KT45 Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Hey Scott I just wanted to ask you some brief questions. I just want to learn and hear from you so I don’t think you will get any return comments from me. Anyone else can jump in but I'm merely interested in learning from scott through Q&A. A few post ago you gave these statements…. http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...11847&st=0# it's like saying a painting has burst into existence and there is no one who painted it. http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...299&st=320# God gives plenty of evidence {the creation} for His existence, yet, you still do not believe. You believe that creation is enough evidence for the existence of god. Well I was wondering this. Why do you think that atheist believe the world did just burst into existence? I think that you feel most atheist believe that the universe just popped out of nowhere. Am I correct? Also, can tell me what you know about the big bang? It doesn’t have to be perfect or scientific so you don’t have to bother copying and pasting an answer. I just want to know what you think that it is. Next, can you tell me what you know about evolution? Just briefly explain your understanding of human evolution or any other form of macro evolution. Again this doesn’t have to be grounded in science. I just want your understanding of the subject. Lastly, why do you believe that the universe had to be created? To elaborate more, why is it logical to believe that a God created the universe but not illogical to believe that the universe always was (in other words: matter and energy existed before the big bang). You believe in an eternal god, why isn’t an eternal universe just as plausible? Hopefully this will discussion will help you understand why some would not consider the universe or the planet as evidence of God. Or maybe I'll start to believe that it is possible for a god to exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Why can't the universe just burst into existence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 Why can't the universe just burst into existence? You mean without prior events triggering the burst? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Why can't the universe just burst into existence? You mean without prior events triggering the burst? Yea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostOrFound Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 It's easier for me to accept that either the universe (perhaps I should say "matter" rather than "universe") has (1) always existed or that (2) it just burst into existence, than to accept that a god exists and meets one of those conditions - I observe the universe while the god remains unobservable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 Why can't the universe just burst into existence? You mean without prior events triggering the burst? Yea. I guess the universe can just burst into existance from nothingness. But for me it is just simpler to believe a cause and effect kind of theory. It is my understanding (which is very limited I might add) that the universe is accelerating outward. Because of that I believe that this universe started with the big bang. Afterwards I try to conceptualize what caused the big bang. For this theory I believe that their are three options. Please take into account that I'm an idiot and know nothing. Theory 1: That matter or some form of energy (electrons, protons etc) merely drifted through space until they met. What caused this meeting? I'm not sure. If matter it was probably a focus of the attraction of masses. If energy then maybe the attraction of the different polarities. As the energy and/or matter collected it built up until it exploded, thus the big bang. Theory 2: The big crunch. The universe has always existed constantly expanding and collapsing upon itself for eternity and will continue to do so. Basically a large cycle of big bangs and big crunches. If scientist are right and the chance for a big crunch to happen to this universe are very slim, then this is the final time it will ever expand until the universe dies. Theory 3: This one is a lot more bizarre than the rest. It is that there are many universes. And the attraction or demolition of one or more smaller universes caused this one. But even if these theories aren't real, I believe that the universe always existed or was caused by different forces in space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everglaze Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I think it's reasonable enough to say that the universe always just existed. I DON'T think it's reasonable to just use "God" as the conclusive "creator" of the universe as a valid arguement. Hell, what came before this "God" myth anyway? People and the universe. There is no proof that God exists, yet there is proof that the sun and the moon exists. Please be realistic. Saying "God" created the universe is just one out of many theories that people have in order to suit something that makes sense to certain groups of people. I personally believe that it's absurd for the sole reason that it just isn't realistic. That's why scientific theories if any theory...are the best in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quicksand Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 You know (generally speaking here about:) the gnostic's believed that Satan created the material universe b/c only Satan would try to seperate you from God in this world. Yaweh, wouldn't do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Why can't the universe just burst into existence? You mean without prior events triggering the burst? Yea. I guess the universe can just burst into existance from nothingness. But for me it is just simpler to believe a cause and effect kind of theory. Nothingness doesn't really exist, but I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Nothingness doesn't really exist, but I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe. Can you elaborate? Its really hard to conceptualize. Is there any other case where something was created out of nothing? -EDIT- "I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe" Is this just a play on words to say that the universe always was because nothing caused it therefore it always existed? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Could it be that nothingess is a finite state, that was inevitably to be broken by the emergence of existence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Could it be that nothingess is a finite state, that was inevitably to be broken by the emergence of existence? The only way I can conceptualize this is if nothingness or space is an unstable system. Since it isn't stable matter came into existence. But this is still hard for me to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 How can nothingness be a system? I tend to think of the story of Ptah, who thought himself into existence, then proceeded to masturbate the rest of reality into existence, or something like that, I have to reread that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 I tend to think of the story of Ptah, who thought himself into existence, then proceeded to masturbate the rest of reality into existence, or something like that, I have to reread that story. How can you think yourself into existence if you have no mind to think with? Could it be that nothingess is a finite state, that was inevitably to be broken by the emergence of existence? How can existance or anything for that matter emerge from nothing when there is nothing to emerge from? How can you emerge if you don't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Meh, it seems just as plausible to me as the idea that existence never wasn't. Potential doesn't have to be matter or energy, necessarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Nothingness doesn't really exist, but I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe. Can you elaborate? Its really hard to conceptualize. Is there any other case where something was created out of nothing? -EDIT- "I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe" Is this just a play on words to say that the universe always was because nothing caused it therefore it always existed? I'm confused. Not created out of nothing, but caused by nothing. Nothing doesn't exist... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Meh, it seems just as plausible to me as the idea that existence never wasn't. Potential doesn't have to be matter or energy, necessarily.How so? Cause and effect has been observed. Therefore I can theorize that something caused this universe to exist. It may not be true but it is plausible because other cause and effect situations has been observed before in smaller testable systems. As far as my knowledge goes an effect without a cause hasn't been observed or studied. How therefore can they be equally plausible in your opinion? To me it seems like since I haven't observed any systems without cause and effect situations I believe that it is plausible that the world didn't just emerge from nothing because something with a prior existence had to cause the chain of events leading to the universe. Of course this is speculative but this is how understand things. Dhampir, could you explain your reasoning further? Nothingness doesn't really exist, but I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe. Can you elaborate? Its really hard to conceptualize. Is there any other case where something was created out of nothing? -EDIT- "I would say that it is certainly plausible that nothing caused the universe" Is this just a play on words to say that the universe always was because nothing caused it therefore it always existed? I'm confused. Not created out of nothing, but caused by nothing. Nothing doesn't exist... How can nothing cause creation if it doesn't exist? When we say nothing we are saying space right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 How can nothing cause creation if it doesn't exist? When we say nothing we are saying space right? Nothing is a concept...so when I say nothing caused the universe I mean that the universe has no cause. When I say nothing I mean the concept of the absence of something. Space isn't nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Nothing is a concept...so when I say nothing caused the universe I mean that the universe has no cause. If there is no cause how is there an effect (bursting into existence)? When I say nothing I mean the concept of the absence of something. Space isn't nothing. Isn't space the absence of matter? I'll reword the question. When you mean nothing do you mean "outer space"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 If there is no cause how is there an effect (bursting into existence)? It's not called an effect, it's called an uncaused event. Isn't space the absence of matter? I'll reword the question. When you mean nothing do you mean "outer space"? No....space is a vacuum. Nothing is the absence of anything, including an empty area or a vacuum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 If there is no cause how is there an effect (bursting into existence)? It's not called an effect, it's called an uncaused event. Why is this probable? Has an uncaused event ever been observed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Why is this probable? Has an uncaused event ever been observed? Yes. Quantum events are uncaused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT45 Posted September 19, 2006 Author Share Posted September 19, 2006 Why is this probable? Has an uncaused event ever been observed? Yes. Quantum events are uncaused. Dammit now I have to study and/or familiarize myself with Quantum physics in order to see if this science is a valid reason to believe the universe came into being from an uncaused event. -Edit- Until I comprehend the subject more I concede that it is probable that the universe might have just happened. Even so I still await scott's answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotBlinded Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Check out Quentin Smith's website and his articles. I think you will like them. My own opinion is that nothing is the counterpart of something. Just like forms and the formless. Without the formless, we could never know forms because we would just be one big glob. Forms exist in the formless. This is why, IMO, science will never prove "God" because it is nothing or formless. It doesn't exist...to us. Here is Quentin's site: http://www.qsmithwmu.com/ Click on the Big Bang or Religion Atheism...or anyone you want to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted September 20, 2006 Share Posted September 20, 2006 Check into something on M-theory (I think...I've discussed it elsewhere). Basically, instead of a god existing forever we simply replace it with energy existing forever (since energy isn't really created or destroyed but transformed). Then you can have something like membranes that fluctuate and when they "bump" into one another you can have an event that is capable of causing a "big bang." It's all about perspective (and a whole bunch of math that is way beyond me at this point in life). You're seeing things about "nothing" and all from inside our universe which is limiting you a bit but reasonably so. You should also look at string theory or any of the other quantum theories that exist. They might make your head hurt but they will help you understand why things just "happen." They quantum realm doesn't need a "reason" (that we've discovered at least) like the macro world and in some theories a big bang could just happen "out of the blue" so to speak. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts