Universal Orlando 2007 Thrill Ride Guide

Universal Orlando's two world-class theme parks – Universal Studios and Universal's Islands of Adventure – each boast one-of-a-kind thrill rides such as Incredible Hulk Coaster, Dueling Dragons, The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man, Jurassic Park River Adventure, Revenge of the Mummy – The Ride and much more.

A diversity of thrill rides can be found in abundance at Universal's Islands of Adventures, which features five uniquely themed islands – Jurassic Park, The Lost Continent, Marvel Super Hero Island, Seuss Landing and Toon Lagoon. Experience classic roller coasters like Incredible Hulk Coaster, which speeds you from zero to 40 miles per hour in just two seconds aboard a "gamma ray accelerator" at Marvel Super Hero Island; and Dueling Dragons, the world's first inverted, dueling roller coasters - Ice Dragon or Fire Dragon – that reach speeds up to 55 miles per hour ("Past this point of no return, your only choice is freeze or burn!").

In addition to Incredible Hulk Coaster, Marvel Super Hero Island is home to The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man, a fascinating indoor thrill ride that features a great mix of 3-D special effects and live action as Spider-Man battles assorted villains; and Doctor Doom's Fearfall, a "free-fall thrill ride that sends you speeding 150 feet high straight into the air and then hurls you back down just as quickly.

Universal's Islands of Adventure also features several thrilling water-based rides (prepare to get soaked!) such as Popeye & Bluto's Bilge-Rat Barges, Dudley Do-Right's Ripsaw Falls and Jurassic Park River Adventure. Popeye & Bluto's Bilge-Rat Barges is a Toon Lagoon raft ride that spins you through some serious rapids as you wind your way around Me Ship, The Olive play area. The highlight of Dudley Do-Right's Ripsaw Falls, an exciting water flume ride also located in Toon Lagoon, is a 75-foot plummet down the falls. At Jurassic Park River Adventure, take an amazing boat ride as you try to escape from the Raptor Containment Area full of animatronic dinosaurs and shoot down 85 feet into the pool below.

Even though Universal's Islands of Adventure is home to all the roller coasters at Universal Orlando, several not-to-be-missed thrill rides can be found at Universal Studios as well such as Revenge of the Mummy – The Ride, a state-of-the-art "psychological" thrill ride where you must battle an army of "warrior mummies" and other obstacles as you cruise through total darkness at speeds up to 45 miles per hour. Other classic thrill rides at Universal Studios include Twister . . . Ride It Out, a live action/simulated ride based on the 1996 hit movie, and Earthquake – The Big One, which allows you to experience an earth-shattering quake complete with crashing subway cars, exploding gas trucks and collapsing ceilings.

"In addition to a great variety of thrill rides and attractions, Universal Orlando boasts three world-class hotels, numerous dining opportunities and CityWalk, a spectacular entertainment complex that features some of the hottest nightlife in Orlando," said Kyle Collins, Director of Interactive Marketing for HotelsCorp.com. "And by purchasing your tickets to Universal Studios or Universal's Islands of Adventure before you arrive in Orlando, you and your family will enjoy incredible savings on your Orlando vacation."

Note: Be sure to check height and medical restrictions that are listed at the entrance to each of the thrill rides at Universal Studios and Universal's Islands of Adventures.

What's New at Universal Orlando for 2007

Several exciting new attractions, restaurants and live entertainment venues are scheduled to open during 2007 at Universal Orlando, which features two world-class theme parks – Universal Studios and Universal's Islands of Adventure – as well as three luxurious resorts – Hard Rock Hotel, Portofino Bay Hotel and Royal Pacific Resort – and the 30-acre Universal CityWalk entertainment complex.

For instance, the internationally renowned Blue Man Group will start performing at a 1,000-seat theater at Universal Studios on June 7, 2007. Founded in 1987 on the streets of New York City, Blue Man Group has evolved into a totally outrageous, multisensory production that mixes elements of live music, theater, art, science, vaudeville and humor into an award-winning show unlike anything you've ever seen before. Blue Man Group has been variously described by critics as "hilarious," "groundbreaking" and "visually stunning." Tickets for the Blue Man Group are currently on sale.

Universal Orlando also has announced a partnership with NBC to broadcast a daily daytime TV talk show, iVillage Live, at an Islands of Adventure theater (formerly the Toon Amphitheater). The iVillage Live show, which will feature rotating hosts, special guests and audience interaction, will be broadcast five days at week on select NBC stations, as well as Bravo and ivillage.com.

In addition, Hard Rock Hotel has recently completed a $6.8 million renovation of its 650 guestrooms and suites. All rooms at Hard Rock Hotel now feature MP3 landing stations and 32-inch flat panel TVs. Meanwhile, the Portofino Bay Hotel at Universal Orlando has been named the official host hotel of the Arnold Palmer Invitational, which will take place at Bay Hill Club & Lodge in Orlando from March 12-18, 2007.

At Universal CityWalk, the NASCAR Café recently underwent a multi-million dollar renovation and reopened on February 1, 2007, as NASCAR Sports Grille. In addition to boasting a variety of NASCAR memorabilia, the 25,000-square-foot NASCAR Sports Grille features a 37-foot media wall, booth-side interactive plasma TV screens, a diverse menu full of new entrees and a NASCAR retail shop. The NASCAR Sports Grille serves lunch and dinner daily.

Finally, Universal Orlando has begun to serve healthier dining options at both Universal Studios and Islands of Adventure with the goal of removing all trans-fat from park food offerings by the end of 2007. For instance, side salads and trans fat-free fries, as well as healthy beverage choices, are now available at many Universal Orlando restaurants. All kids' meals throughout Universal Orlando also now provide healthier options.

"With all of the new entertainment options available at Universal Orlando theme parks, it's more important than ever to plan your itinerary in advance to make the most out of your Orlando vacation," said Kyle Collins, Director of Interactive Marketing for HotelsCorp.com. "For instance, you can enjoy significant savings by purchasing discount Universal Orlando theme park tickets online before you arrive in Orlando."

Is Your University Degree A Fake

Straits Times journalist from Singapore, Lim Yee Hung reported in a newspaper article that he received two university degrees last week. One is an associate degree in Criminal Justice and the other is a bachelor's degree in Journalism. It took him just one week to get both degrees. If university degrees are that easy to get, they are probably fake degrees.

He went on to say in the report that he got the associate criminal justice degree from Belford University and the journalism degree from True Diplomas paying a total of US$349 for the degrees excluding freight charges without any studying on his part or examinations to take.

He called Belford University's hotline before buying the degrees and was assured that Belford University degrees are perfectly legal, properly accredited and accepted all over the world. In order for an applicant to qualify for a Belford online degree, the candidate must have sufficient 'life experience' or an 'online equivalency test' which can be done under one hour.

True Diploma have no degrees of their own to offer for they sell replica and imitation degrees from about 115 genuine universities including Ivy League universities such as Brown University and Cornell University. The degrees offered by True Diploma are certainly fakes and they tell you upfront about it.

When Lim received The Belford University degree, he found that it was very impressive. Along with the degree package were also educational transcripts with grades for each module. The university seal is embossed on the degree and looks authentic. How could there be grades and transcripts if tests and examinations are not taken?

The journalism degree though can be easily spotted as a fake. There are glaring misspelling and grammatical errors. For example, in his degree, December was spelt as Decemberf.

He reported that in the United States, fake degree scams are so rampant that the problem is seen as a national security threat. An audit in May 2004 showed that a total of 463 employees in the federal government had fake academic degrees. Some were even high ranking officials in sensitive positions with top level security clearance to boot.

According to fake degree mill expert John Bear, co-author of Degree Mills, fake degree mills are a billion dollar industry having sold thousands of fake online degrees and diplomas every week internationally.

Although some employers may check the qualifications of a prospective employees directly by calling up the university which awarded the degrees, this screening may not be effective against some degree mills as some of these degree mills provide verification services. Employers who called are told that the job applicant is indeed a graduate from that particular university.

However, not all college and university online degree programs are frauds. There are some great universities such as Harvard University offer online degrees.

So if you want to get an online degree, then it is prudent for you to do a thorough due diligence and check with your local educational authorities for the online university's authenticity so that you will not end up with a fake degree by a costly mistake.

Universal Laws of Attraction (Creation) and Emotional Freedom Technique

To leverage the power of Emotional Freedom Technique and the Universal Laws of Creation, it is essential to know and to understand the basic principles that govern our Universe.

The Universal Laws govern all of life without exception; from the glaciers to earthquakes, from spinning tops and spinning planets to newborns and world leaders, from elephants and arachnids to amoebas, to orchids, oranges and microorganisms.

Metaphysics is the term used to study that which is beyond the physical, beyond what we can touch, see, taste and feel. The Universal Laws are the non-physical principles that govern our Universe in an unfailing, impartial, consistent and dependable fashion.

As we study the laws that govern our Universe, we see certain empirical Truths. It is through the study of these Universal Principles and Truths that we master our creative abilities.

With study, we begin to comprehend the profound implications of each law; we become more and more conscious of the power of our intentionality and of our minds; more and more conscious of the unwavering influence of our thoughts, emotions and beliefs on our experience.

As we begin to work with these Universal Truths (studying, applying, practicing, and redirecting), we learn how it is that we live either in harmony or disharmony with our dreams and goals.

By choosing to become acutely aware of our harmonious or disharmonious actions and thoughts, we experience and observe first hand the Universal Laws playing out in our lives. We experience both the 'negative' and the 'positive'.

Ultimately, we want to use this awareness to intentionally guide and direct our experience, focusing on the 'ascending' or 'positive' thoughts to attract the highest and best that life has to offer.

