Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version)

Moderators: Desolous, Reliah
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 14:36 #17896

  • Anora^una_Ilorn
  • Anora^una_Ilorn's Avatar
In the beginning there were four forces held tightly by a unifying Force that kept them all together. One day the four Young forces got into a huge fight.

'I want my own space' said the strongest Force.
Each of the other forces agreed and at risking the happiness of the little family The Force, in it's infinite knowledge and power agreed to help them out.

'I will give you space but you must work together because we are a family' The Force released one of them into the infinite blackness and the others quickly followed.

Shortly after the universe was filled with energy and heat. But the Force reminded them of their promise. They came together and stretched out combining their gifts.
The forces worked together to create clouds of dust which became stars which died very quickly. Saddened the forces went to the Force with their complaints.
'Everything we create dies. Isn't there something we can do?'
The Force, with it's caring eyes looked down at its family and explained.
'Nothing you create will last forever. In order to create new things the old things must die. Continue to create and they will begin to last longer, give it time.'

Sure enough after several thousand years stars were created out of the dust, stronger matter was created from the dying stars and planets were created from that.

Eventually out of the dust our the Sun was created and our little blue planet was created. At first it was nothing but a ball of heated matter but over time it got cooler one of the forces choose to stay around and influence us directly and the other indirectly.

In our early years as human beings we had a direct connection to the Force but over time, as humans tend to do, we forgot from which we came from. The Force has had many names and many parts. And we are finally learning to connect to it again.

So, what do ya'll think?

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 14:46 #17897

  • Wander
  • Wander's Avatar
Now that is interesting O.o makes alot of since when you sit there and start thinking about it. Very intreasting little story and theroy which goes on with the idea of other galaxys around us.

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 15:24 #17898

  • Anora^una_Ilorn
  • Anora^una_Ilorn's Avatar
I took actual science theory and combined it with the belief in the Force. This is sort of what i believe so i thought it would be a good idea to make it suitible for children. :)

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 15:51 #17899

  • Wander
  • Wander's Avatar
well would be true as the force is unstable energy and most children are hyper like me so the child idea fits perfectly in opinio

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 17:37 #17912

  • Sarus
  • Sarus's Avatar
  • Senior Knight
  • ID: 956
Hehe, awesome April :D
Master Knight of Jediism
Bishop of Jediism

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 17:39 #17913

  • Garm
  • Garm's Avatar
  • Senior Knight
  • ID: 218
I believe that you have just created the first Jedi bedtime story / folklore tale for younglings. Nice one Sister April
- Garm -
Pureland Rite
Apprentice: Daniel L (2007)
Former Bishop O.C.P.
"Festina Lente" - Quickly without Impetuosity

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 13 Aug 2008 19:14 #17916

  • azrel
  • azrel's Avatar
I agree with what you said April and also with Lenny about this being a story to pass on to the younger generation. We have lost much in knowledge because of technology, it is time to combine the old with the new and allow it to grow as the younger forces did in their time. We are slowly reconnecting with the elements which of course stems from the Force. By many standards we are a young species, with great potential.

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 16 Aug 2008 12:54 #17999

  • Anora^una_Ilorn
  • Anora^una_Ilorn's Avatar
That was what i was going for, not to mention this story allows for the explanation of any diety you choose. It is completely pure, no dharma thrown in. So, Christian Jedi, Pagan Jedi, or Sith. It all works. I hadn't thought of the Bedtime story part though. Maybe someone should try it out and see if it works. *hint hint, poke poke* :D

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 06 Sep 2009 12:20 #25611

  • Anora^una_Ilorn
  • Anora^una_Ilorn's Avatar

Re:Big bang theory and the Force (childrens version) 08 Sep 2009 06:25 #25642

  • Jon
  • Jon's Avatar
  • Novice
  • ID: 1798
That really is an interesting story Master April, and whilst reading it makes very much sense. In fact this kind of reminds me of Simarilion by J.R.R.Tolkien and his version of the creation of the world.

