Atheists are hoping aliens from outer space will contact us...

[dblack]

...and tell us there's no God.

That is why scientists like Carl Sagan so eagerly tell us there MUST be life on other planets, but it's a wish, there is no science to back up his claims.

So far, after decades of listening with radio telescopes, the skies have been totally silent.

Either aliens don't exist at all anywhere in the universe, or they are so far away their transmissions will never reach us.

And in either case, we will never have aliens visit us.

We are probably alone.

What if the aliens show up and simply say "There's a god - ours! Yours is just delusion."

 

[MarkDuffy]

You are going waaay afield here. There would still be gravity with a different G. A difference in constants would change the properties of carbon so that there would not be any periodic table or element with 6 protons? Wow! I am talking about changes, not the obliteration of constants and physics itself.

I think you are actually referring to Einsteins cosmological constant from general relativity, shape of the universe & whether or not the universe is open or closed (expansion rate).

Shape of the universe - Wikipedia

Cosmological constant - Wikipedia

You don't know if there would still be gravity if the gravitational force were different. You assume there would be but you can't know. Physicists are still arguing this but most conclude if the gravitational constant weren't as it is, there would be no planets orbiting suns.

Carbon is a necessary component of all life that we know.

12C, a stable isotope of carbon, is abundantly produced in stars due to three factors:

1. The decay lifetime of a 8Be nucleus is four orders of magnitude larger than the time for two 4He nuclei (alpha particles) to scatter.
2. An excited state of the 12C nucleus exists just above the energy level 8Be + 4He. This is necessary because the ground state of 12C is 7.3367 MeV below the energy of 8Be + 4He. Therefore, a 8Be nucleus and a 4He nucleus cannot reasonably fuse directly into a ground-state 12C nucleus. The excited Hoyle state of 12C is 7.656 MeV above the ground state of 12C. This allows 8Be and 4He to use the kinetic energy of their collision to fuse into the excited 12C, which can then transition to its stable ground state. According to one calculation, the energy level of this excited state must be between about 7.3 and 7.9 MeV to produce sufficient carbon for life to exist, and must be further "fine-tuned" to between 7.596 MeV and 7.716 MeV in order to produce the abundant level of 12C observed in nature.
3. In the reaction 12C + 4He → 16O there is an excited state of oxygen which, if it were slightly higher, would provide a resonance and speed up the reaction. In that case insufficient carbon would exist in nature; it would almost all have converted to oxygen.

This is just one of many examples of dimensionless physical constants and how they MUST be fine tuned for our universe and life to exist.

I have no idea what you are trying to prove, but it isn't what you argued.

The constants are part of physics.

Triple-alpha process - Wikipedia ~ formation of carbon in stellar cores

What I do appreciate is your basic posting philosophy is against creation by a God. The universe and its mechanisms are just to complicated for a magical shazaam moment from the alien God.

The funniest thing is that believers expect us to prove everything immediately when advanced science is barely a few hunderd years old, while the believers claim they need to prove nothing.

I have no idea what you are trying to prove, but it isn't what you argued.

Not trying to "prove" anything really. Has anyone ever proven anything on a message board? My "argument" has simply been, that we have a finely-tuned universe and that's possibly more than mere coincidence.

The constants are part of physics.

Well of course they are, what did you think we were talking about--Theological pancakes with the image of Jesus? Many would say the constants are what makes physics work. I mean, can you imagine how hard it would be to calculate things if the gravitational constant were an ever-changing variable?

Yes, I understand the Triple-alpha process, I just posted about it. You indicated you thought I was referring to Einstein's cosmological constant and I was illustrating one of many physical dimensionless constants.

What I do appreciate is your basic posting philosophy is against creation by a God. The universe and its mechanisms are just to complicated for a magical shazaam moment from the alien God.

Let me be clear. I don't believe a physical argument for God is worthwhile. Although, I do believe there is a philosophical argument for both God and a physical universe. MY God is Spiritual Energy. While this is not something physics is adequate to evaluate, it certainly can be debated philosophically. I believe there is a reason human beings have always been spiritually connected to something greater than self. It's not an accident or some vestigial behavior and it shouldn't be easily dismissed as such.