Now, with the support of Emotional Freedom Technique we can quickly and systematically neutralize the thoughts that oppose our goals and cause the postponement of our life's dreams.

This means that with EFT we can more easily and naturally apply the Laws of the Universe!

When we become aware of our limiting beliefs we can use this awareness to realign our energy; to align our thoughts and beliefs with the Universal Laws.

Many a metaphysical student can attest to their personal 'vibrational thesis' (their theory behind which ball of thoughts, feelings and beliefs actually created their experience.)

As we continue, we become more and more adept at specifically recalling and tracing back the thoughts, emotions, and beliefs that literally foretold our experience.

It's very important to understand that when we review our past experience it is not to repudiate or cause anxiety about our creative abilities, failings, or 'mistakes' but to discern which habitual or "beliefs by rote" may be causing us to attract an experience less than Heaven on Earth.

By assessing how and where our beliefs are either supporting or repelling our dreams, we can then intentionally alter our beliefs and thought patterns (with tools such as meditation, silence, prayer and EFT) to navigate towards our optimal future with greater effortlessness, ease and speed.
The Universal Laws of Creation:

The Universal Laws cannot be segmented or independently applied, they work consistently and inter-dependently of one another at all times.

Therefore, to 'apply the law of attraction' intentionally, one must also learn to apply the 'law of detachment', for example.

To summarize, the laws:

The Law of Attraction (aka the Law of Creation) says that whatever you put your attention upon expands.

We draw into our lives whatever we focus upon and emotionalize - be it positive or negative. The more we focus, the more attractive and stronger our vibration becomes, and the more quickly it manifests. To practice the Law of Attraction, simply put your attention and your positive emotions upon the essence of your dreams fulfilled, as if you already have them now!

The Law of Detachment (aka the Law of Allowing) says that in order to intentionally attract something, we must relinquish our attachment to it.

If we are attached, then we project negative emotions of fear, doubt, or craving, for example, which actually repels our dreams. To practice the Law of Detachment, be willing to trust in the Divine Order and Divine Timing. Choose to elevate your consciousness to a place of peaceful expectancy, a place of allowing; where you feel absolutely certain that all is well, right now.

The Law of Unlimited Potential (aka the Law of Pure Potentiality) says that we are unlimited children of a very prosperous, powerful, omnipotent, impartial, all-providing, all-sufficient, all-loving Father/Mother/God. Our Divine Inheritance is all that we desire: wealth, joy, love, peace, abundance, health, beauty, wisdom, wholeness, and harmony.

Practicing the Law of Unlimited Potential requires that we accept our divinity and realize that the Presence of the Divine is within. We do not have to earn the right to our dreams; we were born deserving of all that we desire.

When we accept our unlimited nature, we know that the Source is internal, not external. By expanding our consciousness of this Truth, that the Presence of God is within, we exalt our positive vibrational offering in an organic, all- encompassing and symbiotic manner.

The Law of Reciprocity (aka the Law of Giving) says that as you give you shall receive.

There is a failsafe method of getting everything you want; simply begin giving more of what you want away. To practice the law of reciprocity, begin taking action daily (giving of yourself towards your dreams) and begin tithing of your time, talent, and treasure to wherever you feel spiritually fed. If you aren't sure where you feel spiritual nourishment, just start giving 'it' away everywhere you go. If you aren't sure where or how to take action, just start
taking action is some way (any way) and you will be led. Give freely and with an open and unattached heart. Think of the Law of Reciprocity as priming the pump, the pump of your never-ending, all-providing well of prosperity, love, and success. Taking inspired action is the act of priming the pump and to receive we must be willing to give, both through action and generosity.

The Law of Cause and Effect: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

There is nothing in our Universe that exists independently. In other words, everything was created by something else and every new creation causes a reaction to the existing reality.

Thus, we cannot intentionally attract a new job, without causing the old job to change or cease to exist. We cannot intentionally attract a better relationship, without causing the current relationship (or situation) to change or cease to exist.

In studying this law, we become truly aware that the Universe is not random. There is no such thing as mere coincidence and in order to grow, change, and intentionally attract what we really want, we must be willing to go through the effects of change. When we immerse ourselves in the study and application of the laws of the Universe, we will notice certain 'thoughts' and 'feelings' that prevent us from mastering them.

For example, let's say we want to attract a mate using the law of attraction. If we practice the law of attraction, we will actually visualize ourselves fully embracing, loving, adoring and being loved and adored by our ideal life partner.

Then, we would practice detachment by sending forth love and gratitude for already having them in our lives. We would then maintain our vision and our faith for as long as possible. Here's where most of us go astray!

At some point, we may find ourselves looking around, wondering where our perfect man/woman is; sighing at night when they aren't laying down with us, or anxious at a dinner where everyone else is 'coupled', for example. We may find ourselves longing (not allowing but craving) a mate.

When we observe our attention going to 'he/she isn't here yet'; and this attention triggers negative emotions such as fear, sadness, worry, anxiety, or disappointment then we are attached and not practicing the law of detachment or the law of unlimited potential.

NOW, as conscious creation students, we have the opportunity to USE this awareness to pivot our attention and our vibration; we have the opportunity to eliminate the limiting beliefs that prevent us from practicing the Law of Pure Potentiality (that we are unlimited and therefore would of course have nothing to fear or worry about) and practice the Law of Detachment (that we trust in the Divine Order and know that all is well now).

With EFT (Emotional Freedom Technique) we can get in there, dig out those limiting beliefs of 'he/she isn't here yet' and neutralize them. Negative thoughts and emotions are poisonous acid to our dreams, hopes, and ambitions. Think of EFT as the antidote to the poison. EFT pours an energetic alkaline solution on the acid that's repelling our dreams. When we use EFT, we are alkalizing the poisonous thoughts and returning to a space of courage and neutrality.

When we obtain a consciousness of neutrality, we can then intentionally raise our positive emotions - our level of certainty and purely and intentionally attract outstanding success!

If you haven't used EFT in a consistent manner to eliminate the doubts that hold you back, try it for 30 days. Just give it 3 minutes a day for 30 days. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain - health, wealth, success, love, beauty, joy, peace.and so much more!

Healing the Universe is an Inside Job

"Healing the universe is an Inside Job" is a quote that was printed at the bottom of an email send to me by my good friend Tajuana. When I first read it, I thought "Wow" what a great line - I'll have to use it somewhere. After thinking about it for a few minutes I now see that the line is in complete error.

The universe is perfect the way it is. It is the matrix from which all forms of life interact with each other to experience the physical life. It is a playground or buffet of experiences from which we choose.

As a blank piece of paper would be the background from which we draw our lines, the universe as it is, simply represents the thoughts of its inhabitants. To say that a piece of paper needs healing would be incorrect. The line filled paper with its meaningless scribbles and useless information is simply representative of the mind that drew them. The universe or at least a very tiny part of it may be filled with humanities insanity, but it is the human mind that has created it not the universe. Man creates all that he/she experiences. The bathwater may be dirty but it started out clean; what caused it? You may have nice clean fresh sheets on you bed, but that will change the more you lie in them. It is not the universe that needs healing; it is humanity.

To say that "healing the universe is an inside job" simply is a nice way to say that "we" need healing. We are not separate from the universe; we are intimately connected to it. And the issue I have with using the terminology, or being nice, is that we take away the responsibility for directing the healing where it is needed the most. In other words, if something or someone else needs healing, it is not us and any energy given to the task of healing the universe will not go where it will do the most good.

The bottom line here is that the universe is literally commanded by your words, and it takes them literally. Thought, word, and deed - the word is the command for action and it must be absolutely clear. The universe does not interpret what we say. This is the secret to why most people do not get what they want, because they have not made it perfectly clear to the universe as to what it is that they want.

The mind commands the universe to create by using words, and it is the function of the universe to obey without second guessing. You may ask for a million dollars because you think it will make you happy, but the order you put in was for a million dollars - not for happiness.

I like the line, and it sounds very meaningful and spiritual, but it simply does not work, and it takes us away from the true issue, and that is that man is sickening his part of the universe and he needs to be healed, and that is an inside job.

The other issue is that most of us wouldn't want to hear "Healing man is an inside job." We don't want to contemplate that we are ill or need healing. It is common place in our society to look at another and say it's you, not me!

Our culture and language are full of these nice sayings and we keep using them because it makes us feel good to say them and it moves the responsibility for change to something or someone else.
Our language is probably our greatest obstacle in creating or experiencing what we want. The words we choose separate us from each other, the universe, and all the things we desire.

The first and greatest step to healing the universe is to heal the creator; heal man, and the universe will automatically heal itself.

The Fine Tuning in the Universe

He Who created the seven heavens in layers. You will not find any flaw in the creation of the All-Merciful. Look again—do you see any gaps? Then look again and again. Your sight will return to you dazzled and exhausted! (Qur'an, 67:3-4)

He to Whom the kingdom of the heavens and the earth belongs. He does not have a son and He has no partner in the Kingdom. He created everything and determined it most exactly. (Qur'an, 25:2)

Materialist philosophy emerged with the claim that all the systems in nature and the universe were like machines that functioned on their own, that the flawless order and balance within them were the work of chance. However, today, the false nature of materialism and of Darwinism, its so-called scientific foundation, has been scientifically demonstrated. (See Harun Yahya, The Evolution Deceit, and Darwinism Refuted)

The scientific discoveries of the 20th century that followed swiftly, one after the other, in the fields of astrophysics and biology have proved that life and the universe were created. As the theses of Darwinism collapsed, the Big Bang theory has shown that the universe was created from nothing. Discoveries have revealed that there is a great design and fine-tuning in the material world and this has categorically demonstrated the groundless nature of the claims of materialism.

