I just don’t think that makes any sense whatsoever. How is it that things can pop into existence from nothing, that is the hypothesis and disproving it is on us? It should be the other way around. Burden of proof should lay on the idea that things can, and did, pop into existence from nothing. That isn’t something we see happen all the time. We do observe time and space, and have never observed it not existing. Like gravity. But I’m probably missing something critical. To me it is a bigger leap to assume time and space came into existence from nothing suddenly.

So… Feelings. I would really like to explore this rationale in your mind. Nobody should convert or join any religion on feelings. Yet, prophecy, metaphysics, theology… So the edge of scientific reasoning but just slightly outside? Or because their father and mother practice it?

Unless I have missed something huge, time didn’t ever not exist. If you refer to big bang, what evidence says time started then? Sounds really fascinating but I have never heard of it

I… Yes? That’s a correct interpretation, but you denied an answer to me. Or perhaps I misunderstood your position, that nobody should ever convert or consider any religion?

Um, yeah the interesting part is that while physics itself indicate time as a one dimensional infinite band, (with possibly branching multiverses but I digress) we as humans attribute a beginning and end, as all we know consists of such objects and entities. Our mind is terrible at grasping infinity, it has even broken many curious minds that try to understand it and are a bit too tenacious in their search. In any case that is my proposal here, that it is an unanswerable question how the universe started. We have facts up to big bang. It (as usual with these things) gives us just more questions than actual answers to how the universe came to exist. I argue that it always did and always will.

Everyone on earth that has adopted or converted to any religion has done so with a feeling as their reason. Nobody has ever converted due to cold hard facts or some research on the afterlife. Proof is unexisting by definition of faith.

It makes sense. But why would adding more complexity and information necessarily lead to consciousness? I think there is an assumption that if this much complexity is a consciousness, then more complexity must also be consciousness. I don’t think it has to be the same thing or the same universal consciousness has to exist due to emergence? It can emerge from certain properties, like mushrooms appear in conditions. And then if there is too much of heat or water, it stops emerging. In fact, our planet and existence is on the very edge of a pointy specific and unlikely set of properties tuned just so. It should be said I kind of believe in a universal consciousness anyway but I wanted to discuss this awesome topic

That’s very cool, I also feel like many who meet this kind of entity will more likely than not return a message or keep a wisdom relating to ego. It is not you, and yet encompasses you. Death is the ultimate drop of any ego and return to the light. And the experiences I have heard of and felt is the radiant compassion. That the compassion is overwhelming. The intensity of which of course makes makes lasting tracks and grooves in the mind of anyone.

The most calming and intense feeling is the knowledge that what is behind the veil of everything, is a warm bright love. That our home is a place we can know comes with a soft sigh of contentment where we can bathe in complete belonging and let go of our self.

Nothing in physics say that time has a beginning or end. It says in fact that it doesn’t have that.