Thread Rating:

boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
November 11th, 2011 at 5:48:36 AM permalink
Scientists have no idea at this point of time whether the BIG BANG represented the very beginning of the universe or whether there was a concept of time before the big bang. Just because we don't understand the mechanisms of how the universe happened doesn't mean or even infer that "God" did it. It probably is the biggest mystery out there in physics and one that may never be solved with any certainty.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
November 11th, 2011 at 7:35:56 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Scientists have no idea at this point of time whether the BIG BANG represented the very beginning of the universe or whether there was a concept of time before the big bang.



That's a very good question. it may be time did not exist before the Big Bang, but that brings up a bunch of paradoxes and contradictions that make no sense. For example: if time did not exist, how could change happen?

Quote:

Just because we don't understand the mechanisms of how the universe happened doesn't mean or even infer that "God" did it. It probably is the biggest mystery out there in physics and one that may never be solved with any certainty.



Exactly.

It may be that the data is no longer available. The Big Bang happened a long, long time ago (all of time ago, if time began wiht it <w>). Matter and energy dispersed, combined, interacted, according to the laws of physics, not necessarily in such a way as to preserve the evidence of the event in question, nor in such a way as to destroy it, either. Matter and energy have no volition and take no action; they merely exist.

You know what would make a good science fiction story? Finding cosmological records from a species that lived much closer in time to the Big Bang than we do, and describing what the universe was like then. I lack the knowledge of physics and cosmology to write it, though. So I'm giving it to whover wants it.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
NowTheSerpent
NowTheSerpent
Joined: Sep 30, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 417
November 11th, 2011 at 9:23:28 AM permalink
Quote: FrGamble

I like two headed coins, why do you keep betting on tails! No you are right, its like a math problem with the right answer but I did not show my work.

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2) The universe began to exist
3) The universe has a cause

Let us call this cause God who must have existence in itself and not dependent on another. Therefore God exists. I don't think you can argue with point (1) that is just a undeniable truth. Some like to imagine that the one exception is the universe and will argue point (2), but with the evidence of the Big Bang I think that is harder and harder to do so without writing your own science fiction novel. Alexander Vilenkin in his book about searching for other universes says, "It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning."

Once it is established that there is a cause of all that exists out of nothing then by taking a look at the creation and noticing the beauty, patterns, observable laws and order we can come to further conclusions about the nature of God and our special role in this creation.



Proposition 2 is actually argumentative, not self-evident. The only reason we think that the Universe must have begun is the so-called "time's arrow" phenomenon, everything seeming to run down, as Paul aptly put it, being "in bondage to decay" (Romans 8:21) which is due to Gibbs free energy decreasing with every possible process. But the counter-balancer to this thermodynamic progression might be accumulated within gravitational energy, and the sum might be zero, thus precluding the need for a "first moment" and thus a First Cause.

Also, there is the difference between activity, which all entities contain, and action, or causative influence exerted by an entity. Activity inherent in entities allows them to act. Actions have causes, but activity doesn't necessarily have a cause. That requirement is a leap of faith and a bias toward the idea that only God is capable of not requiring a beginning. Religionists will posit that God, existing absolutely, requires no beginning, despite our inability to comprehend timeless existence. But the idea of the Universe having always existed is no more or less comprehensible. But, the incomprehensibility of the former belief doesn't preclude acceptance of it, so why should it preclude acceptance of the latter. In other words, if God doesn't need a beginning, then neither does the Universe. The real reason, IMO, that we object to a timeless Universe is that we object to the absolutism and finality of Causality - plain reality after all.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
November 11th, 2011 at 10:09:20 AM permalink
Quote: Nareed

Matter and energy dispersed, combined, interacted, according to the laws of physics, not necessarily in such a way as to preserve the evidence of the event in question, nor in such a way as to destroy it, either. Matter and energy have no volition and take no action; they merely exist.

You know what would make a good science fiction story? Finding cosmological records from a species that lived much closer in time to the Big Bang than we do, and describing what the universe was like then. I lack the knowledge of physics and cosmology to write it, though. So I'm giving it to whover wants it.



I remember reading a sci-fi story once about interstellar beings that could actually manipulate the laws of physics, things like changing the strong nuclear or gravitational forces, etc. When you say "according to the laws of physics", it's worth remembering that those laws happen to be the ones we've been able to observe and codify. There is no reason not to believe that some other combination of elementary physical laws could give rise to an entirely different universe with entirely different life.

I also remember reading an analogy once about how our universe might be somewhat like a bubble in a bubble bath. Each one has a different shape, they seem to come into existence out of nowhere (think about it -- have you actually watched bubbles form in a bathtub?), there are a very, very large number of them, and eventually they pop.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
TheNightfly
TheNightfly
Joined: May 21, 2010
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 480
November 11th, 2011 at 12:18:22 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

think about it -- have you actually watched bubbles form in a bathtub?