Considering the conditions necessary for life, we see that only the Earth meets these particular conditions. For an environment suitable for life, there are innumerable conditions taking place simultaneously and unceasingly all around us. There are some hundred billion galaxies, each with-on average-a hundred billion stars. In all the galaxies, there are perhaps as many planets as stars.1 In the face of such overpowering numbers, one can better comprehend the significance of the formation of such an exceptional environment on the Earth.

From the force of the Big Bang explosion to the physical values of atoms, from the levels of the four basic forces to the chemical processes in the stars, from the type of light emitted by the Sun to the level of viscosity of water, from the distance of the Moon to the Earth to the level of gases in the atmosphere, from the Earth's distance from the Sun to its angle of tilt to its orbit, and from the speed at which the Earth revolves around its own axis to the functions of the oceans and mountains on the Earth: every single detail is ideally suited to our lives. Today, the world of science describes these features by means of the concepts of the "Anthropic Principle" and "Fine-Tuning." These concepts summarise the way that the universe is not an aimless, uncontrolled, chance collection of matter but that it has a purpose directed towards human life and has been designed with the greatest precision.

Attention is drawn in the above verses to the measure and harmony in Allah's creation. The word "taqdeer," meaning "to design, measure, create by measuring," is employed in Qur'anic verses such as Surat al-Furqan 2. The word "tibaaq," meaning "in harmony," is used in Surat al-Mulk 3 and Surah Nuh 15. Furthermore, Allah also reveals in Surat al-Mulk with the word "tafaawut," meaning "disagreement, violation, non-conformity, disorder, opposite," that those who seek disharmony will fail to find it.

The term "fine-tuning," which began to be used towards the end of the 20th century, represents this truth revealed in the verses. Over the last quarter-century or so, a great many scientists, intellectuals and writers have shown that the universe is not a collection of coincidences. On the contrary, it has an extraordinary design and order ideally suited to human life in its every detail. (See Harun Yahya, The Creation of the Universe and A Chain of Miracles) Many features in the universe clearly show that the universe has been specially designed to support life. The physicist Dr. Karl Giberson expresses this fact thus:

In the 1960s, some physicists observed that our universe appears to have been fine-tuned for the existence of human life. 2

The Speed of the Big Bang Explosion:

The balances established with the Big Bang, the instantaneous formation of the universe, are one of the proofs that the universe did not come into being by chance. According to the well-known Adelaide University professor of mathematical physics Paul Davies, if the rate of expansion that took place following the Big Bang had been just one in a billion billion parts different (1/1018), the universe could not have come into being. 3

The Four Forces:

All physical motion in the universe comes about thanks to the interaction and equilibrium of the four forces recognised by modern physics: gravity, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force and weak nuclear force. These forces possess extraordinarily different values to one another.4

The Distances between Celestial Bodies:

The distribution of celestial bodies in space and the enormous spaces between them are essential to the existence of life on Earth. The distances between celestial bodies have been set out in a calculation compatible with a great many powerful universal forces in such a way as to support life on Earth.5

Gravity:

- If gravity were stronger, excessive ammonia and methane would collect in the Earth's atmosphere, which would have a most damaging effect on life.

- If it were weaker, the Earth's atmosphere would lose excessive quantities of water, making life impossible.

The Earth's Distance from the Sun:

- If this were any greater, the planet would grow very cold, the water cycle in the atmosphere would be affected, and the planet would enter an ice-age.

- If the Earth were any closer to the Sun, plants would burn up, the water cycle in the Earth's atmosphere would be irreparably damaged, and life would become impossible.

The Thickness of the Earth's Crust:

- If the crust were any thicker, then an excessive amount of oxygen would be transferred to it from the atmosphere.

- If it were any thinner, the resulting amount of volcanic activity would make life impossible.

The Speed at which the Earth Revolves:

- If this were any slower, the temperature difference between day and night would grow enormously.

- If it were any faster, then atmospheric winds would reach enormous speeds, and cyclones and storms would make life impossible.

The Earth's Magnetic Field:

- If this were any more powerful, very strong electromagnetic storms would arise.

- If it were any weaker, then the Earth would lose its protection against the harmful particles given off by the Sun and known as solar winds. Both situations would make life impossible.

The Albedo Effect (The Fraction of Light Reflected by the Earth):

- If this were any greater, an ice-age would rapidly result.

- If it were any less, the greenhouse effect would lead to excessive warming. The Earth would first be flooded with the melting of the glaciers, and would then burn up.

The Proportion of Oxygen and Nitrogen in the Atmosphere:

- If this were any greater, vital functions would be adversely accelerated.

- If it were any less, vital functions would adversely slow down.

The Proportion of Carbon Dioxide and Water in the Atmosphere:

- If this were any greater, the atmosphere would overheat.

- If it were any less, the temperature of the atmosphere would fall.

The Thickness of the Ozone Layer:

- If this were any greater, the Earth's temperature would fall enormously.

- If it were any less, the Earth would overheat and be defenceless against the harmful ultraviolet rays emitted by the Sun.

Seismic Activity (Earthquakes):

- If this were any greater, there would be constant upheaval for living things.

- If it were any less, the nutrients at the sea bottom would fail to spread into the water. This would have a damaging effect on life in the seas and oceans and all living things on Earth.

The Earth's Angle of Tilt:

The Earth has a 23 degree angle of inclination to its orbit. It is this inclination that gives rise to the seasons. If this angle were any greater or any less than it is now, the temperature difference between the seasons would reach extreme dimensions, with unbearably hot summers and bitterly cold winters.

The Size of the Sun:

A smaller star than the Sun would mean the Earth would freeze and a larger star would lead to its burning up.

The Attraction between the Earth and the Moon:

- If this were any greater, the powerful attraction of the Moon would have extremely serious effects on atmospheric conditions, the speed at which the Earth revolves around its own axis and on the ocean tides.

- If it were any less, this would lead to extreme climate changes.

The Distance between the Earth and the Moon:

- If they were just a little closer, the Moon would crash into the Earth.

- If they were any further, the Moon would become lost in space.

- If they were even a little closer, the Moon's effect on the Earth's tides would reach dangerous dimensions. Ocean waves would inundate low-lying areas. The friction emerging as a result of this would raise the temperature of the oceans and the sensitive temperature balance essential to life on Earth would disappear.

- If they were even a little further away, the tides would decrease, leading the oceans to be less mobile. Immobile water would endanger life in the seas, and the level of the oxygen we breathe would be endangered.6

The Temperature of the Earth and Carbon-Based Life:

The existence of carbon, the basis of all life, depends on the temperature remaining within specific limits. Carbon is an essential substance for organic molecules such as amino-acid, nucleic acid and protein: These constitute the basis of life. For that reason, life can only be carbon-based. Given this, the existing temperature needs to be no lower than -20 degrees and no higher than 1200 Celsius (2480 F). These are just the temperature limits on Earth.

These are just a few of the exceedingly sensitive balances which are essential for life on Earth to have emerged and to survive. Yet even these are sufficient to definitively reveal that the Earth and the universe could not have come into being as the result of a number of consecutive coincidences. The concepts of "fine-tuning" and the "anthropic principle" that began to be employed in the 20th century are further evidence of Allah's creation. The harmony and proportion therein were described with magnificent accuracy fourteen centuries ago in the Qur'an.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1- Carl Sagan, Cosmos, (Avenel, NJ: Wings Books: April 1983), 5-7.

2- Karl Giberson, "The Anthropic Principle," Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 9 (1997). (emphasis added)

3- Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, 184.

4- Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe, (New York: The Free Press, 1998), 12-13.

5- Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe, (New York: The Free Press, 1998), 11.

6- "The Elemental Forces of the Universe;" www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/01-ma10.htm#Elemental Forces

Law of Attraction: the Use and Meaning of Signs From the Universe

Ever since I began studying and applying the Law of Attraction, I have always received signs from the Universe. Some are signs of encouragement or inspiration and some are signs to act upon.

Some ask if it is a lack of faith in the Universe if you ask for a sign of encouragement. The answer really depends on how you look at it, but from my point of view I believe signs are here to give us encouragement just like you would give your child praise and encouragement. Encouragement in the form of signs serves as a catalyst to do more and be more.

Signs of encouragement or inspiration send your heart to new heights: You wonder how something is going to work out and you receive a clear sign from the Universe that it will. When I first began practicing the Law of Attraction, I was a professional costume designer. I was unsure of how I was going to make money at it, but I knew at the time that this was what I wanted to do. I kept my focus on costume designing and would look through magazines and sketch out costumes that I would love to make.

I started to specialize in the old time look of Judy Garland and Shirley Temple. I devised a plan to make children's costumes that were old fashioned; glorious fairy costumes, skunks, Little Rascals, and of course Shirley Temple. I wasn't sure what would sell well and I asked the Universe for a sign. I had to make at least twenty copies of one costume to sell at an industry show. I didn't receive what anyone would call a blatant sign telling me what to do. I stepped back and just released it into the Universe and thanked the Universe for the sign.

One day as I was picking up fabrics, I parked next to a car with the license plate that read, 'Shrlyrcks.' "Wow!" I thought to myself, "I think that is my sign!" I was so excited that this was leading me in the direction I needed to go. I went into the fabric store and the fabric needed for a Shirley Temple costume was 75% off, today only! Boom! Boom! Two signs in a row! These kinds of signs take your heart to a new level. You feel so taken care of when you have blatant signs. So I designed the costumes and sold every last one of them at the show and took many orders home with me. Just remember to expect the signs and thank the Universe in advance for the signs and the subsequent manifestation of what you have been attaining.

