In the name of God
The Source of our Existence



The Truth Shall


Welcome to my site


I have proved Holy Torah, Holy Bible, and Holy Quran CANNOT be word of God.

To present my evidence I have proved that   Moses Story is a self-evidenced Fiction and a Hoax   and it CANNOT be word of God.

To extend the proof that Holy Books CANNOT be word God, I refer to Darwin Theory of Evolution. Any reasonable person would acknowledge that Darwin Theory of Evolution of species is a sound scientific theory that without any exception has been accepted by all credible scientists. Darwin's Theory of Evolution clearly nullifies the validity of Adam and Eve story of creation which is the foundation of all three Abrahamic faiths.

Also, the Big Bang theory is accepted by all credible scientists. This finding proves the falsehood of Genesis Story of Creation.

All these various evidences prove that Holy Torah, Holy Bible, and Holy Quran CANNOT be word of God. And all these three scriptures were produced by wisdom of ancient Man in a childish form of fairytales. This is an insult to human's intelligence to believe that all Knowledgeable God has deceived us and has sent us those false stories in those faulty scriptures.

Christians tell us that Jesus was a Jew and while he was living on this earth he was preaching the Holy Torah to his followers. So, Jesus who was preaching the faulty scripture with false stories COULD NOT be all knowledgeable God!

Christians believe that around 2000 years ago some wicked people captured ALMIGHTY God and nailed him to cross until he died. I guess there is no limit to human's Gullibility!

While Man is still struggling to identify his own nature; mind, body, soul, Karma, and so on, but Christians have the audacity to claim Trinity for domain of God!!

In many verses, Quran confidently boasts its unique and un-paralleled status that it is infallible, and it is flawless, and it is a literature way beyond all other masterpieces that are written by Man. Here I am presenting   A list of over 100 flaws in verses of Quran.   Quran is a primitive book, it is full of many unorganized and repeated verses, and its literature is at the level of a 12 years old writer. Verses of Quran clearly validates this assessment without any ambiguity. The reason so many Islamic scholars boasted Quran as an un-paralleled literature, because they were constantly under the threat of the Islamic sword, and on top of that the admirers of Quran were praised and were rewarded by the Moslem rulers. We cannot hear about the opposing voices because they were conveniently silenced by the Islamic sword. According to the prevailing documents we can confidently say that Mohammed was a horny charlatan, who under the banner of monotheism and the Islamic brotherhood with the brutality of the Islamic sword he conquered Arabian peninsula. Quran which is claimed that was recited by Mohammed it clearly reveals his poverty of mind and the falsehood of his claim that he was appointed by God to be his prophet.

Here, I like to add a note regarding Quran English and Farsi translations. I exposed the flaws in verses of Quran based on English and Farsi translations. These translations are made by the people who believed Quran to be word of God, as a result these are NOT really the translations of Quran, but rather these are interpretation of verses of Quran, which during course of time the scholars of Quran have mostly consented to such interpretation. So, if these scholars had noticed any flaw within the Arabic text of Quran, they did not expose them at all, but rather they covered them up according to their conventions. I found the following YouTube videos in Farsi, this author exposes many OTHER flaws in verses of Quran from the Arabic text directly.

Manga Va Ahoora #61 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #62 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #63 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #64 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #65 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #66 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #67 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #68 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #69 in YouTube
Manga Va Ahoora #70 in YouTube

Mohammed-Quran-3

Observing so many clear falsehoods in theologies of religions, one would wonder why such outdated beliefs are still dominating our modern societies? With careful observation, we can see that Religions provide a vital HOPE in most people's tedious life, without such make believe hope MOST people's inquisitive mind would suffer from the brute reality of their apparently pointless existence.

