|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
 Posted - 02/28/2006 : 10:18:01 [Permalink]
|
| I wonder if my name will be mentioned... |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 10:31:30 [Permalink]
|
THoR said:
quote:
Theory is theory not fact.
.... /sigh
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 11:10:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Time is a dimension that exist in correlation with space: Space-time.
It was created at the same time as space was. It's like a video-tape: we can play it backward to the beginning, then we come to the start of the tape and cannot rewind further, because there exist no "before the Big Bang".
(bill) Where did the video-tape come from, doc?
Someone bought it in a video store.
quote:
quote:
You however believe in a being that put the tape in the VCR,
(bill) Not only did he put the tape in the VCR, but he created the tape and the VCR to begin with.
A machine in the factory manufactured the video tape. No matter how many times we play and rewind the tape, its content will never tell us how the tape was made, or for what purpose other than running it.
quote:
quote:
but we have no evidence of that.
(bill) We have the very existence of the tape and the VCR. Or do you claim the tape and VCR are eternal, doc?
I'm saying that we don't know. Maybe someone bought the VCR. Maybe someone rented it. All we have is speculation and no evidence. And our perspective is that of the characters in the movie the VCR is playing. As the events in the video plays out, it does so indifferent to who pressed "play". It may even have started automatically by program.
quote:
quote:
The deity you insist exist, only exist in the realm of philosophy because there is no evidence that science can examine.
bill) The universe had a beginning, it is finite, it is not eternal....
Deja-vu.
You sound like a broken record, or a republican news-reporter at Fox "News" repeating talking-points. How much copy-and-pasting do you do? Why don't you try come up with something new?
quote:
If the universe had a beginning then it has a first cause. A finite first cause will not cut the mustard here, doc, as the finite first cause would have to have a first cause itself.
Ok, so there is a first cause that is infinite. So what? Suppose there is a quantum fluctuation that was eternal before it went Bang, Big time.
There's no need to anthropomorphize it into a deity.
quote:
This is what is known as circular logic, doc, and the atheist wraps himself up tight in it.
Ok, so my statement above have broken the circle. What next?
quote:
The creationist puts forth the notion that a deity, or God, is the eternal first cause.
The atheist puts forth the notion of nothing, as the eternal first cause of the universe, and toss up their hands and proclaim "we don't know" in frustration...
It's not the atheist that is frustrated. It's clearly you. The atheist have no need to believe in a deity of any kind, and that obviously frustrates you because it makes them immune to your prosetylizing. For a scientist, the words "we don't know" is not an admission of defeat. It's the start of a challenge. The universe is the playing field, and one of its corners is an uphill battle. One day science may discover a way to step outside the field. That will be an interesting day indeed, but I will not hold my breath until then.
Face it, you're not making a convincing case since you haven't been able to sway the opinion of anyone here.
quote:
quote:
If a deity exist in a state of eternal, how does he measure up the appropriate moment to create the first cause? How did he find the right time to make his creation if time did not exist before the BB?
(bill) On the day that I meet him, if he gives me the chance, I will ask that question on your behalf, doc.
That's a pretty big if there, Bill. Personally, I don't have the patience to wait a lifetime for the answer. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 11:53:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
a) Either a God exists or it doesn't
b) Either all which exists was created or it wasn't
If ANYTHING which exists wasn't created, then why couldn't the same apply to another thing, or 100 things, or EVERYTHING
Pinning Bill down is like trying to grab a live eel in a bucket of snot.
You have made claims, Bill. Unlike the rest of us, you have not given any reference whatsoever. I, and others, cast doubt upon those claims and that requires you to come up with their support. And no one here takes anyone else's bare word for anything, so save your breath and give reference from qualified sorces.
Shit or get off the pot, Bill.
Pinning Bill down is like trying to grab a live eel in a bucket of snot.
(bill) Well I must say, being referenced to as a live eel is a first for me.