You can also have the kind of sign from the Universe that says, "Here's your sign! It's your time for your light to shine! Act on it!" This kind of sign can be unnerving if you aren't used to 'acting upon' something, but it's best if you do because the Universe lined up the situations and people for this moment for you to help attain the life and wants that you desire.

My husband, Lee, has had many of these in his life time. One of the early signs was when he was a young man wanting to go to sea. He would sit at the union hall for weeks on end in hopes of catching a ship. Many of the old sailors laughed up their sleeves at this young buck waiting to catch a ship. Seniority always got the ships and the newbies usually didn't. It was closing time in the union hall and everyone was leaving. It wasn't quite time to leave but it was five minutes away from the door being locked. Lee said it just hit him. He had to go to the restroom and couldn't wait. Everyone left as Lee went to the restroom before leaving. Then something in Lee whispered, "Stay right here until the very end!" Lee listened to the Universe and one minute before closing a ship came in needing crew. The man at the counter called for seniority and no one was there but Lee. The same Universal voice whispered, "Get your bags and walk up to the counter NOW!" Lee acted and he caught the ship. It was a miracle that it happened but Lee focused on his intention and acted upon the sign from the Universe. Lee listened and was aware and acted upon his sign of going to the restroom before leaving.

These are just a few examples of how signs can come to you. Be aware but not impatient when wanting a sign. Ask and then let it go and just be prepared for the moment because it will come.

If you wonder if the Universe gave you sign, this is a true moment that if you had to ask, it is a sign.

Can you ask the Universe for a sign and get one instantly? You sure can. If you feel like you want inspiration or encouragement, let the Universe know that you are going to pick up a book and ask for a sign in the passage. It doesn't matter what book. Close your eyes, ask your question, or ask for a sign, and visualize that your physical is stepping aside for a moment while your higher self or Core Being as we call it, opens the book to the sign that is for you. Point to a spot and read. You will find that there will be words that are just for you via the Universe.

Follow your signs and the Law of Attraction and you will have the life you want in no time.

Creation of the Universe - the Theory and Evidence..

The creation of the Universe

One theory which dominates the scientific society is the big bang theory.

The Big Bang theory is the most acceptable theory today about the creation of the universe. According to this theory the universe was created in a big bang about 12-15 billion years ago. Science has no way of predicting what was before that time. Before the big bang all the matter in the universe as we know it today was dense in one point. It's hard to imagine but the universe was that point, there was nothing else BUT that point. Then a big blast occurred and the point started to expand with tremendous speed. All the material init moved away from the blast into space . The explosion also created alot of radiation. Evidence for this is the Cosmic background radiation as we see it today. Since then, that point which was the early universe has expanded to the size we know today, and is continuing to expand. The evidence for this is the measurement of the galaxies seem to get further apart as we measure it today.

Immediately after the big bang the universe was filled with a dense "soup" of subatomic particles which are called quarks and leptons (such as electrons) and their antiparticle equivalents. By 0.01 second after the big bang some of the quarks had united to form neutrons and protons. After another 2 seconds the only leptons remaining were electrons; the antiparticles had been annihilated. After 3.5 minutes the hydrogen and helium nuclei had formed. After a million years the universe was populated with hydrogen and helium atoms, the raw material of stars and galaxies. The initial radiation from the big bang has grown less energetic. This "cosmic background radiation" today has a temperature equivalent to 3 degrees above absolute zero which is about -270 C.

The future of the universe has several potential outcomes.
Either it will become a Closed universe where the universe will encounter a critical point were the gravity between galaxies will overcome the speed given to them from the big bang and the universe will start to shrink. All the galaxies will move to a certain point in space where they will be one highly concentrated point like the universe was like before the big bang. That tragic death of the universe was named by some scientists as "The Big Crunch". Then the process may start all over again creating a new universe (it might have also occured before our present universe).
Or it will become a flat universe where the universe will continue it's expansion, but the rate of expansion will decrease nearing zero but never below it.
Or it will become a open universe where the universe will continue expanding endlessly.
Which one of these options will become the destiny of our universe is up for discussions in the scientific society today, and no common agreement has been reached, however we are still in the expanding phase.

The Universal Cycles of Change: 
patterns in Nature Translated to Human Behavior

We can learn so much about ourselves from observing the lives of cells, the growth of trees, the waves in the ocean, along with other universal and biological patterns of growth and self creation. Nature is our greatest teacher. Since humans are a part of nature and our universe is 15 billion years old, it seems obvious that there must be some kind of connection between the patterns that exist outside of ourselves and the unconscious patterns that reside within us.

For the last 16 years I have been observing nature and studying the laws of our universe with the same question in mind. "How is our inner reality directly related to our outer reality, and how do the two affect one another?" This has led me on a long journey that has included studying cybernetics, the sciences of complexity, autopoiesis, chaos theory, morphogenetic fields, quantum mechanics and string theory; coupled with NLP and many other psychological and spiritual models. Through this ongoing research and many long–winded discussions with my husband, Tim Hallbom—we've developed a model to help you consciously create what you want in life called the universal cycles of change.

The universal cycles of change are an ongoing process that's been happening in our universe for about 15 billion years, so it is a really old model. We have observed seven universal cycles of change that occur in all living systems such as plants, trees, stars, cells, and animals. You can also see these same cycles occurring in most nonliving systems such as cars, houses, computers, and the economy.

The universal cycles of change can also be found within all aspects of human life and behavior. They happen in marriages, in business, with health, with families, with various states of mind and so on. We go through these cycles every day and every year of our life. Being aware of these cycles can help us to consciously create the kinds of life experiences that we want, and to bring forth the reality of our choice. The people who do well in life are naturally attuned to these cycles of change.

Here is a brief description of the seven universal cycles of change that have been identified (A more detailed description of these cycles is provided later in the article):

 Creation–This cycle is about new beginnings. All systems must have a starting point of some kind.

Growth–when a living system begins to grow and develop, it becomes "self organizing."

Complexity to Maturity–As a system begins to take shape and form through continued growth, it becomes more complex to the point where it reaches what we call a "steady state. "A system operates at its best when it is in a steady state.

Turbulence–When the system becomes too complex in its growth, problems begin to develop and turbulence sets in. Turbulence is considered feedback from the environment that the system's complex state can no longer be supported. Something has to shift for it to go to the next level of creation and growth. If this shift does not occur, then chaos will set in.

Chaos–This is when the system begins to fall apart because it has become too complex, and chaos sets it. The system can no longer hold it all together.

Droppings Off–Once chaos has set in, there must be some kind of a letting go or dropping off to bring the system back into balance.

Meditation and Dormancy– This is the final cycle in which the ystem regains its balance, which will allow it to recycle back up into…

Creation. The system now has less mass, yet more energy because it contains all the learnings from the previous cycles.Everything in our universe evolves and grows, and has been doing so for billions of years. Part of this natural evolutionary process includes going through different states of change. Let's take a tree for example, since its the easiest metaphor I've found to describe the universal cycles of change.

The first cycle that a tree goes through is that of creation, which happens when a seed gets planted. Then the tree grows—given that it has been provided with enough water and sunshine to grow. Over time the tree reaches a steady state of maturity in which all of its leaves have blossomed with complete beauty. Then the autumn season sets in; the leaves begin to change color. They turn brown and drop off to the ground. After this happens, the tree stands in dormancy without any leaves. But then spring comes around, the tree sprouts new leaves and the whole process of creation happens again.

Because all living systems get too complex in their growth and development, they must have some kind of a dropping off to regain their balance. Trees do this all the time with their leaves. We can learn a lot by modelling trees. Have you ever been walking by a tree and its leaves are falling off. And all of a sudden you hear the tree crying out, "Pleeeease, don't let my leaves fall off!" This never happens. The tree has mastered the art of dropping off and recycling back up to creation. Snakes are the same way when they shed their skin. I have never know of a snake to resist the process. Even most computers have trash bins to drop off the excess information that can slow down their hard drive, which thus allows for the computer to operate more quickly and creatively.

Interestingly, there is only one living system that does not allow itself to naturally go through this 15 billion year old process of change. This same system allows itself to stay stuck in turbulence and chaos for extended periods of time. This same system often resists dropping off what needs to be dropped off. Can you guess which system it is?

Human beings of course.

People represent the only living systems that will allow themselves to stay stuck in turbulence and chaos. They are the only living systems that will not drop off whatever needs to be dropped off in their life. We see this resistance happening a lot in relationships, career, and health.

For example, my husband, Tim, and I were teaching a class in Australia last year, when a man in the group shared an amazing realization that he had about the universal cycles of change and how they related to him. This man had a teenage daughter who he had been unable to communicate with for several years. After learning about the universal cycles of change, he raised his hand and said,

"I finally understand why I have been having so many problems with my 17 year old daughter. In my mind I still think of her as a little child. I am now realizing that I need to 'drop off' my perception of her as a child and start treating her like a young adult. It makes complete sense to me why there has been so much turbulence and chaos in our relationship over the last couple of years."

Another woman who attended our training in London, England, told me of an amazing experience that she had with her children and the universal cycles of change model. "Kris, I just have to tell you about the funniest thing that happened to me last night. After I learned the universal cycles of change model, I made the decision that I needed to 'drop off' the co–dependent relationship that I have with my five adult children." she said with excitement.

"Even though my children are grown up, they are all so needy. I felt like my life was all about them and there was no room for me. On my drive home last night, I set the intent to release the co–dependence that has been keeping me enmeshed with my children for so many years. After I got home, all 'chaos' broke loose. One by one, each child phoned me with some major crisis. One of my children's car broke down, the other had just broken up with a boyfriend, another was having a bad day, and so on. The phone just kept ringing off the hook with their problems. I told each child one by one that they were responsible for themselves from now on and that they will need to solve their own problems," she said. At this point in the story, she was glowing as she continued to say, "I just wanted to tell you that today is the beginning of the rest of my life. I am no longer co–dependent with my children and I can have my life back! I am going to go back to school and I am also going to start painting again, and doing the kinds of things that make me happy. I am going to start living my life for me now, instead of for everyone else."

