Is God real post your thoughts!

[NorthernHero]

Whether it be that you're a theist or an atheist, what it comes down to is that something DID come from nothing.

 

 

I don't expect you to read this overly huge thread thourght, but I explained (tryed to explain) couple pages backwards that there is another theory than "something DID come from nothing" theory. The theory of no time, the "no beginning, no ending" theory, "It always is" theory.

 

 

 

Yes, and I elaborated and tried to counter that theory, again, a couple pages back.

 

Haha lol. :lol: Why did u say so then? 'My' theory didin't impress you much?

 

 

 

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is. It's not how scientists claim the universe was created.

 

 

 

So far, with what we know, the only thing we can assume is that there was a dimensionless point that housed all matter, all energy, all time, and all space. And that it was always there.

 

 

 

It did not come from nothing. It was forever there.

 

 

 

Well, actually, our universe might be going in a bang/crunch cycle. I'm not entirely sure about the physics behind it, and I might be wrong, but I believe that gravitational forces will eventually overwhelm the outward forces gained from the initial explosion. After this, parts of the universe will actually begin to retract, and collapse once more into a singularity.

 

 

 

Anyway. The only thing difficult to wrap our heads around is this: if all of our universe was a singularity, what laid beyond it?

 

The answer is, of course, nothing. But we cannot even begin to fathom that concept yet.

 

(Which is a reason why religion exists in the first place.)

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: By the way, isn't it impossible for our Universe to have a 'beginning'? The Universe isn't contained within Time, Time is contained within it. This effectively means that the Universe never happened, while simultaneously meaning it is always there.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1951406.stm<- link to new article about the 'endless cycle'

 

I think it's a very good idea. Everything we know goes in cycles. Life and death, night and day. It's like the primary function; on - off - on - off - on ... and so on.

[EdgedThesis]

Existence is an unstable form.

 

Haha, I read that when looking up some stuff on thermodynamics, but that article you provided (thanks) said it again.

 

 

 

Pretty funny, seeing as how the first ethical monotheism (Zoroastrianism) stated that nothingness is how the universe is supposed to be, and that it suddenly separated into a conflict of good and evil (which used to be in complete balance). From this conflict came existence.

 

 

 

Funnier still how modern religions look down on Zoroastrianism, the forerunner to it all...

[Lenticular_J]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

[EdgedThesis]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

[l0rd]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

 

 

 

Lol, yeah we're far from the center.

 

 

 

But its basic physics, something with no resistance that has even the slightest bit of force, will go on forever(or in this case, until matter cannot be spread out more).

[Lenticular_J]

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

 

True, true. I'm just saying that no matter what, we have a limited view here on our little marble on a little plate in a little kitchen in a huge mansion. Like trying to find out what's happening in China when you look out your window.

 

 

 

Lol, yeah we're far from the center.

 

 

 

But its basic physics, something with no resistance that has even the slightest bit of force, will go on forever(or in this case, until matter cannot be spread out more).

 

Hm, but how did masses form, then? Why did they stop - or at least slow down enough that they could form into one conglomerate? Or is that not even relevant? I hate physics.

[l0rd]

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

 

Like trying to find out what's happening in China when you look out your window.

 

 

 

Oh no, theres a FLAW! I must point it out, however irrelevant it is, just because I'm that kind of Tiffer.

 

 

 

Some people can find out what's happening in China when they look out their window, because they live in China.

[Laura]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

 

It's called the Doppler Effect.

 

 

 

Imagine a train moving towards you, the whistle it blows is a high pitch. Now it's moving away from you, and the sound becomes lower along with the frequency.

 

 

 

Now, we can use this to tell if objects that are moving away from us, except it uses light. When objects are moving closer, the light has smaller space between it's troughs, and appears red on a Doppler scale. If it's moving away, the space between troughs and peaks are farther apart and appears blue on the scale.

 

 

 

Another example is used at hospitals, to measure blood flow.

 

 

Notice the frequency of the waves in front of the car, and then the lower frequency behind it.

[Joes_So_Cool]

You're 110% right Laura, we just reviewed this in Science actually.

[EdgedThesis]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

 

It's called the Doppler Effect.

 

 

 

Imagine a train moving towards you, the whistle it blows is a high pitch. Now it's moving away from you, and the sound becomes lower along with the frequency.

 

 

 

Now, we can use this to tell if objects that are moving away from us, except it uses light. When objects are moving closer, the light has smaller space between it's troughs, and appears red on a Doppler scale. If it's moving away, the space between troughs and peaks are farther apart and appears blue on the scale.

