We are able to identify the particles that make up atoms- so what makes up those particles? I believe that when we look at the world on this level, we are getting closer and closer to finding out about how the Universe has been put together by God. Are we actually getting close to God when we study these things?

asked 06 Dec '09, 11:04

Jaianniah's gravatar image


My short answer would be yes.

At a certain level, explaining the physical world requires stepping beyond it. An expanded perspective is required to see the 'forest for the trees'. A proper understanding of the effects eventually requires a look at the cause.

You mention an interesting point. In that, studying how various physical things are operating can give us a glimpse into the mind which crafted them. An artist is known through his art. A writer through his words. For example, there are people who believe that we are here purely to lick God's boots - I have reason to believe that is not what God wants - and if God did, it would have created quite a different universe.

Some of the above answers - seem to have missed the mark and gone into rants about how science cannot ever accept or provide evidence for the 'spiritual'. As someone who is studying science at university currently - with great interest in scientific subjects I almost take offense at it. (almost)

Science has no say in the matter. It is heading that way - and will continue to because it reaches for truth. Regardless of the resistance from some of those studying it. Whether it will ever be able to actually explain, is another matter. But the question was, are we getting closer to it...not will we be able to explain it, or reach full understanding - and the answer to that is an emphatic yes!

Frankly, like with many things, those who disagree bang their pans louder than those who agree, creating an illusion that there are more who disagree...and even more frank - most of those doing the banging are not even scientists, but the general population who holds the science they do not study deeply as their guiding beacon of light!

Also, old people die - the younger ones embracing and taught in the new theories? Not so much. Not until they are old enough to be clinging to the currently new theories - which will then possibly be old!


answered 07 Dec '09, 09:55

Liam's gravatar image


edited 07 Dec '09, 22:49

Vesuvius's gravatar image


Our structures of knowledge & understanding seem to be exercises in limitation. There are certain rules that have to be followed.

If it is a mathematical approach you have to contain all you knowledge within the numbers 0 to 9

If it is scientific it has to conform to the scientific method and be repeatable, when in reality nothing is repeatable. There are always differences at the molecular level.

Consciousness on the other hand is different. it is not thought or language. it is more than both of those.
An answer comes to you in consciousness.
By the time you "think of this answer", you have already lost most of the information.
You can retain more of it by feeling it instead of thinking it.
When you try to explain to a colleague what you are thinking through the spoken word, once again, you lose a lot more of what you were able to quantify as thought.

Trying to capture an understanding with a scientific approach is like trying to convey the emotion of Love with a mathematical formula. But they are necessary to brige the gap between the spiritual understanding and the practical application of it in a physical three dimensional reality.


answered 06 Dec '09, 23:20

The%20Traveller's gravatar image

The Traveller

"If it is a mathematical approach you have to contain all you knowledge within the numbers 0 to 9" -- True, if you're only using grammar-school arithmetic.

(07 Dec '09, 04:36) Vesuvius

"If it is scientific it has to conform to the scientific method and be repeatable, when in reality nothing is repeatable. There are always differences at the molecular level." -- Molecular variations do not affect the results of many scientific experiments at all. The result of such experiments is absolutely repeatable. If the result is not repeatable, the hypothesis that the experiment is based on is discarded, and a new hypothesis is formulated that can be adequately explained by repeatable experiments.

(07 Dec '09, 04:41) Vesuvius

About the grammar school arithmetic, I believe the world must have been created based on simple numberic concepts, thus the philosophy of numerology. At first we had the void (0) becoming aware of its existence (1). This means we now have an observer which introduces the concept of separateness, thus duality (2) which tries to resolve into unity (1) again, building a trinity (3) ... and so on. We also see that nature is based on simple structures like the Fibonacci sequence which every child can calculate, but which is all that is needed to grow beautiful complex stuff.

(07 Dec '09, 05:52) herzmeister

Vesuvius your point is well taken. my answer doesn't exactly capture the area that I'm focusing on. I'm trying to convey that we are using structures that originated in the mind as the tools for understanding the phenomenon that gave birth to the very structure. the world around us is dead when observed from the outside looking in. Especially when seen through a structure of understanding. but the same world speaks to us and guides us according to what we need to know, when the observation is free from logic & reason and inspiration is allowed a chance.