So often people are afraid to make changes, because they are worried about throwing their lives into turbulence and chaos. In the case of the English woman, she was worried that her grown children would feel resentment towards her if she was not always fully present for them. Instead of being present for her children, she ended up resenting them because she wasn't getting to live the life she wanted. Once she released her children from the co–dependent bonds of enmeshment, she was able to evolve into a new way of interacting with her children. And in doing so, she found that she could be more present for her children because she felt more spiritually fulfilled in her life.

As mentioned earlier, the universal cycles of change influence all the areas of our lives. The primary life areas that they effect are:

* Romance and Love 

* Career

* Health
* Family
* Money Matters
* Friends
* Spirituality
* Your Present State of Mind

When you assess each area of your life, which universal cycle of change are you experiencing in that context? If any of your areas are in turbulence or chaos, you may want to ask yourself,

"What are some things that I need to drop off so that I can bring my life back into balance?"

It doesn't always have to be a dramatic dropping off. You can drop off something as simple as reading the morning newspaper or drinking diet coke every day. Some other examples of things that may need to be dropped off are: behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, ways of thinking, perceptions, habits, jobs, and relationships. Other specific examples might include: smoking, drinking too much alcohol, weight, television, coffee, unclear boundaries, frenetic busyness, old relationships that need to be updated, a troublesome employee, a toxic friendship, clutter, disorganization, grudges, anger, jealousy, unnecessary debt and unfinished business with people.

 

Here is a more detailed description of the universal cycles of change to help you identify which cycle you might be in:

Creation—This cycle is about new beginnings. Everything has a starting point, and typically that point begins with an idea, an action, or a blueprint. Some examples of this include starting a business, having a baby, investing in your first stock or fund, creating an idea for a book or a painting, building your first house, getting married, buying a new car, planting the seeds for a vegetable garden, or the Big Bang (the beginning of our universe as we know it).

Growth—When a system begins to grow and develop, it also becomes "self organizing." What this means is that the initial creation begins to take shape or form. New patterns of behavior start to develop, and the system self–organizes itself around the original creation. For example, a new business develops a wonderful marketing plan, the tock that you've invested in begins to rise in price, the small tree that you've planted shows signs of growth, you install fancy hubcaps and new seat covers in your car, or your child speaks its first words and takes her first steps.

Complexity to Maturity—As a system begins to take shape and form through continued growth, it becomes more complex to the point where it reaches a "steady state." A system operates at its best when it is in a steady state. Some examples of a steady state are when things are going exceptionally well in your job, when an athlete enters into the zone, when the tree that you have planted is sprouting beautiful green leaves, when your marriage is going incredibly well, the car that you bought is running great, the stock that you have invested in has made a big jump in the right direction, or when you're feeling good about yourself and everything in your life.

Turbulence–Feedback—When the system becomes too complex in its growth and development, problems begin to develop and turbulence sets is. Turbulence is considered feedback from the environment that the system's complex state can no longer be supported—and that something has to be reorganized, changed, or dropped off. For example, you may have hired someone to work for you and that person isn't working out, you may start noticing some serious communication problems in your marriage that are effecting your individual health and well–being, the leaves on the tree that you planted begin to change color, you may have invested in a stock and it begins to drop, you develop a minor physical symptom that is distracting, you notice signs of depression or dissatisfaction in your life, or your car starts making funny little sounds.

Chaos—This is when the system completely falls apart and chaos sets in. For example, the leaves on the tree turn brown and shrivel up, the troublesome employee acts out to the point where the overall welfare of the business is threatened, the stock that you bought takes a huge drop, your marriage is completely falling apart, you get seriously ill, or the funny sound that your car was making turns into a loud choking sound and grey–blue smoke starts blowing out the tail pipe.

Droppings Off and Reorganization—Sometimes life becomes so complex that chaos sets in and you have to drop off something to help the system regain its overall balance. For example, when the snake sheds its skin or the leaves drop off the tree—these are considered to be droppings off. Even having to replace a part on your car is a form of dropping off or a form of reorganization. In order to move forward through a difficult life challenge you often need to let go of a limiting belief, a dysfunctional relationship, change a behavior, or reorganize how you view the world; thus making the space in your life to create something wonderfully new. All life forms in this universe such as trees, snakes, and even stars allow for this natural dropping off cycle to occur; as well as nonliving forms such as computers with animated trash bins. The purpose of the trash bin is to get rid of extra information on the hard drive because it takes up too much space. Human beings are the only ones that resist these natural cycles of change.

Meditation and Dormancy—The way a system regains its balance is to drop something off. Then it can rejuvenate itself during the dormancy phase, thus allowing itself to recycle back up to a new evolutionary level of creation. Just as the tree stands without leaves in the brisk cold winter, we sometimes need to go into a place of meditation and inner silence. It might be uncomfortable for a while, but it can be very healing to quiet one's mind or to lay low for a while. Before you can move forward, you need to give yourself plenty of being time to renew and rejuvenate. Once you've done this, you can become creative again. You will have dropped off what was holding you back. Yet you'll still have all the knowledge and wisdom that was gained from the whole experience. This sets the tone for a whole new cycle of creativity and growth.

My husband, Tim, and I have found that it is useful for people to look at the different areas of their life, and to identify where they are in the universal cycles of change. For example, there was a woman attending a WealthyMind™ seminar in Dallas, Texas last November, who took herself through the universal cycles of change model. In doing so, she discovered that there were three primary areas in her life that were in total chaos. These areas included her job, her marriage, and her health. She had been very unhappy in her marriage for over five years and tried everything possible to make it work. She and her husband hadn't slept in the same bedroom for over three years. She had also become extremely unhappy with her job, and was 40 pounds overweight. She decided that she needed to drop off her marriage, her job, and the extra 40 pounds of weight that she was carrying.

This same woman reappeared four months later at our WealthyMindTM Program in Omaha, Nebraska. She had lost 32 pounds and looked fantastic. I asked her how her life was going. She said that she had asked her husband for a divorce and was in the middle of transitioning out of her old job and starting a new business. She had also dropped off some of her limiting beliefs around money, which had given her the courage to start a new business. She admitted that all of these changes had created some chaos in her life, yet she was happier than she had ever been and was looking forward to her new adventure.

We certainly don't recommend dropping off a relationship or a job. This is a last resort. We always encourage our students and clients to start off by trying to drop an attitude, a perception, or any behaviors and beliefs that are related to their overall disharmony. If dropping those things off doesn't work, then perhaps they will need to drop off the relationship or job. Especially if it is highly dysfunctional, toxic, or abusive. Fortunately, we have NLP as a resource to help people transition through these universal cycles of change.

In the case of the man who was having problems with his teenage daughter, it's not like he could just "drop off" the relationship with his child. His only option was to reorganize who he was within the context of the relationship. As soon as he stopped treating her like a little girl, and started treating her like an adult, their relationship got better. The magic in what he did with his daughter can be found within the structure of his internal experience. He had an internal representation of her being a little girl. When he shifted that representation to her being an adult, then she started acting like an adult. By doing this, he was able to create an entirely new experience with his daughter.

What happened with the man and his daughter leads me back to the original question that I posed earlier in this article. "How is our inner reality directly related to our outer reality, and how do the two affect one another?"

Our outer reality is a reflection of our inner reality. What nature can do for us—is to serve as a perfect model for creating the life we want, as well as evolving to higher levels of personal and spiritual fulfillment. The answers to creating what we want in life can be found by becoming aware of the universal cycles of change and applying them to all the various life areas. There is no reason why we can't harness the same kind of creative potential that exists within the seed of a plant or a star in our galaxy.

Barbara Walters was interviewing multi–billionaire Bill Gates, and asked him, "Now that you're the richest man in the world and you can have anything you desire, what more could you possibly want?" Gates replied, "To never stop changing. Whatever I do today, will be considered history tomorrow. I have to make sure that I never stop creating, and that I am always changing."

Suggested Reading:

 

A Brief History of Everything by Ken Wilber

Complexity by M.Mitchell Waldrop

The Web of Life by Fritjof Capra
The Tree of Knowledge by Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela
Chaos: Making A New Science by James Gleick
Steps to an Ecology of Mind by Gregory Bateson
Psycho–Cybernetics by Maxwell Maltz
Beliefs: Pathways to Health and Well-Being by Robert Dilts, Tim Hallbom, and Suzi Smith

 

© 2003 by Kris Hallbom

 

Chiang Mai University Online Tefl Course

Online TEFL Essentials Course

The Language Institute of Chiang Mai University is offering a self-administered TEFL certificate through our virtual school.  This course has been entirely authored by the experts at the Language Institute.  The content is similar to that of the 120-hour, in-house course, but the online curriculum delves deeper into the theory, philosophy, and psychology of effective language teaching.

This program offers the convenience of learning at your own pace, from anywhere with an internet connection and can be completed in as little as two weeks, or can be taken slowly over six months.  It's all based on what is most comfortable for you.  During the course, you can communicate with trainers and fellow students from all over the world.

Entry requirements:

Although there are no prerequisites for entry into this program, candidates must be able to communicate in English at a native level (or near native level), and should have the motivation, desire and the personality to learn about Teaching English as a Foreign Language.  One should also have the desire to experience new cultures and places.  The ultimate purpose of this course is to prepare you to share your language and culture with strange and interesting people around the world.