 

 

 

Another example is used at hospitals, to measure blood flow.

 

 

 

Yeah, I know that. But that doesn't answer Lenticular's question fully.

 

 

 

Aha! Lenticular, things are moving away from us, right? Well, it's not like the speeds are universally the same for every object we see--otherwise we'd be the center of the Universe.

 

 

 

With all the different speeds, scientists could extrapolate pathways of bodies and figure out a 'center'. Right?

[andylax38]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is. It's not how scientists claim the universe was created.

 

 

 

So far, with what we know, the only thing we can assume is that there was a dimensionless point that housed all matter, all energy, all time, and all space. And that it was always there.

 

 

 

It did not come from nothing. It was forever there.

 

 

 

Well, actually, our universe might be going in a bang/crunch cycle. I'm not entirely sure about the physics behind it, and I might be wrong, but I believe that gravitational forces will eventually overwhelm the outward forces gained from the initial explosion. After this, parts of the universe will actually begin to retract, and collapse once more into a singularity.

 

 

 

Anyway. The only thing difficult to wrap our heads around is this: if all of our universe was a singularity, what laid beyond it?

 

The answer is, of course, nothing. But we cannot even begin to fathom that concept yet.

 

(Which is a reason why religion exists in the first place.)

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: By the way, isn't it impossible for our Universe to have a 'beginning'? The Universe isn't contained within Time, Time is contained within it. This effectively means that the Universe never happened, while simultaneously meaning it is always there.

 

 

 

 

 

For the universe to crunch the density of the universe would have to be greater than the critical density of the universe which would then eventually cause the expansion to stop and it to a form somewhat like it 'began'. The other case is that the density of the universe is less than or equal to the critical density in which the expansion will slow down but continue forever. I feel the second is more like because our best efforts to calculate the density of the universe currently are barely 1/3 of the of the critical density and includes counting dark matter and energy I believe. Either way predicts the end of any life in the universe sometime far in the future so I guess it really doesn't matter too much to us anyway.

[EdgedThesis]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is. It's not how scientists claim the universe was created.

 

 

 

So far, with what we know, the only thing we can assume is that there was a dimensionless point that housed all matter, all energy, all time, and all space. And that it was always there.

 

 

 

It did not come from nothing. It was forever there.

 

 

 

Well, actually, our universe might be going in a bang/crunch cycle. I'm not entirely sure about the physics behind it, and I might be wrong, but I believe that gravitational forces will eventually overwhelm the outward forces gained from the initial explosion. After this, parts of the universe will actually begin to retract, and collapse once more into a singularity.

 

 

 

Anyway. The only thing difficult to wrap our heads around is this: if all of our universe was a singularity, what laid beyond it?

 

The answer is, of course, nothing. But we cannot even begin to fathom that concept yet.

 

(Which is a reason why religion exists in the first place.)

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: By the way, isn't it impossible for our Universe to have a 'beginning'? The Universe isn't contained within Time, Time is contained within it. This effectively means that the Universe never happened, while simultaneously meaning it is always there.

 

 

 

 

 

For the universe to crunch the density of the universe would have to be greater than the critical density of the universe which would then eventually cause the expansion to stop and it to a form somewhat like it 'began'. The other case is that the density of the universe is less than or equal to the critical density in which the expansion will slow down but continue forever. I feel the second is more like because our best efforts to calculate the density of the universe currently are barely 1/3 of the of the critical density and includes counting dark matter and energy I believe. Either way predicts the end of any life in the universe sometime far in the future so I guess it really doesn't matter too much to us anyway.

 

 

 

What exactly is critical density?

[Laura]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is.

 

Hm, how do we know the universe is expanding? Maybe Earth is being sucked into the center.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure theorists took into account that kind of situation. They didn't figure this out by measuring speeds of celestial objects moving far away relative to the Earth, they made it relative to some theoretical center-point.

 

 

 

At least, that's what I think they did. I'm sure that such a simple mistake wouldn't have been made by these guys though.

 

It's called the Doppler Effect.

 

 

 

Imagine a train moving towards you, the whistle it blows is a high pitch. Now it's moving away from you, and the sound becomes lower along with the frequency.

 

 

 

Now, we can use this to tell if objects that are moving away from us, except it uses light. When objects are moving closer, the light has smaller space between it's troughs, and appears red on a Doppler scale. If it's moving away, the space between troughs and peaks are farther apart and appears blue on the scale.

