What are your beliefs on religion, god? (1 Viewer)

[Eastoff]

And Denny; you still haven't explained your gem that there is no such thing as nothingness and how a finite mass is eternal.

Nothingness cannot exist. Just like there is no true infinity. But you can come really close to nothingness and you can come really close to what for our lives seems infinity.

 

[Denny Crane]

Actually no. You said there is no such thing as nothingness; yet you believe the Big Bang. You know that all the matter in the universe was concentrated in a condense mass; then expanded rapidly right? So since the universe expanded; what was around that condensed mass?

Also; since you believe mass is eternal; then explain how a finite object like mass can be infinite?

I never said mass is eternal. Nor do I believe that there is infinite mass.

At time 0 of the big bang, everything (including "nothing") existed as a singularity. That you think there was something somehow outside this, even if that something is nothing (but it's something!), is one of those things that comes across as idiotic.

 

[magnifier661]

Sure the planet will keep having life and may return to a habitable temperature for humanity, but have you considered that humanity may not look anything like it does now by then? That there could be a global famine before that happens? There could be terrible floods?

Absolutely! I don't understand where you are going with this. Does this have anything to do with disproving my faith or something?

 

[magnifier661]

I never said mass is eternal. Nor do I believe that there is infinite mass.

At time 0 of the big bang, everything (including "nothing") existed as a singularity. That you think there was something somehow outside this, even if that something is nothing (but it's something!), is one of those things that comes across as idiotic.

Um news flash Denny. If you believed the universe always existed (the singularity you suggest); then you believe mass is eternal. Because if it isn't eternal; then it debunks the Big Bang.

And nothingness isn't something; it's nothing. It's a void that is without matter, space and time. The singularity concept can't explain this. The expansion needs an area to expand to. Lmao!!!

 

[crowTrobot]

Explain? What post have I made that says that if you give me evidence about something scientific that I've ignored? Don't tell me the earth or universes age or evolution

it has been explained to you quite a few times that physicists don't think the big bang was something from nothing in the sense you mean, few if any think it's likely that our local observable big bang universe constitutes all of what exists, and few think the big bang even necessarily originated from a singularity.

yet you chose to ignore those facts and continually rehash the same 'something from nothing singularity' straw men like you just did in the post prior to the one i'm responding to.

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't believe the universe always existed.

What the heck are you arguing?

Time didn't exist before the big bang. So there was no "before" - you make absolutely no sense at all.

To be eternal, something would have to be older than the universe, which is impossible.

 

[magnifier661]

it has been explained to you quite a few times that physicists don't think the big bang was something from nothing in the sense you mean, few if any think it's likely that our local observable big bang universe constitutes all of what exists, and few think the big bang even necessarily originated from a singularity.

yet you chose to ignore those facts and continually rehash the same 'something from nothing singularity' straw men like you just did in the post prior to the one i'm responding to.

Omg dude listen to yourself. How can matter always exist? That would mean its eternal; not effected by matter, space and time. You figure this out and you just proved Einstein was wrong.

 

[magnifier661]

I don't believe the universe always existed.

What the heck are you arguing?

Time didn't exist before the big bang. So there was no "before" - you make absolutely no sense at all.

To be eternal, something would have to be older than the universe, which is impossible.

See this is where it contradicts. There is atoms inside you that were part of this singularity. The expansion takes place and the start time of the universe exists. If the matter was there before the start time; then that matter is eternal. So even though the universe started 13 billion years ago; the matter and void in the universe must exist before there was a universe; meaning older than the universe. Hahaha

 

[crowTrobot]

Just like there is no true infinity.

if you could prove that you'd win a nobel prize.

whether actual infinities exist is absolutely an open question. there is currently no logical/mathematical reason they can't or observational evidence to suggest they can't, only bad philosophical arguments used by apologists.

 

[magnifier661]

if you could prove that you'd win a nobel prize.

whether actual infinities exist is absolutely an open question. there is currently no logical/mathematical reason they can't or observational evidence to suggest they can't, only bad philosophical arguments used by apologists.

I don't see how it couldn't exist. If you count from 1,2,3 and go on forever; do you reach back to zero?

 

[Denny Crane]

See this is where it contradicts. There is atoms inside you that were part of this singularity. The expansion takes place and the start time of the universe exists. If the matter was there before the start time; then that matter is eternal. So even though the universe started 13 billion years ago; the matter and void in the universe must exist before there was a universe; meaning older than the universe. Hahaha

There was no "before" but you insist on arguing there was. How could there be a "before" when time itself didn't exist (yet)?

There is no void in the universe.

The matter, time, etc., all started being at the time of the big bang.

The singularity concept may be confusing you. You probably picture a tiny dot with "something" that is "nothing" around it, and somehow sitting there for some amount of time, infinite or not.

There was no time yet, so it couldn't have been sitting there prior to time 0.

If you were inside the singularity at the time of the big bang, it would appear to be expanding from everywhere around you, not from some tiny point.

 

[Denny Crane]

if you could prove that you'd win a nobel prize.

whether actual infinities exist is absolutely an open question. there is currently no logical/mathematical reason they can't or observational evidence to suggest they can't, only bad philosophical arguments used by apologists.

If you stand at the edge of infinity and stretch out your arm, your arm is now at the edge of infinity.

 

[crowTrobot]

If you stand at the edge of infinity and stretch out your arm, your arm is now at the edge of infinity.

there can be different sizes of infinity.

infinity is not a number - it doesn't behave like one. mathematicians generally deal with the concept using advanced set theory.

 

[magnifier661]

There was no "before" but you insist on arguing there was. How could there be a "before" when time itself didn't exist (yet)?

There is no void in the universe.

The matter, time, etc., all started being at the time of the big bang.

You just explained there was a "before". You just explained that the universe had a start time. You said the universe always existed, then you said it's 13+ billion years old in previous posts. Total contradiction.

The singularity concept may be confusing you. You probably picture a tiny dot with "something" that is "nothing" around it, and somehow sitting there for some amount of time, infinite or not.

There was no time yet, so it couldn't have been sitting there prior to time 0.

If you were inside the singularity at the time of the big bang, it would appear to be expanding from everywhere around you, not from some tiny point.

I've read your links and they do not explain it like that one bit. They explain that all matter was in a condensed singularity. The moment expansion took place, it began the "Matter, Space and Time" concept. Also, it explains that the universe is still expanding and eventually will expand enough to a nothingness. Meaning, the polar connection of matter will be so far apart that eventually there will be nothing of any true consistency.

 

[Denny Crane]

You can count from 0 to infinity: 1, 2, 3, 4 ...

You can count from 0 to infinity by 2: 2, 4, 6, 8 ...

The first infinity has more numbers in it, eh? If you consider them both to be sets.

 

[crowTrobot]

There was no "before"

there might not have been a "before" relative to our local spacetime, but that doesn't mean there couldn't have been something external to the big bang that caused it.

 

[Denny Crane]

You just explained there was a "before". You just explained that the universe had a start time. You said the universe always existed, then you said it's 13+ billion years old in previous posts. Total contradiction.



I've read your links and they do not explain it like that one bit. They explain that all matter was in a condensed singularity. The moment expansion took place, it began the "Matter, Space and Time" concept. Also, it explains that the universe is still expanded and eventually will expand enough to a nothingness. Meaning, the polar connection of matter will be so far apart that eventually there will be nothing of any true consistency.

You just aren't getting it.

I never said there was a before. I said there is no concept of "before" because there was no "time" at all. The universe is indeed 13.7 billion years old (certainly no younger). There was no "before" 13.7B years ago.

Nobody knows the end of the universe. The theory you describe is the big rip, and is one of many suggested. However you describe "nothing" as being something of no "true consistency" though there would still be scattered photons and particles produced by quantum fluctuation.

 

[Denny Crane]

there might not have been a "before" relative to our local spacetime, but that doesn't mean there couldn't have been something external to the big bang that caused it.

I'm not addressing the why it banged or the how it banged. It just banged.

 

[crowTrobot]

You can count from 0 to infinity: 1, 2, 3, 4 ...

You can count from 0 to infinity by 2: 2, 4, 6, 8 ...

