This is what atheist believe? Atheist believe that nothing created everything

[ding]

We don't know. Suggesting otherwise makes that person a fool.

Incorrect, Taz. We have ample evidence for how the universe began. We know exactly what created the massive background radiation that we can observe. Paired production annihilation from a runaway quantum fluctuation false vacuum. There were 1 billion paired particles (anti-matter/matter pairs) for every one particle of remaining matter. The paired particle annihilation released tremendous amounts of energy which propelled the remaining matter particles outward and powered the expansion of the universe. So there is literally only one way the background radiation can exist... the creation of the universe from nothing.

 

[ding]

We don't know. Suggesting otherwise makes that person a fool.

"An interesting idea is that the universe could be spontaneously created from nothing, but no rigorous proof has been given. In this paper, we present such a proof based on the analytic solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation (WDWE). Explicit solutions of the WDWE for the special operator ordering factor p = −2 (or 4) show that, once a small true vacuum bubble is created by quantum fluctuations of the metastable false vacuum, it can expand exponentially no matter whether the bubble is closed, flat or open. The exponential expansion will end when the bubble becomes large and thus the early universe appears. With the de Broglie-Bohm quantum trajectory theory, we show explicitly that it is the quantum potential that plays the role of the cosmological constant and provides the power for the exponential expansion of the true vacuum bubble. So it is clear that the birth of the early universe completely depends on the quantum nature of the theory. "

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.1207.pdf

 

[ChemEngineer]

1. Life occurring near hydrothermal vents, Fossils, DNA, Evolution.. all are totally compatible with intelligent design

2. It's accurate to say we don't know at all how such complex beings were developed from zero prompting.

3. I, along with probably most believers, have certainly questioned our faith. I'm not sure why you think that's a point in your favor or a bad thing. If anything, it makes our faith that much more noteworthy,

4. You seem bitter.

Colin norris seems bitter because he IS bitter. Atheists are far more pessimistic than believers, on average. Science, that magic potion, has determined such things time and again.

As to questioning our faith, "Israel" means to struggle with God.
Jesus Himself said, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me."

Struggle is part of life. Children struggle with parents and parents with children. Husbands and wives struggle with each other despite their deep and abiding love, one for the other.

Atheists simply throw crap up on every wall and hope some of it will stick.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Mac-7 said:
what is your explanation for how and where the Universe came from?

We don't know. Suggesting otherwise makes that person a fool.

The answer is found in the first line of the first Book of the Holy Bible:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Simple, elegant, complete, incomprehensible, of course.

Mankind is left with one of two incomprehensibles:

1. Either Genesis 1:1 is correct, or
2. The universe made itself, as atheists try to deny with such nonsense as "It's always been here."

The first and correct incomprehensible is self-explanatory, beyond the purview of science, elegant
and delightful to ponder.

The second is absurd, empty, nonsensical, and embraced by a small minority of pretentious desperadoes, whose leaders include Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Joseph Stalin.

 

[JoeBlow]

Neither do we

And no one has suggested that we do know

However we accept the fact that it must involve a higher power that we call God

So you think you know. Quite foolish. You can only guess. That's all we have so far.

 

[Blues Man]

Incorrect, Taz. We have ample evidence for how the universe began. We know exactly what created the massive background radiation that we can observe. Paired production annihilation from a runaway quantum fluctuation false vacuum. There were 1 billion paired particles (anti-matter/matter pairs) for every one particle of remaining matter. The paired particle annihilation released tremendous amounts of energy which propelled the remaining matter particles outward and powered the expansion of the universe. So there is literally only one way the background radiation can exist... the creation of the universe from nothing.

Ample evidence for the 5% of the universe we understand and no clue for the 95% we don't

 

[JoeBlow]

Incorrect, Taz. We have ample evidence for how the universe began. We know exactly what created the massive background radiation that we can observe. Paired production annihilation from a runaway quantum fluctuation false vacuum. There were 1 billion paired particles (anti-matter/matter pairs) for every one particle of remaining matter. The paired particle annihilation released tremendous amounts of energy which propelled the remaining matter particles outward and powered the expansion of the universe. So there is literally only one way the background radiation can exist... the creation of the universe from nothing.

Nice word soup. But tastes a little meaningless.

