Hubble Deep Field Photograph

[ChemEngineer]

NASA published an amazing photograph of what is perhaps the most empty regions of the universe. The photograph was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope and appears in Brilliant Creation 7: Unfathomable Stars, on page 58 of my book.

For perspective, this photograph consists roughly of the area of a grain of sand held at arms length from your eye and shows hundreds of galaxies each consisting of billions of stars.

In decades past, atheists claimed that God would not have wasted so much energy and matter creating such a vast universe just for us humans.

However when Brandon Carter published his paper on the Anthropic Principle in 1974, he demonstrated the extraordinary fine tuning of numerous physical constants which were far too precise to have "happened by chance."

Atheists immediately changed their tune from "God would not have wasted so much energy and matter" to "Ours is just one of an infinite number of universes, i.e. The Multiverse, and we live in the one that works!"

From one absurd just-so story to the opposite extreme is all atheists have. Desperation on steroids.

 

[Meister]

There is no chance that all of this just happened by chance.

 

[Crepitus]

NASA published an amazing photograph of what is perhaps the most empty regions of the universe. The photograph was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope and appears in Brilliant Creation 7: Unfathomable Stars, on page 58 of my book.

For perspective, this photograph consists roughly of the area of a grain of sand held at arms length from your eye and shows hundreds of galaxies each consisting of billions of stars.

View attachment 1067559

In decades past, atheists claimed that God would not have wasted so much energy and matter creating such a vast universe just for us humans.

However when Brandon Carter published his paper on the Anthropic Principle in 1974, he demonstrated the extraordinary fine tuning of numerous physical constants which were far too precise to have "happened by chance."

Atheists immediately changed their tune from "God would not have wasted so much energy and matter" to "Ours is just one of an infinite number of universes, i.e. The Multiverse, and we live in the one that works!"

From one absurd just-so story to the opposite extreme is all atheists have. Desperation on steroids.

It's a cool pic, the religious commentary is retarded though.

 

[scruffy]

Numbers have structure.

There is structure in the act of counting, regardless of what you "call" the numbers or what base they're in.

The ancient Jews knew this, they were into numerology.

 

[Votto]

NASA published an amazing photograph of what is perhaps the most empty regions of the universe. The photograph was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope and appears in Brilliant Creation 7: Unfathomable Stars, on page 58 of my book.

For perspective, this photograph consists roughly of the area of a grain of sand held at arms length from your eye and shows hundreds of galaxies each consisting of billions of stars.

View attachment 1067559

In decades past, atheists claimed that God would not have wasted so much energy and matter creating such a vast universe just for us humans.

However when Brandon Carter published his paper on the Anthropic Principle in 1974, he demonstrated the extraordinary fine tuning of numerous physical constants which were far too precise to have "happened by chance."

Atheists immediately changed their tune from "God would not have wasted so much energy and matter" to "Ours is just one of an infinite number of universes, i.e. The Multiverse, and we live in the one that works!"

From one absurd just-so story to the opposite extreme is all atheists have. Desperation on steroids.

The vastness of creation SHOULD cause man to gravitate towards humility and probably was the design of it all.

The key word though is, SHOULD have.

 

[kyzr]

There is no chance that all of this just happened by chance.

If you haven't read any of the books by Bernard Haisch you might try one or two.

He is an astrophysicist that was a seminarian.

 

[scruffy]

The vastness of creation SHOULD cause man to gravitate towards humility and probably was the design of it all.

The key word though is, SHOULD have.

"Vast" is one of those nebulous words, like "tiny", they don't tell us a whole lot.

Since I'm on a math kick, I'll show you some math that only involves the numbers 1, 2, and 3. This happens any time you count from 1 to 3 - just an illustration of how much structure there is in "just" numbers.

This is one of the most famous and astounding paradoxes in all of mathematics, it's called the Banach-Tarski paradox.

It goes like this:

If you have an object in 3 dimensions with a non-empty interior (like, say, an apple or an orange), it is possible to cut it up, and put it back together again to obtain TWO copies of the original object.

Without mangling or deforming any of the pieces

The strange thing about this statement, is it's not true in 1 or 2 dimensions. Only in 3 (or more, with possibly some exceptions).

The reason is because of the algebraic group of Euclidean motions in N dimensions E(n), which is solvable in 1 or 2 dimensions but in 3 dimensions contains a free group with 2 generators (a fact that was later shown by John von Neumann - in fact von Neumann jumped the gun and published his result before doing the math, and sometime in the 80's it became clear he had the right answer for N=3 but not for N in general).

