God is the only rational explanation for the existence of the universe.

[Czernobog]

Well, that's just because I expectedx you to know how to Google. Sorry I expected to much of you.

Here you go: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.3093.pdf

Now, not being a physicist myself, some of the math is a bit above me. However, here is a nice article that dumbs it down a bit: No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

OK, I've read it. It doesn't say what you think it says. Do you want me to explain it to you?

It says exactly what I think it does. A direct quote from the paper: "The second quantum correction term pushes back the time singularity indefinitely, and predicts an everlasting universe."

It presents a big bang model without the singularity. It existed forever as quantum potential before “collapsing” into the hot dense state and then expanding and cooling. It makes no claim that it is cyclical. Or that space and time existed forever. It claims that quantum potential existed forever. It isn't a cyclical model. It is an inflationary model.

So, my terms were off. The point is it is a continually expanding, and contracting universe without the need to God.

Way off. His model still had us in a hot dense state and then expanding and cooling. His quantum universe was forever. But the universe we live in where there is matter and energy, started in a hot dense state and then began to expand and cool immediately and that was ~14 billion years ago.

And?

 

[ding]

No. You are speaking gibberish.

Fascinating. Not compelling in the least, but whatever. Now... what were you saying about the truth of the existence of magical spirits, and of miracles, and other fun supernatural stuff? Because,boy, that sure wasn't gibberish.

Not compelling in the least. 100%

We'll get to that other stuff soon enough. But to suffice it to say, it is a far better choice than the materialist.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Doesn't matter if it is a subverse or a multiverse. It had a beginning.

No, not necessarily.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But to suffice it to say, it is a far better choice than the materialist.

You are quite fond of authoritative declarations like this. They discredit you.

 

[ding]

OK, I've read it. It doesn't say what you think it says. Do you want me to explain it to you?

It says exactly what I think it does. A direct quote from the paper: "The second quantum correction term pushes back the time singularity indefinitely, and predicts an everlasting universe."

It presents a big bang model without the singularity. It existed forever as quantum potential before “collapsing” into the hot dense state and then expanding and cooling. It makes no claim that it is cyclical. Or that space and time existed forever. It claims that quantum potential existed forever. It isn't a cyclical model. It is an inflationary model.

So, my terms were off. The point is it is a continually expanding, and contracting universe without the need to God.

Way off. His model still had us in a hot dense state and then expanding and cooling. His quantum universe was forever. But the universe we live in where there is matter and energy, started in a hot dense state and then began to expand and cool immediately and that was ~14 billion years ago.

And?

And he wasn't talking about an infinite amount of time once matter and energy occupied his quantum universe that had been existing forever.

He is still using Freidman's equations for crying out loud. They still show that the so called quantum universe - that had been existing forever - started expanding and cooling when matter and energy were added to it and created space and time. And that was 14 billion years ago.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But his model still shows that the quantum universe that had been existing forever started expanding and cooling 14 billion years ago when matter and energy were added and created space time.

So, when does that model begin, and when does it end?

 

[ding]

Doesn't matter if it is a subverse or a multiverse. It had a beginning.

No, not necessarily.

SLoT says otherwise.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Doesn't matter if it is a subverse or a multiverse. It had a beginning.

No, not necessarily.

SLoT says otherwise.

It does not. The 2nd law only says what it says. We make deductions from it in our models. In models that are infinite in all dimensions, there may be no maximum entropy.

 

[ding]

Now... what were you saying about the truth of the existence of magical spirits, and of miracles, and other fun supernatural stuff? Because,boy, that sure wasn't gibberish.

We'll get to that other stuff soon enough. But to suffice it to say, it is a far better choice than the materialist.

You are quite fond of authoritative declarations like this.

For all things there is a final state of fact.

They discredit you.

Far from it. They ennoble me.

 

[ding]

Doesn't matter if it is a subverse or a multiverse. It had a beginning.

No, not necessarily.

SLoT says otherwise.

It does not. The 2nd law only says what it says. We make deductions from it in our models. In models that are infinite in all dimensions, there may be no maximum entropy.