Program Summary:

1. Teacher and Learner - Roles and Characteristics




2. Classroom - Skills, Groups, Tools, Discipline and Organization




3. Language Awareness - Grammar, Lexis, Phonology




4. Teaching Language - Teaching Grammar Lexis and Phonology




5. Teaching Speaking




6. Teaching Listening




7. Teaching Reading




8. Teaching Writing




9. Lesson Planning




10. Resources

Course Fees:

The TEFL Essentials Online Program is currently being offered at a temporary promotional rate of 10,000 Thai Baht.

For further information, please contact:

International Programs
Language Institute Building
Chiang Mai University
239 Huay Kaew Road, Suthep
Muang, Chiang Mai 50200
Thailand

Or alternatively, please email contacts@teflcmu.com
Office: +66 (0) 84 804 4188 Email: mattkay (at) teflcmu.com

Chiang Mai University Online Tefl Scholarship Contest

 

Chiang Mai University Online TEFL Scholarship Contest


The Chiang Mai University Online TEFL Program is pleased to announce the availability of two scholarships for free tuition to our Online TEFL Certification Program.

 

This course has been entirely authored by the experts at the Language Institute.  The content is similar to that of the 120-hour, on campus course but the online curriculum delves deeper into the theory, philosphy and psychology of effictive language teaching.

 

This program offers the convenience of learning at  your own pace from anywhere with an internet connection and can be completed in as little as two weeks or can be taken slowly over six months.

All interested applicants must submit an essay of 300 words or more which addresses the following question.

Why do you want to teach?

All essays should be pasted onto the (Your Message) section of the (Contact Page) on the Chiang Mai University Language Institute web site.

Just visit us at www.teflcmu.com, click on contact and paste your essay.


The deadline for submission is December 31, 2008

The scholarship winners will be announced during the second week in January 2009.

The Scholarships will be awarded to the two best essays.

Please feel free to be creative, funny, serious personal or academic in your approach to this essay.

The scholarships will cover all tuition for the course and certification upon successful completion.

All successful graduates will receive their Chiang Mai University Online TEFL Certification by mail.

Any further questions can be directed to the Chiang Mai Online TEFL Team by using the contact page on the web site.

Good Luck.

We are looking forward to your essays.

Chiang Mai University TEFL Program

 

Miss Universe 2007 in Mexico City

The Metaontology of Universe

Euclid's parallel postulate, in its modern reformulation, holds that, on a plane, given a line and a point not on the line, only one line can be drawn through the point parallel to the line. Gerolamo Saccheri (1667-1733) brilliantly attempted to prove this through a reductio ad absurdum argument. There were two ways to contradict the postulate: space could have 1) no parallel lines (straight lines in a plane will always meet if extended far enough), or 2) multiple straight lines through a given point parallel to a given line in the plane. These become non-Euclidean axioms. Saccheri convincingly achieved his reductio for the first possibility with the innocent assumption that straight lines are infinite [cf. Jeremy Gray, Ideas of Space Euclidean, Non-Euclidean, and Relativistic, Oxford, 1989; p. 64]. Later David Hilbert (1862-1953) would point out that the same reductio proof could be achieved by assuming that given three points on a line only one can be between the other two [David Hilbert and S. Cohn-Vossen Geometry and the Imagination (Anschauliche Geometrie--better translated Intuitive Geometry), Chelsea Publishing Company, 1952; p. 240]. For the second possibility, however, Saccheri did not achieve a good proof. And it was using just such an axiom that the first complete non-Euclidean geometries were achieved by Bolyai (1802-1860) and Lobachevskii (1792-1856).
If by "flat" we mean a plane of straight lines as understood by Euclid, then true non-Euclidean manifolds (i.e. areas, volumes, spacetimes, etc.), in order to really contradict Euclid, who was talking about straight lines, would have to be flat. They could not be curved. Straight lines would be Euclidean straight, but the properties specified by non-Euclidean axioms would be satisfied. Nevertheless, since Bernhard Riemann (1826-1866), non-Euclidean manifolds are said to be "curved," and only Euclidean space itself is called "flat." Contradiction #1 above produces "positively" curved space ("spherical" or "elliptical" geometry, first described by Riemann himself), and contradiction #2 "negatively" curved space ("hyperbolic" or Lobachevskian geometry). To Euclid, this doubtlessly would seem to prove his point: the parallel postulate is about straight lines, so using curved lines hardly produces an honest non-Euclidean geometry. "Curvature" in this respect, however, is used in an unusual sense. Euclidean geodesics "straight" and generalized straight lines "geodesics". "Flat" spaces of more than three dimensions may be called "Euclidean" because of their lack of curvature; but this is an extension of geometry that would have very much been news to Euclid, and I wish to retain the historical connection between "Euclidean" and Euclid]. What "curvature" would have meant to Euclid is now "extrinsic" curvature: that for a line or a plane or a space to be "curved" it must occupy a space of higher dimension, i.e. that a curved line requires a plane, a curved plane requires a volume, a curved volume requires some fourth dimension, etc. Now "intrinsic" curvature has nothing to do with any higher dimension. But how did this happen? Why did "curvature" come to have this unusual meaning? Why should we confuse ourselves by saying that "intrinsic" straight lines, geodesics, in non-Euclidean spaces have curvature? This happened because non-Euclidean planes can be modeled as extrinsically curved surfaces within Euclidean space. Thus the surface of a sphere is the classic model of a two-dimensional, positively curved Riemannian space; but while great circles are the straight lines (geodesics) according to the intrinsic properties of that surface, we see the surface as itself curved into the third dimension of Euclidean space. A sphere is such a good representation of a non-Euclidean surface, and spherical trigonometry was so well developed at the time, that it now is a little surprising that it was not the basis of the first non-Euclidean geometry developed [cf. Gray ibid. p.171]. However, as noted, such a geometry does contradict other axioms that can easily be posited for geometry. Accepting positively curved spaces means that those axioms must be rejected. Also, and more importantly, these models in Euclidean space are not always successful.with Lobachevskian space. A saddle shaped surface is a Lobachevskian space at the center of the saddle, but a true Lobachevskian space does not have a center. Other Lobachevskian models distort shapes and sizes. There is no representation of a Lobachevskian surface that shares the virtues of a sphere in having no center, no singularities (i.e. points that do not belong to the space), and in allowing figures to be moved around without distortion in shape or size. Three dimensional non-Euclidean spaces of course cannot be modeled at all using Euclidean space.
This raises two questions: 1) what can we spatially visualize? (a question of psychology) And 2) what can exist in reality? (a question of ontology). We cannot visualize any true Lobachevskian spaces or any non-Euclidean spaces at all with more than two dimensions--or any spaces at all with more than three dimensions. Also we can only visualize a positively curved surface if this is embedded in a Euclidean volume with an explicit extrinsic curvature. "Curvature" was thus a natural term for intrinsic properties because there always was extrinsic curvature for any model that could be visualized. Why are there these limits on what we can visualize? Why is our visual imagination confined to three Euclidean dimensions? It is now common to say that computer graphics are breaking through these limitations, but such references are always to projections of non-Euclidean or multi-dimensional spaces onto two dimensional computer screens. Such projections could be done, laboriously, long before computers; but they never produced more, and can produce no more, than flat Euclidean drawings of curves. If such graphics are expected to alter our minds so that we can see things differently, this is no more than a prediction, or a hope, not a fact. And considering that non-Euclidean geometries have been conceived for almost two centuries, the transformation of our imagination seems a bit tardy, however much help computers can now give to it. Mathematicians don't have to worry about these questions of visualization because visualization is not necessary for the analytic formulas that describe the spaces. The formulas gave meaningfulness to non-Euclidean geometry as common sense never could.
The Euclidean nature of our imagination led Kant to say that although the denial of the axioms of Euclid could be conceived without contradiction, our intuition is limited by the form of space imposed by our own minds on the world. While it is not uncommon to find claims that the very existence of non-Euclidean geometry refutes Kant's theory, such a view fails to take into account the meaning of the term "synthetic," which is that a synthetic proposition can be denied without contradiction. Leonard Nelson realized that Kant's theory implies a prediction of non-Euclidean geometry, not a denial of it, and that the existence of non-Euclidean geometry vindicates Kant's claim that the axioms of geometry are synthetic. The intelligibility of non-Euclidean geometry for Kantian theory is neither a psychological nor an ontological question, but simply a logical one--using Hume's criterion of possibility as logically consistent conceivability. Kant does not say non-Euclidean geometry is logically impossible, but that is only because he does not claim that any geometry is logically true; geometry in his view is synthetic, not analytic. And Kant's belief that Euclidean geometry was true, because our intuitions tell us so, seems to me to be either unintelligible or wrong.
If we are unable to visualize non-Euclidean geometries without using extrinsically curved lines, however, the intelligibility of Kant's theory is not hard to find. The sense of the truth of Euclidean geometry for Kant is no more or less than the confidence that centuries of geometers had in the parallel postulate, a confidence based on our very real spatial imagination. If Kant's claim is "unintelligible," then Gray has not reflected on why everyone in history until the 19th century believed that the parallel postulate was true. That is the psychological question, not the logical or ontological one. The sense of ancient confidence can be recovered at any time today simply by trying to explain non-Euclidean geometry to undergraduate students who have never heard of it before. We might say that attempts to prove the postulate show that people were uneasy about it; but the universal expectation was that the postulate was really a theorem, and no one cashed in their unease by trying to construct geometry with a denial of it. Saccheri denied it, but only because he was constructing reductio ad absurdum proofs. Non-Euclidean geometry did not change our spatial imagination, it only proved what Kant had already implicitly claimed: the synthetic and axiomatically independent character of the first principles of geometry. It could well be the case that Kant is right and that we will never be able to imagine the appearance of Lobachevskian or multi-dimensional non-Euclidean spaces, or to model them without extrinsic curvature, however well we understand the analytic equations. This is purely a question of psychology and not at all one of logic, mathematics, physics, or ontology. Mathematicians are free to ignore the limitations of our imagination, although they then run the risk of wandering so far from common sense that the frontiers of mathematics will never be intelligible to even well-informed persons of general knowledge. Furthermore, since Kant believed that space was a form imposed by our minds on the world, he did not believe that space actually existed apart from our experience. This leads us to the ontological question: what can exist in reality? Non-Euclidean geometry was no more than a mathematical curiosity until Einstein applied it to physics. Now the whole issue seems much deeper and complex than it did in Kant's day, or Riemann's. If our imagination is necessarily Euclidean, hard-wired into the brain as we might now think by analogy with computers, but Einstein found a way to apply non-Euclidean geometry to the world, then we might think that space does have a reality and a genuine structure in the world however we are able to visually imagine it.
In light of the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic curvature, we must consider all the kinds of ontological axioms that will cover all the possible spaces that Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries can describe. If the limitations imposed by our imaginations present us with features of real space, we would have to say that intrinsic curvature, despite being analytically independent of extrinsic curvature, can only exist in conjunction with extrinsic curvature and so with an embedding in higher dimensions. This could be called the axiom of ortho-curvature, according to which there would actually be no true non-Euclidean geometry, for non-Euclidean geodesics would necessarily have extrinsic curvature and so would never be the actual straight lines that we need ex hypothese to contradict Euclid. The geometry of the surface of a sphere would thus involve ortho-curvature because its intrinsic straight lines, the great circles, must be simultaneously visualized and understood to be curved lines in three dimensional Euclidean space. On the other hand, it may be that intrinsically curved spaces can exist in reality without extrinsic curvature and so without being embedded in a higher dimension. This could be called the axiom of hetero-curvature, and it would make true non-Euclidean geometry possible, since lines with non-Euclidean relations to each other would be straight in the common meaning of the term understood by Euclid or Kant.
A further ontological distinction can be made. Even if the ortho-curvature axiom is true, a functionally non-Euclidean geometry would be possible if a higher dimension that allows for extrinsic curvature exists but is hidden from us. We must consider whether only the three dimensions of space exist or whether there may be additional dimensions which somehow we do not experience but which can produce an intrinsic curvature whose extrinsic properties cannot be visualized or imaginatively inspected by us. Thus we should distinguish between an axiom of closed ortho-curvature, which says that three dimensional space is all there is, and an axiom of open ortho-curvature, which says that higher dimensions can exist. This gives us three possibilities:
That, with the axiom of closed ortho-curvature, there are no true non-Euclidean geometries (and no spatial dimensions beyond three), but only pseudo-geometries consisting of curves in Euclidean space;
That, with the axiom of open ortho-curvature, there are no true non-Euclidean geometries but we may be faced with a functional non-Euclidean geometry in Euclidean space whose external curvature is concealed from us in dimensions (more than the three familiar spatial dimensions) not available to our inspection--this is an apparent hetero-curvature;
And that, with the axiom of hetero-curvature, there are real non-Euclidean geometries whose intrinsic properties do not ontologically presuppose higher dimensions (whether or not there are more than three spatial dimensions).
It is necessary to keep in mind that these axioms are answers to questions concerning reality that would be asked in physics or metaphysics and are logically entirely separate from the status of geometry in logic or mathematics or from our psychological powers of visual imagination. The second axiom leaves open the question whether "hidden" dimensions are just hidden from our perception or actually separate from our own dimensional existence. With these ontological alternatives in mind, we can now examine the philosophical implications of Einstein's use of non-Euclidean geometry.

