The supernatural

[wollery]

Oh! do you have a faster than light speed space ship we have not heard about?
Have you visited 99.9999999% of the universe ? You have just plucked a figure out of the darkness of your cynicism. You cannot possibly say what percentage of the universe is inhabitable. All we know is there are billions of galaxies and we have explored none of them. It seems to me to be more likely that the universe is populated with a super abundance of intelligent life. There are probably countless planets in the Goldilocks zone, revolving around the billions of stars in the billions of galaxies

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Earth’s surface is inhabitable?

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Solar system that makes up?

Even accounting for the possible billions of inhabitable planets the percentage of the Universe that is hospitable for human life is minuscule.

The Earth makes up less than 1 millionth of the mass of the Solar system, and the inhabitable surface an incredibly tiny fraction of the volume of the Solar system.

Let’s then figure in the vast space between stars, and, honestly, Ian’s estimate is pretty low.

 

[Scorpion]

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Earth’s surface is inhabitable?

If you lift up any rock, you will probably find something wriggling under it.
If you go to the bottom of the oceans you will find it filled with strange creatures.

Life can and does exist everywhere on the planet.

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Solar system that makes up?

No.

 

[IanS]

Oh! do you have a faster than light speed space ship we have not heard about?
Have you visited 99.9999999% of the universe ? You have just plucked a figure out of the darkness of your cynicism. You cannot possibly say what percentage of the universe is inhabitable. All we know is there are billions of galaxies and we have explored none of them. It seems to me to be more likely that the universe is populated with a super abundance of intelligent life. There are probably countless planets in the Goldilocks zone, revolving around the billions of stars in the billions of galaxies

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Earth’s surface is inhabitable?

Do you have any idea what fraction of the Solar system that makes up?

Even accounting for the possible billions of inhabitable planets the percentage of the Universe that is hospitable for human life is minuscule.

The Earth makes up less than 1 millionth of the mass of the Solar system, and the inhabitable surface an incredibly tiny fraction of the volume of the Solar system.

Let’s then figure in the vast space between stars, and, honestly, Ian’s estimate is pretty low.

Yes; thank you ... of course by writing any number such as 99.9999999%, I am just using to that to say that the actual number, whatever that really is, is huge ... almost all of the known universe would be instantly deadly to human life.

As for Scorpions post - I don't think that should be dignified by a response lol. But just very briefly and as a general comment - when Christians and Muslims argue that the universe is "fine tuned", they actually mean specifically tuned for human life, and that belief is clearly absurd - humans find many if not most parts of planet Earth inhospitable, let alone the other planets of our solar system (and our solar planets are obviously less than 99.999.....999...99% of the vastness of this entire universe).

Scorpion asks if I have visited 99.9999999% of this universe. Well actually, as a matter of fact, astronomers & cosmological physicists etc. have now investigated an enormous area/volume of this universe as far back as 13.8billion years ago with the Big Bang. So actually the answer is that we do "know" what all of that detectable vastness of the universe is like, and it's certainly not compatible with the evolution of humans or similar advanced intelligent mammalian-type civilisations.

But, if Scorpion and heydarain believe in invisible spirtits and supernatural miracles etc., then unfortuantely it's probably of no use anyone trying to have a sensible conversation with them.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Yes; thank you ... of course by writing any number such as 99.9999999%, I am just using to that to say that the actual number, whatever that really is, is huge ... almost all of the known universe would be instantly deadly to human life.

As for Scorpions post - I don't think that should be dignified by a response lol. But just very briefly and as a general comment - when Christians and Muslims argue that the universe is "fine tuned", they actually mean specifically tuned for human life, and that belief is clearly absurd - humans find many if not most parts of planet Earth inhospitable, let alone the other planets of our solar system (and our solar planets are obviously less than 99.999.....999...99% of the vastness of this entire universe).

Scorpion asks if I have visited 99.9999999% of this universe. Well actually, as a matter of fact, astronomers & cosmological physicists etc. have now investigated an enormous area/volume of this universe as far back as 13.8billion years ago with the Big Bang. So actually the answer is that we do "know" what all of that detectable vastness of the universe is like, and it's certainly not compatible with the evolution of humans or similar advanced intelligent mammalian-type civilisations.

