Last word on the Lakers 2023 Season

 The Lakers had an amazing end of season run following a wonderful trade that brought several good players to L.A. It seems that they lacked a solid center for the Western Conference final when they ran into a superstar center (Nikola Jokic) for the Nuggets. In the championship bubble season the Lakers still had Dwight Howard whom had been one on the leagues best rebounders and defensive players at the position that became the Laker’s Achilles heel easily exploited by the Nuggets.

James is nearing forty yet he still scored 40 points in game four. He would have needed to score 60 points for the Lakers to win; in each game. Anthony Davis is a hybrid player who goes well against teams without a strong star center. He isn’t a corner shooter and driving forward like Rick Barry or Larry Bird, and isn’t a good enough shooter as a forward to play the position like they, Magic Johnson or Julius Erving did. Neither is he solid, durable or tall enough to play the center role like Shaq, Wilt or Kareem when running into a Jokic. Davis can put the ball in the hoop inside and out against the majority of teams. If Davis played just one forward position for the Lakers his value could be optimized. If the Lakers can keep Lebron around for 30 off the bench now and then, retain four of the present guards, as well as Vanderbilt and Gabriel, and find that strong, tall center defender and rebounder able to fill the gap in the key they might be able to make it to the N.B.A. finals next year.

If the Lakers haven’t good draft choices maybe they should go to Africa, Eastern Europe and South America to advertise for guys that meet the physical attributes required for center and give them an audition. Training some non-basketball player to rebound and play tenacious defense even if they haven’t the shooting skills of Davis, Kareem, Lebron, Magic or Julius might be enough to win in 2024. After that it is likely the Nuggets and San Antonio will be fighting for the top spot from the west.

A Generation After Ending School Swats; Enter the Dragon of Mass Shootings

 Corporal punishment in American schools mostly ended in the 1980s I believe it was. Before the rise of the new permissive education ecosystem there were few or no school shooting and zero mass shootings in schools. That makes me wonder if there is some positive correlation; spare the rod and spoil the child as it were.

Some schools have taken to placing police-persons in schools with guns to watch over students. It occurs to me that something is missing in the logic of educators that would use what is fundamentally an adult corrections process to correct juvenile misbehavior. As has been noted ad nauseam the brains of kids don’t fully form until about age 23. Kids will make mistakes and test the limits of their existential experience. It is like putting a hand on a hot stove when young and learning not to repeat the process with it’s implicit correction. A swat with something like a cricket bat until 9^th grade for substantive misbehavior would provide some humility and knowledge for students lacking discipline at home or at school. Maybe putting corporal punishment back into public schools should be considered.

It has been reported that the U.S. education system is presently dominated by females. It has also taken a turn toward associationist psychology and epistemological subjectivism. Maybe that’s a good environment for females yet less so for male educators and students alike. One wonders if the permissive, feminist environment of schools (if that is what it is) has driven some male students to seek fraternity in gangs. I wonder if networking bullies that led to the mass shooting in Uvalde Texas might have been corrected with the presence of corporal punishment. When there is not corporal punishment correcting networking bullies all contributing a piece of abuse on a single target cannot easily be corrected since individually the members of the network are not responsible individually for much of the load of abuse, unlike the victim whom must individually use a high degree of violence to apply some to each member of the network of abuse.

I wonder if feminization of schools has led not only to increase the extra-curricular increase of gangs. Maybe the Sandy Hook shooter in a prosperous home responded to the absence of a father in the home and lack of a fraternal environment in schools by looking inward and becoming isolated with drugs and violent music and gangs his replacement. Of course that led to a bad end. Expecting juvenile corrections systems or incarceration to effectively discipline and correct male students from fatherless homes and non-fraternal school environments without male role models in education seems unreasonable. Wasn’t the Aurora Colorado shooter also acting out a fantasy role model exploring the existential limits of an aneomic environment without the reality check of corporal punishment?

It probably isn’t a good idea to rely on guns of police persons in schools to be the first step of correction for juveniles forced by law to be regimented grade in desks and classrooms until completing the 8^th grade. Maybe swatting some juvenile offender isn’t an ideal way to train youth, yet it may be better than the presence of armed police persons beginning a life experience for Americans of Big Brother with the menace of death in a holster waiting outside the classroom door. Adult corrections should be for adults while corrections of misbehavior for juveniles in school should be less than that of a criminal system reply whenever reasonable.

New Military Units and War Crimes

 When the Soviet Union ended so perhaps did Army unit continuity. The Soviet war in Afghanistan occurred in the 1980s and its veterans are long gone. When the new Russia emerged in the aftermath of the dissolution of the evil empire it may have needed to reform its armed forces from scratch.

Of course New Russia or Russia v. 2.0 may have enlisted some veterans from the evil empire. There was quite a large gap between 1991 and 2013 though. It is likely that the percentage of non-commissioned officers and officers with combat experience dropped quite low since Russia was not involved in nearly the scale of combat operations as the United States during that time. Russia did have the Chechen conflict and some other internal or proximal skirmishes yet not of a scale that would create a vastly combat experienced military. Russian special forces gained much experience yet perhaps not more than private military contractors like the Wagner Group.

I mention the above because of a reflection upon the trouble the Russian Army has had in its Ukraine operation. A military historian named Van Creeveld wrote a book of some title I don’t recall that examined several aspects of military composition and performance. He pointed out that armies without solid unit histories; like irregular and guerrilla units tend to have far more war crimes than regular armies with lengthy unit history. I suppose it is the lack of experience and lack of discipline and order that leads to disorder in job performance. The Russian Army may have had about as much combat experience among its NCOs and Officers as a U.S. National Guard unit had during the Vietnam War; none. They may have performed about as well as its officers and NCOs simply lacked the field experience useful for competent and effective military maneuvers, troop allocations etc. During the Vietnam War the Pentagon formed a new Army Division named the Americal Division that had the lack of unit history of a new unit. It also had more than its share of war crimes, including massacre at Mi Lai. It was made up of draftees, NCOs and officers transferred from other units.

On the other hand, the Ukraine military has been provided with a vast amount of donated military experience of American advisers that have been involved in more than two decades of nearly continuous military conflicts. They have fine tuned their use of military technology and HUMINT and can design offensives for the Ukraine Army to go along with all of the fine weapons paid for by adding public debt to Americans and Europeans.

The Russian Army is gaining very hard won combat experience in Ukraine that will likely inform future combat operations should they arise. Its cadre will develop the knowledge of U.S. veterans. Probably its military discipline will increase even if the political wisdom of politicians in many nations does not.

Russia changed from the old Soviet military models to something of a volunteer Army of smaller numbers with higher quality like that of the U.S. military in the first part of the millennium. It’s special forces and the Wagner Group gained experience in Syria yet the Army was not broadly involved. In my opinion the U.S. military control from the civilian sector and general leadership has learned to minimize casualties in a number of ways while yet conducting military operations while Russian leadership has not. Wars of course are best not started in the first place, yet U.S. leadership of the Democrat Party has learned to let others fight there battles for them where possible and to use the most high-tech and expensive weapons they can obtain to fight them with. Russia has used very costly hypersonic gliders and found they can be shot down with Patriot missiles, and the U.S. is developing hyper-sonic cruise missiles I believe it, so nuclear weapons can be delivered within minutes instead of an hour for targets less than a thousand miles away.

I am not sure what experience will be helpful for constructive use of the very destructive weapons when they are effectively used. Neither am I sure of how to get intelligent leadership inn the White House that could restore full normal relations with Russia and the U.S.A. In my opinion the latter would be a better investment of effort than the former.

President Joe's Special Rule of Law-Ukraine

 I was trying to figure out the logical paradigmata the Biden administration has repeatedly invoked in support of the pretense that they are defending the rule of law by supporting the Ukrainian war with Russia. To my knowledge there was no rule of law involved with the formation of Ukraine from a Soviet political entity following the end of the Soviet Union. Changing government and economic system entirely usually requires direct use of force rather than legal proceedings. Boris Yeltsin had no legal authority to make nations of Soviet political units; he was not the Emperor, and neither was Bill Clinton. I believe Joe Biden wants the Stalinist Soviet state boundaries that existed until 1991 for Ukraine in preference to the restoration of Russian boundaries that existed until Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolshevik Red Army took over the country in 1917.

Law is nothing more than an external formalization of power. Rule of law means rule of power. Usurping power from the demos to elites and elite military backed new rulers is what transpired in the case of the nascent Russian revival when the Clinton-Yeltsin axis filched Ukraine toward the N.A.T.O. side of things. Now the main hegemon; Joe Biden, is using that military power to consolidate Democrat Party lawyer-presidential rule decretals he says are law for Russia, Ukraine and for governing boundary disputes among nations..

