<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What existed before the Big Bang?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/</link>
	<description>The Shortest Distance Between You and Science</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:16:34 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3560</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:09:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3560</guid>
		<description>For those of you who are pure physicists and mathemeticians, I suggest you study the workings of DNA and RNA. Those who lack this biochemical knowledge are sorely at a disadvantage in considering cosmological/physical questions. You will immediately understand that these codes could not have come about by chance. DNA and RNA are proof of creation. Studying biochemistry as a Zoo major is what flipped me from agnostic to creationist. What is impossible to grasp is the nature of the creator. Where did HE come from, and how? And when? The Creator is as impossible to understand as the concept of the Big Bang, or what came before the Big Bang. They are equally untenable concepts. However, knowledge of the workings of DNA and RNA prove creation, so I choose to believe in it. Our thoughts on these matters are nothing more than a choice of belief. I choose belief in Creation because I understand how RNA and DNA work. I choose Christianity because I read the New Testament, and bought it. Not being the Creator is extraordinarily vexing to me, because there is no way to understand the &#039;Why&quot; previously referenced. If God and the humans are all that matters, why have the inconceivably vast Universe? Very perplexing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those of you who are pure physicists and mathemeticians, I suggest you study the workings of DNA and RNA. Those who lack this biochemical knowledge are sorely at a disadvantage in considering cosmological/physical questions. You will immediately understand that these codes could not have come about by chance. DNA and RNA are proof of creation. Studying biochemistry as a Zoo major is what flipped me from agnostic to creationist. What is impossible to grasp is the nature of the creator. Where did HE come from, and how? And when? The Creator is as impossible to understand as the concept of the Big Bang, or what came before the Big Bang. They are equally untenable concepts. However, knowledge of the workings of DNA and RNA prove creation, so I choose to believe in it. Our thoughts on these matters are nothing more than a choice of belief. I choose belief in Creation because I understand how RNA and DNA work. I choose Christianity because I read the New Testament, and bought it. Not being the Creator is extraordinarily vexing to me, because there is no way to understand the &#8216;Why&#8221; previously referenced. If God and the humans are all that matters, why have the inconceivably vast Universe? Very perplexing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christion</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3398</link>
		<dc:creator>Christion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3398</guid>
		<description>To me, I see things different,very different! How can a Rolex watch be created from a big bang? Think about it, our solar system is as, or more complex than a Rolex watch right! My thinking on all this is tha someone, something, or something else created our solar system. I am sure the universe did not create itself, nothing comes from nothing! Remember, Einstein told us so!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To me, I see things different,very different! How can a Rolex watch be created from a big bang? Think about it, our solar system is as, or more complex than a Rolex watch right! My thinking on all this is tha someone, something, or something else created our solar system. I am sure the universe did not create itself, nothing comes from nothing! Remember, Einstein told us so!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Satviewer</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3362</link>
		<dc:creator>Satviewer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3362</guid>
		<description>What was there before the Big Bang and the creation of &quot;our&quot; Universe? Our Universe is but an infant at under 20 billion years old. The &quot;Omniverse&quot;, the infinite space which holds our Universe has existed for longer than our wildest imaginations. During a virtually infinite amount of time, trillions upon trillions of Universes have come into existence, grown old, and eventually died. The reason our Universe is not entirely symmetrical is likely because it is expanding into the remnants of old and dead universe(s). Dark Matter may simply be material left over from old and dead universe(s), which is why our technology is unable to analyse and define it. Dark matter exerts gravitational force (the constant force in all dimensions and throughout the Omniverse), but our instruments are not designed to analyse the matter of other universe(s). Our Universe will eventually die and join the remnants of other Universes. New Universes are continually being created within the Omniverse. If we can one day see far enough, beyond the borders of our own Universe, perhaps we will be able to see light from another Universe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What was there before the Big Bang and the creation of &#8220;our&#8221; Universe? Our Universe is but an infant at under 20 billion years old. The &#8220;Omniverse&#8221;, the infinite space which holds our Universe has existed for longer than our wildest imaginations. During a virtually infinite amount of time, trillions upon trillions of Universes have come into existence, grown old, and eventually died. The reason our Universe is not entirely symmetrical is likely because it is expanding into the remnants of old and dead universe(s). Dark Matter may simply be material left over from old and dead universe(s), which is why our technology is unable to analyse and define it. Dark matter exerts gravitational force (the constant force in all dimensions and throughout the Omniverse), but our instruments are not designed to analyse the matter of other universe(s). Our Universe will eventually die and join the remnants of other Universes. New Universes are continually being created within the Omniverse. If we can one day see far enough, beyond the borders of our own Universe, perhaps we will be able to see light from another Universe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wayhuck</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3290</link>
		<dc:creator>wayhuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3290</guid>
		<description>Everything are created by God.
Don&#039;t believe it?
Here&#039;s the explanation:
If the Universe will expand and collapse over and over again, what started it? God.

