Interesting.......
But I do prefer the other methodolgy of manipulating space/time to achieve FTL travel.
Imagination is more important then knowledge:
Albert Einstein:
Are the laws of physics based on magic?
- Thread starter Mazulu
- Start date
- Status
Interesting.......
But I do prefer the other methodolgy of manipulating space/time to achieve FTL travel.
Imagination is more important then knowledge:
Albert Einstein:
I think human belief systems are static. Belief systems and paradigms have to walk a fine line between flexibility and rigidity. If the whole population believes in static ideas, it won't grow; it will eventually be overcome by a more flexible civilization. But if everybody is too flexible, too dynamic and "changing", then capability breaks down.
Interesting.......
But I do prefer the other methodolgy of manipulating space/time to achieve FTL travel.
Imagination is more important then knowledge:
Albert Einstein:
I don't care what the methodology is, I just want to go for a ride.
You have very credible points. Have you heard of the 'God theory?' The God Theory then includes a very logical and compelling reason for why such a supreme intelligence would create universes in the first place: to transform infinite potential into experience. This has been discussed on here (not the words, ''God Theory'', but the concept of 'infinite potential.' Here's a website that I have a feeling you will like. http://www.thegodtheory.com/questionsanswers.htm
I'd be interested to read your thoughts to it.
I read the article, and I agree with it. But I think it's time to push the issue, to reflect back to the scientific community the unsoundness of their conclusions. Big bangs from nothingness. Magically mysterious laws of physics. Physics constants based on unseen mechanisms. The physics community needs a bigger carpet to cover up all the things that don't make sense.
@Mazulu
In your Post #92 you ask in the form of a statement(!?) : - "I thought the space-time continuum was the universe?"
The "space-time continuum" is like a 4-D map of our "universe" - which is composed of a three-dimensional map of "the observed or known universe" which encompass three spatial coordinates - and the 4th D being the one temporal coordinate. The first three designate the "where", and the fourth designates the "when".
So the "space-time continuum" is NOT the "universe"!
You made 2 statements and asked 1 question in your first line of Post #97 - "I believe that the universes exists. I believe that God exists. What's the problem?
I must separate them to answer completely, okay?
1.) - First, you stated : - "I believe that the universes exists."
The problem with that statement is that currently there is concrete physical evidence of only "One Single Universe" - any and all "Other Universes" can only be referred to as "theoretical" or "imagined" or in some other way "fictional".
2.) - Then you stated : - "I believe that God exists."
I have no problem at all with that statement.
3.) - You then asked : - "What's the problem?"
The problem with that is that I used the word "eternal" - in the statement that you quoted from me : - "Mazulu, seems odd to me that you can accept the existence of a "God", the "Alpha and the Omega", as ETERNAL - but not the universe." Maybe I should have ended the statement : - "...but not the universe as eternal".
Mazulu, my question to you is : - Is it not at all possible for you to accept that the real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical single "universe" can or could or does "exist" without the existence of a "God" ?
The reason I ask is because that I, personally find it impossible to believe that a "God" or anything at all, would or could or can or does "exist" without the existence of at least one real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical "universe".
I have no conception how you can impose "supernatural" presumptions and assumptions into any discussion about the one real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical universe.
In your Post #92 you ask in the form of a statement(!?) : - "I thought the space-time continuum was the universe?"
The "space-time continuum" is like a 4-D map of our "universe" - which is composed of a three-dimensional map of "the observed or known universe" which encompass three spatial coordinates - and the 4th D being the one temporal coordinate. The first three designate the "where", and the fourth designates the "when".
So the "space-time continuum" is NOT the "universe"!
You made 2 statements and asked 1 question in your first line of Post #97 - "I believe that the universes exists. I believe that God exists. What's the problem?
I must separate them to answer completely, okay?
1.) - First, you stated : - "I believe that the universes exists."
The problem with that statement is that currently there is concrete physical evidence of only "One Single Universe" - any and all "Other Universes" can only be referred to as "theoretical" or "imagined" or in some other way "fictional".
2.) - Then you stated : - "I believe that God exists."
I have no problem at all with that statement.
3.) - You then asked : - "What's the problem?"
The problem with that is that I used the word "eternal" - in the statement that you quoted from me : - "Mazulu, seems odd to me that you can accept the existence of a "God", the "Alpha and the Omega", as ETERNAL - but not the universe." Maybe I should have ended the statement : - "...but not the universe as eternal".
Mazulu, my question to you is : - Is it not at all possible for you to accept that the real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical single "universe" can or could or does "exist" without the existence of a "God" ?
The reason I ask is because that I, personally find it impossible to believe that a "God" or anything at all, would or could or can or does "exist" without the existence of at least one real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical "universe".
I have no conception how you can impose "supernatural" presumptions and assumptions into any discussion about the one real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical universe.
Last edited:
Probably because to invoke a "supernatural" omnipotent power as the source of everything, leads to exactly the same questions re cause and effect and what I posted in post 98.......
But I personally love the mystery, and am awed by the many attempts by science to find an answer...finite, infinite, etc, it sometimes seems to be a merry-go-round!
In answer to the "dumbest man on earth", although the Universe is verifiably physical, it is also not yet fully understood.
wegs, really you ask "Why?'
