Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!padraig
From: padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Holy Spirit, Trinity, angels and cosmology: ANSWER PART I
Message-ID: <1285@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Sep-86 22:46:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.1285
Posted: Thu Sep 25 22:46:49 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 29-Sep-86 00:34:01 EDT
References: <7568@tekecs.UUCP> <1503@mtx5a.UUCP> <7616@tekecs.UUCP> <260@prometheus.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 31
Keywords: Trinity, Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit, Substance
Xref: linus net.religion.christian:4735 talk.religion.misc:258

In article <260@prometheus.UUCP>, pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) writes:
> 
> ... 
> To be a viable hypothesis and be able to provide the "energy/information"
> source for the substance of the big bang, the concept had to meet certain 
> requirements.  First the source had to logically predate the big
> bang; second, it has to remain "hidden" from easy view or have a low
> interaction "cross section" with respect to the three space physical
> universe in spite of the fact that it can still generate quasars;
> thirdly, the energy density of the substance must be higher than 
> that of our physical universe, and finally any other characteristics}
> should be in a very generalized sense consistent with the known physical 
> universe.  The hidden requirement is because we scientist haven't been 
> able to find the "creator" or any other mechanism "out in the open" 
> within physical space that could do the trick.

Here we have it. You can't find what you want to see (i.e. a creator to do
the "trick") hence you conjure up spaces to squeeze him into to satisfy
your bias.

Also, covering assertions with more assertions is irritating to me. 
Where did you get the idea that any of this has to do with quasars? 
Why not seyfert galaxies?
Why should the energy density be greater than that of our physical universe?

All I see  here is strings of buzz-words thrown together in an attempt to
explain away that which you don't understand. You are using phrases
like "low interaction cross-section" to protect your theories from
examination. 

Padraig Houlahan.