You're trying to assign a value to infinity, which isn't possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly, my point exactly. Lionheart was saying that an infinite number of moments has passed before now, and I think that isn't possible, because you would have to assign a value to this "number".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well then by your definition the number pi doesnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t exist because you can always add one more decimal to it, however it does have its place on the real number line (like all other irrational numbers do).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, by my definition we can never actually show, in actuality, all of the digits in pi. Just like there are an infinite number of points F between points A and B, doesn't mean that there is an actual infinite - it's just a theory, because these points don't take up time/space - if we tried to write them all down, it would be impossible, because there isn't enough time/space to hold it.

 

You're trying to assign a value to infinity, which isn't possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly, my point exactly. Lionheart was saying that an infinite number of moments has passed before now, and I think that isn't possible, because you would have to assign a value to this "number".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

um, you are looking at it backwards. look at it as now is the start, and its a vector going backwards. there is no begining, it goes on infiinitly into the past.

 

You're trying to assign a value to infinity, which isn't possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly, my point exactly. Lionheart was saying that an infinite number of moments has passed before now, and I think that isn't possible, because you would have to assign a value to this "number".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well then by your definition the number pi doesnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t exist because you can always add one more decimal to it, however it does have its place on the real number line (like all other irrational numbers do).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, by my definition we can never actually show, in actuality, all of the digits in pi. Just like there are an infinite number of points F between points A and B, doesn't mean that there is an actual infinite - it's just a theory, because these points don't take up time/space - if we tried to write them all down, it would be impossible, because there isn't enough time/space to hold it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're looking at time the completely wrong way. A: time doesn't need a spatial area to exist, so, no ammount of time can be "too large for space". B: You're trying to quantize time. Time isn't quantized in the sense that, say, apples are quantized. Time is measured by it's passage.

So then explain to me how infinity moments have passed before now, when each moment we experience after now, just adds a moment to the infinity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

um, you are looking at it backwards. look at it as now is the start, and its a vector going backwards. there is no begining, it goes on infiinitly into the past.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there's no beginning then how did we get here? :|

We're here now, and since no one can really tell me how - I have no opinion.

 

 

 

Yes I look upon evolution and the big-bang theory more so than any religious line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@Rhys: That's a pretty neat theory, and the evidence to support it is overwhelming :shock: Time to switch to your religion, cult, thing I think ;)

 

 

 

@Rhys: That's a pretty neat theory, and the evidence to support it is overwhelming :shock: Time to switch to your religion, cult, thing I think ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Damn right. A few more followers and I can officially call it a religion. :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, about the metal at the core: I will live in my fairy tale of magic seeds and giant pieces of wood and you can live in your World of scientific facts and balls of metal.

So then explain to me how infinity moments have passed before now, when each moment we experience after now, just adds a moment to the infinity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

um, you are looking at it backwards. look at it as now is the start, and its a vector going backwards. there is no begining, it goes on infiinitly into the past.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there's no beginning then how did we get here? :|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

for the first part, you are still looking at infinity as a really large number, not what it actually is. infinity+1=infinity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

we have always been here, just like we will always continue to be here (not the human race, but matter itself)

 

 

 

 

@Rhys: That's a pretty neat theory, and the evidence to support it is overwhelming :shock: Time to switch to your religion, cult, thing I think ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Damn right. A few more followers and I can officially call it a religion. :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, about the metal at the core: I will live in my fairy tale of magic seeds and giant pieces of wood and you can live in your World of scientific facts and balls of metal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thought we'd get more humour in this thread, too. Apparently not, though. ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâì.ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâì

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-Mitch-

So then explain to me how infinity moments have passed before now, when each moment we experience after now, just adds a moment to the infinity.

 

 

 

"infinity" moments haven't passed before now. At least not with respect to our universe. Time is a physical property of our universe, bound by the physical laws and constants of our universe. Prior to the existence of our universe there was no time. So no "moments" passed before the big bang. (Note my use of "big bang" is just pretty much shorthand for "creation event").

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since the big bang, a finite amount of time has passed. However should this universe cease to exist, time - as it relates to our universe - will also cease to exist. Relative to any other universes that may exist our "time" is either zero or infinite depending on which way you wish to slice it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there's no beginning then how did we get here? :|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are here, ergo there was a beginning. What that beginning may have been is the interesting part.