§3. Geometry in Einstein's Theory of Relativity

Einstein's general theory of relativity proposes that the "force" of gravity actually results from an intrinsic curvature of spacetime, not from Newtonian action-at-a-distance or from a quantum mechanical exchange of virtual particles. If we view Einstein's philosophical project as an answer to Kant's Antinomy of Space--to explain how straight lines in space can be finite but unbounded--the introduction of time reckoned as the fourth dimension suggests that we may separate the intrinsic curvature of spacetime into curvature based on the relationship between space and time: we can think of Einstein's theory as one that satisfies the axiom of open ortho-curvature, with the peculiarity that it is indeed time, rather than a higher dimension of space, that is posited beyond our familiar three spatial dimensions. This is a metaphysically elegant theory, since is gives us the mathematical use of a higher dimension without the need to postulate a real spatial dimension beyond our experience or our existence. Time is a dimension that is present to us only one spatial slice at a time, just as the third dimension is only intersected at one (radial) point by the curved surface of a sphere in our previous model of a positively curved space.
Our spherical model for non-Euclidean spacetime, however, is not quite right; for on the analogy, the intrinsic lines in space should be the geodesics and so should appear straight to us. They should appear curved only from the perspective of the higher dimension, as the great circles on the sphere appear curved from our three dimensional perspective. That is not true in terms of astronomical space, where the lines drawn by freefalling bodies in gravitational fields are most evidently curved to our three dimensional imaginations, even while they are understood to be geodesics only in terms of their form in the higher dimension of spacetime. That is exactly the opposite of the case in the model: Freefalling paths ("world lines") are geodesics in spacetime but extrinsically curved lines in space, while in the model great circles are extrinsically curved lines in solid space (corresponding to spacetime) but geodesics in plane space (corresponding to space).
Intrinsic curvature, which was introduced by Riemann to explain how straight lines could have the properties associated with curvature without being curved in the ordinary sense, is now used to explain how something which is obviously curved, e.g. the orbit of a planet, is really straight. Something has gotten turned around. If the curvature of spacetime is evident to us in extrinsically curved lines in three dimensional space, then the form of the analogy forces us to posit the "higher" or extrinsic dimension, into which the straight lines are curved, as a spatial one, not the temporal one. If three dimensional space is not extrinsically curved into time according to the axiom of open ortho-curvature, then it must be time that is extrinsically curved into the dimensions of space. In the model, where before the surface of the sphere was analogous to solid space, now the surface must be analogous to two dimensions of space plus time, with the third dimension of space as that into which the geodesics of spacetime are extrinsically curved. Switching the role of time suddenly makes the model very non-intuitive, but it is compelled by the feature of the model that the geodesic is on the surface of the sphere. It does not help the philosophical issue to eject the complications of the axiom of open ortho-curvature and simply take the four dimensions of spacetime as satisfying hetero-curvature; for this loses sight of Kant's Antinomy of Space, which we hope to answer, and of the circumstance that even in Relativity the dimension of time is not exactly the same as the dimensions of space. That is the most intuitively obvious in the "separation" formula: s2 = t2 - (x2 + y2 + z2)/c2. Here the Pythagorean formula for changes in spatial location, divided by the velocity of light squared, is subtracted from the change in time squared, to give the spacetime "separation" in units of time. Thus time is not treated as simply another spatial dimension. Thus we must consider the differences between space and time, and the axiom of open ortho-curvature alone allows for this.
The result of attributing extrinsic curvature to time is also suggested by the peculiarity of using "curved space" alone to explain gravity, as is common in museums and textbooks around the world; for curved space conjures up images of hills and valleys through which moving objects describe curved paths. However, those images presuppose motion, and motion is the very thing to be explained. Gravity does not just direct motion; it causes it. An object passing by the earth is accelerated towards the earth and thereby acquires a velocity along a vector where it previously may have had no velocity at all. An object placed at rest with respect to the earth, with no initial velocity in any direction, will be accelerated with a velocity towards the earth. If there are no "forces" acting on the body, as Einstein says, then the only change that takes place is the body's movement along the temporal axis; and if the body is thereby displaced in space, it must be displaced by its movement along that axis. The temporal axis can displace the object if the axis is itself curved; so the curvature of spacetime in a gravitational field must result from the curvature of time, not of space. The extrinsic dimension of ortho-curvature, into which the straight lines curve, is a dimension of ordinary Euclidean space. This can be intuitively shown, not so much in our non-Euclidean models, but simply in a graph plotting time (t) against one dimension of space (r). An accelerating body will describe a curved line that changes its coordinate in the r axis as its coordinate in the t axis changes. If the acceleration comes from spacetime itself, then the coordinate grid will itself be curved: the t axis lines will curve, displacing themselves against the r axis (spatial location), while the r axis lines will not curve. The curvature of time itself is hidden from us because, indeed, we intersect only one point on the temporal axis. Consequently, how do we know we are being accelerated by gravity? In free fall we are being displaced with space itself, and so we move with our entire frame of reference and would not be able to detect that locally. Indeed, we cannot. It is Einstein's own "equivalence" principle of General Relativity that we cannot tell the difference between free fall in a gravitational field and free floating in the absence of a gravitational field. The motion induced in us by the curvature of time is evident only because we can observe distant objects that are not subject to our local acceleration. When we are not in free fall, e.g. standing on the surface of the earth, we feel weight, just as according to the equivalence principle when we are being accelerated by a force (e.g. a rocket engine) in the absence of a gravitational field. These are indeed equivalent because in each case we are moving relative to space according to our own frame of reference. When we are accelerated by a rocket we say that we move in the stationary reference of external space; but when we are accelerated standing on the surface of the earth, it is space itself that is displaced (by time) relative to us. Either we move through space, or space moves through us. That is the experience of weight.
A question remains about the global character of spacetime. Gravitational fields are locally positively curved, but Einstein and his philosophical successors evidently expected that spacetime as a whole would be positively curved, since a finite but unbounded universe is aesthetically more satisfying--and it answers Kant's Antinomy of Space. Now, however, the geometry of cosmological spacetime is usually tied to the dynamical fate of the expanding universe. Open, ever expanding universes, are regarded as having Lobachevskian or even Euclidean geometry and only closed universes, headed for ultimate collapse, positive Riemannian curvature. The observational evidence at the moment is for an open universe, and "inflationary" models even have reasons to prefer a Euclidean over a Lobachevskian geometry. These possibilities, however, introduce considerable trouble; for Euclidean and Lobachevskian spaces are both infinite, and it is a much different proposition to say that an infinitely dense Big Bang starts at a finite singularity, into which a finite positively curved space can be packed, than it is to say that an infinite homogeneous and isotropic universe, which must have begun infinite, starts from an infinitely dense Big Bang. An infinitely dense singularity can have a finite mass, but an extended infinite density, even in a small finite region of space, cannot.
In a recent cosmological article in Scientific American, "Textures and Cosmic Structure" (March 1992), the authors, Spergel and Turok, speak of the universe (they do not say "the observable universe") starting from an "infinitesimally small point" or of the universe being at one time the size of a "grapefruit," as though that would hold true for all model universes. The infinite universes are not even considered, and so the questions about density can be happily ignored. The problem is compounded here because there are actually two infinities competing with each other: there is the infinite volume of space, and there is the infinite shrinkage, or compression, represented by the big bang singularity. However much you shrink an infinite space, it is still infinite. On the other hand, any finite region within infinite space, however large, can be compressed to a single point at the big bang. There is no conflict between the two infinities so long as you specify just what it is that you are talking about.
The problem here, however, is not visualization, it is the hard logical truth that an infinite space remains infinite and that the big bang for an infinite space, although it can be described as a singularity in relation to any finite region of space, cannot be a finite singularity.
