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

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It does not matter if our universe has been expanding for an infinite time or has been expanding and crunching for an infinite time.

The thermodynamic response will be thermal equilibrium unless something else puts more energy into the isolated system.

Yes, you already said that. And I already responded to it.

 

[ding]

It does not matter if our universe has been expanding for an infinite time or has been expanding and crunching for an infinite time.

The thermodynamic response will be thermal equilibrium unless something else puts more energy into the isolated system.

Yes, you already said that. And I already responded to it.

And you are the only person who understands what you wrote whereas I made it so that a six year old could understand it.

We're good then.

 

[ding]

To everyone but Fort Fun

It does not matter if our universe has been expanding for an infinite time or has been expanding and crunching for an infinite time.

The thermodynamic response will be thermal equilibrium unless something else puts more energy into the isolated system.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And you are the only person who understands what you wrote

Hmm, I doubt that, because I learned it in a physics course. It seemed like everyone in the room understood it quute well.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The thermodynamic response will be thermal equilibrium unless something else puts more energy into the isolated system

Not necessarily, as it may be that an eternal universe has no maximum entropy.

 

[ding]

And you are the only person who understands what you wrote

Hmm, I doubt that, because I learned it in a physics course. It seemed like everyone in the room understood it quute well.

Actually no, they didn't.

You learned thermo in a physics class?

 

[Flash]

Only two possibilities:

1. The universe created itself out of nothing.

2. There is some intelligent design to the universe.

The first item is beyond human comprehension and against the Laws of Physics.

I'll go with the second one.

 

[idb]

Only two possibilities:

1. The universe created itself out of nothing.

2. There is some intelligent design to the universe.

The first item is beyond human comprehension and against the Laws of Physics.

I'll go with the second one.

Fair enough.
"I don't understand therefore...God"

It stands to reason.

 

[ScienceRocks]

What? You do realize that it took 4 billion years for evolution to create humans? God is 10,000,000,000 more complex.

No it isn't rational and you ******* know it!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You learned thermo in a physics class?

The second law? Correct, in high school. But I was referring to the ideas in my reply to you, which seemed obvious at the time.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God is 10,000,000,000 more complex

Why? Humans are less complex than blue whales. Maybe God is only a particle!

 

[Czernobog]

And even experts can be wrong. Newton was.

Sure they can. I have provided Vilinken's positon so that it can be examined.

You have provided diddly squat.

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.

 

[ding]

You learned thermo in a physics class?

The second law? Correct, in high school. But I was referring to the ideas in my reply to you, which seemed obvious at the time.

What you said was meaningless. There is no nevertheless. If a universe - filled with matter and energy - like ours really had been going on for all of eternity, you would not be here. No heat would be flowing in the universe. That's how infinity and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics works.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What you said was meaningless.

Here is what I said: "It may be that an eternal universe has no maximum entropy."

why is that, "meaningless"? Because of this?: "If the universe filled with matter and energy really had been going on for all of eternity, you would not be here. No heat would be flowing in the universe. That's how infinity works."

"Infinity", in this case, may also mean that, no matter what state of entropy you reach, you may be able to reach a state of higher entropy. A universe may be infinite in all dimensions and achieve this at all times in its history.

 

[ding]

Sure they can. I have provided Vilinken's positon so that it can be examined.

You have provided diddly squat.

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.

 

[ding]

What you said was meaningless.

Here is what I said: "It may be that an eternal universe has no maximum entropy."

why is that, "meaningless"? Because of this?: "If the universe filled with matter and energy really had been going on for all of eternity, you would not be here. No heat would be flowing in the universe. That's how infinity works."

"Infinity", in this case, may also mean that, no matter what state of entropy you reach, you may be able to reach a state of higher entropy. A universe may be infinite in all dimensions and achieve this at all times in its history.

No. You are speaking gibberish.

 

[ding]

Most people get that space and time had a beginning because when you ask them how old the universe is they say ~14 billion years ago.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

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.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Most people get that space and time had a beginning because when you ask them how old the universe is they say ~14 billion years ago.

But many of those same people will also say it is possible that what we have been calling, "the universe" is actually a subverse or just a portion of the universe, and does not represent "all that there is".

 

[ding]

Most people get that space and time had a beginning because when you ask them how old the universe is they say ~14 billion years ago.

But many of those same people will also say it is possible that what we have been calling, "the universe" is actually a subverse or just a portion of the universe, and does not represent "all that there is".

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