I've always believed the best argument for Spiritual Energy is the paradox that physical nature cannot have created itself. As for some mythical incarnation of a deity with a white beard and robe, with a Charlton Heston voice, sitting on a cloud and casting judgment and condemnation down on mankind... I don't believe in that. However, I do believe there is an ever-present mercurial force flowing through our physical universe that we cannot observe directly or evaluate with physics. I believe it's possible that force explains the finely-tuned universe as well as life. And yes... that is a philosophical argument.

A God by a different name, conveniently immune to science, but can create science. A non-physical who can create physical & never has to answer where "it" came from.

 

[BreezeWood]

WS, there is a 4th result of expansion - the Boomerang Theory

matter is expelled from Singularities sphere, its center outward / at a finite angle (trajectory) all matter will then return in unison to that origin, point of Singularity without ever changing direction following the trajectories curvature. to recompact creating a new Singularity and new cyclical expulsion.

And this defies Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

.

And this defies Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

that is patently false - matter is expanding in a vacuum without interaction to distort their momentum - clear sailing from beginning to end. a circuitous cycle.

 

[MarkDuffy]

...and tell us there's no God.

That is why scientists like Carl Sagan so eagerly tell us there MUST be life on other planets, but it's a wish, there is no science to back up his claims.

So far, after decades of listening with radio telescopes, the skies have been totally silent.

Either aliens don't exist at all anywhere in the universe, or they are so far away their transmissions will never reach us.

And in either case, we will never have aliens visit us.

We are probably alone.

What if the aliens show up and simply say "There's a god - ours! Yours is just delusion."

I think they would be ok with that and could even quote you gospel chapter & verse (they did just this in the past, when caught). They would just say the aliens were wrong.

The problem would occur when the aliens were shown to be older than us, ie they were created first.

This must not stand!

 

[Boss]

A God by a different name, conveniently immune to science, but can create science. A non-physical who can create physical & never has to answer where "it" came from.

Is Dark Matter "conveniently" immune to science? I think not.

Again, you are faced with a philosophical paradox, if not, a scientific one. Physical nature cannot create itself.

As for "where it came from" ...this is meaningless to something spiritual. The spiritual exists outside of time and space, it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It is not a physical thing that requires creation. I realize this is a difficult concept for an Atheist to grasp because they don't believe in spiritual existence.

Look, you can believe one of two things: Physical nature created itself from nothing or Spiritual nature which doesn't require creation, created physical nature. I believe the later is more probable than the former. Can I prove it? NO... Can you disprove it? NO. Therefore, it is forever, philosophy.

 

[Boss]

WS, there is a 4th result of expansion - the Boomerang Theory

matter is expelled from Singularities sphere, its center outward / at a finite angle (trajectory) all matter will then return in unison to that origin, point of Singularity without ever changing direction following the trajectories curvature. to recompact creating a new Singularity and new cyclical expulsion.

And this defies Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

.

And this defies Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

that is patently false - matter is expanding in a vacuum without interaction to distort their momentum - clear sailing from beginning to end. a circuitous cycle.

It's not patently false, it's patently true. Singularity has always been a problem for physicists to explain. The theories of a cyclical universe are about 70 years out of date. In terms of science which encompasses thousands of years, that's not much time, so you still have some who will argue these outdated theories.

 

[MarkDuffy]

WS, there is a 4th result of expansion - the Boomerang Theory

matter is expelled from Singularities sphere, its center outward / at a finite angle (trajectory) all matter will then return in unison to that origin, point of Singularity without ever changing direction following the trajectories curvature. to recompact creating a new Singularity and new cyclical expulsion.

And this defies Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Phantom energy[edit]
Main article: Phantom energy
Current observations allow the possibility of a cosmological model containing a dark energy component with equation of state w < −1. This phantom energy density would become infinite in finite time, causing such a huge gravitational repulsion that the universe would lose all structure and end in a Big Rip.[20] For example, for w = −3/2 and H0 = 70 km·s−1·Mpc−1, the time remaining before the universe ends in this "Big Rip" is 22 billion years.[21]

Accelerating expansion of the universe - Wikipedia

The existence of phantom energy could cause the expansion of the universe to accelerate so quickly that a scenario known as the Big Rip, a possible end to the universe.