Heat flows from high energy to low energy. As time approaches infinity, temperature approaches equilibrium, unless heat is put into the system. It has nothing to do with models. It is a natural phenomenon.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For all things there is a final state of fact.

Maybe, maybe not, but that's not the same as claiming to know exactly what those facts are, Shaman Ding. Don't play cute.

As time approaches infinity, temperature approaches equilibrium

And, like I said, it may be that it never gets there.

 

[ding]

For all things there is a final state of fact.

Maybe, maybe not, but that's not the same as claiming to know exactly what those facts are, Shaman Ding. Don't play cute.

No maybe about it. For all things there is a final state of fact. That once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way even when it was believed to have been otherwise.

You might say it is eternal and unchanging.

Heat flows from high energy to low energy. As time approaches infinity, temperature approaches equilibrium, unless heat is put into the system. It has nothing to do with models. It is a natural phenomenon.

And, like I said, it may be that it never gets there.

It always gets there in an infinite amount of time. It never rests. None of the laws of compensation do.

 

[ding]

There was something undifferentiated and yet complete,
Which existed before Heaven and Earth.
Soundless and formless it depends on nothing and does not change.
It operates everywhere and is free from danger.
It may be considered the mother of the universe.
I do not know its name; I call it Tao.

Lao Tzu

The Tao includes several concepts in one word:

• the source of creation
• the ultimate
• the inexpressible and indefinable
• the unnameable
• the natural universe as a whole
• the way of nature as a whole

 

[ding]

The final state of fact

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No maybe about it. For all things there is a final state of fact. That once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way even when it was believed to have been otherwise.

See? charlatan tactic. The 'maybe, maybe not" was not germane to my point, which is why I was able to say it. The second part, that it is QUITE a different claim to know what those facts are, was, very obviously, the point. and you dodged it completely. While there me be a "final state of fact" to all things, asserting so is not the same as claiming to know the facts. You claim to know some facts that , I have to say, make ya sound kind of crazy. Like the guy who knows his houseplants talk to him, crazy.

It always gets there in an infinite amount of time.

No, not necessarily, if the universe is also infinite in all other dimensions.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The Tao includes several concepts in one word:

• the source of creation
• the ultimate
• the inexpressible and indefinable
• the unnameable
• the natural universe as a whole
• the way of nature as a whole

Do you know what the Tao most certainly does NOT include?

A beginning or an end to "everything"

 

[frigidweirdo]

Think about it. Nothing physical can create itself. This is a scientific fact. So if the universe wasn't created, then why does it exist? The only thing that makes sense is that it was created.

God is the most irrational.

Nothing can create itself, therefore GOD cannot have just been created out of nothing. Therefore there had to have been a creator that created God.

Also, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

Therefore, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

Furthermore, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

In addition, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

What's more, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

Consequently, there had to have been a creator that created this creator.

And so on, until you realize that this argument doesn't work simply by process of elimination.

 

[ding]

Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is key to the process. Growth filled communities explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth. Once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way even when it was believed to have been otherwise. It is reality. It is eternal and unchanging. It was that way even before space and time as the laws of nature existed before space and time.

 

[ding]

No maybe about it. For all things there is a final state of fact. That once discovered it is known that it was always that way and will always be that way even when it was believed to have been otherwise.

See? charlatan tactic. The 'maybe, maybe not" was not germane to my point, which is why I was able to say it. The second part, that it is QUITE a different claim to know what those facts are, was, very obviously, the point. and you dodged it completely. While there me be a "final state of fact" to all things, asserting so is not the same as claiming to know the facts. You claim to know some facts that , I have to say, make ya sound kind of crazy. Like the guy who knows his houseplants talk to him, crazy.

It always gets there in an infinite amount of time.

No, not necessarily, if the universe is also infinite in all other dimensions.

Then there would be no light.

 

[ding]

The Tao includes several concepts in one word:

• the source of creation
• the ultimate
• the inexpressible and indefinable
• the unnameable
• the natural universe as a whole
• the way of nature as a whole

Do you know what the Tao most certainly does NOT include?

A beginning or an end to "everything"

It isn't a revealed religion. But that doesn't mean that much can't be learned from men seeking God.