like i've said earlier, philosophy or theoretical cosmology depends on science for it's advancement. in may case, i'm only vaguely aware of where science, mainly physics and astronomy, is to be able to extrapolate from that the nature and extent of existence or the universe. so, what has science come up with. bascially, that macroscopically and microscopically the universe is still going strong and is larger than our ability to discern any end, final analysis, barrier, etc. to my mind, we are dealing with space and matter. since we are yet unable to get to the smallest particle or the apparent end of the distribution of matter throughout space, some of us are led to believe that space may be infinitel, matter may or may not be infinite, the smallest particle may never be forthcoming. the problem is that if infinity has anything to do with this, we will never know because of it's very nature. even if matter appeared to end forming a spherical comglomeration of galaxies, for example, there could be other spheres of matter out there beyond ours that we are yet unable to sense. i admit that i do find it more difficult to conceive of an infinite microcosm since i figure that matter is composed of something definite, like pure energy in the form of an electical current or radiation or something. conversely, maybe space does eventually wrap around upon itself. but i just can't see it. the concept of infinite space is so incredible, so compelling, that i think i, too, am entrenched and dogmatic about it being true, somehow. so the backdrop for the distribution of matter is so incomprehensible, so fantastic that it is kinda fun to think about. anyway, i wanted my topic to have fire on the little topic folder so i thought about this to be the 20th reply. also, say that about 90% of the worlds population is religious and believes, more or less, in a creator (even many scientists). then a small amount are atheist. then a larger amount agnostic (that's what i claim to be) and a large percentage of the remainder is just not religious or philosophical. but my point is that among the philosophical atheists, agnostics and scientists, which is a quite small part of the general public, it seems like most don't really agree that much. so, it seems to me that discussions like the ones that go on on this web site are up in the thin air of escoteric thought. in other words, we are lucky...peace!