But, if Scorpion and heydarain believe in invisible spirtits and supernatural miracles etc., then unfortuantely it's probably of no use anyone trying to have a sensible conversation with them.

Hello. I believe in the supernatural. But it is not in the domain and authority of man. And can not check. And there is no need for man to understand what the supernatural is? And what happens there. No verse in the Qur'an mentions the supernatural. That is, God does not want man to enter this realm. Man has only a duty to know the universe and matter
.... But you yourself introduced the principle of Heisenberg uncertainty. Do you believe in this principle? So why do you give a definite opinion about the existence of life in the universe ?! If your support is astronomy. I must say that: the greatest challenge of all the sciences is change. That is, uncertainty is pervasive in the sciences.
No one but God knows what is going on in the universe. Only God knows. I think you know very well that 95% of the universe is made up of energy and dark matter. It is true? That is, man will do his best to discover only the remaining 5%. Allah is Great. We are in the knowledge of the universe and we can not make a claim. Of course, human discoveries in various fields of science and technology are commendable. And it makes me proud. But ... God can not be left out. In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

If the supernatural has an effect on the world we can test it. Claiming that we cannot is simply special pleading.

 

[IanS]

Hello. I believe in the supernatural. But it is not in the domain and authority of man. And can not check. And there is no need for man to understand what the supernatural is? And what happens there. No verse in the Qur'an mentions the supernatural. That is, God does not want man to enter this realm. Man has only a duty to know the universe and matter
.... But you yourself introduced the principle of Heisenberg uncertainty. Do you believe in this principle? So why do you give a definite opinion about the existence of life in the universe ?! If your support is astronomy. I must say that: the greatest challenge of all the sciences is change. That is, uncertainty is pervasive in the sciences.
No one but God knows what is going on in the universe. Only God knows. I think you know very well that 95% of the universe is made up of energy and dark matter. It is true? That is, man will do his best to discover only the remaining 5%. Allah is Great. We are in the knowledge of the universe and we can not make a claim. Of course, human discoveries in various fields of science and technology are commendable. And it makes me proud. But ... God can not be left out. In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God.

The "definite opinion" is only that human life could not evolve in the vastness of interstellar space (ie in the complete absence of planets). The reason for that should be obvious, and nobody should need to explain that for you.

As for life occurring on other planets (outside of our Earth). Life, of all sorts may well occur where any planets have very similar conditions to our Earth. And there may be very many planets like that. But at this point in time science does not claim enough accurate evidence to estimate how sure we can about that. However, for planets like Jupiter, Saturn Mercury, Venus etc., then all of the physical conditions there are extremely hostile to almost any sort of life as we know it (even very primitive types of life), so it's very unlikely that we will suddenly discover millions of humans living on Jupiter.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle really only applies specifically and directly to quantum states/processes ... such that we can never (apparently) predict or know with 100% certainty what any quantised system will do next. In theory that does indeed extend to macroscopic objects too, however, by the time you get to something as large as a grain of sand, the probability of a quantum event suddenly causing a visible change in the grain of sand (eg, say, it disappears, or radically changes shape), can be calculated and it is mind-bogglingly small, eg say 1 chance in 1-billion-trillion-trillion ... so that for example, if you wanted to wait until a grain of sand disappeared due to internal quantum interactions, then you'd probably have to wait for a time much longer than the current age of the universe, ie waiting longer than 13.8 billion years for that to happen.

But I think what you are trying to do is to claim that because we do not know everything as a matter of 100% certainty, that therefore means that absolutely anything is perfectly likely to happen on a scale that we as humans can readily experience. So for example you are trying to say that because the Uncertainty Principle is almost certainly correct, that means we should regard the existence of God and miracles as perfectly likely. And of course that is a mistake (or more often it is just another example or how religious people simply cannot tell the truth whenever it seems to contradict their beliefs ... and it's also an example of how they do not understand even quite basic 21st century science).

 

[wea]

In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God.