Phantom energy - Wikipedia

Their behavior is codified in Heisenberg's energy–time uncertainty principle

Vacuum energy - Wikipedia

This link sez no it doesn't

Essays on the Frontiers of Modern Astrophysics and Cosmology

 

[MarkDuffy]

A God by a different name, conveniently immune to science, but can create science. A non-physical who can create physical & never has to answer where "it" came from.

Is Dark Matter "conveniently" immune to science? I think not.

Again, you are faced with a philosophical paradox, if not, a scientific one. Physical nature cannot create itself.

As for "where it came from" ...this is meaningless to something spiritual. The spiritual exists outside of time and space, it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It is not a physical thing that requires creation. I realize this is a difficult concept for an Atheist to grasp because they don't believe in spiritual existence.

Look, you can believe one of two things: Physical nature created itself from nothing or Spiritual nature which doesn't require creation, created physical nature. I believe the later is more probable than the former. Can I prove it? NO... Can you disprove it? NO. Therefore, it is forever, philosophy.

Physical nature cannot create itself.

So you continue to claim. You also claim that non-physical CAN create itself & then create the physical too. Sorry, but that is not a solution.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Spiritual nature

I have several problems with this.

1) The singularity of it. Only one Spirit? You still need to explain the origin of this spiritual nature & also why only one.

2) The ability of spirit to interact with the physical, let alone create the physical. This is a HUGE one for me. I would think spirit must remain spirit and cannot pick up a glass of water.

3) The claim that this spirit created our universe must allow for other universes to also be created. Thus, my issue disappears. I can claim there were two universes created, one matter, the other antimatter & we no longer need the big bang singularity from nothing.

4) To allow such a spiritual nature, you also have to allow ghosts, goblins, magic, witches, demons, reincarnation and a host of other things.

 

[Boss]

I think they would be ok with that and could even quote you gospel chapter & verse (they did just this in the past, when caught). They would just say the aliens were wrong.

The problem would occur when the aliens were shown to be older than us, ie they were created first.

This must not stand!

I wrote a really good science fiction novel back in my college days. I really ought to pull it back out and brush it off because I think it would make for a really great movie today. The premise was, a scientist who makes contact with an alien civilization through meditative prayer. He learns all about their civilization and even learns where they are located in the cosmos. He takes his findings to the science community who resoundingly rejects his assertions as crackpot nonsense. He ends up dying an old man who everyone thinks is a religious crazy person except his son who carries on his work. Eventually, the son is able to get an astronomer to listen and they begin to observe the location in the cosmos where the aliens are supposedly from. Low and behold, they find the physical proof needed to confirm the existence of the civilization. Still, they are met with rejection and contempt because of the nature of how the original contact was made. Not only are they condemned by the scientific community but the religious community as well.

The climax comes when the aliens inform them of an impending asteroid on a collision course for Earth. They give them the precise coordinates which they relay to the proper officials but still, they don't believe them. As time ticks off and the impending doom draws closer, more and more people hear of the prediction and begin to "follow" the messengers. With detailed instructions from the aliens, they begin to build an escape vessel and participate in a lottery for who will get to leave. Years pass by as the "real" scientists continue to dismiss these people as nuts and wackos until one day an astronomer observes the actual asteroid careening toward Earth. At this point, it is far too late to do anything about it. The group of followers and messengers are met with hoards of people in panic. They barely escape and they watch from space as the asteroid destroys the planet.

 

[Boss]

A God by a different name, conveniently immune to science, but can create science. A non-physical who can create physical & never has to answer where "it" came from.

Is Dark Matter "conveniently" immune to science? I think not.

Again, you are faced with a philosophical paradox, if not, a scientific one. Physical nature cannot create itself.