(07 Dec '09, 06:05) The Traveller
showing 2 of 4 show 2 more comments

They may, but they most probably won't openly admit. ;-)

But what drives scientists is at last the will to explain everything. Should they encounter the answer "God", they most probably won't be satisfied by that and continue searching for a more rational answer.

There were times when scientists thought they almost got everything, but then they suddenly hit much more crazy stuff: theory of relativity, and quantum theory, which don't go together at all, hence string theory was born, others have a theory of a fractal structure of universes within universes, and so on.

Maybe God always keeps us giving more toys to play with, just when we have yet again come close enough to the possible limits, who knows? ;-)


answered 07 Dec '09, 06:26

herzmeister's gravatar image


When science found out that light is sometimes particles of matter and sometimes waves of energy, I said when I read that "Science just found The Word!" I was stunned at this where energy becomes matter! In other words vibration solidified into the physical, when we speak we send out sound vibrations when we think we send out thought vibrations. I find this pretty interesting that "In The Beginning" God spoke everything in the universe into existence. The more we study science the more we find this beginning is now constantly all matter created from vibration now.

There is a story from my mystery school of a scientist and a metaphysician.

The scientist and the metaphysician agree to meet and talk, both sides have their own followers that were kind of their cheering team. Both sides thought they were going to make fools of the other side. The scientist and the metaphysician meet and they go into a tent together to talk, this last hours, and both sides feel sure it would be their side that wins this. Finely after hours they come out of the tent together. The metaphysician says "everything I see, he knows." then the scientist said "everything I know, he sees." Both sides cheered it was a victory for both sides as they realized they were not opposed at all but instead have been looking at the same things from two perspectives.


answered 08 Dec '09, 00:37

Wade%20Casaldi's gravatar image

Wade Casaldi

I think yes and the Large Hardron Collider near Geneva will open our eyes a little.


answered 08 Dec '09, 15:10

Andrew%202's gravatar image

Andrew 2

Nope, we aren't getting closer to anything because we study or learn. That's the same as saying that something that doesn't learn can't evolve. As long as there is time things will evolve and move. That's just how it is.

This question then could easily lead to another question: is the future already written?

I don't know, but if it is then the answer to the first question is "no" again. In a pre-determined future nothing we do can change it, just like we can't change the past. Not much of a point picturing this, then.

If it isn't, then we actually could think that without working our way to something, it will never happen. But "never happen" can only exist in a finite time spam.

I actually believe it's a mix of both. But I really can find no words to explain how, right now.

Anyway, sorry for deviating so much. My point here is the exact science is not getting closer to spirituality at all. Look at universities all around the world, people are not getting more spiritual than they were centuries ago.

Spirituality at other hand is, as always, following advances in science. So it's always trying to explain whatever science can't with scientific terms, and it gets more and more complicated to the point it looks the same. But it isn't. And it may never be.


answered 18 Mar '10, 21:37

Cawas's gravatar image


No, I don't think science and the spiritual world is getting closer. For the spiritual world can not be explain by scientificate explanations. Now a scientist who is involved in spiritual things can try and put a scientificate spin on it but he can not explain it. For science is all about being able to duplicate the same sequence again and again. you can not do that in the spirit world. What is spirit is spirit and what is physical is physical.

But I do think scientist are trying to learn more about the spiritual not to learn more of God but to learn more of a power or gifts to be use and malipulated into something destructive maybe. They are checking out all areas of everything now just to see is there anything to it. If someone said they could fly like superman they would check into to see how they could harness that power for other useses they would like to use it for.

Even the true healing of an individual is unexpainable if it is done through spiritual ways.

Now if you have someone who has both an spiritual mind of understanding and a scientific mind of understanding and he knows where to leave off the science and go into the metaphysical aspects of it than he can bring some understanding to what just happen but not in a scientific way than he would have to be talking to someone who has an open mind to the spiritual side of things.