What Hawking are you citing? Hardly Stephen Hawking : “What I meant by ‘we would know the mind of God’ is, we would know everything that God would know, if there were a God, which there isn’t. I’m an atheist.”
I guess many others in this thread aready asked you, please point to where you've found "the words of Hawking" you report.
And frankly, you seem to have no idea what the (Heisenberg) uncertainty principle is about. Among others.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Oh! do you have a faster than light speed space ship we have not heard about?
Have you visited 99.9999999% of the universe ? You have just plucked a figure out of the darkness of your cynicism. You cannot possibly say what percentage of the universe is inhabitable. All we know is there are billions of galaxies and we have explored none of them. It seems to me to be more likely that the universe is populated with a super abundance of intelligent life. There are probably countless planets in the Goldilocks zone, revolving around the billions of stars in the billions of galaxies

And yet you speak with absolute certainty about beings you have never seen, in a realm you have never visited, and which, you say, cannot be tested, measured or evaluated in any way except by blind faith.
Curious.

 

[JoeMorgue]

//Westley from the Princess Bride Voice//

heydarian have you ever considered Bayesian Statistics? You'd make a wonderful Jabba.

 

[JayUtah]

//Westley from the Princess Bride Voice//

heydarian have you ever considered Bayesian Statistics? You'd make a wonderful Jabba.

Oh, please no.

 

[heydarian saeed]

If the supernatural has an effect on the world we can test it. Claiming that we cannot is simply special pleading.

Hello. Haven't you been for a while? I miss you. It is clear from his name that the supernatural is not from the universe. Therefore, studying and testing it and knowing it is not in the realm of the material world. And does not need to be examined by humans. Get the supernatural out of your mind. Everything is in this world. Do not look elsewhere in the universe. Wishing you health and success.

 

[heydarian saeed]

//Westley from the Princess Bride Voice//

heydarian have you ever considered Bayesian Statistics? You'd make a wonderful Jabba.

Greetings and Regards. Thank you very much for your kindness. Of course, I'm not aware of the terms you used. Please tell, whats the story of These words.
I am optimistic. I would like to see what is the meaning of the words you said?
What is Bayesian Statistics and Jabba? Please tell. Thanks a lot

 

[heydarian saeed]

The "definite opinion" is only that human life could not evolve in the vastness of interstellar space (ie in the complete absence of planets). The reason for that should be obvious, and nobody should need to explain that for you.

As for life occurring on other planets (outside of our Earth). Life, of all sorts may well occur where any planets have very similar conditions to our Earth. And there may be very many planets like that. But at this point in time science does not claim enough accurate evidence to estimate how sure we can about that. However, for planets like Jupiter, Saturn Mercury, Venus etc., then all of the physical conditions there are extremely hostile to almost any sort of life as we know it (even very primitive types of life), so it's very unlikely that we will suddenly discover millions of humans living on Jupiter.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle really only applies specifically and directly to quantum states/processes ... such that we can never (apparently) predict or know with 100% certainty what any quantised system will do next. In theory that does indeed extend to macroscopic objects too, however, by the time you get to something as large as a grain of sand, the probability of a quantum event suddenly causing a visible change in the grain of sand (eg, say, it disappears, or radically changes shape), can be calculated and it is mind-bogglingly small, eg say 1 chance in 1-billion-trillion-trillion ... so that for example, if you wanted to wait until a grain of sand disappeared due to internal quantum interactions, then you'd probably have to wait for a time much longer than the current age of the universe, ie waiting longer than 13.8 billion years for that to happen.

But I think what you are trying to do is to claim that because we do not know everything as a matter of 100% certainty, that therefore means that absolutely anything is perfectly likely to happen on a scale that we as humans can readily experience. So for example you are trying to say that because the Uncertainty Principle is almost certainly correct, that means we should regard the existence of God and miracles as perfectly likely. And of course that is a mistake (or more often it is just another example or how religious people simply cannot tell the truth whenever it seems to contradict their beliefs ... and it's also an example of how they do not understand even quite basic 21st century science).

Hi Professor.
-We find that there is a vacuum in the space between celestial bodies such as stars and planets. What I am discussing now is this: Human science has discovered the conditions of life on earth. As well as the time it takes for this process to take place, which has taken almost 3 billion years on Earth. And the right conditions for life are fully prepared.
But other than Earth, human science has not yet been able to discover life. Even in the solar system! Does science know what is going on under the atmosphere of Jupiter and its moons? Our technology has not yet made this discovery.
- I agree with you that human science has not yet been able to discover life anywhere other than Earth. The chariot of science is rushing towards the discovery of the unknown. I wish success for human science. Space, as it seems, is not compatible with living life. Not to be extremely hostile. No.
Not to be extremely hostile. I do not like this term. And I'm not compatible with it. Let's not use enmity even for space.
-Exactly. I find your speech very enjoyable here. And thank you. Let me ask you two questions in this regard. Can we accept the possibility that the "single" came into being on its own at the time of the Big Bang? What is the probability or length of it? We know that the "Planck range" time was ten to the power of minus 43 seconds. Can the single make any self at this time? Of course, the universe has not yet formed in the Planck area. Therefore, there is no time. And this is an important objection to Hawking's theory and the physicists of Astronomy. Of course, to justify it, they propose the Planck constant. But it is not acceptable. I do not intend to enter into this discussion further here. Because we are moving away from our main discussion. My next question is:
What is the probability that a living thing came into being from inanimate matter? One of the most important questions for biologists right now is: How can inanimate matter make living things? And give life. They have not yet answered this question. In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God! (Hawking said in an interview with Turkish Channel T)
- No. I do not want to make the existence of God or His miracles possible for you through Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I respect any personal opinion you have in this regard. You gave a definite opinion about the absence of life in the universe along with a statistical number. I mentioned the principle of uncertainty to remind you of your theory of life. It is clear that the absence of life anywhere in space other than Earth is a weak possibility. And no definite opinion can be given. Although human science is extremely limited. And it can not be surrounded by many unknowns.
Hoping to meet dear master.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Oh, please no.

Hi dear friend. Welcome to our discussion. I squeeze your hand warmly.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Let me remind you again: The human genome was the ultimate evolution of eukaryotes (early single cells). And formed after 3 billion years in the process of human evolution on Earth. This is one of the most important discoveries in biology. And it is completely scientific.
And it makes our proud. But the genome did not live. And suddenly came to life. This is the most important biological question that has not yet been answered. And we do not know how inanimate matter came to life ?! ... If any of your friends know the answer to this question, please let us know so we can understand. I will thank him immensely.
In the Qur'an, after stating the various stages of human evolution and its details, it answers this question. He says: After the genome is complete, suddenly God commands and inanimate matter comes to life !!. It's extremely hard to believe. But it is true. See: " soul" is the beautiful order of God. God wills and sends His command into the genome. The place of the soul is in the genome. The number of cells in the human body is 5 trillion to 200 trillion. The command of God, which is the soul, is present in all cells of the human body. Processes and plans all human data.
And it regularly sends all the information to the " Mobin - obvious
book" with every reaction from the cells. Until the Hereafter ... all this happens in this material world. It is not transcendental. It is quite understandable. And it can not be denied. If anyone denies this fact, he has denied himself. It denies itself because man is a combination of matter and spirit. And the soul is the command of God.
There are human beings in all of us. Therefore, God is undeniable. It is present in all our cells. How can we deny our existence ?! Human science has not yet understood this. And yet to answer the important question of how inanimate matter comes to life? It has not arrived. I said the full answer above. Anyone who has a scientific claim against the Qur'an should come and say it. To know and understand.
No one has been found yet. And it will not be. If you know someone, bring it. This is not my claim or sermon. God's claim is in the Qur'an and the Bible And the Torah.
Have a nice weekend. be happy. Healthy and correct body
you.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Are you claiming that humanity is the end goal of evolution?