 

[JoeBlow]

"An interesting idea is that the universe could be spontaneously created from nothing, but no rigorous proof has been given. In this paper, we present such a proof based on the analytic solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation (WDWE). Explicit solutions of the WDWE for the special operator ordering factor p = −2 (or 4) show that, once a small true vacuum bubble is created by quantum fluctuations of the metastable false vacuum, it can expand exponentially no matter whether the bubble is closed, flat or open. The exponential expansion will end when the bubble becomes large and thus the early universe appears. With the de Broglie-Bohm quantum trajectory theory, we show explicitly that it is the quantum potential that plays the role of the cosmological constant and provides the power for the exponential expansion of the true vacuum bubble. So it is clear that the birth of the early universe completely depends on the quantum nature of the theory. "

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.1207.pdf

"An interesting idea". We're all guessing.

 

[Mac-7]

So you think you know. Quite foolish. You can only guess. That's all we have so far.

I have no explanation for eternity

nor do I need one

we exist, and I give credit for that to God

 

[JoeBlow]

Mac-7 said:
what is your explanation for how and where the Universe came from?



The answer is found in the first line of the first Book of the Holy Bible:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Simple, elegant, complete, incomprehensible, of course.

Mankind is left with one of two incomprehensibles:

1. Either Genesis 1:1 is correct, or
2. The universe made itself, as atheists try to deny with such nonsense as "It's always been here."

The first and correct incomprehensible is self-explanatory, beyond the purview of science, elegant
and delightful to ponder.

The second is absurd, empty, nonsensical, and embraced by a small minority of pretentious desperadoes, whose leaders include Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Joseph Stalin.

That's one theory. Nothing substantial though.

 

[ding]

Ample evidence for the 5% of the universe we understand and no clue for the 95% we don't

Ample evidence for the creation of the universe from nothing. Dark matter and dark energy are fudge factors. I doubt you understand that science any better than you understand the science for how the universe was created from nothing and the overwhelming evidence for it.

 

[ding]

"An interesting idea". We're all guessing.

No. We aren't. But I can tell the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce life and intelligence shakes the foundations of your non-belief. Because why else would you be denying the science.

 

[ding]

Nice word soup. But tastes a little meaningless.

Not at all. It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. 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. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description 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. 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.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.1207.pdf

Ten things you might not know about antimatter

Antimatter has fueled many a supernatural tale. It's also fascinating all by itself.

www.symmetrymagazine.org

 

[Blues Man]

Ample evidence for the creation of the universe from nothing. Dark matter and dark energy are fudge factors. I doubt you understand that science any better than you understand the science for how the universe was created from nothing and the overwhelming evidence for it.

And what are fudge factors ?

Made up explanations for shit we have no clue about.

 

[ding]

And what are fudge factors ?

Made up explanations for shit we have no clue about.

No. Fudge factors to explain the apparent acceleration of the universe's expansion.

It seems you don't know why dark matter and dark energy were theorized in the first place, now do you? And yet it's your excuse for denying the overwhelming data we have on the creation of the universe from nothing.

 

[Blues Man]

No. Fudge factors to explain the apparent acceleration of the universe's expansion.

It seems you don't know why dark matter and dark energy were theorized in the first place, now do you? And yet it's your excuse for denying the overwhelming data we have on the creation of the universe from nothing.

Right stuff we have no clue about.

The 5% of matter and energy we understand cannot produce the acceleration we observe and we don't know what's causing it so we make up stuff called dark matter and dark energy which for all we know may be neither matter nor energy

 

[ding]

Right stuff we have no clue about.

The 5% of matter and energy we understand cannot produce the acceleration we observe and we don't know what's causing it so we make up stuff called dark matter and dark energy which for all we know may be neither matter nor energy

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of the universe, just the present expansion of the universe. So why do you keep bringing it up to dismiss the universe being created from nothing? And continue to ignore the question of how the background radiation was created?

 

[JoeBlow]

No. We aren't. But I can tell the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce life and intelligence shakes the foundations of your non-belief. Because why else would you be denying the science.

It's weird, pretty much nothing makes any sense in this religion forum. Funny and weird at the same time.

 

[JoeBlow]

Not at all. It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. 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. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description 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. 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.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.1207.pdf

Ten things you might not know about antimatter

Antimatter has fueled many a supernatural tale. It's also fascinating all by itself.

www.symmetrymagazine.org

More word soup. I'm full already, lol.

 

[ding]

It's weird, pretty much nothing makes any sense in this religion forum. Funny and weird at the same time.

Haven't you heard? God's ways are unsearchable and inscrutable.