The magazine "Australian Science Illustrated" (#98) has an article called "Space Probe Travels to the Solar System's Greatest Water Worlds" by Mikkel Meister. It says that in the next decade, the JUICE spaceprobe will be exploring Jupiter's moons Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto. The probe is expected to find, under the ice sheets covering the moons, oceans of water which are 100 km or more in depth. Ganymede and Callisto interact with Jupiter's magnetic field in a way which indicates major quantities of electrically conductive liquid or a current being generated. Most likely, there must be lots of salt water under the ice.

Astronomy Magazine’s “Explore the Solar System” special issue (2012) says sulphur and oxygen ions supplied by the volcanoes of Io (Jupiter's innermost major satellite) follow Jupiter's magnetic field lines to power an electrical current that arcs between Io and Jupiter. Similar interactions create weaker electrical links with Europa and Ganymede (and presumably with Callisto, the outermost of the four major moons).

What if there are no deep oceans but only relatively small amounts of water? How could we account for the interactions with Jupiter’s magnetic field that indicate "electrically conductive liquid or a current being generated"? The reduced H2O could shoot sulphur and oxygen from rocks inside the Jovian satellites into space. Once there, the chemical elements – in the form of electrically charged ions – would follow the lines of magnetic force from the gas-giant planet and establish electrical arcs between the moons and Jupiter.

There's been a fair amount in recent scientific literature referring to water in outer space allowing life to evolve. If there's relatively little of that liquid on the Jovian satellites, the chance of discovering life there reduces significantly. If evolution has a flaw, the chance of finding life could be nonexistent. Let me explain -

Could the origin of life be related to the movie “Interstellar”? In the movie, it’s stated that humans will oneday be able to build things they can’t make now. If we take this idea to an extreme, and take “oneday” to mean an indefinite point in the far future, will we do what is obviously regarded as impossible and create life – and conceivably, the universe itself?

Evolution can be observed in the form of adaptation of structure and function to the environment but there’s no reason to extrapolate this so it accounts for life’s origin. In future centuries, human technology will develop terraforming and incredibly advanced genetic engineering of cells - amino acids, proteins, water, nucleic acids, etc which were gathered in space or on planets and combined. Transporting these technologies into the remote past before any living thing existed could account for life’s origin since it agrees with 19th-century chemist Louis Pasteur’s proving that life can only originate from life.

For men and women to create men and women in their image, we’d need time travel into the distant and uninhabited past.

The Riemann hypothesis, proposed in 1859 by the German mathematician Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann, might bring time travel out of science fiction and into reality. In the Riemann hypothesis, there may be infinitely many zeros on what is called the “critical line”. Riemann states that these zeros must lie on the vertical line of the complex number plane i.e. on the y-axis in Wick rotation. “Infinitely many zeros” might suggest the y-axis is literally infinite and that infinity equals zero.

If infinity is applied to the current questions which the James Webb Space Telescope is raising in some minds about the Big Bang theory, it could provide a plausible alternative and mean the universe is actually infinite in space and infinite in time (eternal). If infinity equals zero is applied to the universe, it could mean there is actually no distance in either space or time i.e. no distance between past, present, and future (and that's a prerequisite for time travel through the centuries and millennia).

The problem seems to be humanity's perception of time. Einstein and General Relativity introduced the concept of space-time being curved. People tend to only associate this with things such as space being curved, and bending light from stars as it passes the Sun. But it also means time is curved and is not exclusively linear as evolution supposes. Because of its curvature, time doesn't only go from past to present to future. All times can interact and events in the future can affect the past. So men and women from our future will be able to use Relativity's curved time to travel to the remote uninhabited past and create men and women (which is what "Adam" and "Eve" mean).

If time only passed rectilinearly - from past to present to future - the idea of people travelling back in time would make no sense at all. But if time is curvilinear - with past, present, and future interconnected - time must be able to move from future to present to past. Unity of past/present/future may remove the issue of non-simultaneity – in special relativity – because the timing or sequence of events being different in different frames of reference can only exist if past/present/future are separate. The concepts of cause and effect are no longer separate when all periods of time are united, and everything can happen “at once”. This is similar to watching a DVD – every event on the DVD exists at once since the whole DVD exists but we’re only aware of sights and sounds occurring in each tiny fraction of a second.

I do have in mind the Biblical Genesis story. But I'm proposing that what we call God is not a supernatural being who had no origin. I'm suggesting that what we call God is the total of all human life that has ever existed or ever will exist (including the terraforming, bioengineering men and women from the far future who create Adam and Eve). This concept of God is a natural one, incorporating the natural origin of humans being born then learning to use curved time. This is merely a rough outline of how things may be in reality. I don't pretend to know exactly what they're like or what they're capable of. "Supernatural" simply means their abilities are beyond what you or I might call natural, and this "going beyond our idea of natural" is inevitable when we contemplate the distant future.

My strange idea is consistent with Elohim being another word for God. According to my encyclopedia, Elohim means "the plural majesty of the one God". This plurality in the word Elohim may be taken to mean the addition of Jesus and perhaps what religious folk term the Holy Spirit - and perhaps angels. But is there any reason it can't have an anthropic interpretation and refer to men/women? The plurality can also be applied to Genesis 3:22 where it says, "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, ..." "One of us" may not mean like God and Jesus etc - it may mean the image God possesses and created in man is the human one of knowing good and evil.