i agree...
If the universe is 15 billion years old...
- Thread starter GAMETHEORY
- Start date
i agree...
Spark it...
You're being facetious right?
C/S.
The whole shit makes no damn sense sometimes. I say, just put in your years on earth and have some fun. Nothing else is under your control. I'm an atheist so when christians fight with me with me I ask them who created god. Then they have some bullshit answer. If I believe big bang, how can something start from nothing? What was before the something started. How can you measure nothing? Is it the absence of something? Then maybe that something was somewhere else. But the original question can drive you crazy if you think about it deeply and often. Some Matrix type shit might be happening. Check this...ever had a dream that you swore was real and then when you woke up, you're freaked out because you realize you were dreaming. When you were in the dream, you would swear it was real. Now which one is real...the dream that you thought was real or the reality that you believe to be real. What if all those things are a dream? How would you know if you never woke up? Gotta sip a Jack Daniel & coke to calm my nerves after pondering this shit. Good thing I don't smoke.
When we start getting into this sort of physics, it would seem that we have just got to give up on intuition.
However, it is just as well to keep in mind that with all this advanced and highly complex physics, what we are actually talking about is a series of models that apparently fit the facts. As Authur Koestler points out in "The Sleepwalkers", people were able to make pretty good predicitions of planetary motions based on a wholy erroneous concept of all planetary motion being in perfect circles. Complex combinatons of cycles and epicycles were produced to account for factors that could not be explained by single, circular orbits. This system was utterly wrong, and based on a false premise, but it worked.
The apparently irreconcilable aspects of contemporary physics might also be indicative of us having gone down a theoretical blind ally. We have invested so much intellectual capital in the ideas and models that we currently have, that if they are in fact incorrect, it would be just as hard for us to abandon them as it was for people before Kepler and Newton to abandon notions such as the perfect circular motion of heavenly bodies.
As we do nor know what Plasma or Electricity really is and why gravity is said to be so weak, all this creation theory is a mystery to modern day scholars.
I believe in 'M' Theory alongside the holographic principle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory, although the layman understand more concepts from looking at String Theory, where two lines of energy collide, creating the beginnings of a new string.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
Maybe 15 billion years ago a universe like this one collapsed back to singularity in "The Big Crunch" and this is reconstituted energy that we are living in now.
I'm not sure, but I feel the universe that we observe through thought is one of many dimensions of existance that we experience.
As David Icke states We are all one consciousness — that we are all geniuses who've forgotten this about ourselves, and have been manipulated to believe we are all ordinary men in the street because we are controllable that way.
Energy cannot be destroyed, just manifest in another form - the human spirit/ soul do we continue with our thoughts and desires in spirit, or does it take form in another dimension where wants and needs are obsolete?
Someone within our community must be reading sumerian texts, Sitchin will not decipher them for us, so I feel the answers are in those tablets in the British Museum and other such places.
If the Dogon tribe knew about particle formations and drew them on their clothes and retold stories through their traditions about knowledge a lot of scholars had to use sciences to find, maybe a lot about space time and creation is gathering dust in undisclosed venues.
One more article from Dr Michio Kaku:
http://www.mkaku.org/articles/hyperspace_odyssey.php
I believe in 'M' Theory alongside the holographic principle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory, although the layman understand more concepts from looking at String Theory, where two lines of energy collide, creating the beginnings of a new string.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
Maybe 15 billion years ago a universe like this one collapsed back to singularity in "The Big Crunch" and this is reconstituted energy that we are living in now.
I'm not sure, but I feel the universe that we observe through thought is one of many dimensions of existance that we experience.
As David Icke states We are all one consciousness — that we are all geniuses who've forgotten this about ourselves, and have been manipulated to believe we are all ordinary men in the street because we are controllable that way.
Energy cannot be destroyed, just manifest in another form - the human spirit/ soul do we continue with our thoughts and desires in spirit, or does it take form in another dimension where wants and needs are obsolete?
