Jump to content

We are only an effect of Chemistry, but we were foreseen in it.


Recommended Posts

I agree with you on the time thing. Though I vehemently deny any sort of personal or biblical God, I used to give a slight chance of a nonpersonal Deistic Creator Force existing. Like a Universal Mind, maybe?

 

But as you say, the time deal. Why would it take a Deity over one BILLION years for even microbial life to begin? Why so long for even get first strand of DNA? And, why all the waste? A full 99% of all species that ever lived are now extinct. It just doesn't wash...Any sort of omniscient Deity. Oh, and what of the meteor strike that annihilated the dinos 65 Mya?

 

All deal breakers for a Creator hypothesis, imho.

It took a lot more then one billion years but that's for life on this Earth...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life

 

If the holographic principle is correct then the universe basically exists out of 2 dimensional information, outside time and space.

Time is then not an issue when you discuss the possibility of a deistic creative force.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Depends on how that being experiences time.   1. A creator being doesn't imply anything supernatural. 2. We don't know whether supernatural things exist or not. 3. We don't know what is and

Engage brain before posting, in future (making sure that Critical Thinking Mode is enabled). It will save everyone a lot of time.

Drivel - there is absolutely NO evidence for telepathic communication.... It could be invisible fairies whispering in their ears? Just as plausible. Come on! There have been absolutely ZERO demonstra

Our feelings, conscience, mind, life in general, were written since Big-Bang (since ever) and perhaps before, in the law itself of Chemistry in a standard way, like a program with no doubt about the future or mistake. Shocking when you think seriously about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our feelings, conscience, mind, life in general, were written since Big-Bang (since ever) and perhaps before, in the law itself of Chemistry in a standard way, like a program with no doubt about the future or mistake. Shocking when you think seriously about.

 

 

It's just causation (anything that went before in some way influences now), knowing that doesn't change anything and you can do nothing with that information, what's so shocking?

like a program with no doubt about the future or mistake.

 

 

Just because yesterday becomes today, doesn't mean you can predict tomorrow; there is no program, just the laws of physics (not the same thing).

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking because in fact, it should be nothing, not even the Universe.

 

 

Chasing the rabbit down it's hole doesn't always lead to wonderland ;).

Sometimes you just get stuck, with a dirt in your hare.

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Our feelings, conscience, mind, life in general, were written since Big-Bang (since ever) and perhaps before, in the law itself of Chemistry in a standard way, like a program with no doubt about the future or mistake. Shocking when you think seriously about.

If the wave functions do, in fact, collapse, and there are no hidden variables of any kind, this "program" is very unpredictable and chaotic. Even if the manyworlds interpretation is correct and wave functions do not collapse, the totality may be predictable and without mistake but the individual timeline we are aware of, is still equally unpredictable and chaotic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

From where have appeared all these billions of billions of tones of matter of the Universe? In the big bang all these were compressed as energy, but they were already there. From where have phisically appeared? The answer can only be very absurd, in the case they have appeared alone and in the case they have not appeared alone, and will make a bit of fear...

Link to post
Share on other sites

From where have appeared all these billions of billions of tones of matter of the Universe? In the big bang all these were compressed as energy, but they were already there. From where have phisically appeared? The answer can only be very absurd, in the case they have appeared alone and in the case they have not appeared alone, and will make a bit of fear...

The origin of the matter/energy that consitutes the universe remains unknown. Numerous possibilities have been proposed, with more or less support. Your position on the matter seems erroneous, inasmuch as you seem to favour only a single explanation. What is your justification for that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Explanation can only be absurd, whatever it be. Things don't appear by themselves.

How do you know, with certainty, that this is the case?

How do you know, with certainty, that it has always been the case?

 

Why do you think that the alternative explantion to your own belief requires that "things appeared by themselves"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe in religions, they are a creation of men, but I can't neither believe that billions of billions of tons of matter have appeared by themselves from the nothing. It's only what I know. It's curious.

 

And a lot people too (and everyday more people as science advances).

