Bull Ring Can the universe be used as evidence for a creator. ding vs Soupnazi630

[ding]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

5. Friedman's solutions to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity predicts that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom approximately 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

6. The observations of cosmic background radiation and red shift confirm Friedman's prediction that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

Right or wrong?

 

[ding]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

7. The First Law of Thermodynamics (Conservation of energy and mass) states that energy and matter cannot be destroyed or created.

8. Since the time that all matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool, all energy and matter has only changed form (consequence of the First Law of Thermodynamics).

9. All the atoms that makes up every person who has ever existed or will ever exist was present approximately 14 billion years ago when all matter and energy occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom (consequence of the First Law of Thermodynamics).

Right or wrong?

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

5. Friedman's solutions to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity predicts that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom approximately 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

6. The observations of cosmic background radiation and red shift confirm Friedman's prediction that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

Right or wrong?

I will have to read up on Friedman to be positive but I will agree for expediency.

 

[Mindful]

We gaze up at the heavens at stars which aren't there anymore .

How about that?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Can the universe be used as evidence for a creator?

ding versus Soupnazi630

ding will take the position that the universe and everything in it since space and time were created can be used as evidence for a creator.

Soupnazi630 will take the position that the universe and everything in it since space and time were created can NOT be used as evidence for a creator.

I will make my opening statement once Soupnazi accepts this challenge.

I don't believe he will show up.

Soupnaai is the biggest idiot troll you will ever find in your lifetime,he actually believes in magic bullets and even goes as far to talk to HIMSELF to try and get attention when so many people put him on ignore since he ignores facts that dont go along with bis insane babblle and ramblings.

he cant open up his mouth without shitting all over the floor.LOL

 

[ding]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

5. Friedman's solutions to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity predicts that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom approximately 14 billion years ago and then began to expand and cool.

6. The observations of cosmic background radiation and red shift confirm Friedman's prediction that all the matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

Right or wrong?

I will have to read up on Friedman to be positive but I will agree for expediency.

Alexander Friedmann - Important Scientists - The Physics of the Universe

"...By late 1920, he had belatedly become familiar with Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, which was published several years late in war-torn Soviet Russia. In 1922, he discovered the expanding universe solution to Einstein’s general relativity field equations. At first, Einstein thought that the solution was erroneous, but he later agreed that they were in fact correct, and indeed that they shed new light on the whole subject. The expansion of the universe was finally corroborated several years later by Edwin Hubble's observations in 1929.
Friedmann’s papers from 1924 demonstrated all three Friedmann models (describing positive, zero and negative curvature of space-time), a full decade before Howard Percy Robertson and Arthur Geoffrey Walker published their analysis. This dynamic cosmological model of general relativity would come to form the standard for the Big Bang and steady state theories of the universe (Friedmann's work supports both theories equally), although the steady state theory was later largely abandoned after the detection of cosmic microwave background radiation in 1965..."

 

[ding]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

10. 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.

11. Since the universe is not at thermal equilibrium, the Second Law of Thermodynamics confirms the universe has not existed forever and did have a beginning.

Right or wrong?

 

[ding]

So let's examine the evidence.

1. We live in a deterministic universe governed by rules.

Right or wrong?

Wrong...scientifically we dont even know what kind of universe we live in. We have laws but even scientific laws can be disproved as they have in the past.
I like to think we live in a physical, causal universe but then science tells us that even this is not so. We however certainly DO NOT live in a deterministic universe.

You know what...for sake of brevity and simplicity...I will agree. We live in a physical world of cause and effect...sure. Those things that I can observe in my world are the result of cause and effect. Yes.

12. It is possible for matter to have a beginning.

13. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter.

14. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

15. 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.

16. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe.

17. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability.

18. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing.

19. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description (Inflation Theory) 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.

20. 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.

 

[ding]

Shorter answer.

Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

Third video. Alexander Vilenkin.


Longer answer.



Did the Universe Begin? | Closer to Truth

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

You are getting very theoretical by getting into Inflation Theory. Inflation theory, is but one expanding universe theory. In order for me to argue this on point it would require an understanding of physics far beyond my knowledge. I would think, far beyond the knowledge of most people.
From what I have read of the theory it is an attempt to link classical cosmological theories to quantum fields and the actual measured vacuum of space. Unfortunately little data exists because we lack both the ability to measure or sufficient knowledge to.
Either way this is all very heady, highly highly theoretical stuff which cannot be proven because we simply do not have any data for it.

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

 

[ding]

You are getting very theoretical by getting into Inflation Theory. Inflation theory, is but one expanding universe theory. In order for me to argue this on point it would require an understanding of physics far beyond my knowledge. I would think, far beyond the knowledge of most people.
From what I have read of the theory it is an attempt to link classical cosmological theories to quantum fields and the actual measured vacuum of space. Unfortunately little data exists because we lack both the ability to measure or sufficient knowledge to.
Either way this is all very heady, highly highly theoretical stuff which cannot be proven because we simply do not have any data for it.

That's a fair push back. But please keep in mind that we have a very good reason (i.e. evidence) to believe that space and time did have a beginning; the Second Law of Thermodynamics precludes an infinite acting universe and the evidence that all the matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. Specifically, Friedman's solutions to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, background radiation of the initial expansion and red shift confirming expansion and Friedman's solutions to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.

