Creation and so forth

[BackAgain]

Science posits some things we now take for granted. For example, nothing can exist prior to itself.

matter/energy/space/time exist. Where did all this “stuff” come from? Fair question. Tracing it back with observation and science (particularly physics) we seemingly trace it back to the “Big Bang.” But where did the initial super tiny blob of whatever it was come from?

Our reliance on the rules and laws of science breaks down at that point. We call it by another set of names. We call it “quantum” physics and make reference to how the normal scientific laws are suspended at such a point. Basically, we speak of something that is literally outside the bounds of science. It is LITERALLY super-natural. (Not in the sense of the “divine” or “magic” necessarily; just in the sense of requiring explanation that is above and beyond our understanding of scientific “laws”.).

The geniuses who work in the fields of quantum physics and theoretical physics may be able — in a fashion — to explain how absolute nothing led to the infinitesimal “thing” that went “bang” thereby crating all matter/energy and space itself as well as time. But cannot explain the “why” of it all?

What, exactly, perturbed an absolutely empty void where no energy and no matter existed in no space and outside the parameters of time in order to set the Big Bang and all of creation in the cosmos into motion? Why would absolutely nothing lead to something?

(I placed this post in the science section; but I think it might be logically and fairly placed in a religion section, too.)

 

[fncceo]

There was obviously SOMETHING before The Big Bang... something outside of our 3 Dimensional Universe.

There are several theories along those lines, but no way has yet been imagined to design any experiments to confirm them.

There are still things in this universe that we cannot perceive with our 3D dimensional sense and instruments. Someday, we may develop the mathematics and instrumentation model those theories .... or completely different ones.

Until then, it remains tantalizing speculation.

 

[Hossfly]

I have questions and a few observations. I'll post them later today. I have an early get up and go.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Where did all this “stuff” come from?

Counterspace.

 

[DudleySmith]

Science and the empirical method is not really set up to 'prove' events that may not be repeatable. Basic Physics outran the ability of mathematics as a language explaining it a long time ago, back in the late 1960's and 1970's. We may well have just have to rely on Thomas of Aquina's formal logic and definition of 'God' as being as close as we will get. It now seems the West and the East are in a spiral of serious moral and intellectual decline, and yes, they're both joined at the hip, so don't let it keep you awake nights. Other problems are front and center.

 

[BackAgain]

There was obviously SOMETHING before The Big Bang... something outside of our 3 Dimensional Universe.

There are several theories along those lines, but no way has yet been imagined to design any experiments to confirm them.

There are still things in this universe that we cannot perceive with our 3D dimensional sense and instruments. Someday, we may develop the mathematics and instrumentation model those theories .... or completely different ones.

Until then, it remains tantalizing speculation.

I can accept that something outside of our known universe preceded it. But that leads us to a similar question. Where did that something come from?

 

[BackAgain]

Science and the empirical method is not really set up to 'prove' events that may not be repeatable. Basic Physics outran the ability of mathematics as a language explaining it a long time ago, back in the late 1960's and 1970's. We may well have just have to rely on Thomas of Aquina's formal logic and definition of 'God' as being as close as we will get. It now seems the West and the East are in a spiral of serious moral and intellectual decline, and yes, they're both joined at the hip, so don't let it keep you awake nights. Other problems are front and center.

If nothing can exist without being created, where did the Creator come from? To be clear, that question is not an attempt to be disrespectful of religion. I happen to believe in God. But, out of what did God come?

We could beg the question and say “from a super God.” But then, we’d logically ask, from where did the SuperGod come? Etc.

It appears that something has to have come literally from nothing. I think that is a way of saying “super natural” since nature and our understanding of science still posits that nothing can exist prior to itself (or nothing can exist without coming from something).

Nowadaya, quantum and theoretical physics appear to suggest that out of a perfect vacuum a form of probability physics says that something can come from nothing. I’m no scientist. But I get back to a basic question in that case:

what perturbed a perfect vacuum of no matter and no energy in a null space to result in that probability ever happening?