Einstein himself introduced his Cosmological Constant to preserve a static universe, before Hubble's evidence of the red shift. He thus seems to have been thinking that a global positively curved geometry for spacetime was not necessarily tied to some dynamical evolution of the universe. This is still a possibility. Three dimensional space can still be conceived as having an inherent hetero-curvature apart from the gravitational fate of the universe: non-Euclidean without the need to regard time or anything else as a fourth dimension into which space needs to be extrinsically curved. This makes for a finite Big Bang regardless of the dynamical fate of the universe, where that fate is tied to the effect of the curvature of time, locally positively curved but globally possibly Lobachevskian or Euclidean. However, a theory of global hetero-curvature then stands separate from the mathematical Relativistic theory of gravity and becomes a theory in metaphysical cosmology more than a theory in physical cosmology.
A positively hetero-curved universe happens to suit the most commonly used cosmological model of all: the inflating balloon, where motion is added to our spherical model of non-Euclidean geometry. The surface of the balloon remains spherical regardless of whether the balloon is blown up forever or whether it eventually is allowed to deflate. As a model the balloon therefore actually posits five dimensions, with the surface representing the three dimensions of space, time as the fourth, but as a fifth the third spatial dimension into which the surface is curved and through which the surface moves in time. A positively hetero-curved universe, however, does not need that fifth dimension. Space would be non-Euclidean without higher dimensions, even while it moves along a temporal axis that is locally ortho-curved into an apparently hetero-curved spacetime because of the curvature of time. The balloon model therefore can represent a different kind of theory than it was intended to, but a most suggestive one, where the global structure of the isotropic and homogeneous universe may allow us to avoid an infinite Big Bang independent of the dynamical fate of the universe and fulfill the hope of the philosophers that Einstein answered Kant's Antinomy of Space.
§4. Conclusion
Just because the math works doesn't mean that we understand what is happening in nature. Every physical theory has a mathematical component and a conceptual component, but these two are often confused. Many speak as though the mathematical component confers understanding, this even after decades of the beautiful mathematics of quantum mechanics obviously conferring little understanding. The mathematics of Newton's theory of gravity were beautiful and successful for two centuries, but it conferred no understanding about what gravity was. Now we actually have two competing ways of understanding gravity, either through Einstein's geometrical method or through the interaction of virtual particles in quantum mechanics.
Nevertheless, there is often still a kind of deliberate know-nothing-ism that the mathematics is the explanation. It isn't. Instead, each theory contains a conceptual interpretation that assigns meaning to its mathematical expressions. In non-Euclidean geometry and its application by Einstein, the most important conceptual question is over the meaning of "curvature" and the ontological status of the dimensions of space, time, or whatever. The most important point is that the ontological status of the dimensions involved with the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic curvature is a question entirely separate from the mathematics. It is also, to an extent, a question that is separate from science--since a scientific theory may work quite well without out needing to decide what all is going on ontologically. Some realization of this, unfortunately, leads people more easily to the conclusion that science is conventionalistic or a social construction than to the more difficult truth that much remains to be understood about reality and that philosophical questions and perspectives are not always useless or without meaning. Philosophy usually does a poor job of preparing the way for science, but it never hurts to ask questions. The worst thing that can ever happen for philosophy, and for science, is that people are so overawed by the conventional wisdom in areas where they feel inadequate (like math) that they are actually afraid to ask questions that may imply criticism, skepticism, or, heaven help them, ignorance.
These observations about Einstein's Relativity are not definitive answers to any questions; they are just an attempt to ask the questions which have not been asked. Those questions become possible with a clearer understanding of the separate logical, mathematical, psychological, and ontological components of the theory of non-Euclidean geometry. The purpose, then, is to break ground, to open up the issues, and to stir up the complacency that is all too easy for philosophers when they think that somebody else is the expert and understands things quite adequately. It is the philosopher's job to question and inquire, not to accept somebody else's word for somebody else's understanding.
Grappling with the causes of inertia, Newton imagined two buckets partially filled with water. The first bucket is left still, and the surface of the water is flat. The second bucket is spun rapidly, and the surface of the water is concave. Why?
The naive answer is centrifugal force. But how does the second bucket know it is spinning? In particular, what defines the inertial reference frame relative to which the second bucket spins and the first does not? Berkeley [!] and Mach's answer was that all the matter [which Berkeley didn't believe in] in the universe collectively provides the reference frame. The first bucket is at rest relative to distance galaxies, so its surface remains flat. The second bucket spins relative to those galaxies, so its surface is concave. If there were no distant galaxies, there would be no reason to prefer one reference frame over the other. The surface in both buckets would have to remain flat, and therefore the water would require no centripetal force to keep it rotating. In short, there would be no inertia. Mach inferred that the amount of inertia a body experiences is proportional to the total amount of matter in the universe. An infinite universe would cause infinite inertia. Nothing would ever move. [p. 92, comments added]
Whatever the "naive" explanation may be, it is not the one used by Newton. The argument made by Luminet et al., Berkeley, and Mach is actually the argument originally made by Leibniz (and just recycled by Berkeley, who believed in space less than in matter) against Newton's idea that space was real.
For Newton, the rotating bucket was rotating in relation to space itself. Evidently, it is now such "conventional wisdom" that space itself provides no inertial frame of reference, since Einstein, that it doesn't occur to anyone that the kind of reference it provides vis à vis rotation is rather different from what it fails to provide to establish absolute linear motion. The argument that, in empty space, with no "distant galaxies," there would be no centrifugal force in the bucket and the water in one would be just as flat as in the other is not a necessary conclusion, but only a theory. And not a theory easily tested without an empty universe available.
On the other hand, the question can still be asked how the bucket can "know" that the "distant galaxies" are out there. There must be a physical interaction for that (the range of gravity is infinite); yet Einstein, again, said that no physical interaction can travel faster than the velocity of light, and in an "inflationary" universe (which Mach didn't know about) light can have reached us from only a finite part of the universe, even in an infinite universe. Thus the argument of Luminet et al. fails, for a infinite universe would make for infinite inertia only if the whole universe could physically affect a location. If only a finite part of the universe, infinite or otherwise, affects a location, then there will still only be finite inertia.
Apart from a shake-up over the geometry of space, there has been another surprise in recent cosmology. An article in the January 1999 Scientific American, "Surveying Space-time with Supernovae" [Craig J. Hogan, Robert P. Kirshner, and Nicholas B. Suntzeff, pp. 46-51], discusses observational data that seems to indicate that the expansion of the universe has accelerated over time, not decelerated as it should under the influence of gravity alone. This implies the existence of Einstein's "Cosmological Constant" or some other exotic force that would override the attraction of gravity. It also may clear up another pecularity about "standard" cosmology that had been swept under the rug. That is, all closed universes, where deceleration would be enough to produce a collapse into the "Big Crunch," preferred by cosmologists like Stephen Hawking, would have to be younger than 2/3 of the Hubble Time (1/H). This would also mean that no objects in the universe could have a red shift larger than 2/3 of the velocity of light (c), since the red shift gives us the distance in proportion to the Hubble Radius (c/H), and also the age in proportion to the Hubble Time. Thus, in the diagram at right, all the universes under the green curve are closed, and all those above the green curve are open. Now, many quasars have red shifts larger than 2/3 c. Many are even over 90% of c. This has been prima facie evidence since the 70's that the universe was open, but nobody of any influence seems to have noticed. Now, however, if the universe is accelerating, then all possible universes are above the straight red line in the diagram which indicates the Hubble Constant. They will all be older than the Hubble Time. This suddenly makes it quite reasonable that very old objects, like many quasars, would have very, very large red shifts. Indeed, the Big Bang itself would appear to be receding faster than the velocity of light -- it would have an infinite red shift. So again we have an object lesson in the history of science, that a careful examination of the implications of a theory is sometimes neglected by professional science. Inconsistencies can be revealed by even a lay examination.
http://www.scienceomatica.com