Universe Creation

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Because you were talking as if it was deadset fact.
The thread isn't meant to be "I think this. End conversation." but a discussion. Possiblities, no matter how strange.

I was presenting an opinion. You asked for it, I gave it, based on the scientific basis you gave to begin this thread with. Now you counter it is philosophy in following posts. All I ask for is consistency.

Because "The earth is only a few thousand years old, and was made in seven days" wasn't what I was going for.

You seem to know so much about what I believe about religion and how it relates to science. Please enlighten us with what you think my views are, because nothing that you just said reflects anything I've EVER said when it comes to science or religion. Please stop putting words in people's mouths and inventing their opinions based on personal bias and need.

If you want to talk science, talk science. If you want to talk philosophy, talk philosophy, but don't then tell people they can't consider a philisophical argument for creation that BILLIONS believe in.

Thats like trying to have a discussion about math and then saying "but act like numbers don't exist."


Hence, the silliness of this thread.

[Angrist]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Because "The earth is only a few thousand years old, and was made in seven days" wasn't what I was going for.

You are insulting my religion. Not all christians believe that.

[Neo]

Originally Posted by GameMaster

Could you elaborate on the 'something' that sparked the big bang?

That's what I find to be the most fascinating aspect. That the 'something' that occurred by chance (or perhaps not) is responsible for all that is now.

The quick answer? The universe was created from random fluctutations. Matter and energy exist because nothingness is inherently unstable. The reason there is something rather than nothing is because nothingness is a physical impossibility. Or you could say that nothing is something in and of itself. Mathematically you take zero, which represents nothing, and make it a single element of a set which then ends up being equal to one. So S{0} = 1 and presto! We've just made something from nothing. Isn't that cute?

Theoretically there are "micro bangs" which occur in nature all the time as a result of random fluctuations. The vast majority of these bangs do not have the characteristics necessary for forming a full-fledged universe capable of supporting life. Our universe may seem unique and special, and it would be if it were the only possible universe, however statistically speaking the creation of a universe such as ours is an eventual certainty.

People ask where all the energy came from, but in a sense it doesn't really exist in the first place. If you add up all the positive and negative energy in the universe you end up with a big fat zero. Essentially we are all living on borrowed energy.

While physics does not need God to explain the creation of the universe or anything in it, I believe there is still hope arising from the theory that information(consciousness too, if you will), like energy, cannot be destroyed. Rather it can only change form and evolve. Physicists are increasingly viewing the universe in terms of information (1's and 0's) with matter and energy as incidental constructs.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Angrist

You are insulting my religion. Not all christians believe that.

I never said they do.
I was trying to avoid that aspect of it altogether.]

You seem to know so much about what I believe about religion and how it relates to science. Please enlighten us with what you think my views are, because nothing that you just said reflects anything I've EVER said when it comes to science or religion. Please stop putting words in people's mouths and inventing their opinions based on personal bias and need.

I never once directed what I said about religion at you.
Nor did I say I know what you think, or how you think it.
Stop looking for a fight, it's childish.

Also:

Thats like trying to have a discussion about math and then saying "but act like numbers don't exist."

It's nothing like that, actually.


PS: Thank you, Neo. Finally.

[Angrist]

Typhoid, you're a very hard person to discuss with. You keep implying stuff without really saying it, so you can always state "I never said that".

Example:
You say you don't want to talk about God, because you don't want to hear that the world is made in 7 days. When we tell you we don't believe that, you reply that you didn't say we did. But that really wasn't the point and you know it.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Neo

The quick answer? The universe was created from random fluctutations. Matter and energy exist because nothingness is inherently unstable. The reason there is something rather than nothing is because nothingness is a physical impossibility. Or you could say that nothing is something in and of itself. Mathematically you take zero, which represents nothing, and make it a single element of a set which then ends up being equal to one. So S{0} = 1 and presto! We've just made something from nothing. Isn't that cute?

Theoretically there are "micro bangs" which occur in nature all the time as a result of random fluctuations. The vast majority of these bangs do not have the characteristics necessary for forming a full-fledged universe capable of supporting life. Our universe may seem unique and special, and it would be if it were the only possible universe, however statistically speaking the creation of a universe such as ours is an eventual certainty.

