Universal Family

The key to a planetary spiritual renaissance

Cosmology Centered

Science / by

Saggitarius

Want the podcast episode?

I find it stabilizing to orient myself with respect to a few places that I find meaningful. One of them is akin to a pilgrimage site; another one is comparable. But the third one is in the sky, near Saggitarius: it is called the Great Attractor. It is the gravitational center around which everything else orbits. The earth orbits around the sun, the sun around the center of the Milky Way galaxy, the galaxy around the center of the Local Cluster of galaxies, which orbits around the center of the Virgo Supercluster, which is being attracted by the Great Attractor. The scientific story is more complex, and it becomes harder to establish orbits toward the end of the story; but the main idea is that there is scientific evidence of a centered universe.

If we take relativity physics as our ultimate theory of space, it is meaningless to speak of a center; but I would like to see cosmology develop a way to honor relativity physics without marginalizing the fact of the Great Attractor.

Why does the idea of the Great Attractor matter? Because it fits perfectly with the idea that the Creator has a heavenly home, a Paradise of perfection, a residential dwelling place beyond the evolutionary realm that comes within range of our telescopes. Said the Psalmist, “The Creator covers himself with light and stretches out the heavens as a curtain” (Psalm 104).

At any time of the day or night, if I want literally to orient myself to the highest heaven, I turn on my phone, open my sky map, find Saggitarius along the ecliptic, near Pluto, in order to enhance my feeling of being anchored in the center of all things.

 

Photo credit: http://www.absoluteaxarquia.com/nightsky/sagittarius.html

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Since Jeffrey open up a truly beautiful subject I would like to recommend the apps ‘Sky Guide’ and ‘Stellarium’ along with ‘Astronomy Picture of the Day’ or APOD. Most of us who live in urban areas with strong nighttime light never see but a few of the brightest stars. These resources help help with visualizing the night sky as the way our ancient forbearers saw it. Also, there are astronomy and nightphotography clubs who regularly travel to rural areas (like the Trona Pinnicles and Death Valley here in California) to view the nighttime sky. There is no greater thrill than to participate in these hobbies with reflective thinking likeminded people.

  2. Since Jeffrey open up a truly beautiful subject I would like to recommend the apps ‘Sky Guide’ and ‘Stellarium’ along with ‘Astronomy Picture of the Day’ or APOD. Most of us who live in urban areas with strong nighttime light never see but a few of the brightest stars. These resources help help with visualizing the night sky as the way our ancient forbearers saw it. Also, there are astronomy and nightphotography clubs who regularly travel to rural areas (like the Trona Pinnicles and Death Valley here in California) to view the nighttime sky. There is no greater thrill than to participate in these hobbies with reflective thinking likeminded people.

  3. It certainly sounds reasonable to me that the Creator would have a place where he directs everything. The observable facts so far seems to suggest that the Super Virgo Cluster which our galaxy is a part of is being drawn towards something by definition that has to be more massive than what is being drawn to it; otherwise it would be the other way around.

    I wonder if the back ground radiation that is use to justify the Big Bang Theory is the eternal residual radiation that is the result when the Creator flashed his eternal home into existence? Just wondering.

    Dr. Perry

  4. It certainly sounds reasonable to me that the Creator would have a place where he directs everything. The observable facts so far seems to suggest that the Super Virgo Cluster which our galaxy is a part of is being drawn towards something by definition that has to be more massive than what is being drawn to it; otherwise it would be the other way around.

    I wonder if the back ground radiation that is use to justify the Big Bang Theory is the eternal residual radiation that is the result when the Creator flashed his eternal home into existence? Just wondering.

    Dr. Perry

    • Dear brother Luix,
      I appreciate your sharing your ideas with us. You are a deeply sincere and spiritual person, poetic in your expression, and someone who cares about cosmology. I am grateful that you read these blog posts and contribute comments of your own. This time you really worked to give us some links that are meaningful to you. But after taking time today to follow up these links, I have some concerns to voice.
      I have problems with the first link, to the video on the solar system. The graphics are good, and I see impressive statements that seem scientific (although I don’t know how much I can trust them, since they offer no supporting evidence). But they are all placed side by side as if they were all correlated–which is suggested, but not argued, and at times very questionable. And then we hear ominous music, which injects a mood with its implicit interpretations. And finally we have ideas proposed about mental and spiritual phenomena, ideas which are not supported by the “premises” that preceded.
      How can we develop a higher quality integration of scientific, philosophical, and religious thought?
      I note that climate change is “explained” with no reference to human pollution, and the implied reasoning based on those facts seems very questionable to me. I believe that it is essential to remember that ominous music triggers feelings that are inconsistent with the truth of God as our Friend, whose wise laws govern the realms of matter, mind, and spirit in a grand evolutionary process. I believe in a friendly universe, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.
      The second link which simply situates the place of the sun in the sky seems unproblematic to me. But the third link tells of a New Age hypothesis that lacks scientific support. At least that is what I found today. Wikipedia is always changing; people with little knowledge of the topic can revise an article as they like. Thus on controversial topics Wikipedia becomes a less reliable source of information.
      Sometimes hypotheses that are unpopular with a majority of scientists are worth taking seriously; but I try to be responsible to good quality thinking in any area on which I write or host a conversation.
      Your comment has provided a good opportunity to discuss matters that have not been raised in this weblog or its predecessor, ANewPhilosophyOfLiving.com. I am grateful that so many people are interested in cosmology now, and that conversations like this have the possibility to inform, to allow us to know one another better, and to clarify matters, at least a little, on the way to better understanding.

    • Dear brother Luix,
      I appreciate your sharing your ideas with us. You are a deeply sincere and spiritual person, poetic in your expression, and someone who cares about cosmology. I am grateful that you read these blog posts and contribute comments of your own. This time you really worked to give us some links that are meaningful to you. But after taking time today to follow up these links, I have some concerns to voice.
      I have problems with the first link, to the video on the solar system. The graphics are good, and I see impressive statements that seem scientific (although I don’t know how much I can trust them, since they offer no supporting evidence). But they are all placed side by side as if they were all correlated–which is suggested, but not argued, and at times very questionable. And then we hear ominous music, which injects a mood with its implicit interpretations. And finally we have ideas proposed about mental and spiritual phenomena, ideas which are not supported by the “premises” that preceded.
      How can we develop a higher quality integration of scientific, philosophical, and religious thought?
      I note that climate change is “explained” with no reference to human pollution, and the implied reasoning based on those facts seems very questionable to me. I believe that it is essential to remember that ominous music triggers feelings that are inconsistent with the truth of God as our Friend, whose wise laws govern the realms of matter, mind, and spirit in a grand evolutionary process. I believe in a friendly universe, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.
      The second link which simply situates the place of the sun in the sky seems unproblematic to me. But the third link tells of a New Age hypothesis that lacks scientific support. At least that is what I found today. Wikipedia is always changing; people with little knowledge of the topic can revise an article as they like. Thus on controversial topics Wikipedia becomes a less reliable source of information.
      Sometimes hypotheses that are unpopular with a majority of scientists are worth taking seriously; but I try to be responsible to good quality thinking in any area on which I write or host a conversation.
      Your comment has provided a good opportunity to discuss matters that have not been raised in this weblog or its predecessor, ANewPhilosophyOfLiving.com. I am grateful that so many people are interested in cosmology now, and that conversations like this have the possibility to inform, to allow us to know one another better, and to clarify matters, at least a little, on the way to better understanding.