At to using this for children I do think it needs working on. For one the mention of the one big Force, and the four other forces where one of them is stronger. That could prove to be a little to abstract and confusing for some children. Maybe by giving them names and describing what they do may help to construct a pictures in their minds. Also what gifts are they which these forces share? Also the death part where matter becomes stronger may require also a picturesque story.
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • Knights of Awakening: Jedi Safe Spaces (Charles Mc... (Last post by Lancer)
    • Quote: Furthermore, there's a paradox in racial justice: white people stuck together often times tend towards racial prejudice. People of color in their own cultural or ethnic groups often times become more capable and confident in who they are and able to help others (even white people) develop understanding and empathy. Of course, having these people of color-specific circles can be difficult because people on the outside looking in don't understand the benefit. Omg. I can't believe that I actually feel that I have to respond to this. I am open to most ideas. I always am and for the most part I almost always have been. I lead a life in search of knowledge. But I am absolutely stunned that anyone who claims any open-mindedness at all, or claims to search for truth of any kind could ever make such a bold and opinionated statement worded as "fact". Everyone is allowed their own opinion. I truly believe that. But any remotely educated person, in my opinion, should know the difference between fact and opinion and that was stated as fact. And offering something to read to justify an opinionated statement as fact seems no different to me than someone coming on here stating something else just as opinionated from the other end of the spectrum and saying you should read Mein Kampf and that makes it fact. Now I do not agree with either side of the spectrum. I believe we are all human and that is fact. Skin color means nothing to me. That does not however mean that I disregard anyone's cultural heritage. But I am not going to know a black person's cultural heritage any better than I will know a white person's cultural heritage or and Asian person's or a Latin person's and anyone else's and neither will anyone else unless there is some other distinguishing feature other than skin color. The only way I would know an Italian from any other white person is by getting to know them. That goes for Black, Latin, Asian, green, purple, and neon orange as well. All of our heritages are different and we will never know about them until we stop all of this and somehow(and I really wish I knew how) pull our heads out of our asses as a species and realize that while we have histories that are different....WE ARE ALL HUMAN. I apologize, I should not have capitalized that but that is what came out so I won't change it now. I hope I haven't upset anyone with this but if I have I also apologize for that.
    • The Grateful Thread (Last post by Connor L.)
    • I'm grateful Zenchi made a double post and got us closer to defeating the rant thread. :whistle: :evil:
    • This Gave Me Hope (Last post by Leah Starspectre)
    • This is just so beautiful....I admit got a little choked up pretty quickly. But as soon as the pipes started, I started bawling. :P
    • Jediism and Karma (Last post by Senan)
    • For me, the idea of karma is better applied on an interpersonal level rather than a cosmic balancing act. If I treat people with respect, I am more likely to be treated with respect. If I walk around being a giant a-hole all the time, people are going to be a-holes right back. I earn my "karma" by trying to treat people the way I want to be treated. This generally results in others treating me well in return. Not always, but more often than not. On a cosmic level, I agree with tzb. Do good things and the world will be a better place. Do bad things, and you make it worse. Either way, you have to live in that world, so you might as well try to make it better. That seems very much in line with Jedi thinking.
    • Jediism... Religion, Chioce or Philosophy.... (Last post by Death, yet the Force)
    • As I have a different religion, I would not count it as that. However it is definitely a choice and a philosophy in my eyes. I believe wholeheartedly in the beliefs of the Jedi and it's teachings have done me well. I can see why it would be considered a religion though, and who knows maybe I will see it like that one day. But for now, in the present, I see it as a life choice and a code in which to live by. Like everyone has different upbringings, everyone can take Jediism the way they want to. I hope, whatever way you see it, the path of the Jedi does you well :)
    • About Police Shootings (in America, Duh) (Last post by Adder)
    • Surveillance technology has come a long way up, and prices down so that is one way to tackle it. The benefits are increased chances of catching any offender through supply of evidence to try to prevent crime, and early detection of crime... not going to stop gun crime though. Might just need to harden up our facilities and vehicles to make them less vulnerable to small arms fire or forced entry. Release the drones with pepper spray, call Police, and go into lockdown!!!!!!!! (not in that order) :lol:
    • Pokemon Go! A generation lost in 1 day.... (Last post by Goken)
    • It does seem a little odd to me that the length of this thread (or at least its existence) has been brought up on two separate occasions today in regards to it's ridiculousness. The majority of the thread is actually about how many people love the game and all the good things it's doing for people. I feel like the "negative" view of it is a small minority, they just happened to be the ones to name it.
    • Reiki Energy ~ Empathic Abilities & Jedi (Last post by Nike)
