A god that creates energy out o nothing is violating conservation laws & doesnt exist

Discussion in 'Religion' started by garbonzo, Jul 23, 2013.

  1. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    Any god that ever created any amount of energy out of nothing is in violation of conservation laws and does not exist.

    Do you agree / disagree and why?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    Okay. I'll bite.

    Why? Where have you seen energy created or destroyed? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

    I could start a thread that says "Does god defy gravity?" .. Do you agree disagree and why?

    That would make as much sense.

    When formulating thoughts, it is best to be coherent. Maybe say them out loud before committing them to a post.

    Now using the above suggestion regarding coherence, please try to explain how you think the concept of god is violating physics. Please use extra care to use words like "Fire" or "brimstone", as these are good words for making points when we discuss god in a science forum.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I disagree. Although I don't believe in god, energy can come from nothing as long as it is balanced by negative potential energy.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Like a spiritual orb.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    It is created from energy.
     
  8. garbonzo Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    790
    That's not creating energy. Nice try though, troll.
     
  9. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It actually is the source of all the energy we know of.
     
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    The entire universe came "out of nothing" as a temporally and spatially local reversal of entropy, which is fully allowable under the Second Law of Thermodynamics. So long as all the positives and negatives were in perfect balance so the net mass and energy = zero, all that happened was a temporary increase in organization, in other words a temporary reversal of entropy which is being corrected as we speak. So that part of the "god" legend doesn't quite blow itself away.

    The part that doesn't fit into any of this is the "god" him/her/itself. The universe is "everything that exists" and this god must obviously exist if he's capable of the spectacular feats which are traditionally attributed to him, such as creation of the universe. Therefore this god is part of the universe, and therefore he must have created himself.

    This reasoning fails by the Fallacy of Recursion.

    Mrs. Fraggle points out that all religions are created by men, with very few exceptions. The reason is that our egos cannot allow us to answer a question with "I don't know." The fairytales of religion make that unnecessary. As recently as the 19th century, nobody had a clue as to how the universe came to exist, so the "god" fairytale filled that void.

    But today we know a lot more about cosmology, so the fairytale has outlasted its usefulness. We still don't know exactly how the universe came to exist, but we have so many pieces of that puzzle that it's now quite reasonable to assume that the answer is forthcoming, perhaps while you younger members still walk the earth.

    The Ancients didn't know anything about entropy or leptons or relativity or quantum mechanics, so the "god" fairytale was the best they could come up with. But we can do much better than that.

    In America we celebrate the ancient fairytales twice a year: once with a bunny who hides baskets full of chocolate candy all around our houses, and a second time with a jolly fat man who delivers clothes and toys on a sled drawn by flying reindeer.

    The rest of the time, most of us stick with science.
     

Share This Page