You have made claims, Bill.
(bill) If your referring to what you quoted, that is not me. I am not sure who you quoted there. So, again can you please be more specific? I apply cause and effect theory to the hypothetical atheistic universes, is this a claim which you are referring to? Again, please elaborate.
Unlike the rest of us, you have not given any reference whatsoever. I, and others, cast doubt upon those claims and that requires you to come up with their support. And no one here takes anyone else's bare word for anything, so save your breath and give reference from qualified sorces.
(bill) I'll use sheer logic as my reference for you filthy, so pay attention.
The universe exists. Since the universe exists it is either...
A. the result of an infinite first cause,
or
B. it is eternal.
Again, if you have any other hypothesis that explain the existence of the universe then speak now, or forever zip it shut.
NASA, Dave W, as well as most of your atheistic cohorts etc... etc... etc... all agree that the universe is not eternal. So that eliminates B. and leaves us with A. the result of an infinite first cause.
We just concluded that the universe was finite, or that is had a point in time where it began to exist. We can conclude that it had a first cause which caused the universe to begin to exist, and that this first cause would be eternal. A "non-eternal" first cause would require the first cause to have a beginning in existence, which would require a first cause for the first cause, which is obviously circular logic. So we know the first cause would be required to be eternal, other wise we end in circular logic and/or we end right back with the universe having to be eternal, which we have already concluded, thanks to NASA and Dave W., that the universe is not eternal. So we just deduced that the first cause of the universe must be eternal. Now if you have any ideas, or hypothesis, on this eternal first cause, other then it being a deity, or God, then insert that information here, or forever zip it shut. Holding up their hands and shouting "we don't know" is just their smoke and mirrors attempt to sidestep the issue of an eternal first cause, other then a deity, as the atheist realizes that an any other eternal first cause, apart from a deity, ends with the atheist wrapped up tight in ill-logic. They atheist knows the universe is not eternal. The know if it is finite then it requires an infinite first cause. Rather then just acknowledge that it would take a deity to fill the roll of eternal first cause they will jump through so many hoops just to shuck and jive in order to refuse the obvious. I will give you a perfect example:
Please give me one example of a potential eternal first cause to the universe, apart from a deity or God.
Now watch the semantics begin...
Shit or get off the pot, Bill.
(bill) It is time for you to do the same sir....
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 13:37:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Time is a dimension that exist in correlation with space: Space-time.
It was created at the same time as space was. It's like a video-tape: we can play it backward to the beginning, then we come to the start of the tape and cannot rewind further, because there exist no "before the Big Bang".
(bill) Where did the video-tape come from, doc?
Someone bought it in a video store.
quote:
quote:
You however believe in a being that put the tape in the VCR,
(bill) Not only did he put the tape in the VCR, but he created the tape and the VCR to begin with.
A machine in the factory manufactured the video tape. No matter how many times we play and rewind the tape, its content will never tell us how the tape was made, or for what purpose other than running it.
quote:
quote:
but we have no evidence of that.
(bill) We have the very existence of the tape and the VCR. Or do you claim the tape and VCR are eternal, doc?
I'm saying that we don't know. Maybe someone bought the VCR. Maybe someone rented it. All we have is speculation and no evidence. And our perspective is that of the characters in the movie the VCR is playing. As the events in the video plays out, it does so indifferent to who pressed "play". It may even have started automatically by program.
quote:
quote:
The deity you insist exist, only exist in the realm of philosophy because there is no evidence that science can examine.
bill) The universe had a beginning, it is finite, it is not eternal....
Deja-vu.
You sound like a broken record, or a republican news-reporter at Fox "News" repeating talking-points. How much copy-and-pasting do you do? Why don't you try come up with something new?
quote:
If the universe had a beginning then it has a first cause. A finite first cause will not cut the mustard here, doc, as the finite first cause would have to have a first cause itself.
