Insightful Book Review

By Lee Harmon (of The Dubious Disciple)
http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2011/01/book-review-thinking-is-authorized.html

"With a mysterious Bang! 13.7 billion years ago, an incredible universe of time and space tumbled forth. Science and religion both are fascinated by this existence, as we humans peer ever deeper into the mysteries of the universe. But Nash’s book is different: it wonders what else is out there. It invites us to contemplate what lies outside our prison of time and space. This concept is so key to the book that Nash has given it a label: Lack of Time and Space, or LTS.

The greatest mystery of LTS may be life itself. Life, Nash contends, is special; we’ll never instill life in a robot, which will never be more than a construction in time and space. But where did life come from? How did emotion, thought, wonder, break into our world of time and space? Where does this life-matter go when we die? Is life truly eternal, existing in LTS? What does eternal mean where there is no time?

Nash Khatri meanders through these questions and more as he probes the mysteries of LTS. Nash obviously has a religious background, though he doesn’t discuss it in the book. He at time appears apologetic (though he needn’t be) for contradicting the beliefs of various religions. He points out the silliness of some of our age-old assumptions with both humor and respect.

At times, I would find myself asking: “Is this idea theologically sound?” And then, on the next page, “Is this idea scientifically sound?” You know, it really is hard to think beyond religion and science! In the end, I am unqualified to answer either question about the book, but thank you, Mr. Khatri, for encouraging me to think."

Assume away God?

While trying to banish a divine creator from physics, (atheist) physicist Stephen Hawking recently proclaimed that God did not create the universe. Instead, he asserted that given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”

Notably, and irrespective of the validity of Hawking’s theory, the idea of God can apparently be discredited by conveniently treating matters like gravity as “given”. But, given by whom? In my view, the answer lies beyond the time-space realm and depends on our individualized definition of God.

Validity of Hawking's theory is beside the point

The validity of the atheist physicist’s theory is beside the point.

My “utmost faith in science” comment was intended to highlight how the idea of God can (supposedly) be discredited by conveniently treating matters like gravity as “given”. Given by whom? Like I’ve explained in my videos on You Tube, the answer lies beyond the time-space realm and depends on our individualized definition of God.

I have a strong science background and am all for science, but I do not have utmost faith in it because I acknowledge its time-space limitations. For instance, science cannot (and in my view will never) provide a real-time text printout of our thoughts to formally prove (a term cherished by many) that thoughts exist. I also do not think science will enable us to originate life from purely inanimate objects.

It is, of course, your prerogative to disagree and believe (as in blind faith) that science has no limitations. Regards.

Martian colonies

Recently, a couple of scientists suggested that, in order to establish Martian colonies, we should consider sending volunteer pioneers on a one-way trip to the Red Planet. The volunteers would go into the mission knowing that they will die on Mars, perhaps within a few years of landing. Understandably, most of us do not favor such suicide missions. I go a step further. In my view, the very idea of establishing Martian colonies (other than in science-fiction movies) will remain a fantasy even in a distant future.

Even if substantial scientific advancements are assumed to be forthcoming, establishing Martian colonies will basically entail two options. The first will require taking with us parts of worldly essentials to Mars (like we do on Earth inside a submarine). The second option will essentially require making Mars, or portions of it, become Earth-like and thus habitable – which is a tall order, considered potentially satisfiable only by those who blindly believe that science has no limitations. In my view, both options focus too much on the hole (science and technology) as to miss the donut (practicality and quality of life).

Also reminded me of what the physicist Stephen Hawking recently proclaimed while trying to banish a divine creator from physics. He said that God did not create the universe. Instead, he asserted that given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing.” Given the existence of gravity? I suppose, that makes perfect sense to those who have utmost faith in science.

Why bother?

I have had it trying to convince folks about the merits of my ideas/book regarding the great mysteries of life and universe. Perhaps, the stuff I’m talking about is way ahead of its time. Oh well. It’s your prerogative to stick to the status quo. Peace.

Not making up anything

@361240: Note that I have not made up anything in my book/videos. I have merely defined (assigned meaning) to LTS, Life-matter, Creation1, 2, 3, Inter-domain inconsistency, Nalture, Napture, etc. So, I am not asking you to believe (or not believe) in anything. My book/videos are meant to promote self-determination of what we believe regarding nature, life, prayer, future, death, afterlife, etc. They are intended to stretch our imagination and enlighten us in the process, since it is authorized to think.

Fallacies?

@jamesellis33: Are you saying what I call in the video Creation1, Creation2, and Creation3 are fallacies? If so, I am not sure why, since I have merely defined (i.e., assigned meaning to) them. I have not made anything up per se. Are zero and infinity fallacies too? In my view, while the smallest/largest numbers are time-space related, zero/infinity are LTS related. Do you see the subtle difference?