Your opinion: Could Raelian Cosmology be any good

[kmarinas86]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_cosmology#Raelian_Cosmology<br /><br /><font color="yellow">The International Raelian Movement (IRM), a growing quasi-religious organization, also has its own version of cosmology (proposed in 1973). This cosmology is similar to the Jain cosmology in that it proposes that the observable universe has no creator and is infinite in time and finite in size and surrounded by infinite space. One particular difference between Jain cosmology and Raelian cosmology is that Raelian cosmology puts our observable universe within a context of a greater universe that has a fractal structure. IRM's founder, Claude Vorilhon, who later became known as Rael (Raël means "messenger"), wrote several books which favor the idea that the universe is fractal in nature with the property of self-similarity. In such a fractal, there is no smallest or largest object. Instead, our observable universe is said to constitute a subatomic particle of an atom of a much larger level of lifeform. It is also stated in Rael's books that subatomic particles in our body also possess universes like our own, but on a much smaller scale, and that on each level of life, there are atoms, molecules, people, stars, galaxies, and clouds of galaxies. The author of these messages says that human beings from an extrasolar planet created Earth's human beings in their image, and futhermore, the author says that these beings, who resemble us in many ways, were able to prove to members of their planet that the universe is fractal.<br /><br />The idea is similar to that of multiverses that propose that the contents of our observable universe were generated by a greater cause. However, cosmology described in the Raelian messages, founded in 1973, does not branch from the recent cosmological theories of multiverses such as the Ekpyrotic Universe or M-theory. In a fractal universe that corresponds wit</font>

 

[kmarinas86]

Yes, you got right Crazy. Precisly even - I actually thought about a poll, but that thought reminded me of political polls so I decided not to put one up.

 

[qso1]

Kmarinas86:<br />in that it proposes that the observable universe has no creator and is infinite in time and finite in size and surrounded by infinite space...<br /><br />Me:<br />I tend to favor this explanation not so much because Rael or his organization favors it. I'm sure he's not the first to come up with it, but I guess because there has to be some way to account for what existed before the big bang. As to whether it was created, the creator would have to exist infinitely as well. I suppose this is why some believe the Universe itself is God.<br /><br />The fractal part, what would Rael have called it before the term fractal came into the language which was in 1975?<br /><br />The rest of what is stated has also been stated before and as with any theory, its only as good as the science and scientists behind it and any theory IMO regarding the origins of the Universe are far from ever being provable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[alkalin]

You may be on the tracks of truth to it all, but I think there are many yet to be revealed. An example is that if the universe has been around a long time, then there is a very likely possibility that there is a very lively crowd of superscience planets as well as much bureaucracy from them. Also to consider is that most of the universe may not be apparent to us yet. There could be a great deal of it hidden in the ‘spirit’ universe, where there is no direct contact with us. Is there just a simple plain material universe? Nah, I don’t think so. While fractals may be helpful to understand a few things, are they sufficient to bridge the gap to other universes?<br /><br />Make sure you have dotted ties and crossed your eyes.<br /><br />

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">The fractal part, what would Rael have called it before the term fractal came into the language which was in 1975?</font><br /><br />He didn't use a word that would substitute for the term "fractal." He just described it. In fact, Rael <i>never</i> used the word "fractal" in any of his messages (even in his recent 2003 book <i>Maitreya</i>). I know this because I can do a quick PDF search of all books (I have all the books in PDF - for free, so that everybody wins).

 

[qso1]

Fair enough. And as I mentioned earlier, I tend to actually agree with the portion of his statement concerning the Universe ongoing, eternal. Probably the main difference in my take on it is that I don't necessarily try to explain it in a lot of detail because IMO, will simply never know and I'm not a scientist by trade. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>