Ok, so there is a first cause that is infinite. So what? Suppose there is a quantum fluctuation that was eternal before it went Bang, Big time.
There's no need to anthropomorphize it into a deity.
quote:
This is what is known as circular logic, doc, and the atheist wraps himself up tight in it.
Ok, so my statement above have broken the circle. What next?
quote:
The creationist puts forth the notion that a deity, or God, is the eternal first cause.
The atheist puts forth the notion of nothing, as the eternal first cause of the universe, and toss up their hands and proclaim "we don't know" in frustration...
It's not the atheist that is frustrated. It's clearly you. The atheist have no need to believe in a deity of any kind, and that obviously frustrates you because it makes them immune to your prosetylizing. For a scientist, the words "we don't know" is not an admission of defeat. It's the start of a challenge. The universe is the playing field, and one of its corners is an uphill battle. One day science may discover a way to step outside the field. That will be an interesting day indeed, but I will not hold my breath until then.
Face it, you're not making a convincing case since you haven't been able to sway the opinion of anyone here.
quote:
quote:
If a deity exist in a state of eternal, how does he measure up the appropriate moment to create the first cause? How did he find the right time to make his creation if time did not exist before the BB?
(bill) On the day that I meet him, if he gives me the chance, I will ask that question on your behalf, doc.
That's a pretty big if there, Bill. Personally, I don't have the patience to wait a lifetime for the answer.
(bill) Where did the video-tape come from, doc?
Someone bought it in a video store.
(bill) Ok, fair enough then, but where did the video store come from? You don't subscribe to the theory of eternal video stores, do you, doc?
A machine in the factory manufactured the video tape.
(bill) Where did this machine and factory come from? You do not subscribe to eternal manufacturing factories, do you, doc?
No matter how many times we play and rewind the tape, its content will never tell us how the tape was made, or for what purpose other than running it.
(bill) But what about the owners manual that came with the tape, or the directions on the side of the tape? What about where the tape says "made in china"?
I'm saying that we don't know. Maybe someone bought the VCR.
(bill) Is that "someone" the eternal first cause of the VCR and tape?
Maybe someone rented it.
(bill) Again, where did this someone come from? Were they just there?
All we have is speculation and no evidence.
(bill) We know, beyond doubt, that it took an eternal first cause to bring your VCR into existence, well, unless you contend that the VCR holds the attribute of eternal existence.
And our perspective is that of the characters in the movie the VCR is playing. As the events in the video plays out, it does so indifferent to who pressed "play". |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 14:00:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
...
Filthy, here you are up even later posting. Seems me, you and HalfMooner are frequent night owls round here. Looks like I can add Dr Mab to that list as well. In fact the board is quite busy all the way around. Interesting.
I just woke up. I never sleep more than a few hours at a time -- 5 at the very most. It is irritating, to be tired at 9am and asleep for a couple more at noon.
...
Try Melatonin, give up coffee after noon and/or quit naps. For me, I prefer to nap. :D Being self employed, most of the time I can eat and sleep when hungry and sleepy. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 15:07:12 [Permalink]
|
(bill) Where did the video-tape come from, doc?
(me) Someone bought it in a video store.
(bill) where did the video store come from?
(me) A machine in the factory manufactured the video tape.
(bill) Where did this machine and factory come from?
Bill, we can run this almost as many steps you wish. Do you see pattern here?
quote:
(bill) But what about the owners manual that came with the tape, or the directions on the side of the tape? What about where the tape says "made in china"?
But that is outside the contents of the video tape. We who are the characters in the movie on the tape cannot read the manual nor the "made by..." label on the tape. It's outside our universe, and thus science cannot address it. Nor can you.
(bill) Is that "someone" the eternal first cause of the VCR and tape?
(me) Maybe someone rented it.
(bill) Again, where did this someone come from? Were they just there?
