Science and Religion questions

[Denny Crane]

Okay what is the value of all things in this universe? I'm talking energy/mass and time.

$.50.

What a silly question. It deserves a silly answer.

 

[magnifier661]

$.50.

What a silly question. It deserves a silly answer.

Silly? It's actually going to blow your mind.

and no one else answer but Denny. He seems that he knows all science pretty well. Let's see how much he knows.

 

[Denny Crane]

"The value."

Meaningless question.

What time is it?

 

[magnifier661]

"The value."

Meaningless question.

What time is it?

Actually it's not meaningless at all. There is an absolute number and is used every day in science. Just admit you don't know.

 

[magnifier661]

Okay let me rephrase it for you. How much energy, including mass is contained in the entire universe?

 

[magnifier661]

Denny right now (Google: How much energy is in the universe?) It isn't coming up!!!!! I can't use Wikipedia!

 

[VanillaGorilla]

Yes, if they've decided to modify the definition of "atheist" to mean what they want it to mean so they can call themselves an atheist. Being able to call yourself an atheist is becoming so hip.

You atheists jump all over the religious about changing what their beliefs are so they can continue to have their faith, yet atheists do the same thing by modifying the definition of what an atheist actually is.

Once again you have no idea what the shit you're talking about.

Fuck off, Stanford boy.

 

[Denny Crane]

There are several estimates of the amount of mass in the VISIBLE universe.

What about it?

 

[magnifier661]

There are several estimates of the amount of mass in the VISIBLE universe.

What about it?

Actually there isn't. There is just one.

 

[crowTrobot]

Yes, if they've decided to modify the definition of "atheist" to mean what they want it to mean so they can call themselves an atheist. Being able to call yourself an atheist is becoming so hip.

You atheists jump all over the religious about changing what their beliefs are so they can continue to have their faith, yet atheists do the same thing by modifying the definition of what an atheist actually is.

the only people trying to change the definition of atheist are the religious.

the primary (and semantically technically correct) definition has always been lack of belief in god. it has never necessarily implied an assertion that no gods exist.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

For me; I don't know the full details and say "in my opinion, this is what I think is right". People are being brain washed from both sides. That's a fact. Prime example is the kid vanilla gorilla saying things are matter of fact in science; which is hardly accurate. In fact it's about as speculative as the bible thumper saying they have all the answers.

Excuse me, but where did I say this?

 

[Denny Crane]

Actually there isn't. There is just one.

My goodness, you are right again.

Even if this www page shows 6 different estimates:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2006/KristineMcPherson.shtml

 

[magnifier661]

My goodness, you are right again.

Even if this www page shows 6 different estimates:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2006/KristineMcPherson.shtml

Wrong. You are trying to find "particles"; which isn't the question I asked.

 

[magnifier661]

Denny give up?

 

[Denny Crane]

Wrong. You are trying to find "particles"; which isn't the question I asked.

You're right again. Kg means particles, not kilograms as I thought.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[magnifier661]

You're right again. Kg means particles, not kilograms as I thought.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Give up?

 

[Denny Crane]

Give up?

What?

 

[magnifier661]

What?

Zero. The sum is zero. There is zero energy and mass in the entire universe.

Do you know what that means?

 

[Denny Crane]

Zero. The sum is zero. There is zero energy and mass in the entire universe.

Do you know what that means?

I'd guess you're making this up as you go along?

 

[magnifier661]

Now I can't take credit for this. Trip tango taught me this yesterday. And I, like you, was trying to think of all particles. What it means is there is equal positive and negative energy in the entire universe.

 

[magnifier661]

I'd guess you're making this up as you go along?

Made up? Lmao!!!!!!

 

[magnifier661]

Wikipedia and google couldn't save you Denny and you got stumped.

 

[Denny Crane]

Now I can't take credit for this. Trip tango taught me this yesterday. And I, like you, was trying to think of all particles. What it means is there is equal positive and negative energy in the entire universe.

Trip Tango presented you with a concept that is far out of the mainstream view.

If there were equal amounts of positive and negative energy, or matter and anti-matter, there would be nothing. If negative energy is gravity as Hawking suggests, then the universe wouldn't be expanding if there were equal amounts.

 

[Denny Crane]

Trip Tango presented you with a concept that is far out of the mainstream view.

If there were equal amounts of positive and negative energy, or matter and anti-matter, there would be nothing. If negative energy is gravity as Hawking suggests, then the universe wouldn't be expanding if there were equal amounts.

However, in "nothing" there is equal amounts of positive and negative energy. Which is why there is no such thing as "nothing" - because positive energy (or negative energy) is actually "something."

 

[magnifier661]

Trip Tango presented you with a concept that is far out of the mainstream view.

If there were equal amounts of positive and negative energy, or matter and anti-matter, there would be nothing. If negative energy is gravity as Hawking suggests, then the universe wouldn't be expanding if there were equal amounts.

Actually that isn't true. There is negative and positive. They make an equilibrium. Basically canceling their influence to create chaos. This is actually interesting, because it could be used in argument against my beliefs if you knew how to use them.

A big argument is why does the universe fine-tune? Easy, inside the medium of the universe, all negative energy must have the positive energy; which may cause chaos in one part of the universe; but is zero in the grand scheme of things.

 

[magnifier661]

However, in "nothing" there is equal amounts of positive and negative energy. Which is why there is no such thing as "nothing" - because positive energy (or negative energy) is actually "something."

YES!!!!!!!!!!!! Now use this to debate me. I'm tired of the same ole debating on genesis.

 

[julius]

Anyone else having a hard time following this?

 

[magnifier661]

Anyone else having a hard time following this?

Sorry brother. I hope I can explain for you to understand.

1 + -1 = 0. Basically all energy and mass must have equal negative and positive energy and mass. The universe is 100% balanced.

Think of a magnet and if you put the negative with the negative, it repels. But if you put a positive to a negative, it attracts.

 

[magnifier661]

Sorry brother. I hope I can explain for you to understand.

1 + -1 = 0. Basically all energy and mass must have equal negative and positive energy and mass. The universe is 100% balanced.

Think of a magnet and if you put the negative with the negative, it repels. But if you put a positive to a negative, it attracts.

BTW... This is really over simplifying it.

 

[blazerboy30]

Once again you have no idea what the shit you're talking about.

Fuck off, Stanford boy.

Another excellent display of your lack of intelligence.