On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:43 AM, <wjhonson(a)aol.com> wrote:
Point one. I do not presuppose the existence of a
single god who is
omnipotent. After all, if you believe in one omnipotent god, it
doesn't take any leap to believe that that number may be more than one.
I tend to write without the use of capitals at times.
There can be only one. Or if you've already mastered oneness, you
could move on to two-ness, I suppose. (cf Woody Allen)
You assume my religious beliefs, but you're not
correct.
Polytheistic, I suppose?
Point two. It is I believe a fallacy to claim that a
group of atoms
can be crushed. What you are crushing is the space between the atoms.
Once you have crushed them beyond that point, they tend to dissociate
and become simply a neutron ball with no protons, perhaps an electron
cloud or something surrounding the ball I suppose. I would think the
electrons would rather scatter or something. Can you crush a neutron
ball further? I'm not personally very happy with the solutions to the
issue of the black hole problems, but there you go.
Er, that's why I indicated that both the conglomerate being crushed be
of sufficient mass - such as to have crumbling effects - and that the
ones doing the crushing be "sufficiently more massive" than the one
being crushed. There's an physical equilibrium thing going on where
collisions between objects that are too small to generate sufficient
gravity, won't break any atomic bonds.
-Stevertigo