But you are perhaps right that I ought say “mainstream LDS theology” rather than LDS theology proper.

Clearly though I feel that LDS theology entails the existence of actual infinities.

While it seems that in practice on a Abrahamic sort of exaltation that the exalted will preside in part over a virtually endless lineal and adopted posterity, it also seems to be part of the Lord’s long term plan to not only save, but exalt as many as possible. And if the personal intelligence density in the universe is finite, that strictly precludes a technically infinite posterity, in favor of an end game far more egalitarian, much more like the classic ideal of a Zion society, where we are equal not only in earthly things, but heavenly things as well.

Remember that in the D&C our relationship with God starts out as children, then we become servants, and finally friends. It seems to be that the long term horizon for exaltation is indeed a society of friends, and not creating an infinite number of children out of next to nothing, as Brigham Young had it.

Rather, I suggest a model of parallel progression where all the personal intelligences throughout eternity are within one “estate” or soteriological era of each other. It seems most likely to me that all the intelligences in existence have passed through their first estate and are now about to enter the second estate, in the second estate, or have just passed from the second estate – extending the second estate to include the post mortal spirit world and the Millennial terrestrial era.

After we have reached the last day of this soteriological era, presumably at the end of the Millennium, then the plans for the third estate implied in D&C 130 can begin in earnest. I can’t imagine why it is a good thing to keep photocopying the plans for the second estate over and over again, when it would make so much more sense to for the whole host of heaven to progress as individuals, as a society, and as a civilization, in rough parallel.

The issue of brane theory and gravity isn’t such that it could really explain dark matter. MOND was the big attempt and while it’s not completely out, the ref is definitely giving the count. I think the evidence from NASA was compelling enough that dark matter is here to stay. The big issue now is over what, exactly, dark matter is.

Jared, dark matter weakly interacts but I don’t think one can say it only interacts gravitationally. There are a bunch of experiments people are coming up with to look for it, some using particle accelerators. We’ll see. I think the properties at this stage are vague enough that experiments will be difficult, beyond long range telescope observations of galaxies. Which are limited in what they can tell us. (Although someone may get creative. . .)

The biggest problem is that outside a few odd things our theoretical physics doesn’t account for dark matter. We need to expand the standard model but it isn’t clear how to do that. Although at this stage I’d bet loop theory has a better shot than string theory. String theory simply explains too much whereas loop theory is starting to make predictions about the standard model starting just with GR. (Plus I’m a GR guy so I don’t like the ways space and time are handled in string theory – although GR approaches pose difficulties to Libertarian free will proponents like Blake Ostler)

So, I have read just enough to say something stupid, but I am not afriad. Clark, it is my understanding that in brane theory, gravity is not kept withing the brane and seaps onto other branes. Is it possible that dark matter is is just part of that gravitational seppage, like from black hole on another brane?