Vineeto: Hence the expression that the planet grows human beings neither requires conjecture nor searching for the origin of flora, fauna and human beings in outer space.
Henry: I was initially trying to capture that I was observing (more) directly the matter that everything is composed of without the influence of feeling-fed narrative. Though the irony is that describing it as star-dust is reintroducing narrative as in ‘stars act as a forge for the creation of heavier forms of matter via fusion, which are then spread throughout the universe and condense into planets.’ Already this is treading into scientific theory which I haven’t researched deeply.
I found an article which describes this process: “After millions of years, immense pressures and temperatures in the star’s core squeeze the nuclei of hydrogen atoms together to form helium, a process called nuclear fusion. Nuclear fusion releases energy, which heats the star and prevents it from further collapsing under the force of gravity.”
Through further research I found that the idea of nuclear fusion powering stars was presented in 1920 by Arthur Eddington, and that further observations such as stellar spectra, predicted energy output, neutrinos, helioseismology, lifetime of stars, and the relative abundance of the various elements support the current theory that stars are powered by fusion and thus the matter throughout the universe passed through stars.
However, I did have a chuckle when I saw that ‘theoretical models’ were part of the evidence, and it made it apparent that the theorizing since then has also been a model (though many of the aspects of evidence above are directly observable with the right equipment).
Hi Henry,
Well spotted, “spread throughout the universe” is clearly based on belief in an expanding of the universe. You are also alert to “‘theoretical models’” and probably already keep in mind that atoms and molecules and their smaller derivations are all theoretical thingymajigs (see Sir Brian Pippard).
‘Vineeto’ was initially quite delighted with the wonderful images from the Hubble telescope and collected many on the computer until one day Richard told ‘her’ that all images are artificially coloured, ‘translated’, if my memory serves me correctly, from measurement based amongst other input on ‘Doppler shift’ and redshift, both from the assumption that stellar object are ‘moving away’ in an expanding universe. As such the colouring is most likely not how these galaxies actually look like. ‘She’ soon lost interest after that information. I also found this curious quote in the Helioseismology link –
“The derived velocity law implies a supermassive object in the centre of the galaxy with 3×106 solar masses. This provides strong evidence for the presence of a massive black hole {!!} in the centre of the Milky Way.” (link)
Reading these ‘scientific’ presentations requires a lot of care and caution to sort any possible factual information from the generally believed narrative.
Henry: Further, on reflection it’s apparent that part of that theory is dependent on big bang theory, as the supposition is that the universe ‘started out’ in a theorized pre-matter form, transforming into plasma and ‘elementary particles’ (which exist theoretically as well) and then which condensed into “mostly hydrogen, with some helium and lithium.”
Ha, exactly. The first article you linked to states “Astronomers estimate that the universe could contain up to one septillion stars”. This limited number (despite its size) can only be confidently stated when one believes the universe to be finite in time and space (in order to leave room outside the universe for god(s) to reside 
).
Henry: From here, the lighter gases would eventually fuse to form the myriad of forms of matter we see today. However, with no big bang there’s no ‘beginning’ and so this chain of events doesn’t have to occur to produce that myriad of forms.
We do know that fusion occurs, it can be generated(?) in the lab (albeit for a short time), and it does produce heavier elements. But there is plenty of room for theory around the edges…
You do seem to get the drift – as Richard said, facts are thin on the ground.
Henry: Because of all this, I understand what you mean as far as this planet growing us as being directly observable, whereas “the sun is powered by fusion and therefore this is all stardust” is an abstraction based on a theoretical understanding. In me, it took the form of a meme – I first heard the phrase in a Moby song: Moby ‘We Are All Made of Stars’. (snipped lyrics and interviews) That famously solipsistic argument. So that indicates somewhat his attitude toward the universe.
As you demonstrate they are hopelessly steeped in non-material /spiritual fantasy and some are “famously solipsistic” as well.
Henry: All in all, it’s a reminder for me of the dynamics described in one of my favorite passages of Richard’s:
“Pure perception takes place sensitively just before one starts feeling the percept – and thus thinking about it affectively – which takes place just before one’s feeling-fed mind says: ‘It’s a man’ or: ‘It’s a woman’ or: ‘It’s a steak-burger’ or: ‘It’s a tofu-burger’ … with all that is implied in this identification and the ramifications that stem from that.”
In one instant was a quite pure experience (though there was still self present) and then I ‘translated’ the experience into a form that ‘I’ understood. (link)
This is a good description of what happened and you made a very valiant attempt to describe it that I recognized the significance and close-to-purity of this experience for you.
Cheers Vineeto