Laws do not exist for-themselves. Laws do not exist without the people that made them. Rule of Law from the mouth of Joe Biden means rule of the lawyer that was a law maker in the U.S. Senate before executing law. That suit him as president. Joe Biden has in effect a petrified brain viewing himself as the law in-itself.

Rule of Law to Joe Biden does not mean rule of the laws of God. Democrats often break the laws of God as expressed in the Christian Bible inclusive of the Pentateuch. They kill, they do not love God enough to obey His laws, they are adulterers, abortionists, homosexuals and thieves, etc. The rule of law Joe Biden respects and regards as sovereign for the globe are realistically those of the U.S. Democrat Party. Democrats are intolerant of political pluralism or laws not in lockstep with laws they approve of. Democrats may not have forced the world into conformity with their concept of Democracy yet they are trying to get that done.

The Soviet Union ended mostly voluntarily without violence or blood beside a minor fray at the White House (where the Soviet Congress was located) that Boris Yeltsin defeated with a few tank shells. In that regard the ending of the Soviet Union was something of a miracle unparalleled in world history. Some communists dissented with the end of their era. Democrat Party politicians of course were Johnny carpet-baggers on the spot exploiting the situation with the impending vacuum of political and legal power. It goes without saying that U.S. President Bill Clinton had absolutely no legal or moral authority to be involved in negotiating any sort of post Soviet political structure; he didn’t reside in Europe and wasn’t formerly a dual passport holder of the Soviet Union.

Normally nations have formed around tribes or associated tribes that expanded and passed through various social structures of increasing organization levels until they become nations with non-local leadership. Sometimes that leadership is royal or authoritarian, rarely is it democratic and there are several additional forms of political leadership. Sometimes tribes kill their former rulers and ruling class. That occurred in Cahokia and was attempted in the Haitian revolution. The Soviet revolutionaries killed off several members of the former Romanov dynasty in the House of Special Purpose in Yekaterinburg Russia; a tourist site in Boris Yeltsin’s home town.

The non-violent transition from Russia was historically very special and should have been respected rather than exploited by the west. Russian national land should have been fully restored when the Soviet Union died.

Soviet Communist revolutionaries stole Russia in transforming it into the Soviet Union. Normally when property is stolen and recovered through whatever means it is returned to the former owner. When the Soviet Union ended the former Russian borders should have been allowed to emerge from the seventy years of suppression. If a nation had a popular vote and decided to end its existence and join some other entity that would at least be a Democratic procedure. If Mexico petitioned the United States to become a U.S. state and the U.S. Congress voted to accept it that would be a legal process according to U.S. and Mexican law. There would be no international legal convention concerning the process though; it is a process of reason and popular will for two governments to become one as it was in the several European states to form closer political bonds and become the European Union. Russians were never given that opportunity- that is to determine their own destiny in regard to Ukraine that was part of Russian before the Soviet revolution. A tiny minority of one continuing from the Soviet Union (Boris Yeltsin) chose under the influence of Bill Clinton it appears to have disposed of the former Soviet Union land as he saw fit. He ended the Soviet Union and formed the C.I.S. or Community of Independent States as would an Emperor informed by the power of the U.S. President leader of N.A.T.O. with a full and ready war machine poised at his temporarily powerless paper government entity in case he chose another path (such as restoring Russia fully). Boris Yeltsin negotiated with the west with a gun at his head; that was the rule of law that President Biden touts as a great legal and moral principle upon which Western civilization rests.

It is doubtful that Boris Yeltsin had a moral or legal right to dismember historical Russia and render parts of it independent. Neither did he have the legal authority to give independence to the land where the Brooklyn bridge reaches shore. A sober legal mind would have been mindful that popular will and historical circumstance operating in the political ecosystem of Earth makes national boundaries a matter of military power balances. If one wants to have a peaceful society it is necessary to comprehend and respect those international balances rather than to regard them as following legal fictions. The pretense that rule of law precedes rule of reason and historical facts and justice for adjudicating national boundary disputes is specious. Law is a national concern. International law is nothing more than legal comity or cooperation among friendly nations to enforce similar legal paradigms.

The United States and most nations will not enforce laws of other nations they hold to be unjust. Returning escaped slaves from northern states by force was so disagreeable to the north that it was rejected as law and became one of the proximal causes for the U.S. civil war. There was no natural right for Bill Clinton or Boris Yeltsin to give up Russian land as there was a reasonable paradigm for restoration of former East Block nations to a fully independent status. Baltic states for instance that were not part of historical Russia had an inherent right to return to there pre-Soviet status so far as was realistically possible. Russia shared that right.

