- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
Word games do not count.
Your interpretation that there was a creator is not supported by their choice of words.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Your interpretation that there was a creator is not supported by their choice of words.
- Thread starter
- #642
The Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Nature.Laws of nature are generalities laws of thermodynamics are specific.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.I need none as I have only stated that you have failed to prove a creator or god and that is fact and you know it.Do you have a link to a scientist who backs up your position?
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
But both exist within the confines of the universe as we know it and not within the confines of other universes which we suspect exist OR within the infinite possibilities of what came before this universe.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
No you have notI have been discussing the science of multiverses with you for the last 30 minutes.No it does not preclude any such thing much less infinite multiverses which make up an even greater infinite universe.I think you are very confused.You lied about it being the second law of nature.Second Law of Thermodynamics.There is no second law of nature which you lied about.
Yes you dreamed it up because you have lost the argument with every post.
And every link I have provided discusses it.
They also admit that the universe was created according to the Laws of Nature which existed before space and time.
Can you name one scientist who doesn't believe that?
Laws of thermo dynamics and laws of nature are not the same thing.
No they do not admit the universe was created according to the laws of nature as they do not know if it was.
Once again you are pwned and failed to provide evidence of a creator.
And yes I can but it is irrelevant because the proof is in your utter and massive failure.
The second law of thermodynamics precludes an infinite acting universe.
The laws of nature that were in place before space and time were created and controlled the creation of space and time were the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.
You have admitted that the universe had a beginning, right? What exactly does that mean to you?
We do not know if the laws of nature were in place BEFORE space and time sprang into existence. None of your sources or links make any such claim nor do any experts.
By your own earlier statement we cannot know or test or measure what existed before time and space ergo your assumption that those laws existed is false.
Nor do we know if they controlled the creation of space and time. In fact those laws are subject to space and time.
Beginning means beginning.
Trying to pervert it into proof of a creator is absurd and stupid.
- Thread starter
- #644
Do you have a link that backs up anything you believe? Do you have any evidence at all?Word games do not count.So then you disagree with CERN when they say...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"...all the matter found in the universe today -- including the matter in people, plants, animals, the earth, stars, and galaxies -- was created at the very first moment of time, thought to be about 13 billion years ago.
Origins: CERN: Ideas: The Big Bang | Exploratorium
Your interpretation that there was a creator is not supported by their choice of words.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
No they are not.The Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Nature.Laws of nature are generalities laws of thermodynamics are specific.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.I need none as I have only stated that you have failed to prove a creator or god and that is fact and you know it.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
But both exist within the confines of the universe as we know it and not within the confines of other universes which we suspect exist OR within the infinite possibilities of what came before this universe.
The laws of nature are generalities which include many theories to include philosophical and moral
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
Yes your complete and utter failure to provide evidence.Do you have a link that backs up anything you believe? Do you have any evidence at all?Word games do not count.So then you disagree with CERN when they say...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"...all the matter found in the universe today -- including the matter in people, plants, animals, the earth, stars, and galaxies -- was created at the very first moment of time, thought to be about 13 billion years ago.
Origins: CERN: Ideas: The Big Bang | Exploratorium
Your interpretation that there was a creator is not supported by their choice of words.
- Thread starter
- #647
Yes, I have.No you have notI have been discussing the science of multiverses with you for the last 30 minutes.No it does not preclude any such thing much less infinite multiverses which make up an even greater infinite universe.I think you are very confused.You lied about it being the second law of nature.Second Law of Thermodynamics.
And every link I have provided discusses it.
They also admit that the universe was created according to the Laws of Nature which existed before space and time.
Can you name one scientist who doesn't believe that?
Laws of thermo dynamics and laws of nature are not the same thing.
No they do not admit the universe was created according to the laws of nature as they do not know if it was.
Once again you are pwned and failed to provide evidence of a creator.
And yes I can but it is irrelevant because the proof is in your utter and massive failure.
The second law of thermodynamics precludes an infinite acting universe.
The laws of nature that were in place before space and time were created and controlled the creation of space and time were the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.
You have admitted that the universe had a beginning, right? What exactly does that mean to you?
We do not know if the laws of nature were in place BEFORE space and time sprang into existence. None of your sources or links make any such claim nor do any experts.
