Ye Religion Thread

[metaL]

What about the idea of the universe having always existed?  Does that have no validity?

this involves one of my strongest opinions on this subject, which i have stated previously.  I feel that this is impossble (that is, saying that time goes on backwards to infinity).  Time is a measurable entity in the real world, where real life events take place.  Infinity, on the other hand, is an immeasurable, non-numerical value that simply cannot be used for any kind of quantification.  It is a concept and nothing more, and a correlation (that actually holds water) between these two just does not make sense to me (ie infinity cannot exist in the physical realm - measurable events cannot go back in time infinitely).

This sounds illogical.  Time is recorded in the brain, and the brain has its limits.  That has no bearing on whether or not the universe has a beginning and an end.

Its not illogical, and your response to this completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

It's like saying the universe cannot possibly have X number of elements, because X is too large for me to comprehend.

X number? infinity is not a number. quit making correllations between quantifiabe an inquantifiable information.  Infinity is not too large to comprehend.  It is not large at all, it is a concept which basically means neverending.  When we refer to the creation of the universe, we are talking about history.  History is contained with tangible, physical, actual events that have occured.  These can be measured and quantified (like years can).  Infinity CANNOT be measured and quantified.  How could this world possibly be used to describe the duration of history?

[Robot]

It isn't irrelevant.  I'm not arguing that infinity is some finite number.  The brain can set a beginning and end on whatever events are recorded, but that has no bearing on whether there is a beginning and end for the universe.  By your logic, I could say "I wasn't around in the 50's, so nothing in the 50's happened."

[metaL]

It isn't irrelevant.  I'm not arguing that infinity is some finite number.  The brain can set a beginning and end on whatever events are recorded, but that has no bearing on whether there is a beginning and end for the universe.  By your logic, I could say "I wasn't around in the 50's, so nothing in the 50's happened."

Yes it is.  You have misinterpreted my post completely.

[Robot]

No, not really.  Provide your explanation instead of trying to make it look you didn't get schooled.

[metaL]

No, not really.  Provide your explanation instead of trying to make it look you didn't get schooled.

Ok then!

The brain can set a beginning and end on whatever events are recorded, but that has no bearing on whether there is a beginning and end for the universe. 

This does not matter. you are constantly avoiding the concept of infinity.

By your logic, I could say "I wasn't around in the 50's, so nothing in the 50's happened."

No, this example involves ACTUAL, PHYSICAL OCCURENCES that HAVE HAPPENED and can be quantified (in this case, through years, the 50s).  Infinity has nothing to do with this whatsoever. 

[Robot]

It is relevant because time is a brain-related concept.  If you can't pay attention and observe things happening (which your brain allows), you will have no time concept.

Your argument is "The universe has to have a beginning and end because I want to know that I can conceive a beginning and end in MY LIMITED MIND".  Sorry, but there is nothing to assume that the universe will change according to your mind's limitedness.  You can go and say the universe's time (and even size) are limited, but there is no scientific evidence you have to believe this, it's just a more comfortable concept to you, and I can understand that.

[metaL]

You are very far off.  First of all, my brain has no limits    Second, I say this because you obviously dont understand the concept, and your responses are irrelevant.  History is quantifiable.  Infinity is not. that is really all you need to know, but feel free to post another irrelevant response.

[Robot]

Wow, so your brain has no limits, but the universe's time and size does?   I guess some of us on this forum have never seen or felt a brain with their hands.

Feel free to post more responses to make it look like you didn't actually realize your foolishness!

[Robot]

"History is quantifiable.  Infinity is not. that is really all you need to know"

Just like saying "God is real, that is all you need to know", followed by no explanation and no scientific evidence and usually followed further by a "don't question the bible!".  Sound familiar to you?

[metaL]

you are really, really, off topic, and your posts make you sound ignorant. i figure this is the case, and you aren't actually that ignorant. just take a break. 

[quadz]

As regards the origins of the universe, though, it seems there are only a couple broad possibilities:

  1. matter/energy have always existed in some form
  2. matter/energy appeared one day out of absolute nothingness

Or, if God is involved:

  1. God has always existed
  2. God appeared one day out of absolute nothingness

Now the #1's to me seem to definitely represent a kind of infinity.

Especially considering something like Hawking's "virtual time" which is a way of measuring time across successive big bangs, if I recall correctly.

As for the #2's, I dunno.  Absolute nothingness is a concept I'm having trouble reasoning about.  I intentionally didn't call it "infinite nothingness"... but I'm not sure what the difference between absolute nothingness and infinite nothingness would be, anyway.




Regards,

quadz

[reaper]

Especially considering something like Hawking's "virtual time" which is a way of measuring time across successive big bangs, if I recall correctly.

Below is a quote from "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawkin.

[Whirlingdervish]

The arrow of time has nothing to do with the ability of a God to appear within a universe which is governed by physical laws that do not allow his existence. No matter which way you spin the clock, the laws of physics still say that the existence of an uber-complex being with supernatural powers is very very improbable.

Imaginary Time doesn't beget Imaginary Beings.
 

[metaL]

physical laws that do not allow his existence. No matter which way you spin the clock, the laws of physics still say that the existence of an uber-complex being with supernatural powers is very very improbable.

Science, which includes physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, etc., and the laws that govern this realm were created by man.  The laws of physics, which were also created by man, say that the existence of God is improbable? hmm... I don't think so.  The argument of intelligent design will never be disregarded to me.  The many factors that contribute to not only the successful but extremely unique individuals that we come in contact with every day means something to me, however.  And i feel that Athiests are honestly taking the easy way out, not the hard way.  Reaper might make it very easy for them to do so, but I feel that there is much more to our lives as human beings than what meets the "eye" aka the human brain.  "

[metaL]

wow, i'm not even going to begin to correct the typo's in that last post.............. that was bad. lol