There is another possibility to why a well-educated believer still remains a believer in spite of all the condemning evidences against their primitive religions; maybe God is enlightening them, and is rewarding them within their thought activities, far beneath of the uncertainty principles. Otherwise, it makes no sense that a well educated individual is still believing in these childish theologies. Children change their view of Santa Claus to fairytale, as soon as they find out the falsehood of Santa Claus.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Consciousness


Consciousness is an elusive phenomenon. There are much debates and discussions about the nature of our Consciousness. In a nutshell our Consciousness is our awareness about our existence and about our activities. Our awareness presumably emerges from the activities of the components of our brain. But, our glorious science yet to be able to recognize the existence of this emerging awareness! Science has interjected that our Consciousness might be an illusion. Perhaps science is right, the examined activities of our brain do not produce our Consciousness. Maybe the source of our Consciousness has not been identified correctly. I think I have found the Source, and here I am going to prove its existence, and its activities. I will show after all God is not just a silent by stander, God is the Active Conductor of the events of this Universe in extremely minute details.

In order to establish validity of a claim we need to move the argument from the realm of the philosophical discussions into the domain of testable scientific analysis. On PBS brain series program with Dr. David Eagleman, he talked about "Iowa Gambling Task experiment". By this experiment and other experiments scientists have proved when the activities of our sub-conscious mind are realized by our Conscious mind, those information are already old news. This means there is a time delay between the comprehension within our sub-conscious mind and the comprehension in our Conscious mind. This discovery is very important, but I do think that "Iowa Gambling Task experiment" reveals something far more fundamental, it reveals the Source of our awareness. Let us review this experiment more closely, then I will explain my reason for the ramifications of this revealing discovery.

Iowa Gambling Task experiment

Task structure
Participants are presented with 4 virtual decks of cards on a computer screen. They are told that each time they choose a card they will win some game money. Every so often, however, choosing a card causes them to lose some money. The goal of the game is to win as much money as possible. The decks differ from each other in the number of trials over which the losses are distributed. Thus, some decks are "bad decks", and other decks are "good decks", because some will lead to losses over the long run, and others will lead to gains.

Common finding
Most healthy participants sample cards from each deck, and after about 40 or 50 selections are fairly good at sticking to the good decks. Concurrent measurement of galvanic skin response shows that healthy participants show a "stress" reaction to hovering over the bad decks after only 10 trials, long before conscious sensation that the decks are bad.

The Brain with David Eagleman on PBS | How Do I Decide?

The winning incentive in "Iowa Gambling Task experiment" is an abstract incentive. As far as we know only human conscious mind has the capability to comprehend the meaning of an abstract incentive, no other living creature is capable comprehending of such abstract incentives. And now we have discovered that our sub-conscious mind possesses the intelligence to recognize such abstract incentives much faster than our conscious mind does. This is a revealing discovery. How is this possible? Our sub-conscious mind is not supposed to have this capability, but it does! Not only it has this capability, but it possesses this capability far better than our conscious mind. This should not be, but it is! We always had assumed that our conscious mind had the best thinking power, and it was supreme. Our conscious mind is supposed to be the jewel of comprehension, and here we have discovered a far inferior system preforms the abstract comprehension much better than this jewel of creation.

Now that we have discovered the comprehension of abstract incentives are realized in our sub-conscious mind much faster than in our conscious mind, we can sense, maybe this is our sub-conscious mind that it is feeding such comprehension into our conscious mind to begin with, and our comprehension is bubbling up from the bottom. This conclusion suggests that there has to be a self-awared intelligent entity at the fabric of our world, who is the source of our comprehension, and this is the source who is empowering and is maintaining all functions of this world.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

In 1983 the people who were denying the existence of our "free will", they thought Benjamin Libet's experiment confirmed that our "free will" was just an illusion. Libet's experiment underwent enormous scrutiny and analyses by the advocate of our "free will", the result of Libet experiments have been challenged a great deal. Since then our latest experiments concludes: "A recent experiment, using Libet's paradigm, confirms the same pre-urge buildup at the single-neuron level (16). Such demonstrations have had an unrivaled influence on the prevailing view that movement is initiated preconsciously and the feeling of intending to move is grafted on after the fact."
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/libet_experiments.html

The result of this experiment combined with other neuroscience experiments has convinced science that our "free will" is just an illusion. This conclusion points that our conscious mind is not the source and the origin of our "decisions", and this conclusion is quite consistent with my conclusion that "Iowa Gambling Experiment" proves our conscious realization acquires its awareness from the activities of our unconscious part of our brain.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

"Iowa Gambling Task experiment" is not the only experiment that shows us scientifically the active influence of this Intelligent Agent in processes of this world. I found two other very common phenomena which prove similar conclusions. They are "Paradox of the reflected images from mirrors" and "Formation of Multiple Symmetries in Snowflake's Designs".