Yes, but it was after a long night of drinking beer and eating chilli. I never thought about how each little bubble was a distinct universe. I am the creator.
Happiness is underrated
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
November 11th, 2011 at 1:04:47 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

I remember reading a sci-fi story once about interstellar beings that could actually manipulate the laws of physics, things like changing the strong nuclear or gravitational forces, etc.



In Trek, Q could hcange the gravitational constant of the universe. Geordy managed to change it for an asteroid.

Quote:

When you say "according to the laws of physics", it's worth remembering that those laws happen to be the ones we've been able to observe and codify.



Sure. And there may be laws we don't know yet (almost certainly there are). It's even possible some laws of physics change over time. But matter and energy still "act" only as the laws of physics allow, and still lack volition. They simply exist.

Quote:

There is no reason not to believe that some other combination of elementary physical laws could give rise to an entirely different universe with entirely different life.



That's part of Asimov's premise in "The Gods Themselves." He pictures a universe with a stronger strong nuclear force, where things like Plutonium 187 are stable elements, stars are tiny and the sentient beings are permeable. There are serious scientific speculations about the matter, too. Including not even having a weak nuclear force.

Quote:

I also remember reading an analogy once about how our universe might be somewhat like a bubble in a bubble bath. Each one has a different shape, they seem to come into existence out of nowhere (think about it -- have you actually watched bubbles form in a bathtub?), there are a very, very large number of them, and eventually they pop.



Bubbles in a bath come from air and water alreasy present. Do universes form from available matter and/or energy, or from nothing?
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
FrGamble
FrGamble
Joined: Jun 5, 2011
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 790
November 11th, 2011 at 10:19:39 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed


Bubbles in a bath come from air and water alreasy present. Do universes form from available matter and/or energy, or from nothing?



All matter and energy that constitute the universe where created from nothing, ex nihilo. Space and time also come into being at that inital moment of the universe's beginning, most often called the Big Bang. For this to make sense and avoid the logical truth that, "something cannot come out of nothing" we have to remind ourselves what we mean by Creation. Creation in this ultimate sense is not a change or a mutation of pre-existing or available matter. Creation is a cause, not a change. The biggest mistake we often make here is treating nothing as if it were really something. God did not take a little bit of nothing and make something out of it. God creates not out of nothing, but from nothing at all. Creation is the radical causing of the whole of existence to come into being at that inital cosmological singularity. God makes all of the matter, energy, and stuff that makes up everything else exist at one amazing and awesome moment.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 311
  • Posts: 8622
November 12th, 2011 at 4:04:35 AM permalink
Quote: FrGamble

All matter and energy ... ex nihilo.



What came before the big bang? Is your statement Church doctrine? Just curious.

I used to think of the Universe as quite old, but the more we know about it, the age of it seems young compared to what came out of this single spot.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
November 12th, 2011 at 5:08:54 AM permalink
Quote: FrGamble

All matter and energy that constitute the universe where created from nothing, ex nihilo.



You don't know that. But if you can supply proof, I'd like to see it.

Quote:

Creation in this ultimate sense is not a change or a mutation of pre-existing or available matter. Creation is a cause, not a change.



Proof?

Quote:

God did not take a little bit of nothing and make something out of it. God creates not out of nothing, but from nothing at all.



If one of your parishioners came regularly to confession and he kept confessing the same sin each time, wouldn't you advise him to stop committing that sin? I advise you to stop using circular arguments. They are an affront to logic.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
November 12th, 2011 at 5:13:03 AM permalink
Celebrate religion here.
What is religion?
I think we have a state religion imposed upon us known as the belief in medicine.

I think some try to impose on us a never-ending focus on the poor, the sick, the generally unpleasant such as the homeless in tent cities, the teeming masses in China or some similar nonsense. There is a measure of money and treason in religion. Its always give to the religion officials so that they can in turn give resources to other nations and sap our nation's strength. They never quite disclose the Vig in such operations but I think its high.

Its sort of a constant sapping of strength so that religion itself acts as a parasite. We can't go get a bagel and a cup of coffee in the morning anymore, we must have an encounter with some blue-blazoned religious icon insisting that only those touched by Allah may park or sit in certain places. We can not simply drink coffee and enjoy the fruits of colonialism and imperialism, we must pay homage to some sort of morally correct beans or religiously endorsed beans that benefit some thirteen cents a day peasant in some filthy poverty-stricken village in the belief that there is some inherent good in filthy people in some far-off hell hole. It seems Religion does not want us to enjoy our bagel and coffee we have to focus on something unpleasant in the attempt to start our day. Our focus is required to be on something not only unpleasant but also unlikely. When someone religious prattles about some dead kid, its never some dead throwaway brat who had he lived would have been a felon feasting at the taxpayer's expense, its always some noble Saint who would have cured us of cancer and dandruff.

Celebrate miracles? Okay.... Lets. By all means. Lets go celebrate a miracle or two. Roulette wheel or Craps Table???

  • Jump to: