Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism

[Liability]

Physicists often ignore the question "Where did everything come from?"

Creationists answer the question with God. Only, creationist ignore the follow-up question "Where did God come from?"

I always find it funny when creationists insist that everything complex HAS to have an origin due to their complexity and yet God has no origin despite being able to wish things into existence, living forever, and being all knowing (far more impressive than anything a living creature can do here on Earth).

I for one would not go so far as to say that just because there is so much order (and deep layers of order) in the universe, that it necessarily follows that there MUST be a Divine Creator. But I am comfortable saying that it is the conclusion I come to.

However, this part of the discussion might be better set-aside and taken up in a separate thread. Although there are areas of overlap, I wouldn't want to be guilty of derailing THIS thread.

 

[edthecynic]

Physicists often ignore the question "Where did everything come from?"

Creationists answer the question with God. Only, creationist ignore the follow-up question "Where did God come from?"

I always find it funny when creationists insist that everything complex HAS to have an origin due to their complexity and yet God has no origin despite being able to wish things into existence, living forever, and being all knowing (far more impressive than anything a living creature can do here on Earth).

I for one would not go so far as to say that just because there is so much order (and deep layers of order) in the universe, that it necessarily follows that there MUST be a Divine Creator. But I am comfortable saying that it is the conclusion I come to.

However, this part of the discussion might be better set-aside and taken up in a separate thread. Although there are areas of overlap, I wouldn't want to be guilty of derailing THIS thread.

I guess it all depends on what universe you are looking at. I see things habitually smashing into each other throughout the universe. The universe appears to be more like a perpetual COMMOTION machine than some well-oiled, smoothly ordered machine.

 

[Liability]

I always find it funny when creationists insist that everything complex HAS to have an origin due to their complexity and yet God has no origin despite being able to wish things into existence, living forever, and being all knowing (far more impressive than anything a living creature can do here on Earth).

I for one would not go so far as to say that just because there is so much order (and deep layers of order) in the universe, that it necessarily follows that there MUST be a Divine Creator. But I am comfortable saying that it is the conclusion I come to.

However, this part of the discussion might be better set-aside and taken up in a separate thread. Although there are areas of overlap, I wouldn't want to be guilty of derailing THIS thread.

I guess it all depends on what universe you are looking at. I see things habitually smashing into each other throughout the universe. The universe appears to be more like a perpetual COMMOTION machine than some well-oiled, smoothly ordered machine.

And all that commotion has had its results, too.

And it can be analyzed via the use of very orderly math and physics.

Most scientists seem amazed by the abundance of order in the cosmos.

EDIT: For example, take a gander at what MANY of history's leading physicists have had to say: http://www.creationofuniverse.com/html/order_skies_04.html

 

[edthecynic]

I for one would not go so far as to say that just because there is so much order (and deep layers of order) in the universe, that it necessarily follows that there MUST be a Divine Creator. But I am comfortable saying that it is the conclusion I come to.

However, this part of the discussion might be better set-aside and taken up in a separate thread. Although there are areas of overlap, I wouldn't want to be guilty of derailing THIS thread.

I guess it all depends on what universe you are looking at. I see things habitually smashing into each other throughout the universe. The universe appears to be more like a perpetual COMMOTION machine than some well-oiled, smoothly ordered machine.

And all that commotion has had its results, too.

And it can be analyzed via the use of very orderly math and physics.

Most scientists seem amazed by the abundance of order in the cosmos.

EDIT: For example, take a gander at what MANY of history's leading physicists have had to say: Creation of the Universe - Harun Yahya

In order to understand the concept of order in the universe, we need first to talk about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, one of the fundamental universal physical laws.
This law states that, left to themselves, organized systems will become unstable and less organized as time advances.

You do realize that is not a correct representation of the SLoT, don't you???
You know if that was the actual SLoT, no matter could exist, don't you???
Here's the actual SLoT

, can you see what your source changed???