Edited by Enric
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe in religions, they are a creation of men, but I can't neither believe that billions of billions of tons of matter have appeared by themselves from the nothing. It's only what I know. It's curious.

 

And a lot people too (and everyday more people as science advances).

Why does it matter if it is "billions of billions of tons"? What is your reference for magnitude?

Edited by Bender
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe in religions, they are a creation of men, but I can't neither believe that billions of billions of tons of matter have appeared by themselves from the nothing. It's only what I know. It's curious.

 

Without making any kind of judgement on your particular worldview's relevance, I can say that you're making a mistake equating your incredulity (the "I can't believe this could be true" parts) with "It's only what I know". You DO NOT "know" these things with any decent amount of certainty. You should hold "what [you] know" to a higher standard than those things that just don't seem right to you. It's possible you haven't really studied them fully, or because they're complex and non-intuitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe in religions, they are a creation of men, but I can't neither believe that billions of billions of tons of matter have appeared by themselves from the nothing. It's only what I know. It's curious.

 

And a lot people too (and everyday more people as science advances).

Many religion don't concern a creationstory.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You DO NOT "know" these things with any decent amount of certainty.

 

Except that things physically popping into existence out of absolute nothingness seems absurd. It's pretty safe to say that something has always existed and simply didn't come from anywhere.

Edited by Thorham
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Except that things physically popping into existence out of absolute nothingness seems absurd. It's pretty safe to say that something has always existed and simply didn't come from anywhere.

You seem to be expressing personal views that exist independently of reality. Just because you believe something to be absurd does not make it so.

 

What evidence do you have that is is "pretty safe to say that something has always existed"?

 

Do you not realise that Big Bang theory does not preclude something always having existed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be expressing personal views that exist independently of reality.

 

I did say 'seems', not that it's simply so.

 

Just because you believe something to be absurd does not make it so.

 

I don't believe it's absurd, I find it logically reasonable that it's absurd. Big difference.

 

What evidence do you have that is is "pretty safe to say that something has always existed"?

 

None, but I don't think it's possible to get any evidence that points either way. I might be wrong of course.

 

Think about it. You have absolutely nothing. Pure void. Absolute nothingness. How can something come from that? It just doesn't seem to make any sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Think about it. You have absolutely nothing. Pure void. Absolute nothingness. How can something come from that? It just doesn't seem to make any sense.

 

When has anyone observed this?

 

We have have no idea this condition ever existed, the only absurdity is to assume it did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be expressing personal views that exist independently of reality. Just because you believe something to be absurd does not make it so.

 

What evidence do you have that is is "pretty safe to say that something has always existed"?

 

Do you not realise that Big Bang theory does not preclude something always having existed?

 

 

Since time came into being along with space it is correct to say something has always existed. To ask what came before is like asking what is south of the south pole. The surface of a globe is endless and finite at the same time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

When has anyone observed this?

Could it even be observed? The problem is knowing that what you're looking at is absolute nothingness. A good example is virtual particles seemingly pooping into existence out of nothing. Is a human made vacuum really absolute nothingness?

 

We have have no idea this condition ever existed, the only absurdity is to assume it did.

 

Blindly assuming anything is absurd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A good example is virtual particles seemingly pooping into existence out of nothing.

 

It also pops out of existence at, virtually, the same time, so, no change here.

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it even be observed? The problem is knowing that what you're looking at is absolute nothingness. A good example is virtual particles seemingly pooping into existence out of nothing. Is a human made vacuum really absolute nothingness?

 

 

Blindly assuming anything is absurd.

So you acknowledge that absolute nothingness has never been observed. Why then do you assume that it ever existed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you acknowledge that absolute nothingness has never been observed. Why then do you assume that it ever existed?

 

What gave you the idea that I assume that? I think that absolute nothingness never existed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing cannot exist is my take on this. The idea of particles popping into existence out of nothing is flawed, the particles pop into existence but not out of nothing. Space is full of energy fields, these energy fields are the source of virtual particles... For there to be nothing there has to be something to compare it to and nothing automatically becomes something..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.