How about this : would you sit down with a new car dealer, in this real world, and discuss buying a new car - with the options of say...a trans dimensional stabilizer operating in 17 quantum fluctuating dimensions that enable you to visit Vahalla in 1,000,000 b.c. and then instantly go to the planet Niburu in the year 3479 after a quick stopover for lunch in the Andromeda Galaxy's "Restaurant at the End of the Universe"...with room for 11 Faeries, 7 Unicorns, your friends Aphrodite, Mary Poppins, Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, Sneezy, Sleepy, Dopey,Doc, Happy, Bashful, Grumpy and Snow White...powered by Dragon Scales...with an invisible convertible top...all for less than $374.29...and actually be able to drive it home that afternoon - in this one known universe?
wegs, that is why!
Regardless of anyones beliefs of Deities or imaginings or fantasies - if they start actually believing those beliefs of Deities or imaginings or fantasies to be physically manifested - there is a problem.
I think while we have questions to be answered, and other questions yet to be asked, some people will invoke a deity of sorts. I see nothing too wrong with that, other then that the same cause and effect questions can be asked of the deity.
When we first hopped down out of the trees, we invoked Gods in all the mysteries that surrounded us in those times...the Sun, the Moon, even Mountains and Rivers...we saw the Earth as the center of the Universe...our arrogance coupled with our lack of scientific knowledge, limited our views of the Universe around us.
Gradually the need for deities has been pushed back a fair bit....The Catholic church now recognise the BB and evolution. They see those things as the work of God.....science still sees questions to be answered.
Let me ask you something dmoe. Why do you presume that a person who believes in God can't also seek the same answers from a practical, scientific standpoint...as you?
There is this notion than some atheists have of believers that in absence of scientific answers, we invoke "a god" by default.
We still believe in the logic and necessity of science.
So, why do you presume such notions, dmoe?
There is this notion than some atheists have of believers that in absence of scientific answers, we invoke "a god" by default.
We still believe in the logic and necessity of science.
So, why do you presume such notions, dmoe?
Probably because to invoke a "supernatural" omnipotent power as the source of everything, leads to exactly the same questions re cause and effect and what I posted in post 98.......
But I personally love the mystery, and am awed by the many attempts by science to find an answer...finite, infinite, etc, it sometimes seems to be a merry-go-round!
In answer to the "dumbest man on earth", although the Universe is verifiably physical, it is also not yet fully understood.
paddoboy, no, it has nothing to do with your Post #98.
I,dmoe, did previously realize that the known observable universe is "... not yet fully understood", and in noway did I ever "question" if, nor state that it was!
So, paddoboy, please excuse me for not thanking you for your "answer".
I, dmoe, do however, also fully understand that by borrowing "Dr. Who's sonic screwdriver and driving Marty McFly's or Doc's Flux capacitor equipped DeLorean DMC-12 across time to investigate quantum fluctuated universes" will never get me or anyone else to any fuller understanding of the single observable known universe!
Amen!
The problem with defining EVERYTHING as being included in one universe is that it biases the conversation. What if I want to talk about hypothetical hyper-spaces, or a spirit world, or other space-times that have not been discovered yet? I can't because the word UNIVERSE only means the billions of galaxies out there, and that's it.
wegs, I never stated, nor do I presume or assume that a "person who believes in God can't also seek the same answers from a practical, scientific standpoint..." as me or anyone else. Many scientists are deeply religious!
wegs, what is important is that the "practical, scientific standpoint", be just that - practical and scientific!
You can't "plant a field of Jacks magical Beanstalk beans" to do a study on the progression of recessive genetic traits in plants with vascular systems!
wegs, would it be of any use from a "practical, scientific standpoint" to call in Inspector Clouseau, Sherlock Holmes or Hercule Poirot to investigate a crime in the real world?
wegs, as far as "...this notion than some atheists have of believers that in absence of scientific answers, we invoke "a god" by default".
I, dmoe, never stated that - and I assure you wegs, I, dmoe, do not possess, assume or presume such biased and conceited puerile notions!
BTW, wegs, why do you presume Atheism ?
Because there is no evidence for them and they answer no questions.
Mazulu, I'll see your Amen and raise you two more Amens, a Hallelujah and a hearty You go Girl !
In the meantime can you answer my question to you from Post #107 : - Is it not at all possible for you to accept that the real, actual, evidenced, verified, physical single "universe" can or could or does "exist" without the existence of a "God" ?
That question does not presume or assume anything - it is just a simple practical question - that to this point in the "Space Time Continuum" remains unanswered by you, Mazulu.
Unless, possibly you answered it while occupying the "Space Time Continuum in one or more of the alternate universes inside one of your Quantum Fluctuations".
It's not so subtly inferred, but ok. lol
BRB...throwing into the dumpster my magical beanstalk beans.
Straw man, and a silly one at that.
You not so subtly imply it. And I don't mind if you are implying it, but to say you're not is silly...
I don't presume to know what all atheists think. I'm addressing you, specifically. I actually have never made a derogatory comment about atheism on this forum, or in my offline life. I don't really get hung up on what other people believe as long as it doesn't hurt others, or infringe on the rights of others.
There will most likely never be evidence of God/supernatural. Not because there may never actually be any, but because man will never be able to obtain it. As a believer, I tend to think that God is Infinite. Or maybe a better way of putting it is...he represents infinity. Man will never be able to physically 'measure' something that is infinite. Guess, maybe. Not scientifically measure it. That's how I sort of see it. Of course, I don't know for certain. But, that is what faith is about, really. A belief or a trust in something of which you don't have evidence.
- Status