If the Universe will expand forever, who started it? God.

Out anything you can think of, or something in something inside of something...There must be a beginning. And that beginning can only be one. God created us all.

It doesn&#039;t matter if we deny or accept, this is the fact which scientists doesn&#039;t want to accept.
We can explore, but we&#039;ll still be exploring the creation of God.

We simply cannot deny it. Denying it means denying ourselves. What created our conciousness?
Why are we able to think, reason and see things?
Where does our conciousness came from?

We&#039;re created by God, yet some or many of us doesn&#039;t believe in God. It&#039;s time we wake up. Science is something that God gave to us as a present. We can&#039;t deny this fact.

What we are trying to do is to use this science, to explore creation of God, to try to see what&#039;s before big bang. It&#039;s just a waste of time.
By the way, time are also created.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everything are created by God.<br />
Don&#8217;t believe it?<br />
Here&#8217;s the explanation:<br />
If the Universe will expand and collapse over and over again, what started it? God.</p>
<p>If the Universe will expand forever, who started it? God.</p>
<p>Out anything you can think of, or something in something inside of something&#8230;There must be a beginning. And that beginning can only be one. God created us all.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t matter if we deny or accept, this is the fact which scientists doesn&#8217;t want to accept.<br />
We can explore, but we&#8217;ll still be exploring the creation of God.</p>
<p>We simply cannot deny it. Denying it means denying ourselves. What created our conciousness?<br />
Why are we able to think, reason and see things?<br />
Where does our conciousness came from?</p>
<p>We&#8217;re created by God, yet some or many of us doesn&#8217;t believe in God. It&#8217;s time we wake up. Science is something that God gave to us as a present. We can&#8217;t deny this fact.</p>
<p>What we are trying to do is to use this science, to explore creation of God, to try to see what&#8217;s before big bang. It&#8217;s just a waste of time.<br />
By the way, time are also created.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kaetalist</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3284</link>
		<dc:creator>kaetalist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 01:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3284</guid>
		<description>&quot;Einstein&#039;s believed that, &quot;as he progressed towards E=MC2, he would come closer to God&quot;. Unfortunately towards the end of his life this caused him great disappointment, as he felt that this had not been realized. But philosophically his disappointment was unfounded, as he had in fact, explained existence. 

Mathematics exists to measure the material world, so I have always been surprised that mathematicians and physicists expect to find answers to questions, where measurement is no longer possible. How can you expect to measure what came before the Big Bang, where matter as we know it no longer exist. All the fanciful mathematical extrapolations to form wilder and wilder guesses really has to stop. E=MC2 is the explanation of the existence. The Unified Theory had been found by Einstein, but unfortunately he had not discovered it&quot;. 

This maybe the answer to existence, but to understand what came before the Big Bang only has one possible explaination and that is to understand where the mass of the universe originated. 