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Let me remind you again: The human genome was the ultimate evolution of eukaryotes (early single cells). And formed after 3 billion years in the process of human evolution on Earth. This is one of the most important discoveries in biology. And it is completely scientific.
And it makes our proud. But the genome did not live. And suddenly came to life. This is the most important biological question that has not yet been answered. And we do not know how inanimate matter came to life ?! ... If any of your friends know the answer to this question, please let us know so we can understand. I will thank him immensely.
In the Qur'an, after stating the various stages of human evolution and its details, it answers this question. He says: After the genome is complete, suddenly God commands and inanimate matter comes to life !!. It's extremely hard to believe. But it is true. See: " soul" is the beautiful order of God. God wills and sends His command into the genome. The place of the soul is in the genome. The number of cells in the human body is 5 trillion to 200 trillion. The command of God, which is the soul, is present in all cells of the human body. Processes and plans all human data.
And it regularly sends all the information to the " Mobin - obvious
book" with every reaction from the cells. Until the Hereafter ... all this happens in this material world. It is not transcendental. It is quite understandable. And it can not be denied. If anyone denies this fact, he has denied himself. It denies itself because man is a combination of matter and spirit. And the soul is the command of God.
There are human beings in all of us. Therefore, God is undeniable. It is present in all our cells. How can we deny our existence ?! Human science has not yet understood this. And yet to answer the important question of how inanimate matter comes to life? It has not arrived. I said the full answer above. Anyone who has a scientific claim against the Qur'an should come and say it. To know and understand.
No one has been found yet. And it will not be. If you know someone, bring it. This is not my claim or sermon. God's claim is in the Qur'an and the Bible And the Torah.
Have a nice weekend. be happy. Healthy and correct body
you.

No.

To elaborate. Hell no.

I suggest you actually look into genetics and learn how it works, then come back to this drivel.
Of course that will be hard, as learning genetics means reading more than 1 book.
This is the problem with all the -my holy book shows science- idiocies, the sum of the current scientific knowledge of mankind takes up enough books to fill several rooms, possibly several houses. And yet believers always assume that a work of mythologies that can fit in a single pocket somehow is a better reference.

The human genome is NOT the ultimate evolution of eukaryotes. Eukaryotes are still evolving. Evolution has no end other than the total extinction of all life when the sun bakes the earth in a billion years or so.
Not only that, the human genome is so flawed that if it were designed, the designer is an utter incompetent or a total sadist.
Which is your god?

 

[abaddon]

Hi Professor.
-We find that there is a vacuum in the space between celestial bodies such as stars and planets.

And what we find at the end of such a journey are planets that will kill you or anyone else. We don't even have to leave this planet to know most of it will kill you.

What I am discussing now is this: Human science has discovered the conditions of life on earth. As well as the time it takes for this process to take place, which has taken almost 3 billion years on Earth. And the right conditions for life are fully prepared.

Where is 3 billion tears discussed in your magic book? Or the required conditions for life? They are not. You are lying. What has your magic book got to say about lying?

But other than Earth, human science has not yet been able to discover life. Even in the solar system!

Europa, Enceladus and even Mars are candidates. We will not know for sure until those missions happen. But we do know for sure that it is possible. Where does your magic book describe Enceladus? Chapter and verse please.

Does science know what is going on under the atmosphere of Jupiter and its moons? Our technology has not yet made this discovery.

Yes it does and yes it has. Any questions?

- I agree with you that human science has not yet been able to discover life anywhere other than Earth. The chariot of science is rushing towards the discovery of the unknown. I wish success for human science. Space, as it seems, is not compatible with living life. Not to be extremely hostile. No.
Not to be extremely hostile. I do not like this term. And I'm not compatible with it. Let's not use enmity even for space.

So you think space, the vacuum of space will not kill you if you have enough faith. Good luck with that.

-Exactly. I find your speech very enjoyable here. And thank you. Let me ask you two questions in this regard. Can we accept the possibility that the "single" came into being on its own at the time of the Big Bang? What is the probability or length of it?

You understand none of this. If you did you would not ask such stupid questions.

We know that the "Planck range" time was ten to the power of minus 43 seconds. Can the single make any self at this time? Of course, the universe has not yet formed in the Planck area. Therefore, there is no time. And this is an important objection to Hawking's theory and the physicists of Astronomy. Of course, to justify it, they propose the Planck constant. But it is not acceptable. I do not intend to enter into this discussion further here. Because we are moving away from our main discussion.

There is a Planck constant, a Planck time, a Planck distance, a Planck scale, actually Planck a lot of other things. There is no "Planck range"

My next question is:
What is the probability that a living thing came into being from inanimate matter? One of the most important questions for biologists right now is: How can inanimate matter make living things? And give life. They have not yet answered this question. In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God! (Hawking said in an interview with Turkish Channel T)

That is a false quote from Hawking. You seem to have no problem with making crap up and flat out lying about it.