People ask where all the energy came from, but in a sense it doesn't really exist in the first place. If you add up all the positive and negative energy in the universe you end up with a big fat zero. Essentially we are all living on borrowed energy.

While physics does not need God to explain the creation of the universe or anything in it, I believe there is still hope arising from the theory that information(consciousness too, if you will), like energy, cannot be destroyed. Rather it can only change form and evolve. Physicists are increasingly viewing the universe in terms of information (1's and 0's) with matter and energy as incidental constructs.

How exactly is any of what you described more plausible than God creating the universe? It all sounds well and good, but in the end it can be perceived as being just as much gibberish as you perceive creationism. Full of sound and fury but signifying nothing. Once again, you're just replacing one aspect of faith for another based on taste.

Remember string theory? How amazing that was? Now it's widely considered as crap. I think its "membrane theory" now, which actually fits in with a lot of what Tesla theorized in his later years. But give it five years, and membrane theory will be crap as well.

I'm not saying to stop trying to discover new ideas and aspects of the universe and its creation, but to rule out God as a possible source is bad science. God doesn't have to be the end of the discussion. It can be the beginning of a new one. One that is not greater less than that of "no God", but a companion to it.

Typhoid, you're a very hard person to discuss with. You keep implying stuff without really saying it, so you can always state "I never said that".

Example:
You say you don't want to talk about God, because you don't want to hear that the world is made in 7 days. When we tell you we don't believe that, you reply that you didn't say we did. But that really wasn't the point and you know it.

You hit the nail on the head, Angrist. Typhoid, say what you mean and mean what you say. You lie to do all of this semantic dancing, and the sad part is you're not very good at it. It doesn;t come off as clever, just confusing to the reader.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Angrist

Typhoid, you're a very hard person to discuss with. You keep implying stuff without really saying it, so you can always state "I never said that".

Example:
You say you don't want to talk about God, because you don't want to hear that the world is made in 7 days. When we tell you we don't believe that, you reply that you didn't say we did. But that really wasn't the point and you know it.

That's not it at all.

I say I don't want God brought up in this discussion because I don't want it to turn into a "God created everything" "no he didnt" Yes he did" "No he didnt" sort of thread.

I intended it with no bashing, and sadly - religion is the course of most discussion. Even as is now. I said I didn't want it brought up. Yet someone brings it up, and draws attention to it. I didn't mean it as disrespect, i simply meant it to simplify a thread on a conversational level.

All of you can pick that apart if you wish.

And Stangler, I'm done with you. Seriously. You're just a shit-disturber. You try and start arguments where no arguments are needed, and you latch on to conversations in a debatable sense, which need to attacthment. I know you'll feel the need to answer this. But I won't even read it. So feed your ego, but pay no mind.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

I say I don't want God brought up in this discussion because I don't want it to turn into a "God created everything" "no he didnt" Yes he did" "No he didnt" sort of thread.

I intended it with no bashing, and sadly - religion is the course of most discussion. Even as is now. I said I didn't want it brought up. Yet someone brings it up, and draws attention to it. I didn't mean it as disrespect, i simply meant it to simplify a thread on a conversational level.

This hasn't been a "God created everything" discussion. It has been a "God is at least a possibility for creating everything" discussion. They are very different. Its about keeping options and ideas open, and not closing them. You entered the realm of philosophy, and God is a huge philosophical part of the creation argument, so to exlcude Him is to have a dishonest discussion.

Originally Posted by Typhoid

And Stangler, I'm done with you. Seriously. You're just a shit-disturber. You try and start arguments where no arguments are needed, and you latch on to conversations in a debatable sense, which need to attacthment. I know you'll feel the need to answer this. But I won't even read it. So feed your ego, but pay no mind.

Typhoid, you say I'm a "shit-disturber" (whatever that means), but all I've done is call you our on the words that you've written and your constant back tracking. In essence, I will hold you accountable for what you say when you refuse to recognize your own words. If that angers you, examine what you say, not the person who makes the observation.