As mass accelerates towards the speed of light it becomes energy. This explains the relationship between energy and matter in the known Universe; however, to satisfy the law of conservation of energy, (that energy is a constant)there must also be an equal and opposite force - so; A=//=E=mc^2 where A = anti-energy/matter and =//= is subspace. It is called Equilibrium Theory and this explains Infinity and therefore where life itself originated. (This equation and intellectual property is copyright)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Einstein&#8217;s believed that, &#8220;as he progressed towards E=MC2, he would come closer to God&#8221;. Unfortunately towards the end of his life this caused him great disappointment, as he felt that this had not been realized. But philosophically his disappointment was unfounded, as he had in fact, explained existence. </p>
<p>Mathematics exists to measure the material world, so I have always been surprised that mathematicians and physicists expect to find answers to questions, where measurement is no longer possible. How can you expect to measure what came before the Big Bang, where matter as we know it no longer exist. All the fanciful mathematical extrapolations to form wilder and wilder guesses really has to stop. E=MC2 is the explanation of the existence. The Unified Theory had been found by Einstein, but unfortunately he had not discovered it&#8221;. </p>
<p>This maybe the answer to existence, but to understand what came before the Big Bang only has one possible explaination and that is to understand where the mass of the universe originated. </p>
<p>As mass accelerates towards the speed of light it becomes energy. This explains the relationship between energy and matter in the known Universe; however, to satisfy the law of conservation of energy, (that energy is a constant)there must also be an equal and opposite force &#8211; so; A=//=E=mc^2 where A = anti-energy/matter and =//= is subspace. It is called Equilibrium Theory and this explains Infinity and therefore where life itself originated. (This equation and intellectual property is copyright)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3271</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:42:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3271</guid>
		<description>It interests me that people will subscribe to the Big Bang Theory in all it’s fanciful, scientific, theoretical glory; yet dismiss the idea of a supreme, omnipotent being without a moment’s thought.

Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful [the Babel fish] could have evolved by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
     The argument goes something like this: &quot;I refuse to prove that I exist,&quot; says God, &quot;for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.&quot;
     &quot;But,&quot; says Man, &quot;the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn&#039;t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don&#039;t. QED&quot;
     &quot;Oh dear,&quot; says God, &quot;I hadn&#039;t thought of that,&quot; and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
-- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker&#039;s Guide to the Galaxy (book one of the Hitch Hiker&#039;s Guide to the Galaxy series), p 50</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It interests me that people will subscribe to the Big Bang Theory in all it’s fanciful, scientific, theoretical glory; yet dismiss the idea of a supreme, omnipotent being without a moment’s thought.</p>
<p>Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful [the Babel fish] could have evolved by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.<br />
     The argument goes something like this: &#8220;I refuse to prove that I exist,&#8221; says God, &#8220;for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.&#8221;<br />
     &#8220;But,&#8221; says Man, &#8220;the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn&#8217;t it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don&#8217;t. QED&#8221;<br />
     &#8220;Oh dear,&#8221; says God, &#8220;I hadn&#8217;t thought of that,&#8221; and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.<br />
&#8211; Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker&#8217;s Guide to the Galaxy (book one of the Hitch Hiker&#8217;s Guide to the Galaxy series), p 50</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamey Spratt</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3256</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamey Spratt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3256</guid>
		<description>It interests me that people will subscribe to the Big Bang Theory in all it&#039;s fanciful, scientific, theoretical glory; yet dismiss the idea of a supreme, omnipotent being without a moment&#039;s thought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It interests me that people will subscribe to the Big Bang Theory in all it&#8217;s fanciful, scientific, theoretical glory; yet dismiss the idea of a supreme, omnipotent being without a moment&#8217;s thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kaetakist</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3157</link>
		<dc:creator>kaetakist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:23:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3157</guid>
		<description>The Big Bang happened, hopefully that is unquestionable. 
So there can only be two theories: 

1) God is supernatural and was the only thing before the Big Bang and he/she made existence. This is called Creation Theory. This idea has been adopted in the form of different religious beliefs for thousands of years to explain aspect of life which have been difficult to understand. 

2) Existence is infinite. This is called Recreation Theory. This idea is being adopted to explain existence through our increasing understanding of the laws of nature. 

So which is right? 

Creation Theory has two insurmountable difficulties: 

A) If God made the universe he/she cannot exist in it. This is because, if one makes a thing, by definition, one cannot be that thing. Take the example of the Universe, if you fashion energy and matter into Suns, Galaxies and planets you must be outside it and cannot exist within that thing. If the Universe is what one considers existence to be, God must be outside existence. This would mean that God would have no interaction with existence. 

B) If Creation Theory is the method of creating existence, then God must have been created and who/what created he/she? 

These difficulties mean that God is outside existence if he/she made it and that there must be another explanation for who/what made he/she. 