Light Reflection in QED Theory

QED argument of reflection has been demonstrated in the following short video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1GdgD77AQ4&t=183s&index=1&list=PL-yth3DXLxrSBzqpDUSX0pIPSLCTEaQqw

When photons (light) hit the surface of water at normal (this means it is perpendicular to the surface of water, and that makes its angle of incident to be zero) only 2% of photons get reflected, and 98% of photons pass through the surface of water and enter into water. The same situation from the surface of glass reflects 4% of the photons, and the rest pass through the surface and enter into glass. This reflection percentage increases when the angle of incident increases. Figure 2 presents the percentage of reflections for few materials and for different angles of incidents.

Optic-Law

In reflection of light from the surface of water or a glass Science has absolutely no clue what makes a photon to get reflected, and another photon to pass through. For many years Physicists have tried hard to find a property within the photon that would be the cause of this effect, but they could not identify anything in this regard. This phenomenon remains a mystery. Finally to handle this phenomenon in practice physicists have developed QED theory, which is based on statistical model. QED theory was designed based on the results from various experiments, and in its arguments purely implements the results of those experiments into its well-designed mathematical structures.

Let us explore how the mathematical tool of amplitude vector is used to explain the case of light reflection from the two surfaces of a glass. When a photon hits the surfaces of a glass, the photon gets reflected from both surfaces of the glass, and with some unknown mechanism which so far it has been beyond human's comprehension, the reflection from both surfaces interacts with each other, and that interaction affects the percentage of the reflection, and it produces strange results. Experiments show that the thickness of the glass plays a major role in the probability of the reflection. QED theory has devised the following argument trying to formulate the probability of the reflection from both surfaces of glass.

QED associates an amplitude vector for each possible path that the photon might get reflected. The length of each amplitude vector is defined purely from the result of the experiment, and it is equal to the square root of the probability that it is revealed by the experiment. This amplitude vector rotates 360 degree when the photon moves a distance equal to its wavelength. Since there are two surfaces that reflect the photon then the amplitude vector of the glass reflection is defined by summing up the amplitude vectors from both surfaces of the glass. Here, we need to add one more rule; we have to advance the amplitude vector of the front surface by 180 degree. The probability of the glass reflection is defined by the square of its amplitude vector. Based on this mathematical definition the value of the amplitude vector from each surface is 0.2, and the thickness of the glass causes the angle between their amplitude vectors to be between 0 and 360 degrees, and that makes the value of the summed up amplitude vector to range between 0.0 and 0.4, and that makes the probability of light reflection from both surfaces of the glass to range between 0.0 and 0.16 (0% and 16%), and this is exactly the result that we get from the experiments. As you see this mathematical structure expresses exactly the result of the experiment, and nothing more, and there is absolutely no insight regarding the mechanism of light interactions between the two surfaces of the glass.

People have interjected that QED theory is weird. This is an inaccurate statement, on contrary QED theory is a well-structured mathematical model, these are the phenomena of nature at atomic and sub-atomic level that they are beyond our comprehension, and they look weird to us.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

QED's "all path argument" for mirror reflection is false

QED theory has used the amplitude vector model trying to explain the optic law of reflection for mirror reflection. The optic law of reflection states that "the incident ray, the reflected ray, and the normal to the surface of the mirror all lie in the same plane. Furthermore, the angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence". This optic law is correct for each and every one of the photons in the incoming and the reflected images. The consistency of these reflections causes the reflected image to look exactly like the flipped image of the incoming image.

To explain the mirror reflection with amplitude vector tool, QED has devised "all path argument". QED theory says every photon is reflected from the entire surface of the mirror, and we need to add up all the amplitude vectors from all these paths to get to the final amplitude vector for the photon's reflection. Summing up the amplitude vectors from entire surface of the mirror shows the amplitude vectors from the edges of the mirror they mostly cancel each other out, only the amplitude vectors from the paths which are close to the path of the optic law contribute significant value to the summation of the amplitude vectors. In this analysis QED "all path argument" identifies the path that matches with the path that optic law of reflection provides. So, QED's "all path argument" is credited as another evidence in validity of the amplitude vector model.

There are many serious problems with QED "all path argument":

If we assume that "all path argument" is correct, then that makes the probability of reflection from EACH PATH to be 1 (100%), (because in mirror reflection photon is reflected with 100% certainty, versus the glass reflection that there was a small probability for reflection), and that makes the value of its amplitude vector to be 1. You know, we cannot sum up the amplitude vectors of these paths, because we cannot have probability more than 100%.

As I mentioned before one of the components of the optic law of reflection is the angle of incident; that is the angle that identifies the direction and the point that photon hits to the surface of the mirror. In QED "all path argument" there is no consideration for this angle of incident, so, it does not matter with what angle of incidence the incoming photon hits to the surface of the mirror, the summation of the amplitude vectors produces exactly the same result for any of the incoming photons regardless of their angles of incidents, and they all are directed toward the photon-multiplier which it is conveniently placed at the location that it matches with the result from the optic law.

QED's "all path argument" also has no consideration for the angle of reflection either, no matter where you place the receiving photon-multiplier it gets a valid value for the summation of its amplitude vectors. Even if we put multiple photon-multipliers on the receiving side, each one of them does get a valid summation for its related amplitude vectors. So, QED's "all path argument" generates a summation of amplitude vectors that it does not relate to anything that are dictated by the optic law of reflection. Since "all path argument" covers all paths whatsoever, then naturally that includes the path which matches with the optic law of reflection, without identifying it exclusively.

As I explained, in the case of the reflection from both surfaces of glass, the amplitude vectors model perfectly resembled the anatomy of the underlying experiment, but QED's "all path argument" does not resemble to anything that the optic law of reflection states, not even close! How can anybody possibly claim that "all path argument" has properly analyzed the Optic Law of Reflection? QED's "all path argument" is just a false argument.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Paradox of the reflected images from mirrors

We all have seen the reflection of images from the surfaces of calm water, or from a window, or from a mirror. The reflected images from these smooth and flat surfaces are flipped images of the incoming images that are hitting these surfaces. As I mentioned earlier the optic law of reflection states that "the incident ray, the reflected ray, and the normal to the surface of the mirror all lie in the same plane. Furthermore, the angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence". This optic law is correct for each and every one of the photons in the incoming and the reflected images. The consistency of these reflections causes the reflected image to look exactly like the flipped image of the incoming image.

Quantum Electrodynamics theory (QED) tries to answer the mechanics of the mirror reflection at atomic level. When a single photon hits to the surface of a mirror QED theory says it most likely the photon gets absorbed by an electron, and this energized electron moves to a shell with a higher energy, and when this energized electron emits a photon, it moves back to its equilibrium shell. In fact the emitted photon is not the same photon that hit the surface of the mirror. QED gives a statistical model for this emission that it is based on the uncertainty rule, in this statistical model the photon gets emitted in many possible directions. QED formed this model based on the results from numerous experiments. As you see the statistical direction of the emitted photon that QED's patterns offers is very different from the direction that Optic Law of reflection dictates, which the photon is reflected in a very specific direction with an absolute certainty. In fact the direction that Optic Law of reflection provides annihilates QED's statistical model. And if the reflected photons get dispersed in all those directions as QED model suggests, the reflected images from the surface of a mirror could not be recognizable at all. I have called this difference between QED's statistical model and the Optic Law of reflection the paradox of light reflection.

To resolve this paradox QED resorts to the "all paths argument". In previous section I proved the falsehood of the "all paths argument". It is not good trying to deceive ourselves with a phony argument, that destroys the integrity of our scientific methods. As you see QED theory has no clue what is going on at mirror reflection. The deceptive argument has distracted us from learning something fundamental at the heart of the mirror reflection.

From emitting electrons we have formed our QED's statistical model, but the mirror reflection defies QED's statistical model, and it reflects the incoming photon in a specific direction with an absolute certainty. I do NOT think that the emitting electron possesses the cognition to differentiate between these two very different emissions. This strange phenomenon reveals the existence of a force (an Active Agent) at the heart of the mirror reflection that it is producing this beautiful phenomenon. This force is very different from the other forces of nature that we have discovered so far, this force has cognitive characteristic, he acts consciously, his action is deliberate and it serves a purpose, simply he is the creator of this phenomenon, and without his influence mirror reflection images cease to exist, and the reflected photons from a mirror would have been a mixed up lights in all directions and without any recognizable image. This is one of the solid scientific evidence that proves the existence of God that through ages all over the world every seeker has been looking for.

As you see the mirror reflection phenomenon which looks so simple and presumably un-important, and if it did not exist probably it would have not made any difference in the processes of nature, except that it would have deprived the development of our intelligence a great deal. Similar to the activities that feed intelligence to our Conscious minds, the reflected images is another phenomenon that manifests their existence to the existence of an Intelligent Agent in the processes of nature. It seems that our rich stimulating environment have been intentionally designed in order to nurture the development of our inquisitive minds.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The existence of Multiple Symmetries in Snowflakes' Designs

This is the third phenomenon which I found out that it requires the influence of an Intelligent Agent for its manifestation.

I got the following passage on snowflake's formation from Wikipedia. "The exact details of the sticking mechanism remain controversial. Possibilities include mechanical interlocking, sintering, electrostatic attraction as well as the existence of a "sticky" liquid-like layer on the crystal surface. The individual ice crystals often have hexagonal symmetry." "Most snowflakes are not completely symmetric." "Empirical studies suggest less than 0.1% of snowflakes exhibit the ideal six-fold symmetric shape." "The most common snow particles are visibly irregular, although near-perfect snowflakes may be more common in pictures because they are more visually appealing." "A non-aggregated snowflake often exhibits six-fold radial symmetry. The initial symmetry can occur because the crystalline structure of ice is six-fold. The six "arms" of the snowflake, or dendrites, then grow independently, and each side of each arm grows independently." "Since the micro-environment (and its changes) are very nearly identical around the snowflake, each arm can grow in nearly the same way."

Snowflakes formation is a case of a well-known phenomenon that science has failed to come up with a plausible answer to explain it, and instead it has resorted to few phony and incoherent arguments to FIT the KNOWN fact! Science has attributed snowflakes' artistic symmetries to the structure of water molecules. To prove the falsehood this argument, let us briefly examine the ramification of this argument. According to this explanation the structure of the water molecules causes the frozen water molecules to form a hexagon shape foundation (diamond dust). And they claim when the new water molecules get attached to this hexagon shape foundation, they get attached to its six corners, as a result the snowflakes develop six symmetrical arms, which they grow fairly in similar shape, because the micro-atmospheric environment is very similar for all these six growing arms while they are forming.

There are many flaws in this explanation, and each one of these flaws is sufficient to discredit this explanation to its core, and I will try to explore few.

The snowflakes' shapes are NOT the MAGNIFICATION of the hexagon shape that water molecules bonding produces at their foundation! This is so absurd to claim the structure of a molecule to influence the shape of the structures at the visible level. The microscopic hexagon shape at the foundation is too tiny that they could influence the shape at the macroscopic level.

To show you the validity of these statements, first I look at that hexagon shape at the foundation of a snowflake when one billion water molecules are attached to each of its arms. Then, let us look at a tiny piece of snow at the center of any snowflake, this observable tiny speck of snow, which it does not show any symmetry, within it contains many billion times of that "six billion molecules hexagon shape structure", and all those "six billion molecules hexagon shape structures" are buried within this tiny speck of snow at the center of the snowflake, without showing any trace of any hexagon shape symmetries whatsoever! As you see science has offered us a bogus argument, that it does not make any sense!

Let us focus on a small section of a snowflake's arm, let's assume the thickness of this arm is around .5 mm, and this section of arm is around 1 mm wide, and only 2 mm in length. In this little candy bar shape of the snowflake's arm there are more than 10 to the power 17 (10^17) water molecules. These water molecules have been attached to each other in various directions that they are measurable in all three axes. Just in this little candy bar shape of the snowflake's arm there might be billions and billions of hexagon shapes water molecules structures (diamond dust). As you see the hexagon shapes bonding at the foundation has not affected the shape of this candy bar shape at all. The hexagon shape of water molecules bonding at atomic level is too insignificant that they could influence the developing shape of the snowflake at our visible level.

Claiming that the hexagon shape of water molecules bonding at the snowflake's foundation is the cause of various symmetries in the snowflakes' designs, is similar that we claim that the structure of the paint molecules produced Mona Lisa! I doubt it that anybody would even consider such possibility.

Science has failed to come up with any plausible argument for the multiple symmetrical designs of the snowflakes, so it has resorted to the bogus argument that the structure of the water molecules must have had something to do with it! Since in the development of the snowflakes the "randomness" is name of the game, and water molecules are too small to influence the shape of the developing snowflake, then the emergence of any SYMMETRICAL pattern should be totally an unexpected outcome!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Let us still explore snowflakes' symmetrical designs from another angel. Let us safely assume there are 10,000 different shapes of snowflakes' arms. Since a non-aggregate snowflake exhibits six arms, and each arm is developing independently, then for the snowflakes' shape we could end up with the possibility of 10,000 to the power six snowflake shapes (10,000^6), or 10 to the power of 24 (10^24) shapes. This is one snowflake in every 10^24 snowflakes would have the ideal six-fold symmetrical shape. But rough empirical counting indicates that one in every 1000 snowflakes has the ideal six-fold symmetrical shape, then there has to be a force that it is influencing the development of the snowflake's shapes, favoring the development of the ideal six-fold symmetrical shapes. This increases the probability of forming the ideal six-fold from one in every 10^24, to one in every 1000; this increases the possibility of forming the ideal six-fold shape by a factor of 10^21. And this is a huge dominating factor that we cannot ignore it! The evidence of the existence of this force who is favoring the development of the ideal six-fold snowflakes is overwhelmingly clear.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Let us still examine snowflakes' symmetrical designs from another perspective. Time lapse development of the snowflakes shows some part of snowflakes develop first and the rest of the snowflake develops gradually later, and somehow the rest of the snowflake mysteriously continue to follow the pattern of the grown arm! We expect that micro-atmospheric condition should be changing in the interval. Then absolutely there is no justification that a developing arm to follow the design of any other arm in its development. Actually the numerous possibilities in the designs should make any similarity of the arms a very rare occasion, and certainly not the norm!

In the development of the identical twins babies, their identical genes causes their identical shapes, but in snowflake developments there is no gene to force the developing arm to acquire the same shape. This strange phenomenon forces us to recognize the existence a force in the fabric of the nature, who deliberately and intelligently, introduces multiple symmetries in various parts of each snowflake structure.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The thickness of the snowflake structures shows that vapor water molecules get bonded to the snowflakes' core structure in all three directions of x, y and z axes. Snowflakes' thickness is the result of many trillions of water molecules piled up on top of each other. The Snowflakes thickness is fairly uniform, and this produces two fairly flat surfaces. Since vapor water molecules are present everywhere, and they do get attached to snowflakes' structures in all three directions of x, y, and z, then there is no reason that two surfaces of the snowflakes to remain flat. And this is another indication of the influence of the Intelligent Agent at work in this process.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Let us analyze the development of a snowflake from another angel. Time lapse photography of snowflake shows different stages of a snowflake development. Let us focus on one of the developing arm which already has grown half way. Let us vision four little imaginary rings on this newly developing arm, and name them a, b, c, and d in a row, and let each of these rings to be one half of one millimeter apart from their adjacent ring. We know these four rings are flattened in the middle; at 90 degree and 270 degree. Let us name the left edge of these rings by a1, b1, c1, and d1. And their right edges by a3, b3, c3, and d3. And name their mid points (at 90 degree and 270 degree) by a2, b2, c2, d2 and a4, b4, c4, d4 respectively.