Bill, I'm suggesting that the chain of cause-and-effect is eternal by itself. Then no deity is required. However, we are faced with a more immediate problem: once we reach the singularity of the Big Bang, we run out of tape, out of road signs. Nothing that can tell us what was really there.
The only thing you have is your idea that the chain of cause-and-effect must have an originator. But you haven't shown any evidence that your assumption is valid.
quote:
quote:
All we have is speculation and no evidence.
(bill) We know, beyond doubt, that it took an eternal first cause to bring your VCR into existence, well, unless you contend that the VCR holds the attribute of eternal existence.
That is why we are skeptics. You haven't shown that there must exist a deity without boubt.
quote:
(bill) Your whole willingness to just except the existence of the VCR, while not giving one rat's a$$ as to how or who created the VCR or who pushed the play button, and your willingness to brush off the origin of the VCR as irrelevant comes off as intellectual laziness considering you are a great skeptic who prides himself in critical thinking for all things.
It's not laziness. It's intellectual honesty. So far, science haven't manage to figure out how to answer the question of what caused the Big Bang. To make up a fairytale about a deity and claim it is the truth is dishonest when we really don't know. To anthropomorphize the cause of Big Bang to a deity is to ascribe characteristics that we have no evidence of.
quote:
(bill) Because you atheist keep using the same ill-logic over and over so I just refute it again. Again, if you have any late breaking news on the origin of the atheistic universe then by all means please share.
We're trying, you just ain't listening.
quote:
quote:
Ok, so my statement above have broken the circle. What next?
(bill) Your statement proves that the atheist will either go for eternal existence, or the suspension of time and space effect to get their atheistic universe rolling, bar none...
And you refuse to consider an explanation without God. How does that make you any less dogmatic/bigotted?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 16:56:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by Hawks
quote:
Who created, or was the first cause, of the universe?
Picture this: Hawks is jumping up and down on the spot while shouting excitedly: ME ME ME, debate with ME. LIEs were the first cause of the universe and they were not eternal. Pure logic. Debate with ME!!!
Picture this: Hawks is jumping up and down on the spot while shouting excitedly: ME ME ME, debate with ME. LIEs were the first cause of the universe and they were not eternal. Pure logic. Debate with ME!!!
(bil) This is a chat room forum for discussion, Hawk. We are having a discussion, Hawk. Feel free to join the discussion anytime you wish, Hawk.
How obvious do I have to be? I'm trying to demonstrate two things. (1)I'm doing the same sort of hand-waving that you are. We both claim that the universe had a first cause. We both claim that it was a "who" that was the first cause. We both back up our claims with nothing. Your only "evidence" seems to be that since the universe is not eternal, then something - an eternal being - must be the first cause. This was my second point: the "creator" of the universe does not have to be eternal since LIEs aren't. Feel free to discuss.
|
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 17:05:23 [Permalink]
|
Bill said:
quote:
(bill) Because you atheist keep using the same ill-logic over and over so I just refute it again.
The only thing you have "refuted" is the claim that you understand logic.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 18:24:38 [Permalink]
|
Whose logic, Bill? Yours? You expect us, or anyone, to take your mere word over scientific investigation?! Hey, quit smokin' that stuff!
But, you finally came out and stated the G-word with emphasis, putting this ridiculous discussion into religion, where it's belonged from the start.
So which God, Bill? Yahweh? Allah? Quetzacoatl? Ronald Reagan? There's been thousands of them, none more worthy than another except to their various followers. So which do you prefer?
And, as logic unsupported by fact will never compare with science, which uses logic to it's fullest extent, what empirical proofs do you have for the existence of this entity? Never mind; I already know. None.
And as you have not even the least of proofs for God, you are simply taking the story of the genesis of the universe on faith.
Atheist says: "I don't know."
Churchy says: "I do; it's written right here in my book. Y'know, that book written before the invention of the telescope."
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 20:29:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
But you can define atheism out of existence, since it never really existed anyway, only in man's imagination.