    • I appreciate the replies to my query. My learning style is to read lightly, but more learn by doing. When I studied Taoism, I learned a great deal through a continuous practice of qi gong and daily reading by a modern Spiritual Teacher. He's out in California and I would some day hope to study with him. I am concerned about taking on this practice on my own. It is very difficult to find other Taoists. It is considered a solitary practice and highly contemplative. Mostly, learning to observe what is happening around you, especially in nature, including the stars and find yourself a part of it all. Not to separate the human from the natural world around us. And, ultimately, there is so much seen and unseen that words often cannot describe insight. This would appear to be a virtual community. It's hard to sustain interest on my own. My pattern of internet activity tends to be low use. It's hard to find time to read on line. And, that's not doing, that's reading. I cannot learn unless I can actively do something or talk with others. It's not a virtual interest, I want to apply these principles in daily life.
    • On the Nature of Crime vs War - An Open Discussion... (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • Quote: In my opinion, if the Jedi love humanity we should lean to the left as much as we can. the left has been hijacked there are now people who promote traditionally leftist positions but who do it in ways that violate the underlying principles which lead to those positions if you oppose free speech you are not a leftist in my view if you promote racist ideology, you are not a leftist, you are a racist the left that i signed up for, and have always supported, believes in equality and opportunity for everyone, even the people we dont like the left, as i am seeing it today, is just as corrupted by money as the right, and has become just as belligerent and narrow minded as the conservative and fundamentalist right wingers the left used to be noam chomsky and ralph nader, bill moyers, al gore even barney frank (who was more liberal than most) ect ect people who would deliver commentary that was critical and biting, yes, but was also somewhat balanced in the sense that it did its best to be thoughtful and inclusive and to critique in a mature way, which started from the position that we are supposed to all be in this thing together, even though we disagree at least, thats how i perceived it at the time; maybe its me who has changed? now the tide seems to have shifted towards the likes of michael moore and francesca ramsey, and these people seem no different to me at heart than limbaugh or falwel: bigots bigots are bigots whatever side of the isle they stand on, and it is bigotry itself that i oppose
    • Something terrible? (Last post by Ryder)
    • Hmm... I sometimes get those feelings too. Usually it's just something that will happen in my personal life, but today has just been very normal for me until I read this post.
    • Philosophical Defenses for the Force; Common Groun... (Last post by Gisteron)
    • You are assuming that two distinct things need to be differentiable. For the sake of pragmatism I would make that assumption, too, but you do need to postulate that as an axiom if you want to use it. You are also saying that the nature of a thing equates to its identity. In your model two things cannot share a nature. That is also an unstated premise. Lastly, about step 4, and allow me to be a little nitpicky here... you say that there cannot be two substances who share the same attribute. To me that sounds like there cannot be two that have so many as one attribute in common. So ontop of the missing premises mentioned earlier, even granting them, this literal interpretation of step 4 in your argument wouldn't follow. As for step 11, I concluded that considering that we have no axiom stating that it is impossible for a substance to have impossible attributes. So for any substance we propose that is maximally real, we can easily define another one that is more real still by just saying that for every possible property the old one has, the new one has a pair of that property with a matchinig impossible one. The point here is, infinity is not a quantity, it cannot be a maximum. You are basically talking about a convergent thing that diverges. Well, I could at best agree that when we speak of something, we do have some idea of that thing and the thing then exists at least in the form of that idea. But when I describe a two-masted sailing yacht that has the attribute of being my property, that does not actually mean that there actually is a yacht I own. In fact, I might as well describe a roughly sphere-shaped space station with the firepower to blow peaceful defenseless planets to fist-sized chunks and simply by defining an object O with this set of properties S of which existence is an element, I have proven that the Death Star is actually out there. Also, the step 16 I'm reading states that it belongs to the nature of the (infinite) substance to exist, i.e. it has the attribute of existence. And considering how you defined the infinite substance as that which has all the possible attributes, you are basically saying either that existence is a possible attribute or that that which exists, exists. See, tautologies are - in my opinion - valid. Circular arguments are not formally wrong, they are just useless to conclude the non-trivial. If you define something as existent you don't need to spend another dozen lines only to restate it. Would I not know any better, I would have to think you are trying to confuse people, trick them with complicated language to accept a proposition without a proper intellectual justification. And I would also say that with all due respect to language and logic as tools of understanding the world around us, we don't get to ammend that world by just defining things into existence. If we could, we could define two things into existence that are mutually incompatible, thereby proving that logic is utterly unsuitable to understand anything in the actual world, thereby rendering pretty much any and all intellectual inquiry pointless.

There are 151 visitors, 9 guests and 20 members online (one in chat): Guardianofwinds, ren, Adder, Darren, Proteus, Alan, PatrickB, Lykeios, Archon, Kit, Avalonslight, Jamie Stick, carlos.martinez3, Cabur Senaar, TheDude, Tellahane, WRRPhoto, MadHatter, Arthur H., Kyrin Wyldstar, Rahatha, Kaccani, LukaManuka, Sinjin, Lancer, Everett9, NightHawk108, Attala, Soma.

Follow Us