Jump to content

The big bang reveals a problem with the materialistic view


Recommended Posts

The existence of a starting point in the universe that all motion in the universe can be traced back to suggests that this motion is being intentionally created as the result of this event.

The classical view is that matter is obeying the laws of physics as it travels through space-time. What is really happening is that a starting point is being created in order to lead to the motion in the present.

 

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The existence of a starting point in the universe that all motion in the universe can be traced back to suggests that this motion is being intentionally created as the result of this event.

No. Causation does not imply intention.
But then, it also does not preclude intention either - the question of whether or not there is a creator deity is outside the domain of the natural sciences. It is seldom a good idea to try and conflate fundamentally different domains of enquiry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Markus Hanke said:

No. Causation does not imply intention.
But then, it also does not preclude intention either - the question of whether or not there is a creator deity is outside the domain of the natural sciences. It is seldom a good idea to try and conflate fundamentally different domains of enquiry.

Yea it does, because all of the motion in the present is caused by an uncaused event in the past. It can't be an accident that the universe has an orderly distinction between the past and future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The existence of a starting point

There is no evidence for a “starting point”. 

12 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Yea it does, because all of the motion in the present is caused by an uncaused event in the past.

1. There is no evidence for such an event

2. Even if that event occurred, there is no reason to think it is uncaused (although it might be)

3. There is no reason to think there is any intention behind this event (whether it is caused or uncaused)

We observe uncaused events and there is no reason to think there is any intention behind them. 

In summary, you have made a baseless assertion with no evidence, theory or logic behind it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Strange said:

There is no evidence for a “starting point”. 

1. There is no evidence for such an event

2. Even if that event occurred, there is no reason to think it is uncaused (although it might be)

3. There is no reason to think there is any intention behind this event (whether it is caused or uncaused)

We observe uncaused events and there is no reason to think there is any intention behind them. 

In summary, you have made a baseless assertion with no evidence, theory or logic behind it. 

The event I am refering to is the big bang.

By uncaused I mean that there is no physical cause that brought matter into the high entropy state. It doesn't rule out any higher power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The event I am refering to is the big bang.

There is no evidence for a big bang "event". The Big Bang model describes the evolution of the universe from a hot, dense state. We don't know how the universe came to be in that state. It may have been created that way (by demons or aliens), it may have been formed by the earlier collapse of the universe, it may have existed in an earlier state for infinite time, it may ...

Quote

By uncaused I mean that there is no physical cause that brought matter into the high entropy state.

 How do you know it is "uncaused"?

And, even if it is, why is that significant? Uncaused events happen all the time.

Quote

 It doesn't rule out any higher power.

It doesn't provide any evidence for one either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said:

Yea it does, because all of the motion in the present is caused by an uncaused event in the past. It can't be an accident that the universe has an orderly distinction between the past and future.

The orderly distinction you reference is just your own perception. It isn't something which governs the Universe. Some people view all of time as happening at once, Eternalism .

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The orderly distinction you reference is just your own perception. It isn't something which governs the Universe. Some people view all of time as happening at once, Eternalism .

There is clearly an orderly distinction between past and future.

The universe is moving from a high entropy to low entropy state.

The big bang event was the highest entropy state of the universe. The motion in the present is happening as a result of the event.

This distinction exists to create the motion in the universe that would allow the observer to exist. This would be how it relates to a higher power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said:

It doesn't rule out any higher power.

 

9 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

There is clearly an orderly distinction between past and future.

The universe is moving from a high entropy to low entropy state.

The big bang event was the highest entropy state of the universe. The motion in the present is happening as a result of the event.

This distinction exists to create the motion in the universe that would allow the observer to exist. This would be how it relates to a higher power.

 

The expansion of the universe follows laws that just happen to apply to it, and despite the many continued attempts to somehow put it down to some mythical higher power is just another "drag it out of my rear end" solution.....It is also an obvious "short circuit" to the discussion and science of how and why the BB started, what was before etc etc So far, all we know with any reasonable degree of certainty, is that the universe evolved/expanded from a hot dense state from around t+10-43 seconds, to the present day where we find that expansion over large scales now accelerating.

Much of course is still an unknown factor but scientists instead of short circuiting things with some magical spaghetti monster rear end idea, are using present day technology to gather further data, conduct research and hopefully in the not too distant future, supply a reasonable answer to some or all of the present unknowns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, beecee said:

 

 

The expansion of the universe follows laws that just happen to apply to it, and despite the many continued attempts to somehow put it down to some mythical higher power is just another "drag it out of my rear end" solution.....It is also an obvious "short circuit" to the discussion and science of how and why the BB started, what was before etc etc So far, all we know with any reasonable degree of certainty, is that the universe evolved/expanded from a hot dense state from around t+10-43 seconds, to the present day where we find that expansion over large scales now accelerating.

Much of course is still an unknown factor but scientists instead of short circuiting things with some magical spaghetti monster rear end idea, are using present day technology to gather further data, conduct research and hopefully in the not too distant future, supply a reasonable answer to some or all of the present unknowns.

There can not be scientific answer to how space and time were created in an instant. 

2 hours ago, Strange said:

Except there is no such relationship (outside your imagination)

Yes there is.

The past only exists to the observer that exists in the present. It is only possible to have the creation of space-time occur in the past because the observer is observing the event in the present.

Edited by Endercreeper01
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

There can not be scientific answer to how space and time were created in an instant. 

If there is ever any evidence that it happened then we can use that evidence to provide a scientific explanation. As it is, there are several scientific hypotheses. 

So you are talking nonsense. Again. 

7 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The past only exists to the observer that exists in the present.

I suspect it exists even without that observer. 

7 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

It is only possible to have the creation of space-time occur in the past because the observer is observing the event in the present.

1. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THE CREATION OF SPACETIME. What is wrong with you? Why do keep repeating this nonsense?

2. That has nothing to do with a “higher power”. It seems you are incapable of a coherent discussion. 

Edited by Strange
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

There can not be scientific answer to how space and time were created in an instant. 

Rubbish! Who knows what a QGT may reveal. We do have plenty of reasonable speculative scenarios though..https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/

 

Quote

Yes there is.

No there isn't, absolutely not.

 

Quote

The past only exists to the observer that exists in the present. It is only possible to have the creation of space-time occur in the past because the observer is observing the event in the present.

More '"pulled out of your rear end" crap. The universe could have evolved without any abiogenesis or evolution of life...so no observer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Endercreeper01 said:

The event I am refering to is the big bang.

And why are you discussing the Big Bang in the Religion forum?

Because of that, and your incoherent answers, I am going to suggest this is closed. If you have anything sensible to say about cosmology (unlikely) you can start a new thread in the appropriate place. 

Edited by Strange
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Endercreeper01 said:

There can not be scientific answer to how space and time were created in an instant. 

Yes there is.

The past only exists to the observer that exists in the present. It is only possible to have the creation of space-time occur in the past because the observer is observing the event in the present.

!

Moderator Note

You know better than to soapbox without the scientific arguments to back up your assertions. Correct the misconceptions, and show some support beyond handwaving next time. 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • 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.