Someone within our community must be reading sumerian texts, Sitchin will not decipher them for us, so I feel the answers are in those tablets in the British Museum and other such places.
If the Dogon tribe knew about particle formations and drew them on their clothes and retold stories through their traditions about knowledge a lot of scholars had to use sciences to find, maybe a lot about space time and creation is gathering dust in undisclosed venues.
One more article from Dr Michio Kaku:
http://www.mkaku.org/articles/hyperspace_odyssey.php
Now that's a deep concept!
You can give the right response, but biased minds wont accept.
I wondered that question myself
I've got a lot of respect for your post count and BGOL Exp. But that was some ignorant ass nigga shit to say bruh.
And there's the rub. What we have conceived as an idea a thousand years ago and advanced upon by curiosity, imagination, pure brain power and technology, has advanced us to where we are today. More than likely we ARE being guided by our intuitions. The brains in each of us are the centers of our individual universes. There are as many neurons, cells and synapses in our brains as there are stars in the galaxy. Our concept of reality would be based on an imperceptible connection between our cognitive thoughts and the expressions and revelations we interpret from them as we interact with our surroundings both here and out there. We have arrived at this point in discovery simply because there's nothing else to guide our hand or show us the way. Indeed, no matter how sophisticated the phrase, or the number of platitudes, degrees and prestige bestowed upon and used by those who have been raised to the level of genius on these matters, they are literally making it up as they go along, naming new finds and breakthroughs after themselves or after the significant names and discoveries of others in their elite field; because there's nothing else out there EXCEPT our own instincts(?) to rely upon. Unless/until we come across another intelligence where we can compare notes, all these scientific results, theories and conclusions are nothing more than sophisticated shots in the dark, if you will. In essence we're making it up as we go along
Here is the kicker. There could have been another universe before that and they big bang would have wiped out that universe. The possibilities are astounding.
We, as humans, look for a solution to all things that exist. Some need a definitive answer, but questions such as how it all started, or even if there was ever a true beginning, may never be answered. Many people can't deal with that so they insert the an answer that is palatable to their sensibilities.
.....And as for athiests. You can't be serious. The more scientific knowledge you glean and understand the more you can logically accept only one conclusion. The universe we live in and the conciousness we experience is the result of intelligent design. There is no other possible way to explain the complexity of the universe. Anyone with even a basic understanding of mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, cosmology and astronomy cannot possibly deny the existence of an intelligent designer. There is no way to push a specific religion on a non-beleiver. I can't prove that what Christians or Jews or Muslims or anyone else beleives is true is indeed true, but its almost un-fathomable to think that there is no greater mind that created this universe and everything in it.
Don't want to get into an extended back and forth, but all an intelligent designer hypothesis does is regress the issue. If the world is so complex that it requires a designer, does not a designer complex enough to design such, require a designer itself? All ID does is raise more questions.
Wow...out of the mouth of Newbs. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant
my pov is, i don't really care to spend my time wrapping my mind around micro and macro universes... so excuse me professor. if you do, great. more power to you.
Inserting an answer where there isn't one doesn't help your argument. It only furthers complicats your argument. It's not an answer.
There may very well be a designer, but you need proof in order for it to be a fact. If there is no proof then you are grasping at straws.
Time does not exist Time is only relevant to things that are finite. Time only became relevant when life began and then became aware of itself. Before there was life there was no such thing as time. Life is arrogant enough to attempt to apply restraints that only pertain to living things ie limited existence to things that have no such restriction. I say all that to say the Universe has been here forever. The Universe IS. and thats all. Anything that IS is the universe. The universe may change but has always existed.
The universe is 16 billion years old in western philosophy years. That number is open to debate since time and definitions of time are not static they change. It's possible for people to live 700yrs in Biblical times whereas they would only be 30yrs old by todays numbers. The difference is who's in power and how they interpet time.
Not speaking as an atheist but,
The main argument I see a lot of in the "there has to be an intelligent creator" bit is always generally the same thing.