Democrat Party politicians have consistently claimed to be enforcers of the rule of law in supplying countless billions of dollars of advanced military weapons to Ukraine when what they have actually accomplished is the rule of lawyers that are Democrat party Presidents asserting their will to power. Instead of peace they chose sufficiently corrupt policies to compel war in Ukraine. Piling up vast public debt in the U.S.A. they risk the security of the nation in escalating a military crisis that brings the world to the brink of nuclear conflict quiescent since 1945.

Russia should never have been placed in the situation of being required to fight with Ukrainians and the west as if it was one of two pit bulls in a dog fight for spectators. There was an are numerous ways to peaceful and directly end the conflict and begin to restore normal relationships in business and ecospheric world recovery from innumerable continuing insults. When a vacuum of power occurs of a unique historical nature simply restoring boundaries of what existed before the Soviet takeover of Russia would have been the conservative step to take. There have been circumstances where international powers have decreed international boundaries or formed nations from what were possession of defeated former ruling powers. One of the most obvious examples is that of the Ottoman Empire.

When the Ottoman Empire lost the First World War the allied powers decided to make several nations in the Middle and Near East from it. England and France ruled large areas of it for a time as well; from Iraq to Syria, Lebanon and Palestine. Saudi Arabia and Jordan were created yet the process was the consequence of military and political necessity for the victors to decide the fate of the former possessions of the defeated.

It is the case that most of the nations created in the Middle East did not exist before the First World War and that the people that lived there in the occupied class rather than that of the ruling class emerged from a time when they had lived repressed for centuries. People of the Middle East had not had an opportunity to live in the form of modern nation states nor with elected national government while the colonial power ruled.

Russia before the Soviet takeover was a well developed modern nation with strong national identity and borders including that of the Ukraine. The Soviets were like a ruling colonial power in Russia. Russia may not have been the most developed of nations in comparison to those smaller nations to the west, and it only eliminated serfdom about the time the U.S.A. ended slavery, yet it was not a completely undeveloped country. Russia had the malodorous institution of royal aristocracy of course, yet it also had a middle class and might have better developed a form of constitutional democracy with fetters and muzzles on the royals given time while the petty bourgeois prospered.

President Clinton made sure that Russians never had a choice about restoring their nation once the terrible oppressive weight of Soviet Communism was lifted. The ancient practice of war to retake their land was the sole remedy available in an international environment where Democrat Party presidents claimed that rule of law gave them the right to dismember Russia and defend the Ukraine, with the long view of joining it with N.A.T.O. and deploying advanced weapons systems on the Russian border to defend the law of force, force of law, or rule of force or law or whatever.

The Biden paradigm of meaning for rule of law means rule of force. It means more than that however. It means that in the future whenever any ruler can be co-opted by a strong international power or when a coup against a government can be orchestrated and an agreeable puppet put in place if he signs a paper with the international power to dissolve his nation and form several new ones as he deems fit the international power may invoke the rule of law precedent to intervene militarily. Stealing nations overnight and laundering their disposal through the rule of law gambit could become the norm for slick elite land grabs.

I believe a couple of additional points may be learned from the Biden and Democrat party lawyer-president history since 1992. One is the trust and betray nature of U.S. foreign policy. Instill the trust of America’s benevolent intentions in an adversary who drops their guard and is then betrayed by the U.S.A. at some future time. Trust and betray has several variations including enlisting allies who are discarded following use.

The other point is retro-causality. A concept invented by the physicist John Wheeler for use in cosmology applications, it also applies to U.S. foreign policy. The Reagan administration for example developed a good and even trusting relationship with Moscow concerning U.S. intentions, who let down their guard and moved toward capitalism, free enterprise and democracy passing through a period of power vacuum while abandoning Soviet communism. Later, due to Democrat lawyer Presidents of the U.S.A. the good work of the Reagan administration followed by the Bush I administration was betrayed thereby retroactively causing the trust phase to become a necessary part of the betrayal phase that was the emergent true policy of the United States Government.