The first infinity has more numbers in it, eh? If you consider them both to be sets.

your point is valid but the wording of your example is bad - infinity is not a number, you can't count to it.

yes there can be infinite subsets of infinite sets.

the set containing 'all natural numbers' is an infinite set.

the set containing 'all natural numbers that are even' is an infinite subset of the infinite set of natural numbers.

 

[Denny Crane]

your point is valid but the wording of your example is bad - infinity is not a number, you can't count to it.

yes there can be infinite subsets of infinite sets.

the set containing 'all natural numbers' is an infinite set.

the set containing 'all natural numbers that are even' is an infinite subset of the infinite set of natural numbers.

Counting to infinity means you keep counting forever. You obviously never get there since infinity isn't a number.

 

[crowTrobot]

Counting to infinity means you keep counting forever. You obviously never get there since infinity isn't a number.

exactly

logically if something infinite exists that would have to be its natural state. it couldn't have been formed from something finite.

 

[magnifier661]

You just aren't getting it.

I never said there was a before. I said there is no concept of "before" because there was no "time" at all. The universe is indeed 13.7 billion years old (certainly no younger). There was no "before" 13.7B years ago.

Nobody knows the end of the universe. The theory you describe is the big rip, and is one of many suggested. However you describe "nothing" as being something of no "true consistency" though there would still be scattered photons and particles produced by quantum fluctuation.

I think it's you that's not getting it. Do you believe that matter is finite or infinite?

 

[magnifier661]

there might not have been a "before" relative to our local spacetime, but that doesn't mean there couldn't have been something external to the big bang that caused it.

Yeah like god

 

[magnifier661]

Actually the counting concept will never have a greater end value like Denny mentioned. Doesn't matter if counting by ones or twos; there is no end; which means there is no greater value.

 

[crowTrobot]

Yeah like god

possibly, yes. but that isn't license to go all god-of-the-gaps-happy. it could also have been intelligent aliens creating big bangs in labs. or mindless quantum mechanical potential that was actualized. or some other god-free cause we can't currently comprehend.

 

[magnifier661]

You probably picture a tiny dot with "something" that is "nothing" around it, and somehow sitting there for some amount of time, infinite or not.

Odd that you don't assume this since the majority disagrees with you.

It is difficult enough to imagine a time, roughly 13.7 billion years ago, when the entire universe existed as a singularity. According to the big bang theory, one of the main contenders vying to explain how the universe came to be, all the matter in the cosmos -- all of space itself -- existed in a form smaller than a subatomic particle.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/astronomy-terms/before-big-bang.htm

 

[Denny Crane]

I think it's you that's not getting it. Do you believe that matter is finite or infinite?

Finite.

You went through the exercise a long time ago to figure out the FINITE number of hydrogen atoms in the universe.

 

[Denny Crane]

Odd that you don't assume this since the majority disagrees with you.



http://science.howstuffworks.com/dictionary/astronomy-terms/before-big-bang.htm

Your link doesn't describe a tiny dot with "nothing" around it.

 

[magnifier661]

possibly, yes. but that isn't license to go all god-of-the-gaps-happy. it could also have been intelligent aliens creating big bangs in labs. or mindless quantum mechanical potential that was actualized. or some other god-free cause we can't currently comprehend.

I am not trying to go all "God of the gaps" on you right now. What I am explaining is that something did creat this universe we live in today. Aliens, maybe another universe (like your adopted multi-verse idea), God. But in the end, there needs to be an eternal being or energy that was the first to start everything.

I remembered an interview with Dawkins regarding the first "self replicating molecule" and he admitted that it's quite possible for a dawinian intelligence started life on this planet. It may have solved Earth's living jump start; but it still doesn't explain theirs and so on.

The missing piece is an eternal being or thing outside the boundries of matter, space and time. Something or someone that needs no start because it is eternal.

 

[magnifier661]

Your link doesn't describe a tiny dot with "nothing" around it.

It is difficult enough to imagine a time, roughly 13.7 billion years ago, when the entire universe existed as a singularity. According to the big bang theory, one of the main contenders vying to explain how the universe came to be, all the matter in the cosmos -- all of space itself -- existed in a form smaller than a subatomic particle.

What are you talking about? Does this prove you don't even read what I posted?