Recreation Theory has eight definite advantages: 

A) It is based on the laws of nature. Everything that exists in the Universe recreates, energy, matter, people, plants, rocks and even machines, because people can reproduce them. 

B) It follows the laws of physics E=MC2 nothing can be created or destroyed, it just changes form. 

C) It explains where energy and matter come from, simply that they were always there before the Big Bang and that our Universe is part of a larger system. The chicken is the egg. 

D) If you think about yourself, how did you come into existence, sperm and egg, parts of other life your parents, which grew into another life. Trace this back through history and nothing ever died, all the way back to the Amoeba and beyond; it was just too small to see. 

E) Life itself is a function of the Universe, it is inherent within every cell, atom, element and even energy. 

F) The Big Bang was where our Universe came into being, but therefore that is not where existence started, as our Universe had parents. 

G) If you think the Universe is big, just consider for a moment billions of Universes, the Multiverse; at that scale there is no reason to try and comprehend where they came from, because it is so far from your existence. 

H) Finally and most intriguing is that the Universe is not just expanding from the Big Bang at a uniform speed, it is actually accelerating. This presents the exciting notion that the Universe is not a &quot;closed&quot; system, it is an &quot;Open Universe&quot; still taking in light and matter from the Multiverse, as we would eat and drink and that Black Holes are our Universe&#039;s &quot;tail pipe&quot;. 

This is what came before the Big Bang; the Universe made man in it&#039;s own image, what comes next, is up to you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Big Bang happened, hopefully that is unquestionable.<br />
So there can only be two theories: </p>
<p>1) God is supernatural and was the only thing before the Big Bang and he/she made existence. This is called Creation Theory. This idea has been adopted in the form of different religious beliefs for thousands of years to explain aspect of life which have been difficult to understand. </p>
<p>2) Existence is infinite. This is called Recreation Theory. This idea is being adopted to explain existence through our increasing understanding of the laws of nature. </p>
<p>So which is right? </p>
<p>Creation Theory has two insurmountable difficulties: </p>
<p>A) If God made the universe he/she cannot exist in it. This is because, if one makes a thing, by definition, one cannot be that thing. Take the example of the Universe, if you fashion energy and matter into Suns, Galaxies and planets you must be outside it and cannot exist within that thing. If the Universe is what one considers existence to be, God must be outside existence. This would mean that God would have no interaction with existence. </p>
<p>B) If Creation Theory is the method of creating existence, then God must have been created and who/what created he/she? </p>
<p>These difficulties mean that God is outside existence if he/she made it and that there must be another explanation for who/what made he/she. </p>
<p>Recreation Theory has eight definite advantages: </p>
<p>A) It is based on the laws of nature. Everything that exists in the Universe recreates, energy, matter, people, plants, rocks and even machines, because people can reproduce them. </p>
<p>B) It follows the laws of physics E=MC2 nothing can be created or destroyed, it just changes form. </p>
<p>C) It explains where energy and matter come from, simply that they were always there before the Big Bang and that our Universe is part of a larger system. The chicken is the egg. </p>
<p>D) If you think about yourself, how did you come into existence, sperm and egg, parts of other life your parents, which grew into another life. Trace this back through history and nothing ever died, all the way back to the Amoeba and beyond; it was just too small to see. </p>
<p>E) Life itself is a function of the Universe, it is inherent within every cell, atom, element and even energy. </p>
<p>F) The Big Bang was where our Universe came into being, but therefore that is not where existence started, as our Universe had parents. </p>
<p>G) If you think the Universe is big, just consider for a moment billions of Universes, the Multiverse; at that scale there is no reason to try and comprehend where they came from, because it is so far from your existence. </p>
<p>H) Finally and most intriguing is that the Universe is not just expanding from the Big Bang at a uniform speed, it is actually accelerating. This presents the exciting notion that the Universe is not a &#8220;closed&#8221; system, it is an &#8220;Open Universe&#8221; still taking in light and matter from the Multiverse, as we would eat and drink and that Black Holes are our Universe&#8217;s &#8220;tail pipe&#8221;. </p>
<p>This is what came before the Big Bang; the Universe made man in it&#8217;s own image, what comes next, is up to you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-3091</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 22:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-3091</guid>
		<description>Ok. Back to nothing. The largest problem we have in our nature as humans is our need for explanation. We do not know what we do not know. That is very simple. The only thing we are able to do is say what is, but only in the minute capacity within which we have to see what is. We have not the right nor the omnipotence necessary to say what isn&#039;t or what cannot be. Why must we create rules that specify the actions of &#039;nothing&#039; if &#039;nothing&#039; does not exist? How can we assume that something cannot come from &#039;nothing&#039; if &#039;nothing&#039; does not
exist? In its wonderful childhood, every science takes its first few breaths as philosophy. It only becomes a science when something is proven. We ulitmately fail and will perpetually continue to fail to see that when compared to the infinite possibilities of which we can only grasp 1.0*10^-inf. percentage of, that our most advanced and &#039;proven&#039; sciences are merely philosophies and assumptions based on the limited knowledge we have aquired; we are a blip in &#039;time&#039;, our very universe is a blip in &#039;time&#039; and the theory that &#039;time&#039; even exists in some quantifiable manner is as ludicrous a concept as any known to this writer. All of that being said, do not stop thinking, theorizing and dreaming. Though it is futile it is our only hope to see outside of our infinitesimally small portion of existence.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok. Back to nothing. The largest problem we have in our nature as humans is our need for explanation. We do not know what we do not know. That is very simple. The only thing we are able to do is say what is, but only in the minute capacity within which we have to see what is. We have not the right nor the omnipotence necessary to say what isn&#8217;t or what cannot be. Why must we create rules that specify the actions of &#8216;nothing&#8217; if &#8216;nothing&#8217; does not exist? How can we assume that something cannot come from &#8216;nothing&#8217; if &#8216;nothing&#8217; does not<br />
exist? In its wonderful childhood, every science takes its first few breaths as philosophy. It only becomes a science when something is proven. We ulitmately fail and will perpetually continue to fail to see that when compared to the infinite possibilities of which we can only grasp 1.0*10^-inf. percentage of, that our most advanced and &#8216;proven&#8217; sciences are merely philosophies and assumptions based on the limited knowledge we have aquired; we are a blip in &#8216;time&#8217;, our very universe is a blip in &#8216;time&#8217; and the theory that &#8216;time&#8217; even exists in some quantifiable manner is as ludicrous a concept as any known to this writer. All of that being said, do not stop thinking, theorizing and dreaming. Though it is futile it is our only hope to see outside of our infinitesimally small portion of existence.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 2nth</title>
		<link>http://www.scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-snyder-bang/comment-page-3/#comment-2985</link>
		<dc:creator>2nth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 22:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceline.org/2006/08/21/ask-alison-bang/#comment-2985</guid>
		<description>WE NEED A MIND THAN CAN IMANGE THINGS
LIKE (TACKING A RIDE ON A BEAM OF LIGHT)
OR   ( WATCHING A CAFETERIA PLATE SPINNING AND 
       AND REALIZE THE ATOMS HAVE SPIN )
     