Affirming the Consequent
Affirming the Consequent
Affirming the Consequent
Affirming the Consequent
again, again and again. In different forms. Within their respective versions of it, it always has to be pointed out this it is the "only logical" solution. When the argument in its basic form, was never logical to begin with.
Problems being definition, perception, assumption.
The whole, "If an intelligent creator, created this it would be complex" "It is complex, so an intelligent creator had to of created it - it's ultimate logic and anyone else is a complete idiot not to grasp it" (not neccesarily accusing you or anyone else specifically of that).
Just, no.
Whatever side you choose to be on, the whole situation is pretty complex to say the least. But, it most certainly won't be answered by the same fallacious argument.
Also, skeptics are not your enemy. Whatever side they may be on. They're pretty crucial in helping to bring the truth out. Regardless of whatever ego-infested, condescending arguments may arise
.LOL I'm talking about how time is a matter of opinion.
Yeah...I'll stop.
rap your brain around this one.
Ever hear of Schrödinger's cat? its an experiment where you place a cat inside of a box, along with a radioactive pellet, and close the box. The pellet, has a half life, and when it reaches that half life, an atom of it may or may not decay if it does, the cat is dead, if it doesnt, the cat is alive.
Since you cant see into the box.. the cat is effectively dead and alive at once. The pellet may or may not have decayed, and since you cannot see the outcome the cat is alive and dead at the same time.
You are aware that our days get longer and longer each year?
The moon is effectively slowing the planets rotation, the tug and pull that the earth and moon play with each other slows each others rotations.
Effectively time is different every year. ( a day is longer by micro nano fempto whatever seconds so small its negligible)
point is.. a day back then.. was a hell of a lot shorter than it is now.. and effectively longer
but based on what he was saying..
Time.. is based on what we say it is, 1 year to us.. could be 2 years to zimmabob of the middle of no where.
same as i can call a pencil an licnep. its still referring to a pencil.. just a different name becuz i said so.
something had to be able to transcend creation in itself in order for anything else to be created. That's what atheist refuse to acknowledge, but it is the only concievable option.
but was that thing sentient?
or are we a product of random probability? a random group of chemicals.
Wrong. Atheists are not creationists to begin with.
There is no point on stressing yourself thinking about an answer.
Just live, worry about it on your death bed
Just live, worry about it on your death bed
chemicals are still products of matter and energy.
By scientific law, matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. So how does it exist?
Logic tells you if it exist, despite the fact that by law it can't be created. Then either something can transcend creation, or it was created. There are no other concievable options.
Now you must ask, which is more logical to you. Is the transcendent being Sentient or not?
I would say Sentient. Because the only thing that we know that can act uncaused is Intellect. Matter and energy need a cause to act.
Exactly, so like i said they refuse to acknowledge that a trancsendental cause is the only concievable cause.
There is no natural cause to the existence of matter and energy. A natural cause would contradict the law that matter and energy cannot be created. So therefore the cause is supernatural. Which Atheist also won't acknowledge.
So tell me, what is the third option?
Your error is in presupposing that the universe is the effect of a cause.
The universe exists. You presume that it had to be created. If so, I would ask who created the creator. You might say... the creator just exists. I would end the discussion by pointing out your inconsistency is allowing creators to just exist but not "creations."
Science indicates the universe is the effect of a cause, the big bang is the cause. If it is not, your saying the universe exist uncaused. Which means it transcends creation. Again there is no third option.
If the being is transedent, by definition there is no need for a transcendent to be created. Transcendent means to exist independently. So to ask what created that being independent of creation,is a ridiculous question.
Last edited:
The big bang is not a cause. It's not an origin. It's a description of the movement of matter through space-time.
The universe exists. There is no evidence that leads anyone to any credible speculation of a cause.
Which is why asking about a creator is indeed a ridiculous question.
If the big bang is not a cause than what is the cause of the universe?
If there is no cause, then the universe exist uncaused.
You saying the universe exist without speculation of a cause. Then you believe it exist uncaused. If exist uncaused, then it exist independent of creation. That by definition is Transcendent. Unless you have a third option.
Similar threads