Yes, and as filthy recently pointed out man has feared and worshipped thousands of spirits and deities. How many of those deities do you believe in? All? Some? One? If not all, be honest, why do you dismiss those that you do not believe in?
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
The creationist puts forth the notion that a deity, or God, is the eternal first cause.
And I put forth a trans-dimensional being. Though being a recent convert I missed one of the steps of creation. However, I can show just as much evidence as any creationist can.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
quote:
Originally posted by besketigal
"Tell me where God came from"
Ok what part of eternal, infinite, uncaused do you not understand here?
billy, you are not in AIG any more.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
... "don't confuse me with any facts or reality or try to use any logic, I am very comfortable where I am at, thank you."
Histerical. In this context it actually suits you.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
He is eternal. That is an attribute of deity. Eternal means that he had no point in time where he began to exist. That is the definition of eternal, which is an attribute of deity. It only ends in redundancy when you refuse to accept the attributes of deity, as being given to a deity, and then you try to redefine eternal, with your own definition, which says that eternal beings, or deities, still have to have a beginning.
So the attributes of your deity were given to it? I agree with that and the giver was most likely man. Man has created others and he has created yours too. Regardless of your eternal spin that will remain a fact until you can come up with something a bit more substantial than a personal testimonial of faith.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
Ok, fair enough then, but where did the video store come from? You don't subscribe to the theory of eternal video stores, do you, doc?
Again, you hold others to a standard for evidence that you can not and have not offered.
What is this all for billy? Is so you can brag to all of your fundy-buddies about how you flustered a forum full of skeptics with your reason and logic, and outright clevernous. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
| Edited by - moakley on 02/28/2006 20:52:28 |
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2006 : 23:40:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
I'll use sheer logic as my reference for you filthy, so pay attention.
The universe exists. Since the universe exists it is either...
A. the result of an infinite first cause,
or
B. it is eternal.
Again, if you have any other hypothesis that explain the existence of the universe then speak now, or forever zip it shutou to do the same sir....
I'm not the first to attempt to point this out Bill, but you don't get to ignore C or any to other options. You have yourself a nice little false dichotomy here.
By "infinite first cause" I'm assuming you mean "eternal first cause", in that it transcends time. You are discounting the option that time, in every way we understand it, simply did not exist before this universe was created. "Before" simply has no meaning. Time is a feature/property of this universe, if it doesn't exist outside of this universe then talking about "before" is a non sequitur.
I have a formal background in physics, but I'm certainly not about to pretend to comprehend every aspect of relativity and quantum physics. I know enough, however to appreciate that time is not necessarily just the "intuitive" interval between events as commonly held.
Spend a little time studying something new instead of just copying and pasting for a change. Your head may hurt a little (mine certainly does on occasion), but without a little work, you aren't going to learn anything. And without at least indicating that you're prepared to learn a little, you're certainly not likely to convince anyone (especially at SFN) that your argument and/or position has any merit. |
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2006 : 00:03:44 [Permalink]
|
bill, here is a concise, well-written article that addresses precisely what you presume to not exist--a non-caused, non-eternal creation event. The article is entitled What Happened Before the Big Bang?
It begins, in part, with this observation: quote:
Children grow up with an intuitive sense of cause and effect. Events in the physical world aren't supposed to "just happen." Something makes them happen. Even when the rabbit appears convincingly from the hat, trickery is suspected. So could the entire universe simply pop into existence, magically, for no actual reason at all?
The conclusion is most important.
quote:
A typical quantum process is the decay of a radioactive nucleus. If you ask why a given nucleus decayed at one particular moment rather than some other, there is no answer. The event "just happened" at that moment, that's all. You cannot predict these occurrences. All you can do is give the probability-there is a fifty-fifty chance that a given nucleus will decay in, say, one hour. This uncertainty is not simply a result of our ignorance of all the little forces and influences that try to make the nucleus decay; it is inherent in nature itself, a basic part of quantum reality.