The World of Super-Shocks (a poem)

 

Centered within space-time          paces          pry ultrified knocks
dimensions to believe in                places        some things are taught
eventual horizons                            face            surfaces of spheres   
shapes yet to come                        grace            formations of years
each star of the galaxy                    spaces          where galaxies go 
one thought to feel                          light              one thought to know
drawn to start                                races            called to beginnings
tempests and structures              case            beatings of hearts.

Venus Global Warming Repair Lab

 The Earth’s atmosphere and ecosphere need repair. Since Venus is the most Earth-like planet in the solar system and has a temperature on the surface of something like 750 degrees F, it could be a good experimental repair lab for testing global cooling technology. The added benefit is that reducing the temperature of Venus would be a first step toward terra-forming that planet.

It is said that the Earth will burn up in four billion years or so when the sun becomes a Red Giant and expands in size to incinerate the Earth. Yet in four thousand million years physicists probably will have discovered some way to convert the red giant star’s heat into an energy field surrounding the Earth so they can keep the planet at a cool, comfortable temperature. Actually one might expect they could get that job done within one million years since a million years is quite a while for science to advance.

Of course it is difficult to test out some scientific theories. Hawking radiation theoretically would let a black hole cough up enough virtual particle half pairs in a trillion billion years to evaporate the black hole. Alternatively a black hole may input enough super-positioned virtual particles from all over the Universe to increase its size over a trillion billion years rather than decrease it. Perhaps every virtual particle that could appear from space-time eventually goes into a black hole until space-time is exhausted of virtual energy and not even space-time exists outside of a singularity at which point a catastrophic release of the black hole content might arise. It would be difficult to test that sort of theory.

Space-time,virtual particles in space-time, gravity and engineering anti-particles are four elements that allow for some fascinating potential configurations for experimenters of the future. One might find a way to use anti-particles to repel or kedge a space ship through the gravitational fields of the Universe toward the high end of relativistic limits without need for fuel (if one manufactured the antiparticles aboard ship). If one knew enough about gravity and what causes it one might in some way repel the space-time with gravity in it just enough to allow a spaceship to slip through the rent in space like a torpedo with super-cavitation follows an air bubble at its bow through water. It might be possible to travel faster than the speed of light with relativistic limits of space-time finessed away from a ship’s immediate area of travel.

Developing some technology or innovating convenient product is occasionally simple. For instance one enjoys a supply of empty bags for filling with coffee, folding over the opening and stapling it closed to make single coffee bags with whatever ground coffee blend one likes. Making space transport work better for the masses with electro-magnetic mass drivers is an obvious upgrade over single use chemical rockets because mass drivers can be used 24 hours a day repeatedly launching specially designed modules into orbit. One can research and upgrade planetary cooling devices in field test experiments. Applying a global cooling sun-screen above the atmosphere of Venus should be requisite before even considering applying one as a band-aid last-resort for Earth at L-5 in case of runaway greenhouse effects.

N.A.S.A. should add a Venus sunscreen program to its bucket list and enlist support for and cooperation with the space agencies of China, Russia and Japan plus anyone else that might want to contribute to making Venus habitable in the long run while developing a potential remedy for Earth’s greenhouse gas problem. Individuals making coffee single bags at home is controversial too I suppose, and even dangerous, yet not as dangerous as making a sunscreen to cool down a planet without testing it first in a full-scale model.

Immutability and Uncertainty

 I wanted to write a bit on contemporary topics of cosmology and economics. It’s a reasonable place to drop in a philosophical idea or two as well.

In a video titled “If there is a God, why are there atheists?” R.C. Sproul raised several interesting points that prompted me to review a few issues. Sproul quoted the New Testament book of Romans (cited below) to make the point that everyone knows God directly, in a sense through plain wonder at creation and existence. It is an innocent apprehension of being at all and the wonder of existence. Then people develop false explanations for why things existence, etc. That may be comparable to intuitively recognizing a good first choice move in a blitz chess game and setting it aside to overthink the position and with enough sophistication select a bad move.

Romans Chapter 1: 17 “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are

clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his

eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as

God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and

their foolish heart was darkened.”

Verse 20 above relates that “the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are plainly seen, being understood by the things that are made”. Quantum mechanics at least is unseen to the naked eye, and I believe God’s spirit is deeper even than quarks or strings. Certainly each are invisible, yet God has made visible things from the invisible that humans may perceive or understand-with the term understand perhaps meaning to be aware of or to re-cognize. It may be an error to go too much further in that direction, for beyond the naive, primal perception and recognition of perceived objects lies the sophistication that effaces the first impression and its wonder.

Not to say though that scientific knowledge is wrong or an error. Mankind needs to work and physics and cosmology are work. One can learn a tremendous amount about the relationships among things that exist in the Universe. For instance, mass and energy are convertible and may be viewed as two forms of the same kind of thing that are in different states. It is somewhat remarkable to me that Einsteins formula E=mc² was written before knowledge of the Higgs Field or of Higgs Field values if those are known very well, or are as familiar as the values of electro-magnetic fields. Light particles are nearly massless particles (photons) that exist in electro-magnetic fields I believe. Converting mass into energy at the speed of light squared plainly would seem to burn up all of the energy, or expend all of the energy, yet it can’t really do that. How can mass convert itself into a massless state, be neither created or destroyed and still exist? It might just be to reduce the mass to a massless form (a photon wave) that exits the Higgs field entanglement wherein two dimensional particles become three-dimensional and seem to have mass when they don’t really. Three-dimensional mass converting to spent energy becomes two-dimensional with the entanglement that made its mass shorn away.

Alternatively gluons that make the strong force between quarks, and are pure energy may transfer their energy to something else, like space-time itself. It may be that within an event horizon as quantum relations are annihilated and mass even at the scale of gluons and strings become energy in-self without relational form that some asymmetry in the process attaches itself to space-time and energy quanta with virtual entanglement effects on the event horizon creating the apparent, emergent effect of gravity and space-time expansion. I wonder if anyone has considered the issue of CP violation inside the event horizon as quanta are destroyed and converted to pure energy and virtual energy; could virtual anti-energy act as virtual anti-dark matter acting to push space apart on the event horizon Universe a concatenated anti-gravitational emergent field?

Other obvious questions arise concerning a four-dimension Universe located on the event horizon of a black hole in a five dimension Universe. One wonders if matter from the five dimension Universe continues to be taken into the black hole passing through the four dimension Universe. One wonders if the cosmic microwave background pattern at the earliest time that can be captured by the Webb Space Telescope was caused by the black hole drawing in mass or energy from the event horizon. One wonders if space-time yielded the energy that became mass after a burp from the black hole wherein a lot of virtual entangled particle pairs appeared outside the event horizon. Black hole belches could occur like solar flares perhaps at rare times as often as the appearance of a Majorana neutrino in a particle detector.

Sproul mentioned Kant and Sartre in a class he taught on atheist attacks on faith I believe it was, as atheists. He did so in the context of disagreeing with Kant that one can’t know certain things that are unseen. I believe Sproul and Kant are functioning in different categories and Sproul’s reasonable ideas on Kant and Sartre were misplaced.

I read most of Sartre and Kant’s works and don’t recall anything about atheism in them. Certainly they weren’t in Being and Nothingness or The Critique of Pure Reason. Sartre’s Being and Nothingness is fundamentally an author’s intimate oversoul point of view of a human; nearly a first person narrative of what one mind experiences existing. It is like an authors’ examination of what a character in a novel perceives and thinks about what he perceives, feels, senses etc. It is a very subjective work rather than an objective philosophical examination of the Universe. Sartre tends to analyze social reality and social behavior rather than to seek scientific accounts of nature. Sartre infers the reasons why others behave the way they do in the reality of his experience on the basis of how he understands himself.

The Critique of Pure Reason was a great book that might probably was influenced not only by Hume and his ideas about cause and effect, what can be known empirically and so forth. Kant was probably heavily influenced by Descartes’ Meditations on a Method. French rationalism opened the door to a systematic examination of the relation between perception, mind and logic. Kant’s noumenon or unknown is not quite the same as the Apostle Paul’s invisible things made visible. The noumenal are things one doesn’t know and hasn’t perceived. It is possible that things like quarks are imperceptible, or that theoretically very small quanta of less than Planck length size are a reasonably classified as noumenal and cannot be seen or known beyond theory.

One might speculate about the qualities of God from what is seen or known from first impression of perceiving the world (such as He is omnipotent and Good), yet I don’t think one can know all of His qualities or Being at all, unless of course is purity of power and goodness cohere in on-the-surface apprehensible and perceptible impression anyone may have if they don’t hide their knowledge with false-consciousness and self-deception. Maybe understanding salient characteristics of God visible in nature, or direct inferences one may make from nature is as far as the faithful may go, and from that point they need rely on scripture and revealed knowledge.