Inflation theory is the best explanation for how space and time began as it addresses many of the problems that have nagged physicists and cosmologists; namely the horizon problem, the flatness problem and the magnetic mono-pole problem.

But the key point for me was that it makes perfect sense that the creation of space and time followed rules; specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.

It would be illogical for there not to be a law governing the creation of space and time. Which is really the jumping off point for the next part of the investigation of the evidence.

So regardless of the mechanism, I believe that the evidence and logic shows that there were laws in place before space and time were created and space and time were created according to those laws. Can you agree with that?

 

[ding]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

I am not either but I have a curious mind and an engineering background. Check out the video's I provided and do your own exploration.

 

[ding]

You are getting very theoretical by getting into Inflation Theory. Inflation theory, is but one expanding universe theory. In order for me to argue this on point it would require an understanding of physics far beyond my knowledge. I would think, far beyond the knowledge of most people.
From what I have read of the theory it is an attempt to link classical cosmological theories to quantum fields and the actual measured vacuum of space. Unfortunately little data exists because we lack both the ability to measure or sufficient knowledge to.
Either way this is all very heady, highly highly theoretical stuff which cannot be proven because we simply do not have any data for it.

21. The laws of nature were in place before space and time were created.

22. Anything which was possible to exist according to the laws of nature was a potentiality before space and time were created.

Right or wrong?

 

[Mindful]

You are getting very theoretical by getting into Inflation Theory. Inflation theory, is but one expanding universe theory. In order for me to argue this on point it would require an understanding of physics far beyond my knowledge. I would think, far beyond the knowledge of most people.
From what I have read of the theory it is an attempt to link classical cosmological theories to quantum fields and the actual measured vacuum of space. Unfortunately little data exists because we lack both the ability to measure or sufficient knowledge to.
Either way this is all very heady, highly highly theoretical stuff which cannot be proven because we simply do not have any data for it.

21. The laws of nature were in place before space and time were created.

22. Anything which was possible to exist according to the laws of nature was a potentiality before space and time were created.

Right or wrong?

Ding.

You don't know that.


Unless you were privy to something I wasn't.

 

[ding]

You are getting very theoretical by getting into Inflation Theory. Inflation theory, is but one expanding universe theory. In order for me to argue this on point it would require an understanding of physics far beyond my knowledge. I would think, far beyond the knowledge of most people.
From what I have read of the theory it is an attempt to link classical cosmological theories to quantum fields and the actual measured vacuum of space. Unfortunately little data exists because we lack both the ability to measure or sufficient knowledge to.
Either way this is all very heady, highly highly theoretical stuff which cannot be proven because we simply do not have any data for it.

21. The laws of nature were in place before space and time were created.

22. Anything which was possible to exist according to the laws of nature was a potentiality before space and time were created.

Right or wrong?

Ding.

You don't know that.


Unless you were privy to something I wasn't.

See post #92

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

I am not either but I have a curious mind and an engineering background. Check out the video's I provided and do your own exploration.

I have looked at them and I appreciate theory as much as the next guy.
Physics is one of those subjects which is so cutting edge and so full of theories that it is very easy for the layman to become lost. These are folks way above my IQ. Waaaay above.
Interesting none the less...what I can process.

 

[ding]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

I am not either but I have a curious mind and an engineering background. Check out the video's I provided and do your own exploration.

I have looked at them and I appreciate theory as much as the next guy.
Physics is one of those subjects which is so cutting edge and so full of theories that it is very easy for the layman to become lost. These are folks way above my IQ. Waaaay above.
Interesting none the less...what I can process.

21. The laws of nature were in place before space and time were created.

22. Anything which was possible to exist according to the laws of nature was a potentiality before space and time were created.

Right or wrong?

 

[ding]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

I am not either but I have a curious mind and an engineering background. Check out the video's I provided and do your own exploration.

I have looked at them and I appreciate theory as much as the next guy.
Physics is one of those subjects which is so cutting edge and so full of theories that it is very easy for the layman to become lost. These are folks way above my IQ. Waaaay above.
Interesting none the less...what I can process.

23. Generally speaking, evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state.

24. The Stages of the Evolution of Matter are:

a. Cosmic evolution: the formation of hydrogen and helium from sub atomic particles in the very early universe.

b. Stellar evolution: the formation of structures in the early universe from hydrogen and helium.

c. Chemical evolution: the ongoing generation of all the elements from supernovas and all subsequent chemical reactions.

d. Biological evolution: the leap to life from inorganic material and it's evolution towards beings that know and create.

e. Evolution of consciousness

Right or wrong?

 

[ding]

I appreciate your sharing of knowledge but I am not a physicist. I cannot debate you on point in theoretical physics.

I am not either but I have a curious mind and an engineering background. Check out the video's I provided and do your own exploration.

I have looked at them and I appreciate theory as much as the next guy.
Physics is one of those subjects which is so cutting edge and so full of theories that it is very easy for the layman to become lost. These are folks way above my IQ. Waaaay above.
Interesting none the less...what I can process.

25. Since the moment when space and time were created matter has continued to complexify according to the laws of nature.

26. We live in a universe where the laws of nature are such that beings that know and create will eventually arise given enough time and the right conditions.

Right or wrong?