As for "where it came from" ...this is meaningless to something spiritual. The spiritual exists outside of time and space, it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It is not a physical thing that requires creation. I realize this is a difficult concept for an Atheist to grasp because they don't believe in spiritual existence.

Look, you can believe one of two things: Physical nature created itself from nothing or Spiritual nature which doesn't require creation, created physical nature. I believe the later is more probable than the former. Can I prove it? NO... Can you disprove it? NO. Therefore, it is forever, philosophy.

Physical nature cannot create itself.

So you continue to claim. You also claim that non-physical CAN create itself & then create the physical too. Sorry, but that is not a solution.

It's not a claim, it's a paradox you have no explanation for. I didn't claim the spiritual can create itself, I argued the spiritual doesn't require creation because it's not physical.

 

[MarkDuffy]

I think they would be ok with that and could even quote you gospel chapter & verse (they did just this in the past, when caught). They would just say the aliens were wrong.

The problem would occur when the aliens were shown to be older than us, ie they were created first.

This must not stand!

I wrote a really good science fiction novel back in my college days. I really ought to pull it back out and brush it off because I think it would make for a really great movie today. The premise was, a scientist who makes contact with an alien civilization through meditative prayer. He learns all about their civilization and even learns where they are located in the cosmos. He takes his findings to the science community who resoundingly rejects his assertions as crackpot nonsense. He ends up dying an old man who everyone thinks is a religious crazy person except his son who carries on his work. Eventually, the son is able to get an astronomer to listen and they begin to observe the location in the cosmos where the aliens are supposedly from. Low and behold, they find the physical proof needed to confirm the existence of the civilization. Still, they are met with rejection and contempt because of the nature of how the original contact was made. Not only are they condemned by the scientific community but the religious community as well.

The climax comes when the aliens inform them of an impending asteroid on a collision course for Earth. They give them the precise coordinates which they relay to the proper officials but still, they don't believe them. As time ticks off and the impending doom draws closer, more and more people hear of the prediction and begin to "follow" the messengers. With detailed instructions from the aliens, they begin to build an escape vessel and participate in a lottery for who will get to leave. Years pass by as the "real" scientists continue to dismiss these people as nuts and wackos until one day an astronomer observes the actual asteroid careening toward Earth. At this point, it is far too late to do anything about it. The group of followers and messengers are met with hoards of people in panic. They barely escape and they watch from space as the asteroid destroys the planet.

Good story! I think it might have already been done, but duplicates occur. Watch out for the lawyers!

Scientific peer review is very brutal, sometimes indistinguishable from a food fight.

 

[Boss]

You still need to explain the origin of this spiritual nature & also why only one.

This argument often arises from skeptical Atheists but it's a non sequitur. If we apply this logic, there is indeed, no explanation for anything. Because, you would require the explanation of the explanation... then the explanation of the explanation of the explanation... then the explanation of the explanation of the explanation of the explanation... etc.

You do not need to explain the explanation for the explanation to be valid.

As for the "how many" question... it's like asking how many Dark Matters are there? It's not really an important query is it? Personally, I believe there might be a Spiritual Nature and a (for lack of a better term) Dark Spiritual Nature or Anti Spiritual Nature.

 

[MarkDuffy]

A God by a different name, conveniently immune to science, but can create science. A non-physical who can create physical & never has to answer where "it" came from.

Is Dark Matter "conveniently" immune to science? I think not.

Again, you are faced with a philosophical paradox, if not, a scientific one. Physical nature cannot create itself.

As for "where it came from" ...this is meaningless to something spiritual. The spiritual exists outside of time and space, it doesn't "come from" anywhere. It is not a physical thing that requires creation. I realize this is a difficult concept for an Atheist to grasp because they don't believe in spiritual existence.

Look, you can believe one of two things: Physical nature created itself from nothing or Spiritual nature which doesn't require creation, created physical nature. I believe the later is more probable than the former. Can I prove it? NO... Can you disprove it? NO. Therefore, it is forever, philosophy.

Physical nature cannot create itself.

So you continue to claim. You also claim that non-physical CAN create itself & then create the physical too. Sorry, but that is not a solution.