If God is the creater of the universe and time itself, he can surely make the earth and its inhabitants in 6 days. Genesis itself cleary states that he made it in 6 DAYS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You absolutely CANNOT be a luke-warm creationist. You must follow God's word to the fullest, and trust in him with all your heart, and lean not on your own understaning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just like to clarify that 8)

 

They say that humans sinned, thereby corrupting themselves. Because we turned away from perfection, we now have imperfections in our morality, our bodies, our minds, and everything else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which brings us to an interesting paradox. Most theists believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing god. A god that planned the universe out in minute detail and who remains aware of all that it contains. Any such being would undoubtedly be fully aware of all the decisions that each of us will make during the course of our lives and the consequences those decisions will have. Leading to a very deterministic point of view.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My problem with this line of thinking is that the notion of an all-knowing deity naturally precludes anything other than a determinist theology. And a determinist theology cannot account for the notions of free will and sin. Or at least under a determinist theology either free will cannot exist or 'sin' is planned and accounted for by god from the outset.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So while I can acknowledge that there may have been a supernatural 'beginning' to the universe as we know it, the idea of an interventionist deity doesn't stand up to any sort of rigorous scrutiny.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My only problem with that line of reasoning is that is assumes fore-knowledge precludes free will. If I know that my friend is going to order grilled chicken instead of a steak, does it change the fact that he still chose the chicken? I can't seem to put words to my view of the situation, and I really don't think I can wrap my mind around the issue. However, I tend to believe that foreknowledge does not preclude choice. Knowing what one will chose does not change the fact that one chooses it and could have chosen something different. Forgive me if I'm not making much sense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this issue, I just tend to fall back on the old catechism, because the whole matter seems beyond my reasoning. God's sovereignty not only coexists with our free will, but it establishes it. Sure, it's a paradox, but I believe in an infinite God who is big enough to encompass paradoxes.

My only problem with that line of reasoning is that is assumes fore-knowledge precludes free will. If I know that my friend is going to order grilled chicken instead of a steak, does it change the fact that he still chose the chicken?

 

 

 

Unless you are sounding out a scenario where you knew before you even met your friend, perhaps even before they were conceived, that they would choose chicken on that occasion, then that would require your friend to have already chosen the chicken. If your friend habitually chooses chicken over steak, you can make a pretty good guess as to what she will eat, but that's not the sort of omniscience that Christians and other theists ascribe to their version of God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't seem to put words to my view of the situation, and I really don't think I can wrap my mind around the issue. However, I tend to believe that foreknowledge does not preclude choice. Knowing what one will chose does not change the fact that one chooses it and could have chosen something different. Forgive me if I'm not making much sense.

 

 

 

You're making perfect sense - in terms of what us humans can concieve of in terms of "knowing" something. If you and I were lunch buddies for forty years and every day I ate chicken, and we went out to lunch and on the way all I could talk about was how much I wanted chicken for lunch, we look at the menu and I say how good the chicken sounds - you can be 99.99% sure that I will order chicken. But all you are basing your knowledge on is my past behaviour and what I've told you. You don't actually have any preordained knowledge of the events that will follow when the waiter approaches our table. That sort of preordained knowledge is what anyone believeing in an "all-powerful, all-knowing" God must accept that that God posesses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this issue, I just tend to fall back on the old catechism, because the whole matter seems beyond my reasoning. God's sovereignty not only coexists with our free will, but it establishes it. Sure, it's a paradox, but I believe in an infinite God who is big enough to encompass paradoxes.

 

 

 

The paradox in itself is not really a problem. You're right in that an all-encompassing deity would be able to handle such paradoxes with ease. The problem arises when one turns their thoughts to the concept of "sin". According to the church's teachings, we "sin" when we act in a way that is contrary to God's wishes of our own free will. If I was created by an all-powerful deity, then they would know my every thought, word and deed in advance. In fact they would have created them along with me. Even though a God might give me "free will" he would know exactly how I would use it in every moment of my existence. So any choices that I made would, in fact, have been made by God. Following from that, any "sin" that I may commit would actually have been "god's will" rendering the very notion of "sin" quite redundant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So I believe that either God is not "all-powerful and all-knowing" or that free will and sin are a logical fiction.

