Evidence of God in physics , MIND BOGGLING

reply to post by Arbitrageur


The thing with science is, if you go too far in your cold analysis, all meaning in the universe just becomes a jumble of numbers and chemical formulas. Are you trying to kill all meaning in the universe? Does it make you feel better to think that all of this was just random and there is no purpose to existing? Does that warm your heart?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

The thing with science is, if you go too far in your cold analysis, all meaning in the universe just becomes a jumble of numbers and chemical formulas.

That's not the case. When you study enough, you see more of the world's beauty and complexity. Like insects see in UV, you feel like you are wearing magic glasses invisible to everyone else. You see cause and effect and symmetry and depth that aren't accessible to others. The world opens up to you.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


I'm assuming you have not read the entire thread. I don't support the claims in the video. I'm merely pointing out the discrepancies in peoples understanding of the the theory behind the "finely tuned universe" concept. AND that if the theory is valid, it is by no means "proof" of intelligent design!!

Logic dictates that all possible alternative explanations COULD be the answer.

Counter arguments to the "divine creator" conclusion include (as I stated before)

~ One hypothesis is that the Universe may have been designed by extra-universal aliens. Some believe this would solve the problem of how a designer or design team capable of fine-tuning the Universe could come to exist. Cosmologist Alan Guth believes humans will in time be able to generate new universes. By implication previous intelligent entities may have generated our Universe

This one is my personal favorite...

~ "modern cosmology indicates that multiple universes may exist with different constants and laws of physics. So, it is not surprising that we live in the one suited for us. The Universe is not fine-tuned to life; life is fine-tuned to the Universe."

~ The Simulation hypothesis promoted by Nick Bostrom and others suggests that our Universe may be a computer simulation by aliens.

~ The Biocosm hypothesis and the Meduso-anthropic principle both suggest that natural selection has made the universe biophilic. The Universe enables intelligence because intelligent entities later create new biophilic universes. This is different from the suggestion above that aliens from a universe that is less-finely tuned than ours made our Universe finely tuned.

~ The Designer Universe theory of John Gribbin suggests that the Universe could have been made deliberately by a member or members of a technologically advanced civilization in another part of the Multiverse, and that this advanced civilization may have been responsible for causing the Big Bang.

Same source:

The constants mentioned above in my previous post are undeniable fact. Yes, it's true that if certain of these constants were changed, the Universe would be an entirely different place where even the formation of atoms would not be possible.

My point is that even if we work from the premise that the Universe IS finely tuned, it doesn't actually provide irrefutable proof of God.

reply to post by Blarneystoner

My point is that even if we work from the premise that the Universe IS finely tuned, it doesn't actually provide irrefutable proof of God.

So you need to have absolutely irrefutable evidence of a god laid on a table in front of you, and your nose rubbed in it for half an hour, before you begin to reconsider your opinion?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

The thing with science is, if you go too far in your cold analysis, all meaning in the universe just becomes a jumble of numbers and chemical formulas. Are you trying to kill all meaning in the universe? Does it make you feel better to think that all of this was just random and there is no purpose to existing? Does that warm your heart?

Do you know what science is?
Cold analysis or dealing with facts, or EVIDENCE is really all there is, and if one can find god with cold analysis, so be it. I just hope it ain't the dude in the Old Testament.
What other kind of analysis is there but cold? Any other analysis would just be mythology would it not, as it would just be made up fantasy and tales spun from unicorn shavings?

What is meaning in the Universe? Does it need to have meaning for it to exist? Does it need to have meaning for the sake of humans?
NO!
Tell me why I am wrong.
How does one kill something that may not be? (Are you trying to kill all meaning in the universe? Quoted from above)

All of it could very well be random with no purpose, have you got any cold hard evidence to present your side of the truth? Most explosions are completely random, and most Big Bang events are giant explosions. (I believe there are more Universes out there).

I really do hope there is more to life than cold reality, but most people's facts are hearsay from a book written by superstitious people 1000's of years ago.


Do you believe god wrote (or dictated) the bible?

I am reading this right now, I dare you to. :
Why Won't God Heal Amputees?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Man... you need to back the eff off. I've already stated my personal beliefs... But we're not talking about Faith are we?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
Does it make you feel better to think that all of this was just random and there is no purpose to existing? Does that warm your heart?

I certainly prefer no purpose over the whole point being pleasing some supernatural being. Also, it's irrefutable that our existence (the existence of our specific species) is just a random coincidence. Unless of course you think that, for example, a certain rock was meant to hit our planet some 65 million years ago.

reply to post by Toadmund

Do you know what science is?
Cold analysis or dealing with facts, or EVIDENCE is really all there is, and if one can find god with cold analysis, so be it. I just hope it ain't the dude in the Old Testament.

I am very familiar with science. However, you seem to be missing one small fact: if our science isn't good enough to see what's there, does that mean it isn't there? Or does that mean we must be patient until we have the necessary means to ascertain that knowledge?

I don't see anyone waiting patiently for the answer...do you? Does that make them right, or does that make them impatient and thus uninformed?

No, science can't prove anything unless there are facts to back it up.
Science can only tell us what we know, not what we don't.

Things like god, weather the universe has a purpose, science has not ruled that out. You have a point, but there is also no evidence of those things.

So what does one believe? Science or superstition?

But then again, i do believe aliens are out there.
Ghosts may be real.