The problem is that the real number line (in this case R3) is uncountable, and therefore it generates "paradoxical sets". These sets only show up in the results when certain symmetry conditions are present.

Paradoxical set - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So if you just "count", you get lots and lots of structure. In 3 dimensions you get a bunch of non-Euclidean geometries, stuff like that. These are a property of "just" numbers, you don't need any physics or anything else.

 

[Meister]

If you haven't read any of the books by Bernard Haisch you might try one or two.

He is an astrophysicist that was a seminarian.

I play the odds, and it would have been an astronomical chance that this all happened randomly

 

[ChemEngineer]

I play the odds, and it would have been an astronomical chance that this all happened randomly

Meister, my Friend, I have computed odds on the naturalistic synthesis of only ONE protein in the human body, and there are over 20,000 of them in humans alone.

If I made any errors, someone please point them out precisely and I will correct it/them immediately.

Mathematical Proof of Nature's God

mathprovesgod.blogspot.com

 

[scruffy]

Meister, my Friend, I have computed odds on the naturalistic synthesis of only ONE protein in the human body, and there are over 20,000 of them in humans alone.

If I made any errors, someone please point them out precisely and I will correct it/them immediately.

Mathematical Proof of Nature's God

mathprovesgod.blogspot.com

lmao !!!

You've been called out a dozen times already on your ignorant bullshit.

And you ran away every time.

Watch, this time will be no different.

 

[scruffy]

I play the odds, and it would have been an astronomical chance that this all happened randomly

You don't get it.

Even "randomly" has structure.

Why? Because you get outcomes, which means you have to count.

In real life there's almost no such thing as a flat distribution. All the random sets have some greater structure to them.

 

[Meister]

'Real life' isn't random, partner.
Perhaps, you are the one who doesn't get it.

 

[scruffy]

'Real life' isn't random, partner.

Yes, it is.

Perhaps, you are the one who doesn't get it.

God does in fact play dice with the universe.

Prove me wrong.

 

[frigidweirdo]

NASA published an amazing photograph of what is perhaps the most empty regions of the universe. The photograph was taken by the Hubble Space Telescope and appears in Brilliant Creation 7: Unfathomable Stars, on page 58 of my book.

For perspective, this photograph consists roughly of the area of a grain of sand held at arms length from your eye and shows hundreds of galaxies each consisting of billions of stars.

View attachment 1067559

In decades past, atheists claimed that God would not have wasted so much energy and matter creating such a vast universe just for us humans.

However when Brandon Carter published his paper on the Anthropic Principle in 1974, he demonstrated the extraordinary fine tuning of numerous physical constants which were far too precise to have "happened by chance."

Atheists immediately changed their tune from "God would not have wasted so much energy and matter" to "Ours is just one of an infinite number of universes, i.e. The Multiverse, and we live in the one that works!"

From one absurd just-so story to the opposite extreme is all atheists have. Desperation on steroids.

It's a ridiculous argument to suggest that the universe is proof of God.

If you needed an entity that was this intelligent to have made the universe, then something has to have created that entity.

Which means that the thing that created that entity also needs to have been created.

So, at some point in your argument you need something to have been created out of nothing.... or something evolved into the smart that it was.

So, humans have gotten smarter over their existence from a single cell entity to what we are now and that there somehow was a God, or series of Gods that were created out of nothing and evolved.

Either way, it all starts from A) they appeared out of nowhere or B) stuff has always existed.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I play the odds, and it would have been an astronomical chance that this all happened randomly

Depends what it is.

As far as I can tell, the only thing in the universe is energy.

Energy has formed together to make atoms. Atoms have permanent energy (protons and neutrons in current view of things) and then they have temporary energy which can orbit the main part of the atom, or it can leave, like light, heat etc.

Atoms form together, they gain enough mass that they attract other energy to each other to form molecules, which get enough mass to attach themselves to other molecules and form liquids, solids, gas and plasma.

The energy behaves in different ways, and forms different things depending on the way it moves (waves perhaps, like in String Theory).

Quantum physics also seems to be present, which we haven't really figured out why it happens, which will be interesting, even then it's probably just about energy doing stuff.

 

[scruffy]

Either way, it all starts from A) they appeared out of nowhere or B) stuff has always existed.

There are other options.

A quantum wave function is characterized by a frequency, some angular momentum, and a probability amplitude.

By definition, the wave function is a superposition of all possible states.

If we consider 0 to be a state where nothing exists, and 1 to be a state where something exists, then by definition of the superposition, nothing exists, and something exists, at the same time.

Thus there is no need for "a beginning", all that is required is a state of indeterminateness.