Even though a God might give me "free will" he would know exactly how I would use it in every moment of my existence. So any choices that I made would, in fact, have been made by God. Following from that, any "sin" that I may commit would actually have been "god's will" rendering the very notion of "sin" quite redundant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would say that you having a choice would have been God's will, but the choice itself would not be God's will (assuming you are sinning, for the sake of this argument), even though He knows we will mess up. Maybe it's just something you can or cannot accept, but I believe that God giving us free will is more loving than making us robot followers with no say - because God would rather someone freely reject Him than be forced into "choosing" Him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Btw, I like your thoughts on infinites.

I believe that God created everything, possibly through the big bang. I don't think we evolved from monkeys but that we were always human beings. Just because I don't believe we evolved from monkeys doesn't mean I don't think we won't evolve. Who knows, in millions of years if we make it an evolved civilization of people will be debating if they evolved from the current form of humans.

I would say that you having a choice would have been God's will, but the choice itself would not be God's will (assuming you are sinning, for the sake of this argument), even though He knows we will mess up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He knows we will mess up. Being God he has known we would mess up from the time we were created - even before our grandparent's grandparents were created.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So knowing that we would mess up we were created with that destiny anyway - by God presumably - I don't see how "sin" can be viewed as anything other than preordained destiny if you accept the notion of an all-knowing God.

Dwarfie: I'm not a christian, but, just to play the devil's advocate..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You seem to be arguing sin in a sense of semantics. In my view, if an all-seeing greater being did exist, then he would have created us, along with the "sins" that free will implies, with full knowledge. He did this because the advantages of creating a world outweigh the disadvantages (sin)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If that makes sense to you..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That sort of gets us into a whole other fun existential side of things.. Why were we created?

M-Theory all the way. Hate religion and I dont like the "just because" answer so genises isnt for me. M-theory exsplanes why the Big Bang happend so im happey there. All that I need now is a Theory that started the Multiverse and im happey for life.

You know that wood theory? Was the log floating in outer space, since it couldnt have been on Earth because it "WAS Earth". I think its sensible enough to cross that one out. I think i'll side with the big bang theory just because it sounds smart.

Dwarfie: I'm not a christian, but, just to play the devil's advocate..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kindred spirits then :)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You seem to be arguing sin in a sense of semantics. In my view, if an all-seeing greater being did exist, then he would have created us, along with the "sins" that free will implies, with full knowledge. He did this because the advantages of creating a world outweigh the disadvantages (sin)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's all fine and dandy. I could accept that. However it knocks out the fundamental Christian concept of redemption. If the sins were all part of God's design plan, there would really be no need to atone for them (in God's eyes any way, it's probably pretty important to the people you've sinned against). Most branches of Christianity teach that you can be cast into Hell for sinning - although they mostly have different opinions about just what sins are bad enough to get you there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now an all-powerful God who created us with a foreknowledge of the sins we commit, would also have foreknowledge of the sins we would fail to seek forgiveness for. Thus creating some people which he would know would never attone for their sins, seek forgiveness, accept the lord into their lives or do any of the other things that are our supposed tickets through the pearly gates. So we come back to a determinist viewpoint. Everything has been set in stone by God. Some will be saved, some won't and there is nothing we can do to alter our path. Free will and the JudeoChristian model of God are incompatible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That sort of gets us into a whole other fun existential side of things.. Why were we created?

 

 

 

I'm not inclined to think that there ever was a "why". Just natural forces conspiring to form us in the same way that wind and rain conspire to erode a rock.

 

You seem to be arguing sin in a sense of semantics. In my view, if an all-seeing greater being did exist, then he would have created us, along with the "sins" that free will implies, with full knowledge. He did this because the advantages of creating a world outweigh the disadvantages (sin)..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's all fine and dandy. I could accept that. However it knocks out the fundamental Christian concept of redemption. If the sins were all part of God's design plan, there would really be no need to atone for them (in God's eyes any way, it's probably pretty important to the people you've sinned against). Most branches of Christianity teach that you can be cast into Hell for sinning - although they mostly have different opinions about just what sins are bad enough to get you there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now an all-powerful God who created us with a foreknowledge of the sins we commit, would also have foreknowledge of the sins we would fail to seek forgiveness for. Thus creating some people which he would know would never attone for their sins, seek forgiveness, accept the lord into their lives or do any of the other things that are our supposed tickets through the pearly gates. So we come back to a determinist viewpoint. Everything has been set in stone by God. Some will be saved, some won't and there is nothing we can do to alter our path. Free will and the JudeoChristian model of God are incompatible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What if, though, along with sin, the redemption was also part of his plan? I mean.. If I created a race of fuzzballs, and had complete foreknowledge that they would destroy half their population with a cute fuzzy nuclear warhead, I'd still want a friggen apology.

