Hi Hilmar,

>>Perhaps another approach will help..
>>
>>Atoms have in them the behavior that they will fly apart if the force that is holding them together is induced to release them. That is, their 'natural desire' is to separate much like two north or south ends of a magnet wish to do. When this happens we can get atomic bombs. The explosion is in so many words a release of energy, not the creation of energy. But, when this happens the violent expulsive forces exhibited are absolutely consistent with the observed laws of nature. It's the force holding them together that is evidently violating known laws of physics. But, that's a phenominon that is current. That is, it's ongoing.
>>
>>So, given this then we must conclude that the force holding the atoms together is greater than the force already in the atoms that 'desires' to exit.
>>
>>That leaves us at least two fundamental questions:
>>
>>1) What force originally placed the current energy in the atoms in their current form?
>
>The "strong" force.

IOW, they really don't know. <g>

>
>>2) What force is holding them together now?
>
>The "strong" force.
>
>
>Physicists consider there are four basic forces in nature: gravitation, the "strong" force, the "weak" force, and the electric/magnetic forces.

This phrase "the strong force" seems to be really nothing more than a euphimism for God.

Remember, there is order in the universe and order, coming from chaos is as John Ryan has already pointed out only possible as a result of directed force (power, energy,..) and direction infers intelligence. And, as Jerry has pointed out (if I'm correctly reading him) this force must by nature counteract or impose itself upon equilibrium and provide a force above (greater, more, beyond, ..) the force of equilibrium.


>
>The "strong" force holds protons together - at a short distance, this force is stronger than the repulsive electrostatic force.
>
>At longer distances, it seems that this force has no influence.

Oh? How so? Are you talking about magnetism?

>
>Hilmar.