 

 

 

Another example is used at hospitals, to measure blood flow.

 

 

 

Yeah, I know that. But that doesn't answer Lenticular's question fully.

 

 

 

Aha! Lenticular, things are moving away from us, right? Well, it's not like the speeds are universally the same for every object we see--otherwise we'd be the center of the Universe.

 

 

 

With all the different speeds, scientists could extrapolate pathways of bodies and figure out a 'center'. Right?

 

Because we can use this effect on multiple galaxies and see that nearly all of them are moving away from us. That and the fact that the farther away a galaxy is from us, the faster it moves.

[andylax38]

The Big Bang theory explains why the universe is expanding as it is. It's not how scientists claim the universe was created.

 

 

 

So far, with what we know, the only thing we can assume is that there was a dimensionless point that housed all matter, all energy, all time, and all space. And that it was always there.

 

 

 

It did not come from nothing. It was forever there.

 

 

 

Well, actually, our universe might be going in a bang/crunch cycle. I'm not entirely sure about the physics behind it, and I might be wrong, but I believe that gravitational forces will eventually overwhelm the outward forces gained from the initial explosion. After this, parts of the universe will actually begin to retract, and collapse once more into a singularity.

 

 

 

Anyway. The only thing difficult to wrap our heads around is this: if all of our universe was a singularity, what laid beyond it?

 

The answer is, of course, nothing. But we cannot even begin to fathom that concept yet.

 

(Which is a reason why religion exists in the first place.)

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: By the way, isn't it impossible for our Universe to have a 'beginning'? The Universe isn't contained within Time, Time is contained within it. This effectively means that the Universe never happened, while simultaneously meaning it is always there.

 

 

 

 

 

For the universe to crunch the density of the universe would have to be greater than the critical density of the universe which would then eventually cause the expansion to stop and it to a form somewhat like it 'began'. The other case is that the density of the universe is less than or equal to the critical density in which the expansion will slow down but continue forever. I feel the second is more like because our best efforts to calculate the density of the universe currently are barely 1/3 of the of the critical density and includes counting dark matter and energy I believe. Either way predicts the end of any life in the universe sometime far in the future so I guess it really doesn't matter too much to us anyway.

 

 

 

What exactly is critical density?

 

 

 

It is the limit of the density of the universe where it goes from being ever expanding to crunching in on itself. It is measured to be about 2 × 10-26 kg/m3. Basically if there is so much matter that the density of the universe is greater then this number the universe will eventually collapse in on itself but if there is not enough matter and the density of the universe is less then this number the universe will forever expand.

[Shinjula]

Aha! Lenticular, things are moving away from us, right? Well, it's not like the speeds are universally the same for every object we see--otherwise we'd be the center of the Universe.

 

 

 

With all the different speeds, scientists could extrapolate pathways of bodies and figure out a 'center'. Right?

 

Um, this is nearly entirely wrong, everything is moving away from each other at the same speed but this doesnt tell us we are at the centre of the Universe

 

 

 

 

 

 

So no matter where you are in the universe you always see things moving away from you, there no special place you can stand so that you can see. One good visualisation to do is imagine a barely inflated balloon, now draw little pictures of galaxies on its surface. Now blow the balloon up.

 

As you are blowing the balloon up the little pictures of galaxies get further and further away from each other as the space in between expands.

 

The interesting thing about this example is that it shows that the centre of the expansion is not actually on the balloons surface, flatlanders living on the surface of the balloon would have difficulty understanding where the centre of the expansion was, they'd see the pictures of the galaxies moving away from them no matter where on the balloons surface they were, but to them the centre of the expansion occurs in a dimension they are unfamiliar with.

 

 

 

Which brings the idea that the centre of the universe might not actually be located within the Universe.

[EdgedThesis]

Aha! Lenticular, things are moving away from us, right? Well, it's not like the speeds are universally the same for every object we see--otherwise we'd be the center of the Universe.

 

 

 

With all the different speeds, scientists could extrapolate pathways of bodies and figure out a 'center'. Right?

 

Um, this is nearly entirely wrong, everything is moving away from each other at the same speed but this doesnt tell us we are at the centre of the Universe

 

 

 

 

 

 

So no matter where you are in the universe you always see things moving away from you, there no special place you can stand so that you can see. One good visualisation to do is imagine a barely inflated balloon, now draw little pictures of galaxies on its surface. Now blow the balloon up.

 

As you are blowing the balloon up the little pictures of galaxies get further and further away from each other as the space in between expands.

