|
Note that a u quark and a d anti-quark form a pion, the mesotron discussed earlier. These are virtual particles that pop in and out of existence, part of a cloud that extends to a mathematical infinity. The quark system is not enclosed within walls and is continually changing shape and form. It is the 'permanent' part of the proton, hence can justifiably be considered to define the proton radius.
The question again arises: How could it be possible for a human being to make such an estimate prior to 1955? My answer: Impossible!
[Diagram (A) illustrates the binding by gluons of the three valence quarks, u, u, and d that form the core of a proton. The quarks behave as if bonded by unbreakable "strings" that grow stronger when stretched. Stretched far enough by an input of energy, rather than break, they emit excess energy as a new quark-antiquark pair, a meson, as shown in (B) above, leaving the three-quark core of the proton intact. There are no walls to define a proton radius. Thus the quark system radius appears to be a valid choice.]
There is, of course, a wealth of material in The Urantia Book that other readers have pointed out as "prophetic." I hope that it should, by now, be obvious to all that our hypothesis about a secret Triple "A" committee writing the Urantia Papers and handing them over to Dr Sadler and his Contact Commission cannot explain figures that did not even exist until 25 years after the book was published, such as the radius of the electron and proton. Nor can it explain the prophetic science and historic material we, and others, have uncovered in The Urantia Book. In fact, I do not believe that the prophetic materials discussed herein can be accounted for in any other terms than that their source was non-human in origin.
Now a brief word about what I call the "funny" parts of the book such as the birth of invisible babies. We cannot pretend that they are not there, nor can we make them go away. Obviously the revelators have put them where they are for purposes of their own--which have not been revealed to us. What their purpose might be, can only be a matter of subjective personal opinion. Mine is that the "funny" bits are to do with preservation of our free will, something that may be assaulted by the correctness of the remarkable prophecies that have been uncovered. I see it this way. If, after a reasonable exposure to the book, persons reading it feel that they really would prefer it not to be true, then they will have little difficulty in finding something that will permit them to reject it with at least a partially placated conscience. Reader, Todd Moody, labels this feat of mental acrobatics as "plausible deniability."
But if, on the other hand, book readers are filled with the hope that the revelation is true and they seek confirmation, then their Thought Adjusters will see to it that they find it, whether it be via the spiritual content, the prophetic material, or in some other manner. Whatever the result, the revelators will have succeeded in complying with the universe laws that we mere mortals must not be coerced into seeking the pathway to the Universal Father and that our freewill is sacrosanct.
For me, the remarkable spirituality of its total content means that the Fifth Epochal Revelation is exactly what it claims to be, and the confirmation via its prophetic component is simply a bonus. But regardless of how I came to that conclusion, its acceptance still puts me in the situation of having to decide what effect the revelation must have upon the remainder of my Urantian life. Fortunately this amazing book provides the answers to most of our questions if we but go to the trouble to search for them. It says:
Belief has attained the level of faith when it motivates life and shapes the mode of living. The acceptance of a teaching as true is not faith; that is mere belief. Neither is certainty nor conviction faith. A state of mind attains to faith levels only when it actually dominates the mode of living. (1114)
The attainment of salvation is by faith and faith alone. (1593)
Put another way, it says that the harvest of belief is faith; that just as even a record crop of grain has no monetary value until it has been harvested, so with beliefs--they have no spiritual value until we acquire the faith that permits our beliefs to motivate our lives and dominate our mode of living. And since we have wound up on the subject of faith, let me finish with Brian Appleyard's gem one-liner: "If we had reason for faith, then it would not be faith at all, it would be logic. Faith can only be unreasonable."
References
Asimov, I. "The Neutrino." (Dobson Books Ltd, London, 1966)
Burbidge, E.M., G.R. Burbidge, W.A. Fowler & F. Hoyle. (1957)
Close, F., M. Marten, & C. Sutton. "The Particle Explosion." (Oxford University Press, 1987)
Gardner, M. "Urantia: The Great Cult Mystery." (Prometheus Books, New York, 1995)
Gamow, G. & M. Schoenberg. "Neutrino Theory of Stellar Collapse." Physical Review, 59, 539 (1941)
Hoyle, F., and J. Narliker. "The Physics Astronomy Frontier." (W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, 1980)
Isham, C. "Quantum Gravity" in The New Physics (P. Davies, ed.) (Cambridge University Press, 1989)
Lederman, L. "The God Particle." (Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1993)
|
|