The lesson of quantum physics is this: Something that "just happens" need not actually violate the laws of physics. The abrupt and uncaused appearance of something can occur within the scope of scientific law, once quantum laws have been taken into account. Nature apparently has the capacity for genuine spontaneity.
It is, of course, a big step from the spontaneous and uncaused appearance of a subatomic particle-something that is routinely observed in particle accelerators-to the spontaneous and uncaused appearance of the universe. But the loophole is there. If, as astronomers believe, the primeval universe was compressed to a very small size, then quantum effects must have once been important on a cosmic scale. Even if we don't have a precise idea of exactly what took place at the beginning, we can at least see that the origin of the universe from nothing need not be unlawful or unnatural or unscientific. In short, it need not have been a supernatural event.
So perhaps you need to lose your childish sense of cause and effect and understand that in nature events can "just happen"--things do not always need a cause.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/01/2006 00:04:27 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2006 : 04:10:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
bill, here is a concise, well-written article that addresses precisely what you presume to not exist--a non-caused, non-eternal creation event. The article is entitled What Happened Before the Big Bang?
It begins, in part, with this observation: quote:
Children grow up with an intuitive sense of cause and effect. Events in the physical world aren't supposed to "just happen." Something makes them happen. Even when the rabbit appears convincingly from the hat, trickery is suspected. So could the entire universe simply pop into existence, magically, for no actual reason at all?
The conclusion is most important.
quote:
A typical quantum process is the decay of a radioactive nucleus. If you ask why a given nucleus decayed at one particular moment rather than some other, there is no answer. The event "just happened" at that moment, that's all. You cannot predict these occurrences. All you can do is give the probability-there is a fifty-fifty chance that a given nucleus will decay in, say, one hour. This uncertainty is not simply a result of our ignorance of all the little forces and influences that try to make the nucleus decay; it is inherent in nature itself, a basic part of quantum reality.
The lesson of quantum physics is this: Something that "just happens" need not actually violate the laws of physics. The abrupt and uncaused appearance of something can occur within the scope of scientific law, once quantum laws have been taken into account. Nature apparently has the capacity for genuine spontaneity.
It is, of course, a big step from the spontaneous and uncaused appearance of a subatomic particle-something that is routinely observed in particle accelerators-to the spontaneous and uncaused appearance of the universe. But the loophole is there. If, as astronomers believe, the primeval universe was compressed to a very small size, then quantum effects must have once been important on a cosmic scale. Even if we don't have a precise idea of exactly what took place at the beginning, we can at least see that the origin of the universe from nothing need not be unlawful or unnatural or unscientific. In short, it need not have been a supernatural event.
So perhaps you need to lose your childish sense of cause and effect and understand that in nature events can "just happen"--things do not always need a cause.
Very interesting, Double H. I wonder if we'll ever know the mechanics, if "mechanics" they be, of the formation of the universe. And of what use that knowledge could be put, if any.
Our friend Bill has trapped himself in the Either/Or Fallacy and can't See his way out. So, he argues from incredulity, which is the only straw left to grasp:
The universe exists, therefore it must have a cause. And if it has a cause, it must have a purpose. I cannot see that cause, therefore God created it and therein lies it's purpose. Anything else is impossible because I cannot see it, and thus my logic prevails.
Staggeringly simplistic and not an uncommon mindset.
I myself like this
version of the story, which is at least as good as Bill's, and a whole lot prettier.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2006 : 07:42:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
we can at least see that the origin of the universe from nothing need not be unlawful or unnatural or unscientific. In short, it need not have been a supernatural event.
I predict Bill will just say that is just the atheists' way of getting god (which one? who knows, only the shadow I suspect) completely out of the picture, and will dismiss it with a wave of his bible.
@ filthy - I agree, much prettier! |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
| Edited by - pleco on 03/01/2006 07:43:03 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