As the snowflakes swinging and falling down toward the earth each second the condition of the micro-environment might be changing. Because our marked points on the arm are very close together then the changes in atmosphere are affecting our marked points more or less the same way. At this situation the shape of water molecules have no impact on the shape of the developing arm; water molecules attach themselves to the growing arm without any preference, for the water molecules the bonding at a1, b1, c1, d1 are very similar to each other, and bonding at a2, b2, c2, d2 are very similar too, and so on and so forth. Of course because of the difference of the shape of the ring at point a1 and point a2 the rate of water molecule bonding at these points might be slightly different from each other, but the condition at points a1, b1, c1, d1 which all are located at the left edge of the arm are virtually the same, and they are very close together. It makes no sense that the rate of growth at point a1 be twice, or three times, or ten times of the rate of growth at point b1, or point c1, or point d1, or vice versa. But still one might argue that being one half of one millimeter apart in their positions does affect the bonding of new water molecules at those points. To flatly reject this picky criticism, I would say if being one half of one millimeter apart in the position on the arm can affect that much change in the rate of the bonding of water molecules, then for sure I expect to see far more drastic differences in the rates of growth of the similar points on the other arms of the snowflakes which are much further apart! As the empirical count shows 0.01% of snowflakes all six arms grow more or less in similar pattern! As I argued before the production of these ideal six-fold symmetric shapes with this abundance goes far beyond of the probability of random growth. These arms grow as if they are carrying the same gene, but another snowflake which is developing nearby in the same micro-atmospheric condition its arms are developing in a very different pattern, as if it is carrying a totally different gene! As far as our science is concerned absolutely there is no mechanism to coordinate or to harmonize the growth of these arms in the developing snowflake. The possibility that each arm can grow in various different shapes, but actually they do not, this process defies the scientific idea of the statistical randomness to its core.

Water molecules which come to contact with these surfaces they get attached to the developing snowflakes' structure. Maybe the micro-environment conditions at a1, a2, a3, and a4 differ from each other, because they are located at different sides of the arm, but I do not see any major factor that could influence the water molecules to favor any of these spots consistently for the duration of their development, since the snowflake is falling and the direction of its arms are constantly changing. This strange behavior defies the randomness nature of this process.

All

Scientifically most snowflakes do not have a perfect symmetry, but as far as our artistic point of view is concern their symmetrical shapes are pleasing to our eyes, an object of beauty with tremendous appeals. Their symmetries have been a source of enormous inspiration in our art and in our taste of design. Confidently I can claim their symmetrical beauties have been nurturing our intelligence and they have been contributing to our inspirational intellects. So, their beauty should not be considered just a random act of nature, it is much more than that, it is a channel guiding us and educating us to the existence of the Active Agent deep within the fabric of the nature who consciously, deliberately, and intentionally is empowering the growth of our intelligence with such clarity and awareness!

Even though the ancient man from very early stages of his intelligence was inspired to recognize the existence of this mysterious force who was influencing his environment and his life, but our advanced scientific discoveries were needed to confirm the validity of those early confusing assessments! And for us science has been and it is our best arbitrator.

This conclusion also confirms the existence of panpsychicism and synchronicity phenomena that some psychologists and philosophers have discovered them through their rational thoughts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfevXVQSaNU&index=16&list=PL-yth3DXLxrQl4BSptPEOhj-ejg4sV0CR

With unimaginable successes that our science has produced our amazing technologies it is hard to stand up and challenge our science for being faulty and wrong. I hope that you focus on the essence of my arguments and judge them rationally without being intimidated. I am sure with further investigations we can prove the existence of this Active Conductor in many other phenomena all around us, we only need to have keen observations in order to recognize them. And of course, we need to understand the corresponding scientific methodologies in order to be able to detect the possible influence of the Active Conductor in those processes.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

God
The Active Conductor


I think full glories of God are beyond human's imaginations. Each of us based on our individual capabilities can only grasp a very limited vision of God's glories. These individual visions of God have been tailor-made for each individual's capacities and experiences. Based on this understanding, I believe in the existence of God who is running our lives in minute details all the time.

In the past in some articles I assumed that God was the creator of this Universe, and he was a separate entity from this Universe. This is the view of Monotheism. I reached to that conclusion because no changes could be allowed within the glory of God. This made sense to me at that time. Then, I realized there was a problem with that view. If our Universe is outside the domain of God, then the existence of this Universe imposes a limitation to the domain of God, and this is unacceptable. Domain of God should encompass everything, and that includes our Universe. This is the view of Panentheism. But, still the contradiction of "the change within the domain of God" persists. To solve this problem we need to examine passage of Time for the events of this universe. For us passage of time is real and it is relativistic, our life has been entangled with the element of time, so passage of time and the changes that it produces is the main experiences of our life, but for God Time is a constant, and it does not change, God sees this Universe as a four-dimension block, past, present, and future exist simultaneously. And since for God all events are known then quantum uncertainty rule does not exist. And this conclusion is quite in harmony with our other findings.