- No. I do not want to make the existence of God or His miracles possible for you through Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I respect any personal opinion you have in this regard. You gave a definite opinion about the absence of life in the universe along with a statistical number. I mentioned the principle of uncertainty to remind you of your theory of life. It is clear that the absence of life anywhere in space other than Earth is a weak possibility. And no definite opinion can be given. Although human science is extremely limited. And it can not be surrounded by many unknowns.
Hoping to meet dear master.

And now you are just waffling.

 

[IanS]

Hi Professor.
-We find that there is a vacuum in the space between celestial bodies such as stars and planets. What I am discussing now is this: Human science has discovered the conditions of life on earth. As well as the time it takes for this process to take place, which has taken almost 3 billion years on Earth. And the right conditions for life are fully prepared.
But other than Earth, human science has not yet been able to discover life. Even in the solar system! Does science know what is going on under the atmosphere of Jupiter and its moons? Our technology has not yet made this discovery.
- I agree with you that human science has not yet been able to discover life anywhere other than Earth. The chariot of science is rushing towards the discovery of the unknown. I wish success for human science. Space, as it seems, is not compatible with living life. Not to be extremely hostile. No.
Not to be extremely hostile. I do not like this term. And I'm not compatible with it. Let's not use enmity even for space.
-Exactly. I find your speech very enjoyable here. And thank you. Let me ask you two questions in this regard. Can we accept the possibility that the "single" came into being on its own at the time of the Big Bang? What is the probability or length of it? We know that the "Planck range" time was ten to the power of minus 43 seconds. Can the single make any self at this time? Of course, the universe has not yet formed in the Planck area. Therefore, there is no time. And this is an important objection to Hawking's theory and the physicists of Astronomy. Of course, to justify it, they propose the Planck constant. But it is not acceptable. I do not intend to enter into this discussion further here. Because we are moving away from our main discussion. My next question is:
What is the probability that a living thing came into being from inanimate matter? One of the most important questions for biologists right now is: How can inanimate matter make living things? And give life. They have not yet answered this question. In the words of Hawking: Many questions from scientists must be answered by God! (Hawking said in an interview with Turkish Channel T)
- No. I do not want to make the existence of God or His miracles possible for you through Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I respect any personal opinion you have in this regard. You gave a definite opinion about the absence of life in the universe along with a statistical number. I mentioned the principle of uncertainty to remind you of your theory of life. It is clear that the absence of life anywhere in space other than Earth is a weak possibility. And no definite opinion can be given. Although human science is extremely limited. And it can not be surrounded by many unknowns.
Hoping to meet dear master.

I'm not going to trawl through the above trying to correct all your mistakes about science. You are obviously getting your beliefs about science from the propaganda websites of Islam known as "I'jaz". Those websites and their religious preachers are not qualified to explain science, and they are just dishonestly misrepresenting science to claim that it supports their religion.

You need to stop looking at and believing dishonest religious websites like that. If you want honest education about science then you need to look instead at genuine independent non-religious websites, or better still study with some real science books or get yourself on a university science course.

But just from your very first sentence - interstellar space is NOT a vacuum. There is no such thing as a true vacuum where nothing at all exists … we found out long ago from QM that a true vacuum like that is not possible (interstellar space for example is filled with all sorts of energy fields that are impossible to remove … in fact the “space” is not merely “filled with” those energy fields, the space is a actually “composed of” those fields … those fields are the space itself!).

I am not goping to explain that any further for you, nor respond to any of your other claims about science, until you stop using religious websites as your source of "science".

 

[heydarian saeed]

Are you claiming that humanity is the end goal of evolution?

Hi dear friend. Your question depends on how you define "humanity". Of course, I do not interfere in your meaning and interpretation of the word humanity. The choice is yours. My personal opinion is: man must always be on the path of evolution. And do not spare any effort. In my opinion, achieving "complete happiness" is the ultimate evolution of man. And I think everything in the universe came into being because of that. And all the objects of the universe interact with man. Of course, you might think that I am a human-centered and introverted person. No. This is not the case. I said: The whole universe interacts with man. And man must also interact with the universe.