 

 

 

Damn fuzzballs with their cute fuzzy nuclear fusion.

 

 

 

I guess I do kind of see where you're coming from, though. If god created us, why does he want an apology for something he knew would happen, and created by proxy? The answer - God is a vindictive bastard.

God is a vindictive bastard.

 

 

 

Now that's the sort of God I could actually believe exists :D

 

 

You're trying to assign a value to infinity, which isn't possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exactly, my point exactly. Lionheart was saying that an infinite number of moments has passed before now, and I think that isn't possible, because you would have to assign a value to this "number".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well then by your definition the number pi doesnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t exist because you can always add one more decimal to it, however it does have its place on the real number line (like all other irrational numbers do).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, by my definition we can never actually show, in actuality, all of the digits in pi. Just like there are an infinite number of points F between points A and B, doesn't mean that there is an actual infinite - it's just a theory, because these points don't take up time/space - if we tried to write them all down, it would be impossible, because there isn't enough time/space to hold it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're looking at time the completely wrong way. A: time doesn't need a spatial area to exist, so, no ammount of time can be "too large for space". B: You're trying to quantize time. Time isn't quantized in the sense that, say, apples are quantized. Time is measured by it's passage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ever hear of Einstine's General Theory of Relativity?

 

 

 

Time infact DOES need Space to exist. Time and Space are very closely related. That is why it is called Time-Space is Astro-Physics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And may I point out just one more tiny thing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY ARE WE ARGUING ABOUT INFINITY?!?! TIME IS FINITE. SPCACE IS FINITE. WHEN BIG BANGS AND BIG CRUNCHES HAPPEN TIME AND SPACE WILL CEASE TO EXIST BE RE-BORN.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also... For the person who said Matter will always exist... You're wrong... When all the anti-matter in the Universe meets all the Matter, all that will be of the Universe will be a big void full of energy. This Energy will then compress itself into a singularity which will result in Time-Space being re-created in another Big Bang.

wow this 1s a killer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

maybe its all just a joke played by people 1000 years ago. I always think that maybe people just existed for a while but then that makes no sence when i try to rationalize it. I much like the idea of natural selection and evolution. But if i wanted to get real creative i probably could. I mean ther is realy no scientific proof and there never will be, but on the other hand i dont realy agree wiht one supreme omnipresent being or lifeforce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ouch

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lets just think that were all bacteria on a off peice of chicken in some mega large paralell world(realy we are all parasites, nobody can be truly self sufficient).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

head hurts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

thx

 

 

 

I was reading a small article on dark matter a few weeks ago.. and I agreed with what it had to say, which was basically that dark matter doesn't exist. The only reason scientists theorize darkmatter is because supposedly things don't fit into the equations we have, the author of the article surmised that our equations were simply wrong, and it makes more sense to just rewrite the equations. Make a square hole. Don't pound a square peg into a round one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yep, dark matter surely doesn't exist so what would be causing the anomalies? Jesus playing with the observational equipment? There is a fair bit of evidence for dark matter (otherwise we need to refine existing theories); they have even started to measure properties of it. Check out the link below for some more info about the latest results.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research into dwarf galaxies starts to unlock the deep secrets of dark matter:

 

 

 

ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâ÷ Mysterious substance described for first time

 

 

 

ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâ÷ 1,000-light-year-wide bricks make up universe

 

 

 

Alok Jha, science correspondent

 

 

 

Monday February 6, 2006

 

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1703203,00.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: IÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢m not saying this is conclusive ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâproofÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢, just an article trying to quantify the gravitational anomaly that people call dark matter.

Read my post Pl0X?

 

 

 

"Almost" exactly what I said... Except I used the Galactic Rotational Problem instead of the Dwarf Galaxy Paradox.