Let me explore this view for the events of our life, and see how our common belief in God jives with this idea. The believers commonly believe that God hears and answers our prayers all the time. This common belief reveals an important insight to our perception of God. Let us explore a scenario. In near future we will send human astronauts to Mars and to the other planets in our solar system. Assume when the astronauts are exploring the surface of Mars one of their computer malfunctions and put their lives at risk. They immediately report the problem to earth and ask for help. At the same time they pray to God for help.

We commonly believe that God is with us all the time, then God knows of this incident right away, but how he answers our pray, this is not our focus at this point, but we will get that answer as a natural outcome for this analysis. It depends to the positions of Earth and Mars, it takes the signal from Mars to reach to Earth between 3 to 22 minutes. So, the mission control on earth will receive the information between 3 to 22 minutes in the future, but God who is present at the mission control already knows about the future signals in advance. So, as a believer we have to conclude, at least in this scenario, God knows the future before we do.

This scenario also reveals another fact, that God gets all the information instantly, and the distance in space is not a barrier for God. So, a supernova which exploded seven billion years ago, and we will receive that signal let's say ten years from now, but God already knows of that information at present time. This scenario reveals for God the past information and the future information is present simultaneously at present time. For God the presence of the simultaneous information at all time means that God has instant knowledge of every photon at all time. Then, this Universe becomes a four dimensional block of events that it is present to God simultaneously without any change for the passage of time. In this four dimensional block Universe all events are strictly under certainty rule, and all the quantum probabilistic events which are puzzling our grasp of the underneath mechanics of the events vanishes altogether! Since this vision of universe at domain of God is a fixed structure and it does not evolve at all, then we can consider this universe as part of God, or a project of God that exists within his domain. But, for us and all material things in this four dimensional block universe we do experience the passage of time and the limitation of the uncertainty rule.

So, in this picture that every event is already established with absolute certainty, our Free Will for our physical body is absolutely out of question. In order that our Free Will to have any validity at all, we need to associate an individual soul which it is not energy based, and somehow it is connected to our physical body, but it cannot influence the conducts of our physical body. Our soul responds spiritually to the experiences of our physical body, and our Free Will boils down to the nature of these spiritual reflections. This is like we are watching a movie which we cannot control or influence anything, we only can form some thoughts and emotions about the content of the movie, and that is all. In processes of our life maybe our soul is learning something.

I hope you could tolerate the shortcoming of my writing.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The material of this site may be reproduced in any medium, without applying for permission. (Provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/ copyright information.)

Moses Story is just a self-evidenced Fiction and a Hoax

God and Reason

A list of 100 flaws in Quran

Bahaullah's Claims

Christianity in Crisis

Adam and Eve Story of Paradise

Ancient Jewish Communities

Jesus Life and His Beliefs

Jesus Message and Jesus Miracles

Jesus and Judas Plan

Jesus Resurrection

Jesus Movement after Jesus Crucifixion

Apostle Paul and Brotherhood Communities

Destruction of the Jewish Temple and Start of Christianity

Paul's Vision on the Road to Damascus

Flaw in QED "all path argument"

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


The following links are some discussions that I had in few forums.

Religious Education / Abrahamic Religions / God and Reason

Lisa Shea Forum / Religious Research / Why do I believe in God?

Gods, Heroes, and Myth Forum / Other Mythologies / Faulty Religious Myths can not take us far

http://www.religiousforums.com/search/11487398/?page=2

Religious Education / Abrahamic Religions / Jesus Body

Religious Education / Abrahamic Religions / How far is Heaven?

Religious Education / Abrahamic Religions / Does Jesus have any limitation?

Cygnus' Study "Evolution/Creation" Evolution is part of the Creation

Backpage.com Forums / Religion & Philosophy / Civility


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Persian Translation

E-mail:

Unes Gollestani
UnesGo@Yahoo.com

Unes