 

The interesting thing about this example is that it shows that the centre of the expansion is not actually on the balloons surface, flatlanders living on the surface of the balloon would have difficulty understanding where the centre of the expansion was, they'd see the pictures of the galaxies moving away from them no matter where on the balloons surface they were, but to them the centre of the expansion occurs in a dimension they are unfamiliar with.

 

 

 

Which brings the idea that the centre of the universe might not actually be located within the Universe.

 

 

 

What about objects within the balloon? It's not like there's just one curved plane where everything exists, right?

 

 

 

Or maybe it is. I'm not sure. But if it isn't, then those objects wouldn't seem to be moving far away from us. Isn't Andromeda coming towards us?

 

 

 

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't read an entire section of you post (the one equating us to flatlanders). Back to the balloon analogy-- the expansion of the Universe could be observed in three dimensions, right? As in, we are not flatlanders, but creatures aware that we are within a certain layer on a certain position in the Universe. Isn't the space within the balloon host to several more objects?

[Zierro]

I never got the idea behind church and worship. If God created our world, wouldn't he want us to enjoy it to the fullest instead of wasting our time extolling him and reciting the same verses over and over again?

[Shinjula]

Happy Christmas/Midwinter Festival to both Athiests and Theists alike

[Racheya]

I have 2 Gods.

 

 

 

One is called Kira.

 

The other is called Google.

 

 

 

:thumbsup:

[dorcus1]

Short answer: tentative no

 

 

 

 

 

I'll just throw in my thoughts really quickly.

 

This is a badly worded question with the "possible answers" creating a false dichotomy. Setting up the question the way the OP did sets you up in one of two different camps, with flamethrowers at the ready :twisted:

 

 

 

My answer is that I don't know. I don't really care either way. I'm agnostic. I have a weak belief that God is not real. If anyone can prove that God is real, I'll accept it. If anyone can prove God isn't real, I'll accept it. And please, don't try to convince me either way. Text and pictures won't convince me. A chorus of angels bursting into existence would probably be enough to convince me. Probably.

 

 

 

I've taken one year of a philosophy class (Theory of Knowledge - It's a required course for my IB Diploma, don't laugh). As a rational person, I hold the belief that science is the way to go. But science only explains the natural world (the world we can see and measure). God is not a part of the natural world. God is something that's beyond the physical. God, by his own nature, can't be measured using our technology. So, for me, God doesn't make a difference in my life. I won't care whether he's real or not until something drastic happens to me.

 

 

 

However, I find it very easy to believe in the possibility that there are aliens such as Q (for all you Trekkies out there). Omnipotent aliens with powers beyond our imagination? That's believable. Omnipotent aliens pretending to be God? That's more believable than the concept of God.

[Necrobean]

I couldn't resist. Not even in the mood to read all of these discussions;

 

 

 

[M_u_s_ii_X]

No.

[Promise]

This thread was created to debate your ideas about whether a god does exist. This isn't restricted to Christianity, which seems like everyone is aiming at. This friendly place to exchange your beliefs and talk about it, but all I've seen are ignorant and disrespectful posts. Just because someone has a different belief, that gives you no right to look down upon them or call it wrong. God is a very vague term and can refer to anything from Buddhist Demigods to Jesus Christ. I won't name any of you, but flaming a person because of their religious beliefs is called discrimination. Something you might want to think about. I find it very sad that this is happening during the holiday season. :shame:

[Cup Lion]

I couldn't resist. Not even in the mood to read all of these discussions;

 

 

 

 

Does conventional logic, in that case, work if you don't have a baseball? What else do you do?

[warri0r45]

This thread was created to debate your ideas about whether a god does exist. This isn't restricted to Christianity, which seems like everyone is aiming at. This friendly place to exchange your beliefs and talk about it, but all I've seen are ignorant and disrespectful posts. Just because someone has a different belief, that gives you no right to look down upon them or call it wrong. God is a very vague term and can refer to anything from Buddhist Demigods to Jesus Christ. I won't name any of you, but flaming a person because of their religious beliefs is called discrimination. Something you might want to think about. I find it very sad that this is happening during the holiday season. :shame:

 

 

 

I'd agree that looking down on people with different beliefs is in bad tatse, but there's nothing bad about denouncing other's beliefs as wrong.

 

 

 

I don't know where you get that people here are being descriminated against because of their beliefs, either. Calling a belief stupid/insane or anything else for that matter isn't an attack on the person, it's an attack on the belief.