By your own earlier statement we cannot know or test or measure what existed before time and space ergo your assumption that those laws existed is false.
Nor do we know if they controlled the creation of space and time. In fact those laws are subject to space and time.
Beginning means beginning.
Trying to pervert it into proof of a creator is absurd and stupid.
If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. An infinite acting universe cannot avoid this problem.
It is possible for matter to be created. Inflation Theory which is the foundation for multiverses states, that in a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.I need none as I have only stated that you have failed to prove a creator or god and that is fact and you know it.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Thread starter
- #649
Do you have a link for that?No they are not.The Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Nature.Laws of nature are generalities laws of thermodynamics are specific.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
But both exist within the confines of the universe as we know it and not within the confines of other universes which we suspect exist OR within the infinite possibilities of what came before this universe.
The laws of nature are generalities which include many theories to include philosophical and moral
- Thread starter
- #650
Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.I have proved that space and time were created (i.e. that it had a beginning) and that beginning followed the Laws of Nature, specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation, and that those laws were in place before space and time itself.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
No you have not as none of what you have posted suggests much less proves a creatorYes, I have.No you have notI have been discussing the science of multiverses with you for the last 30 minutes.No it does not preclude any such thing much less infinite multiverses which make up an even greater infinite universe.I think you are very confused.You lied about it being the second law of nature.
Laws of thermo dynamics and laws of nature are not the same thing.
No they do not admit the universe was created according to the laws of nature as they do not know if it was.
Once again you are pwned and failed to provide evidence of a creator.
And yes I can but it is irrelevant because the proof is in your utter and massive failure.
The second law of thermodynamics precludes an infinite acting universe.
The laws of nature that were in place before space and time were created and controlled the creation of space and time were the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.
You have admitted that the universe had a beginning, right? What exactly does that mean to you?
We do not know if the laws of nature were in place BEFORE space and time sprang into existence. None of your sources or links make any such claim nor do any experts.
By your own earlier statement we cannot know or test or measure what existed before time and space ergo your assumption that those laws existed is false.
Nor do we know if they controlled the creation of space and time. In fact those laws are subject to space and time.
Beginning means beginning.
Trying to pervert it into proof of a creator is absurd and stupid.
If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. An infinite acting universe cannot avoid this problem.
It is possible for matter to be created. Inflation Theory which is the foundation for multiverses states, that in a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
Yes yours.Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
Do you have a link for that?No they are not.The Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Nature.Laws of nature are generalities laws of thermodynamics are specific.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
But both exist within the confines of the universe as we know it and not within the confines of other universes which we suspect exist OR within the infinite possibilities of what came before this universe.
The laws of nature are generalities which include many theories to include philosophical and moral
Yes you provided it.Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?You are a childish lair as you have proven no such thing.
Created and had a beginning are not the same thing.
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Thread starter
- #654
Can you show me where he said that?Do you have a link for that?No they are not.The Laws of Thermodynamics are the Laws of Nature.Laws of nature are generalities laws of thermodynamics are specific.How are they not the same?
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
But both exist within the confines of the universe as we know it and not within the confines of other universes which we suspect exist OR within the infinite possibilities of what came before this universe.
The laws of nature are generalities which include many theories to include philosophical and moralYes you provided it.Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Thread starter
- #655
Can you show me where it said that?Yes yours.Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.How are they not the same?
Where did all the matter and energy come from it if could not have existed forever and had a beginning?
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
You already did.Can you show me where it said that?Yes yours.Do you have a link for that?So then you disagree with Dr. Leon Lederman, experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate when he said...We do not know whether or not existed before the beginning of the universe.
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential."
He did not state it as fact he stated it as one possibility to be explored.
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
The record shows no such thing.Let the record show that I have spun soupnazi630 like a top tonight.
The record shows you failed as always to provide evidence of your claim.
You have engaged in a lot of spin but only made yourself into as fool.
that is what the record shows and everyone knows it especially you;
- Dec 9, 2013
- 16,866
- 4,788
- 265
You lost.^ he mad
No one is mad.
But you do know you failed miserably to show evidence for your original claim.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 24
- Views
- 414
- Poll
- Replies
- 127
- Views
- 2K
- Poll
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 453
- Replies
- 19
- Views
- 467
- Replies
- 344
- Views
- 3K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 107
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8110
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-