Science tends to rely on evidence based knowledge, and on verifiable knowledge. One may verify that the Mona Lisa is made of select materials, and even analyze the brush strokes and order of composition, yet the painting’s aesthetic qualities are challenging to confirm scientifically such that one might verify that it is beautiful or somewhat less than comparable portraits, etc. What one finds beautiful may have different value to others. Human judgment and aesthetic values are made by creatures. God evidently recognized that His human creatures have the capacity for aesthetic and moral value judgments. Those judgments tend to surpass a scientific, evidence based criterion. Quantum mechanics itself is a kind of bootstrapped art form that is phenomenal and temporal referring to radiated waveforms in which they exist in an entangled state.

And that brings me to the idea of this Universe existing on the event horizon of an extra-dimensional black hole. The four dimensions of space-time could be located on the event horizon of a five-dimension black hole apparently. At least that’s one theory. The Universe would be on four dimensions around the black hole rather like a sphere around a black hole, or a kind of Dyson Sphere around a black hole.

A Dyson Sphere is like a giant basketball built around a star. People would live on the basketball. A universe located on the sphere of the event horizon may be referred to as a Basketball Universe I suppose. Well, enough of that metaphor.

The initial singularity would have been theoretically caused by information that was gulped by the black hole, or half of the information of entangled virtual particles gulped from a vast black hole inputting a tremendous amount of galactic mass, being refocused toward the event horizon and experiencing faster-than-light seeming redistribution from a starting point around the event horizon. Maybe virtual particles may be entangled in triples as well as pairs- who can say for sure. If they can it might cause faster area dispersion coverage during formation of a universe from a singularity.

Gravity may be an action of the vast black hole acting on the mass-energy of the Universe. It may equally well be the cause of the continuing acceleration of the universe being drawn into the black hole. Because of the time dilation the life span of the Universe on the surface of the event horizon that seems billion of years old may be far less if viewed from further toward the center of the black hole- even a few days. I suppose one might calculate the size and spacing of the Universe in regard to the mass and area of a black hole able to host the known or observable universe.

If a black hole has so much mass that it warps space-time that wraps itself around mass when there is enough of it, to form a black hole, it has also been suggested that quantum structures collapse inside a black hole at the singularity. Mass exists because the smallest known particles pick up a third dimension in the Higgs field that is a scalar field that works in all directions; unlike a charged magnetic field. Unanswered are questions like does the Higgs field exist within a singularity even if no mass does, and all mass is made into massless energy. One wonders how many dimensions energy needs to exist, or if strings are simply energy, in addition to what energy is in-itself...Is energy a wave, and are plain waves trapped at the singularity compiled into themselves?

If the singularity of a black hole is pure energy, or if the singularity rolls up space-time within itself to a singularity too what fills the space outside the singularity, and what force or field prevents more space-time from entering into the singularity even if it is mostly devoid of mass? Space-time cannot exist apart from mass-energy embedded in it?

If quanta are annihilated in the singularity or converted into energy and space-time combined, what is the primordial field thereat and is it charged inwardly, or does it have any qualities that allow it to radiate outward or tunnel through the hyper-density of a singularity. At the event horizon what pull might be made upon the Universe existing on the event horizon? Could the appearances of gravity or expanding space-time be a consequence of unknown fields within the area between the event horizon and the singularity that act upon quanta and space-time on the edge or dimensional surface?

If from the inflationary epoch the universe gradually slowed down while expanding for seven billion years that could have been a function of mass attracting itself to other mass though gravity, and that acting partially antipathetical to the direction of travel of all mass on the event horizon toward the black hole. It was discovered that the Universe renewed expanding about seven billion years ago and that could have been a result not of dark energy, but of the end of the consolidating, semi-salutary or beneficial effects of the energy of the initial Hawking radiation escaping information burst of particle pair singles forming mass and energy being attracted by gravity and resumption of the inexorable pull of the black hole on all of the Universe living on its edge.

God always was; He is eternal. So He may manifest whatever form of being in whatever way and within any form of space-time he selects. He may issue a singularity at any space-time like that of an event horizon with its own space-time relativity scales.

There are many things that are unknown in cosmology yet that are interesting to speculate about. Problems of quantum uncertainty and linguistic indeterminism and the non-translatability of language lexicons and space to other lexicons space-time locations make philosophy a valuable tool for working up theories. God is immutable fortunately so while human understanding may vary and evolve at least they have Him, through the Son Jesus Christ, to rely on for certainty.