You can not explain God scientifically or angels. You can not. That why God and Jesus said it is base on our faith. Jesus told the woman with the issue of blood who touch his garment. Who touch me he said and the deciples said Lord of all these people walking around in this crowded area bumping into you and you want to know who touched you. He said yes someone touched me for I felt the healing go out of me and into someone who touched me. The lady said I did my Lord and he said go for your faith has healed you for you believe if you could simpy touch the hem of my garment you would be healed and so you are.


answered 07 Dec '09, 07:53

flowingwater's gravatar image


edited 07 Dec '09, 08:01

It's a shame that there are so many people who seem to now hold science in such contempt. It was the arts and sciences that brought us out of the dark ages...from the realm of superstition and fear to the confidence and creativity of rational thought. It it that very repeatability of which you speak that makes it possible for us to rely on technology. It is what makes it possible for me to read your words, and to respond with the words you're reading. Those who are contemptuous of science simply don't understand it (because they haven't made the effort), and therefore they fear it.

(07 Dec '09, 22:57) Vesuvius

What did I say that stirred you all up Vesuvius. I am not holding scientist in contempt the question ask was did I think science and the spirit world were getting closer and I said No than I went on to explain why I thought not because scientist has to prove something is this way and than it must be able to repeated that again I feel it is not getting closer. I did not show contempt for scientist. If you are a scientist and you have read contempt in my statement than you read it wrong. I personally like proving hypothesis into facts or not. Science has it place and spirituality has it place.

(08 Dec '09, 05:16) flowingwater

You go about both of them in different ways. Science and spirituality looks at things and go about procedures differently. If someone has step on your toes Vesuvius than take a step back maybe the two of us are looking through different lens at the same picture. You are in one section and i am is in the other section seeing from two different view points and sections. Have a nice day Vesuvius.The person that funded the arts and science funded with the spirituality and superstition of that day.They were King and Queen who were responsiable for funding many of the artists, musicians.

(08 Dec '09, 05:36) flowingwater

Let me give you a example of science. I was doing a scientific experiment of making water go up hill when you pour it. I had watched someone do the experiment and I was going to duplicate it. I gathered all of my materials and try and try as I might I could not get the picture of water when poured into the glass to go up instead of down. Now I tried to duplicate the experiment and I could not for I did not have the proper equipment. Duplicating the experiment again and again proves that it is than a scienctific fact not just a hypothesis.

(08 Dec '09, 06:07) flowingwater

Thanks for your comments. I was mostly focusing on your statement about scientists' motivations for trying to understand the spiritual. Maybe you don't personally view science with hostility, but I think your statement about the misuse of power is representative of how many people do view science and scientists nowadays; they fear it because they don't understand it, and because science has become so profit-motivated and politicized today that it can be hard to see who's telling the truth.

(08 Dec '09, 17:44) Vesuvius
showing 2 of 5 show 3 more comments

science is well aware of its limitations , at some point they find themselves up against a brick wall where either they experience a ''breakthrough'' or throw their hands up and say ''only god knows''


answered 13 Dec '09, 23:18

eleanor%20sawitsky's gravatar image

eleanor sawitsky

Watching Bruce Lipton has been very exciting. Here is a video where he scientifically explains the spirit. So, yes, science has found the spirit.


answered 10 Apr '11, 16:39

Fairy%20Princess's gravatar image

Fairy Princess

With last weeks discovery of a possible "fifth force", not the God Particle (Higgs Boson), we are always moving towards new discoveries to enlighten us.

But the thing is, there is no 'end point" no prize at the bottom of the box. Only constant unfolding of this infinite universe as above so below. CNN Is it a new Particle?


answered 10 Apr '11, 17:25

you's gravatar image


Click here to create a free account

If you are seeing this message then the Inward Quest system has noticed that your web browser is behaving in an unusual way and is now blocking your active participation in this site for security reasons. As a result, among other things, you may find that you are unable to answer any questions or leave any comments. Unusual browser behavior is often caused by add-ons (ad-blocking, privacy etc) that interfere with the operation of our website. If you have installed these kinds of add-ons, we suggest you disable them for this website



Asked: 06 Dec '09, 11:04

Seen: 1,553 times

Last updated: 10 Apr '11, 17:25

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Related Questions