Writers block now...end

reply to post by Toadmund

Science can only tell us what we know, not what we don't.

Indeed.

Things like god, weather the universe has a purpose, science has not ruled that out. You have a point, but there is also no evidence of those things.

Doesn't mean they don't exist. Just means we're not smart enough to see it yet. All of your arguments beg the assumption that the technology we have today is the best technology there will ever be, or that this is as smart as we'll ever be. Wait until the chickens have hatched, okay? As of this moment, we are quite possibly one of the most idiotic species on this planet. How can we understand what's outside our world, when we keep misunderstanding that which is right next to us?

We are still children. Give it time before suddenly deciding, "Oh, well, we have enough data to conclude blah blah blah." Don't jump the gun.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

Doesn't mean they don't exist. Just means we're not smart enough to see it yet.

Lack of proof is what it is, until then we must have doubt, and people don't have to be smart to know what's real or not.

All of your arguments beg the assumption that the technology we have today is the best technology there will ever be, or that this is as smart as we'll ever be.

Did I make that assumption? If I did, I assume I am mistaken. I don't remember intending to assume anything. That's just an assumption, I assume.

Wait until the chickens have hatched, okay? As of this moment, we are quite possibly one of the most idiotic species on this planet. How can we understand what's outside our world, when we keep misunderstanding that which is right next to us?

Isn't it odd and mysteriously coincidental that we are so idiotic and most of us are religious or claim 100% that there is a god?

We are still children.

Not me, I'm 43 years old

Give it time before suddenly deciding, "Oh, well, we have enough data to conclude blah blah blah." Don't jump the gun.

You're not jumping any guns?

reply to post by Arbitrageur


WELL TOO BAD!

It's so sad how facts such as this about our Lord just bring out such hatred in so many people. Nothing angers so many people so easily, and that's tragic.

Originally posted by jeramie
It's so sad how facts such as this about our Lord just bring out such hatred in so many people. Nothing angers so many people so easily, and that's tragic.

Which facts?

I would assume you are religious as you say 'our Lord'.
I would assume you believe that Jesus is/was god, right?

Do you pray to Jesus?
How is his hit/miss ratio for answering your prayers?

Where is the resurrected Jesus right now?
He seems to be missing.

It's almost like he was just a mortal man, who just died and stayed dead, because if he came back to life, he could help end world hunger and end wars.
But he does not!

That there is no proof that there is a god, he doesn't even answer prayers, people still have bad things happen to them, even if the pray really, really hard!

Where is god, you would think the Master Of The Universe, the Omnipotent One would do SOMETHING to help us out.
He doesn't.

Are those the facts that you speak of?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Toadmund

 

Science can only tell us what we know, not what we don't.

Indeed.

Things like god, weather the universe has a purpose, science has not ruled that out. You have a point, but there is also no evidence of those things.

Doesn't mean they don't exist. Just means we're not smart enough to see it yet

You are repeating what your interlocutor said, however the important point is that it doesn't make much sense talking about things without necessity or indication that they may exist. There can be a frozen pre-historical animal buries under my house. Your neighbor may well be a space alien in disguise. Ahmadinejad can be an agent of Mossad. It's a waste of time to discuss the endless possibilities, which are frankly very improbable.

All of your arguments beg the assumption that the technology we have today is the best technology there will ever be, or that this is as smart as we'll ever be.

I beg to differ, I think you misinterpreted your interlocutor.

reply to post by buddhasystem


My point here is simple: we don't know enough to say "yes" or "no". Yet we THINK we do, and that's where the mistake is. We act as though we know enough now to say almost anything as an absolute, and that's not realistic. Let's give it a few hundred years, shall we? It's not like we've had 10 trillion years devoted to the study of these matters. In fact, a large percentage of the time we've spent on the matter has been wasted on dogma. It's foolish to think we're anywhere close to a definite answer at this point in time.

So let's not act like it, lest we begin to believe our own arrogance. I'd rather admit I have no idea than live with the wrong idea.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

My point here is simple: we don't know enough to say "yes" or "no". Yet we THINK we do, and that's where the mistake is. We act as though we know enough now to say almost anything as an absolute, and that's not realistic.

And my point is even simpler - you are making things up. Nobody is saying "this" or "that" with 100% certainty, at least as far as science is concerned. It's just in cases where there is zero factual base, we tend to avoid wasting time on these things. As I said, there may be an ancient creature buried deep underground in my village. Feel free to discuss the color of its scales, I have more important things to do.

reply to post by buddhasystem

And my point is even simpler - you are making things up.

You certainly have a way of constructively criticizing without the constructive aspect. And in this case, without the justified aspect, either.

Nobody is saying "this" or "that" with 100% certainty, at least as far as science is concerned.

In short, try searching the ATS archives for the number of times opinions were used as an absolute, or as fact. When you have done that, THEN you can disrespect me. Sound fair?

I'm trying to show you how to play nicely. Is it working?

As I said, there may be an ancient creature buried deep underground in my village. Feel free to discuss the color of its scales, I have more important things to do.

Your tone implies vast reluctance to participate in this thread, which leaves me curious as to whether you're here to be rude, or just here to rip down any semblance of intelligent polite discussion - aka being rude. You seem to have a certain grudge against any type of speculation, which leaves this thread mud-bogged since speculation is the only source of momentum available for the topic.

Mind boggling indeed. Mind boggling that 1 YouTube vid is the smoking gun lol