning of EVERYTHING and the start of NOTHING for The All of all things but also of even more things and also of no things repeated or repeating itself outside of what is or can be known and beyond what is only known.

There's a reason these phenomena defy the laws of physics or natural law and can't be detected, yet. It's because it defys man's belief in the unimaginable as natural wonders and because you can't test or Truly study something beyond current capability and current willingness to be able to touch the far reaching tenacles of what has come before and the potential of what can be known and what has always been. And, btw, the reason why light can't escape a black hole, or the event horizon, which I've learned is really just God's garbage disposal, and I would say, recycling center, where they say the physical laws break down, is because it's not supposed to. The physical laws were meant to forward or push out, then in, all living matter to be eventually condensed to start the process of creation all over again and to cause the burgeoning of material matter and all the Universe is made of into existence, or, what it would make of existence and physical reality.

What's known as The Event Horizon (the swirling of stellar debris of dust and particles and all matter also called the accretion disk around a black hole) all matter and light swirling around a black hole eventually falls in and is captured and gathered and stored and unimaginably condensed evermore into what's called The Singularity an extremely small subatomic ball based on The Big Bang theory of black holes being formed at the genesis of the Universe' creation and when a star dies in the absence of gravity.

When its time is come because first light; the irreducibly small adamantine particles that form and are the genesis of all creation are in their pre-burgeoning or pre-emerging form or state and yet to initiate the new process of new life and existance into existance again. These are the genesis of the formation of all living matter and physical processes that keeps the finely tuned mechanisms of God's life cycles in motion and ever eternally beginning and ending and beginning again and Being. You might say God is waiting for her time in the Sun so all may know the glory of its, our, GREAT light and Truth, again.

One very smart science writer explained it as a "neutral state" no interfacing or interacting atoms or particles, no friction, where positive and negative energy are counter balanced so no space/time where time is meaningless also calling it "Absolute Entropy" (the cessation or unavailability of usual work, or, no more, more, of anyting. He also says this is the problem or confusion of the word or designation of nothing in terms of what is thought to have, or thought not to have, birthed the Universe. In the next podcast we will get into this more. See you on the other end.

SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING.

The well known and highly regarded scientist and physicist and black hole reasearcher Steven Hawking, said at the end of his life that he believes the Universe and all that is came out of or was created out of nothing, or had to. But also says there was no Big Bang and that nothing could not have created anything or everything so it's a bit confusing. And far be it for me to question a great phycisist or to imply he's wrong in any way. But he says "There was nothing around before The Big Bang," basing his assumption on that the Universe has no boundaries. He said, "The boundary condition of the Universe... is that it has no boundary." He's right in a way but not in how he meant it or meant to say it in my opinion.

He does site an ancient Greek philosopher, Euclid, and his theory of space-time as a closed surface without end. I think this is a very accurate and True statement or theory. I do believe a closed surface has a boundary even though it can continue unending in another form or realm or at another time before its remergence back into existance and all that it will contain.

Everything that is something, but not more than that, has a boundary. But who says a boundary has to exist for something to not have come from nothing or to validate there was a something before and not a nothing, And why do you need time and space to know or figure out what created time and space, especially if you deny something possibly outside it. It seems kind of limiting, but I guess that's all you have. But even if it didn't have a boundary and you needed time and space to figure out what came before it how does that validate them or nullify or negate or resist or agree with something or anything before that? Everything is eternal and forever anyway. What does something have to be known to exist to know what caused it into being.

If the cosmos is evolving into an never ending or unending expansion into and through, and out of, the ethers of space and time what, or who, is its driver or propelling force, because surely, it can't propel or move itself if it was it's own creation if it had no other reason for being created or existing or moving other than for its existance and just to do so or anyway to do it. And who can Truly argue nothing can Truly do that.

The Universe is a contained and combined system but beyond that there's a vacuum, not a void of just nothing as some scientists or pysicists believe. It's the energy of God who, when the Universe' time is done and all compresses boils down to the indescribably and most infinitly small particle or dot (The Singularity) as in the saying "It all comes down to this," She will start it all over again and with a "Big Bang,"recreate it all once again and us in the endless cycle of creation of Being. This Universe, btw, is not the only one. This has happened many, many, times before. I'd like to add here i heard, this from the Science Channel, that there was no real Big Bang that that would imply and call for a force to initiate it but that there was nothing before it was to cause it and that the Bang was more of a soft or quiet expansion, or poof--my word;) Interesting, huh?

Everything could not have come nothing because that would mean it had to be something not the All of nothing and definitely not everything. It also denies infinity which is The All of more than everything and isn't anything but what it could be being what would be All, and nothing. But it doesn't matter what it is unless it's not until it is. If existance is infinite, and everything in the Universe is finite, could everything have come from nothing and not from more than itself and the always will be and the always has been and everything that it's not or could be and what continues, and, what will always be?

Steven Hawking also believes the Universe was created out of nothing if we have gravity. But then says, "It's spontaneous creation and created out of "something" after nothing and we are the result and that there probably is no Afterlife and there is no God, saying, there is no proof and science can explain everything. Well, I beg to differ on all counts.

That something after nothing couldn't do that because it wasn't the nothing before the something that existed and was created by it. But if that were True and if that something was before the nothing that created it that still would have to be the creation after the creator since it couldn't create itself and that something couldn't be the creator being after the nothing that created or would create it since it would have to be that way but somehow creating something outside of "nothing."

There's more burgeoning evidence and thoughts of the Universe being well alive and thriving and at least undead and of the real existance of Life after death and that what was supposed to be not there before it all happend is there and not going anywhere.