It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion
reply to post by Lynexon
When there is nothing... it creates the necessary potential for "something".
Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
uni = single
verse= spoken sentence
Originally posted by Watts
Interesting, but that introduces a "rule", and for there to be an established rule/law, there has to already be a "something". "Nothing" means absolutely absent of anything, how can an absolute "nothing" be governed by a rule that says "nothing will create something" if there is nothing for the law to founded on? My head just exploded trying to type that.
Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion
reply to post by Lynexon
Much like electric or physical energy... it's about potentials.
Originally posted by Lynexon
Everything is a theory but the big bang theory is getting harder to hold up. I started this as a reply in this thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
However, I found myself not really replying to the person but saying something I wanted to say anyways. I couldn't find anything disputing the theorized age of the Great Sloan Wall Galaxy cluster but I'd be open to a discussion about it. But when the equation used to calculate the theorized age of the universe is similar to the type of equation used to calculate the time for the wall to form, they are going to have a chance to conflict. These ginormous galaxy walls are new discoveries and new discoveries are supposed to conflict with current theories. There is just too much to take into account when trying to explain these things when we only have so little information to go off of.
The big bang theory itself is based on equations and measurements we take through looking at space. We can't test it and I've always had the opinion that saying that a gigantic explosion created all of existence that we can see is not that much different than believing that a higher being created existence. Even the big bang theory doesn't account for what existed before it, because something had to explode and space had to exist for something to explode in. So it can't fully be said to be the beginning of everything. The same can be said about an intelligent designer for the universe because if one existed, it can be left to assume that he came into being some-how, so that's an entire origin story that is never calculated.
One theory I have is that space itself is probably infinite. Even by standard expansion theories, the universe has to be expanding into somewhere.
I just have the belief that we can talk all we want about how everything came into existence but we will never truly know unless we find out more information from either out there in space or from God. Because when you truly think about religion, they are our beginning stories so that leaves room for God to exist having created other life elsewhere.
Anyways i thought this would be a good discussion and I want to hear some opinions.
Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion
Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
uni = single
verse= spoken sentence
You know what... as much time as I have spent immersed in exploring the "oneness" of existence... I haven't put this aspect of the wordplay together. Thank you.
It can also be expressed as the original "equation" or "Theory of Everything" that is so sought after in the scientific approach to knowing.
Namaste.
Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion
Originally posted by Watts
Interesting, but that introduces a "rule", and for there to be an established rule/law, there has to already be a "something". "Nothing" means absolutely absent of anything, how can an absolute "nothing" be governed by a rule that says "nothing will create something" if there is nothing for the law to founded on? My head just exploded trying to type that.
Originally posted by Watts
I don't know whats more exciting... the philosophy going on in this thread or the total lack of bashing from any side.
So are you saying that in a way, "nothing" is a "something"?
Originally posted by creatednotEvolved
If I stand still, I have the potential to move create energy, but I still exist, I am not nothing, I am mass.
If we see clouds, there is a potential for lightning, but clouds exist, they are not nothing, they are vapor, liquid, protons, electrons, etc.
I just don;t see the potential from nothing. Nothing to something is is a pretty big gap to overcome on one thought.
Originally posted by Watts
As clever as man is, I doubt we'll ever have a nailed down, scientific explanation of all that "is". I feel the same way you do about the Big Bang. Something had to initiate this Bang of creation. 0+0≠1, no matter what anyone tries to say. It just doesn't happen.
There had to be a tilting factor to start it all even if its [0.00000000000001+0] Otherwise we'd see random things popping into existence to this day, which we don't.
We're just too small and short lived to ever have all the answers. Its funny how science scoffs at the idea of "faith" but when you get to a certain point, whether in religion or science, you HAVE to use some kind of faith in what you believe.
Scientists have faith in numbers that the Big Bang was the beginning of all that "is" and nothing came before it.
Christians, among other things, believe the same except that God was the initiator so to speak of the Big Bang.
Originally posted by Seektruthalways1
I just dont understand how the Big Bang Theory can be told to people that it is a 'fact'.
It is called a Theory for one.
And to prove it fact, someone would have to duplicate it or have seen it happen. Which is impossible.
How can you now produce nothing to explode into something? Uhhhh I dont see it happening.
Also if anyone asks a Creationist "Well then who made Yahuwah(who many call god)" We say well we dont know for sure, thats why its a belief.
But if we ask a Evolutionist "How did the Big Bang start or what exploded"?
Well they say, "well we dont know that for sure yet" sounds to me they are the same 'belief' in something that made the universe.
And universe, Evolutionists capitlize it to 'Universe' like its their god.
Likewise Christians capitalize "God" instead of 'god'.
uni = single
verse= spoken sentence
Do you realize that we live in a single spoken sentence??? Hmm...... sounds like someone like a Creator "Spoke" us into being.
Originally posted by creatednotEvolved
They are both religious beliefs.
It just amazes me that because "experts" make "scientific" claims about evolution, creationism is thought of a a foolish fairytale, when just as stated above, both doctrines go into the realm of faith at some point and they can both be seen as foolish depending on what platform of opinion you are standing on.
Everyone should just pick their side and wait and see and hope the right belief was chosen. IMHO