A Modern Flat Earth Perspective
Google "ekpyrotic universe". Note that the brane we are in is three-dimensionally flat. Note that it is separated from the other universe brane by a fourth spatial dimension, very thin and flat, indeed. Now realize that the ancients did not have a concept of earth as a planet. When it was discovered that indeed the planet we are on is spherical, the name "earth" was applied to it. However, who is to say that "earth" should not rather refer to our universe brane in which case it is, indeed, flat! And what is more impermeable to us than a fourth spatial dimension? (Of quantum particles, apparently only gravitons, which are string rings without free ends, can pass through this 4th dimension. Hence the detection of dark matter, (from the sister universe?) is only by its gravitational force.) The 4th dimension separating the two universe branes, then, would be the firmament and the plasmas of the two post collision-phase universe branes would be the "waters" referred to in Genesis 1. This perspective gives some rather astounding insights into the creation account. Read about them in my upcoming book: Why the Universe Bothers to Exist, Theistic Determinism, Evidences and Implications. As soon as I finish the last chapter which is on heaven (in the brane opposing ours?) the manuscript will be submitted for publication. Hopefully, this will take place this year.
If any of this interests you, the reader, perhaps you would be willing to help me out with ideas on the nature of heaven. Let me know <firstname.lastname@example.org> and perhaps we can have dialogue . (e.g. How can one account for entropy in heaven? Do angels need to eat? If so, do they have complete digestive tracts so that sewage systems are needed in the heavenly dwellings? Why are heavenly dwellings even needed if the environment is so perfectly suited to the comfort of heavenly beings, or is it? And many more.) Also, if any of you know of any space probe results on the nature of the microwave background radiation that disqualify the ekpyrotic model, I would like to hear of them. My perspective would certainly come into question.
David V. McCorkle, Professor of Biology, Emeritus, Western Oregon University