 

[DudleySmith]

If nothing can exist without being created, where did the Creator come from? To be clear, that question is not an attempt to be disrespectful of religion. I happen to believe in God. But, out of what did God come?

We could beg the question and say “from a super God.” But then, we’d logically ask, from where did the SuperGod come? Etc.

It appears that something has to have come literally from nothing. I think that is a way of saying “super natural” since nature and our understanding of science still posits that nothing can exist prior to itself (or nothing can exist without coming from something).

Nowadaya, quantum and theoretical physics appear to suggest that out of a perfect vacuum a form of probability physics says that something can come from nothing. I’m no scientist. But I get back to a basic question in that case:

what perturbed a perfect vacuum of no matter and no energy in a null space to result in that probability ever happening?

obviously the assumption that there was 'Nothing' is what is false; there was the will of the 'Prime Mover', as per Thomas. That doesn't have to have anything material to start with.

The 'Big Bang' theorized doesn't have to be the first 'Big Bang', either; it could have been just one more of an infinite number of them. There is a lot that Physics will never answer empirically; it is more philosophy than engineering. Maybe it is just barking up the wrong tree to begin with. 'Black holes' for instance are sort of like funnels; where do they go? Do they create other 'Big bangs' on other planes and spaces? There are any number of possible answers, and just because we don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist.

We can only verify, abstractly, four dimensions. We may need a lot more to get close to an answer, or maybe even only one more, who knows? Why do you need to know in the first place? We have far more than enough problems without getting neurotic over abstract ones.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The universe has never been "a perfect vacuum" nor sprung from nothing. When matter gets sucked into a black hole, which genuinely is an (imperfect) vacuum, it can be transformed into energy and sunk into counterspace among other things depending on circumstances. Space has one but dimension, space, which has spatial attributes such as "3D" coordinates, but time is space's simplest and most logical method of measuring A to B over vast distances. Counterspace, having no dimensions, can't be observed or measured and so exists everywhere at once. "Magnetic" repulsion emerges from counterspace. Any gravitational pressure not transformed into heat sinks into counterspace. It's not really all that abstract and makes sense. Just not what we were all taught.

 

[BackAgain]

obviously the assumption that there was 'Nothing' is what is false; there was the will of the 'Prime Mover', as per Thomas. That doesn't have to have anything material to start with.

The 'Big Bang' theorized doesn't have to be the first 'Big Bang', either; it could have been just one more of an infinite number of them. There is a lot that Physics will never answer empirically; it is more philosophy than engineering. Maybe it is just barking up the wrong tree to begin with. 'Black holes' for instance are sort of like funnels; where do they go? Do they create other 'Big bangs' on other planes and spaces? There are any number of possible answers, and just because we don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist.

We can only verify, abstractly, four dimensions. We may need a lot more to get close to an answer, or maybe even only one more, who knows? Why do you need to know in the first place? We have far more than enough problems without getting neurotic over abstract ones.

Again, that seems to beg the question. Where did God come from? To say that He is the Prime Mover is well and good. I think it may even be true. But it still leaves unaddressed “where did God come from?”

One answer is that God is the one entity that has ever been able to exist without causation. That is literally supernatural. But to the (questionable) degree to which I grasp the scientific theories, scientists postulate that because of quantum probability it is possible that matter/energy/space/time are the entities that can spring from nothing. Again, by literal definition, that too would be “supernatural.”

It seems to me that it has to be one or the other of those two competing supernatural theories that explains Creation. I default to God mostly because the more we (humans) unravel the mysteries of the Universe, the more we see of amazing “laws” that can describe things we can’t even see. I am of the opinion (belief) that such laws seem to have an intelligence underlying them.

I am also quite content to hear that others disagree. As is their right.

 

[DudleySmith]

But it still leaves unaddressed “where did God come from?”

Maybe you will find out when you're able to grasp it. It would be pointless to tell you anything now, or it would be in the book.

 

[BackAgain]

Maybe you will find out when you're able to grasp it. It would be pointless to tell you anything now, or it would be in the book.

Have you “grasped” it yet?

I suspect that you are using “know” and “firm belief” interchangeably.

 

[DudleySmith]

Have you “grasped” it yet?