It's not a claim, it's a paradox you have no explanation for.

It's not a paradox unless you assume it is true.

I didn't claim the spiritual can create itself, I argued the spiritual doesn't require creation because it's not physical.

Yes, you do and I don't buy it. Using spiritual does not get you outta jail free.

 

[MarkDuffy]

You still need to explain the origin of this spiritual nature & also why only one.

This argument often arises from skeptical Atheists but it's a non sequitur. If we apply this logic, there is indeed, no explanation for anything. Because, you would require the explanation of the explanation... then the explanation of the explanation of the explanation... then the explanation of the explanation of the explanation of the explanation... etc.

You do not need to explain the explanation for the explanation to be valid.

As for the "how many" question... it's like asking how many Dark Matters are there? It's not really an important query is it? Personally, I believe there might be a Spiritual Nature and a (for lack of a better term) Dark Spiritual Nature or Anti Spiritual Nature.

You do well about beating around the bush.

Describe your religion for me.

Does every human have a spiritual part? Where did this come from and what happens after death. Is this spirit only in humans, no other life on earth?

It sounds like you are talking the Christian God in all its glory, but w/o saying so.

Soooo, where do you differ from Christianity?

 

[Boss]

2) The ability of spirit to interact with the physical, let alone create the physical. This is a HUGE one for me. I would think spirit must remain spirit and cannot pick up a glass of water.

I think there is evidence of the spiritual interacting with the physical all the time. I previously offered the example of "Love." Of course, you'll say that's an emotion but so so what? It's still a spiritually guided emotion from my perspective. As for picking up a glass of water, that's a physical action. Is physical nature or physics required to perform spiritual actions? Then why would spiritual nature be required to perform physical actions?

I can put some carbon and water in a petri dish and tomorrow, the dish will not contain an assortment of life forms. I can't draw the conclusion that water and carbon are obviously not the building blocks of life. That would be to draw a conclusion based on an impossible expectation. That's what you seem to be doing with spiritual nature.

 

[Boss]

3) The claim that this spirit created our universe must allow for other universes to also be created. Thus, my issue disappears. I can claim there was two universes created, one matter, the other antimatter & we no longer need the big bang singularity from nothing.

I agree... God could have created the parameters by which physical reactions created a physical universe from nothing.

 

[Boss]

4) To allow such a spiritual nature, you also have to allow ghosts, goblins, magic, witches, demons, reincarnation and a host of other things.

Do you have a valid physical explanation for ghosts, goblins, etc.? It's obvious these experiences of various phenomenon have existed in human nature for a long time and it doesn't appear to be a fad or trend. I would surmise that spiritual nature might play a role.

 

[Boss]

It's not a paradox unless you assume it is true.

I'm not sure if you understand what a paradox is.

Yes, you do and I don't buy it. Using spiritual does not get you outta jail free.

Didn't ask for an "outta jail free" here. Again, spiritual nature doesn't require physical creation.

 

[MarkDuffy]

2) The ability of spirit to interact with the physical, let alone create the physical. This is a HUGE one for me. I would think spirit must remain spirit and cannot pick up a glass of water.

I think there is evidence of the spiritual interacting with the physical all the time. I previously offered the example of "Love." Of course, you'll say that's an emotion but so so what? It's still a spiritually guided emotion from my perspective.

That's pretty lame

As for picking up a glass of water, that's a physical action. Is physical nature or physics required to perform spiritual actions? Then why would spiritual nature be required to perform physical actions?

Creating the physical universe is pretty physical

I can put some carbon and water in a petri dish and tomorrow, the dish will not contain an assortment of life forms.

If you start with a sterile petri dish, sterile carbon & water, sterile swab and don't leave the lid off for more than a second, you might get lucky and nothing happens. Trust me. Been there done that. Nothing worse than that fuzz stuff messing up a good plan.

I can't draw the conclusion that water and carbon are obviously not the building blocks of life. That would be to draw a conclusion based on an impossible expectation. That's what you seem to be doing with spiritual nature.

I have observed the physical world. I have not observed the spiritual. I can explain the voices in my head. LOL