WE NEED ONE MIND TO TAKE A LEAP OVER THE CONVENTIONS OF SCIENCE AND CHANGE OUR UNDERSTANDING
AND OUR LIFE&#039;S  POSSIBLY .WEAR THE IMPOSSIBLE
IS ACTUALITY POSABLE . IN THEORY OF COURSE. 

ONE THOUGHT CAN CHANGE THE WORLD!!
TO USE OWEN FRAISE
OK &quot; Do you get it now guys ? &quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WE NEED A MIND THAN CAN IMANGE THINGS<br />
LIKE (TACKING A RIDE ON A BEAM OF LIGHT)<br />
OR   ( WATCHING A CAFETERIA PLATE SPINNING AND<br />
       AND REALIZE THE ATOMS HAVE SPIN )</p>
<p>WE NEED ONE MIND TO TAKE A LEAP OVER THE CONVENTIONS OF SCIENCE AND CHANGE OUR UNDERSTANDING<br />
AND OUR LIFE&#8217;S  POSSIBLY .WEAR THE IMPOSSIBLE<br />
IS ACTUALITY POSABLE . IN THEORY OF COURSE. </p>
<p>ONE THOUGHT CAN CHANGE THE WORLD!!<br />
TO USE OWEN FRAISE<br />
OK &#8221; Do you get it now guys ? &#8220;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