I suspect that you are using “know” and “firm belief” interchangeably.

I think you're just running around in circles, saying you don't get the science but demanding scientific answers that make sense or something. Most of us stopped doing that by our junior year in college and starting spending more time trying to get in the freshman class chicks' pants, before they figured out juniors and seniors were mostly still the same pretentious assholes they were in high school and found bikers to hang out with.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I wonder if the OP has considered pondering simpler things first? Like why do permanent magnets attract or repel one another? Where does the apparent force originate from and disappear to? Perhaps seeking satisfying, evidence based answers to that sort of thing would help him feel more qualified to proceed down big rabbit holes like this without retreating to tired, magical nonsense explanations in the Science and Technology section.

 

[BackAgain]

I think you're just running around in circles, saying you don't get the science but demanding scientific answers that make sense or something. Most of us stopped doing that by our junior year in college and starting spending more time trying to get in the freshman class chicks' pants, before they figured out juniors and seniors were mostly still the same pretentious assholes they were in high school and found bikers to hang out with.

You “think” wrong.

First, I haven’t demanded any answers about anything.

Secondly, challenging the responses I’ve gotten isn’t running around in circles.

Thirdly, I don’t care which fellows you dated in your sophomore year.

Fourthly, just because what you’ve offered here isn’t blindly accepted as “Gospel” truth doesn’t mean you should be so easily offended. It’s all just a give and take. None of us is going to resolve the matter here on a message board discussion.

Finally, I find the topic quite interesting. It seems like maybe a few others do too. If you don’t or if you’ve lost interest, cool. Nobody is insisting that you post here or read a single word.

 

[BackAgain]

I wonder if the OP has considered pondering simpler things first? Like why do permanent magnets attract or repel one another? Where does the apparent force originate from and disappear to? Perhaps seeking satisfying, evidence based answers to that sort of thing would help him feel more qualified to proceed down big rabbit holes like this without retreating to tired, magical nonsense explanations in the Science and Technology section.

I haven’t retreated to anything magical. Wtf are you babbling about. Just because you can neither prove the God hypothesis nor refute it doesn’t make you anything special and you shouldn’t necessarily feel like less of an intellect because of it.

Some people a whole lot brighter than us have contemplated these same things and it might surprise you to learn that some physicists walk away feeling as though the existence of God is more likely after their advanced considerations have run their course.

To me, it’s almost a coin flip. But I’ve come down to a belief that there seems to be more reason to assume that their is an intelligence behind it all. I have never suggested that others “should” come to the same conclusion.

 

[DudleySmith]

You “think” wrong.

First, I haven’t demanded any answers about anything.

Secondly, challenging the responses I’ve gotten is r running around in circles.

Thirdly, I don’t care which fellows you dated in your sophomore year.

Fourthly, just because what you’ve offered here isn’t blindly accepted as “Gospel” truth doesn’t mean you should be so easily offended. It’s all just a give and take. None of us is going to resolve the matter here on a message board discussion.

Finally, I find the topic quite interesting. It seems like maybe a few others do too. If you don’t or if you’ve lost interest, cool. Nobody is insisting that you post here or read a single word.

You got snarky first, asshole. You just aren't intellectually equipped for these types of discussions is all.

 

[BackAgain]

You got snarky first, asshole. You just aren't intellectually equipped for these types of discussions is all.

No. I sure didn’t ya butt rash. That would have been you.

And, as a non scientist and as a non theologian, I am as equipped as most other laymen to engage in the discussion.

I haven’t seen anything from you that speaks to you having much of an intellect. I have seen evidence of your possession of a very thin skin. Go Toddle off.

 

[DudleySmith]

No. I sure didn’t ya butt rash. That would have been you.

You have a rich fantasy life in your head. You must be a God yourself. The only issue here is whether you're a Prime Mover or a Prime Moron.

 

[BackAgain]

You have a rich fantasy life in your head. You must be a God yourself. The only issue here is whether you're a Prime Mover or a Prime Moron.

No. That’s not even “an” issue. One issue that does exist is why you are such a shithead troll. Not that it matters.