 

[Liability]

* * * *
You do realize that is not a correct representation of the SLoT, don't you???
You know if that was the actual SLoT, no matter could exist, don't you???
Here's the actual SLoT

, can you see what your source changed???

No. Why don't you translate it for those of us who are not well-versed in Physics?

Then, for fun and giggles, maybe you could show how it was allegedly "changed."

 

[THE LIGHT]

Because in Physics, work is defined as a force through a distance.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

The heat death of the universe is defined as all the energy of the universe existing in the form of heat which can do no work.

I'm also aware of that. How do these definitions address this question?:

Why does this expansion per se preclude the possibility of a heat death?

From the same "physlink.com" source you used earlier:

The sources I linked to were the first results on google. I guess I should have scanned them more closely.

The respondent claims that a heat death can't occur in an expanding universe, which implies that the universe isn't approaching a state of maximum entropy, which, in turn, implies that the maximum value of entropy increases more rapidly than the universe approaches it. These claims have not been shown to be true.

Those quotes you put my name on were NOT MADE BY ME!!! I hope that you just made a mistake.

Thanks in advance for fixing it.

 

[Kalam]

Those quotes you put my name on were NOT MADE BY ME!!! I hope that you just made a mistake.

Thanks in advance for fixing it.

Yeah, my bad. Unfortunately, it's too late for me to edit it now.

 

[edthecynic]

In order to understand the concept of order in the universe, we need first to talk about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, one of the fundamental universal physical laws.
This law states that, left to themselves, organized systems will become unstable and less organized as time advances.

* * * *
You do realize that is not a correct representation of the SLoT, don't you???
You know if that was the actual SLoT, no matter could exist, don't you???
Here's the actual SLoT

, can you see what your source changed???

No. Why don't you translate it for those of us who are not well-versed in Physics?

Then, for fun and giggles, maybe you could show how it was allegedly "changed."

The key is the "greater than or equal to zero" sign in the equation. Your source eliminated the "equal to zero" part of the equation. Therefore not all systems if left to themselves become unstable, only those systems whose entropy is GREATER than zero. A very professionally crafted deception that only a physicist would catch, and they are few and far between. You've probably heard that misrepresentation preached from the pulpit for years and years and this is obviously the very first time you've been exposed to the real SLoT and the importance of that pesky little zero. If entropy cannot equal zero then no matter can exist.

 

[JBeukema]

If entropy cannot equal zero then no matter can exist.

Why is that, exactly?

 

[Kalam]

First of all, I didn't give a reason for the expansion in this thread and we went over this in the old thread when you bailed.

Yeah, your Einstein-like intellect and knowledge of physics were simply too much for me to handle.

And second, for whatever reason the universe is accelerating, it is MOVING and therefore kinetic energy still exists and there is no heat death possible while kinetic energy exists,

I'm done. Here you go:

Future of an expanding universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd have no problem admitting that a heat death won't occur if you'd actually prove it.

which is why you want to change the subject from the heat death to dark matter.

Mind-reader too, huh?

 

[edthecynic]

If entropy cannot equal zero then no matter can exist.

Why is that, exactly?

Consider a stable atom. It is a closed system of protons, neutrons and electrons. The negatively charged electrons orbit around the positively charged nucleus at the speed of light. The positively charged nucleus wants to draw the electrons into it but the speed of the electrons offsets this attraction. If entropy could not equal zero then the electrons would not be able to maintain their speed and would be pulled into the nucleus splitting the atom so no atomic matter would be able to exist..

 

[JBeukema]

And second, for whatever reason the universe is accelerating, it is MOVING and therefore kinetic energy still exists and there is no heat death possible while kinetic energy exists,

I'm done. Here you go:

Future of an expanding universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd have no problem admitting that a heat death won't occur if you'd actually prove it.

He seems unable to discern the difference between matter strictly moving through space and the expansion of spacetime itself