Getting it wrong
-
Nothing, no time existed before the big bang.
ThomasCarmen wrote:
Nothing, no time existed before the big bang.
You say that with such conviction. Did you read that somewhere? :rolleyes:
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes -
ThomasCarmen wrote:
There were no laws of physics until quite some time after the creation of the universe, so your argument is null and void.
They may not have been articulated, but I'm pretty sure they would have existed... That's like saying (the patch of dirt sticking out of the ocean known as) Australia didn't exist until someone discovered it...
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know." As in I don't know, you don't know and even more, none of the religious nutjobs know. Being certain about your dogma doesn't make it true. The truth is the big bang is an extrapolation and our current best guess, not fact and subject to change as more data is found. So going even farther back, our knowledge (and ability to know) becomes even more murky. By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics, unless you can prove it is. Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
Matt Gerrans
-
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know." As in I don't know, you don't know and even more, none of the religious nutjobs know. Being certain about your dogma doesn't make it true. The truth is the big bang is an extrapolation and our current best guess, not fact and subject to change as more data is found. So going even farther back, our knowledge (and ability to know) becomes even more murky. By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics, unless you can prove it is. Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
Matt Gerrans
Matt Gerrans wrote:
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know."
Exactly. Hence my flippant reply...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics,
The first law of thermodynamics (which I paraphrased to physics) is that matter can neither be destroyed nor created, only transformed from one form to another. (again, paraphrased).
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
ROFL... Nice leap of faith there... (pun intended). Amazing that my flippant remark about creating something from nothing has led you to this conclusion... do tell us the steps you went through to get there, as it might be interesting... ;)
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
Matt Gerrans wrote:
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know."
Exactly. Hence my flippant reply...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics,
The first law of thermodynamics (which I paraphrased to physics) is that matter can neither be destroyed nor created, only transformed from one form to another. (again, paraphrased).
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
ROFL... Nice leap of faith there... (pun intended). Amazing that my flippant remark about creating something from nothing has led you to this conclusion... do tell us the steps you went through to get there, as it might be interesting... ;)
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
Ah, perhaps I was led astray by your "So something came from nothing?" question -- I've often heard this used by Christians to claim that the universe must have been created by the Christian god. Of course, not one of the gods invented by the thousands of other religions. Any rational person realizes it simply leads to an infinite regress, but the faithful will jump to the even more ludicrous idea of an uncreated creator that creates things so he can persecute and torture the vast majority of them for all eternity. Sounds reasonable. Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold; inside our universe, we don't often see things created out of nothing, but we don't know it to be impossible; I thought there were some quantum effects where particles (and their antiparticle counterparts) do spring into existence, but usually quickly collide with their counterpart and disappear.
Matt Gerrans
-
Ah, perhaps I was led astray by your "So something came from nothing?" question -- I've often heard this used by Christians to claim that the universe must have been created by the Christian god. Of course, not one of the gods invented by the thousands of other religions. Any rational person realizes it simply leads to an infinite regress, but the faithful will jump to the even more ludicrous idea of an uncreated creator that creates things so he can persecute and torture the vast majority of them for all eternity. Sounds reasonable. Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold; inside our universe, we don't often see things created out of nothing, but we don't know it to be impossible; I thought there were some quantum effects where particles (and their antiparticle counterparts) do spring into existence, but usually quickly collide with their counterpart and disappear.
Matt Gerrans
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Ah, perhaps I was led astray by your "So something came from nothing?" question
Fair enough... that was my response to the OP saying that there was nothing before the big bang... there must have been *something*... It's a bit like particle physics... what makes up an atom - electrons, neutrons etc... what makes up an electron... quarks. What makes up a quark? Whatever that happens to be... ad infinitum...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
the even more ludicrous idea of an uncreated creator that creates things so he can persecute and torture the vast majority of them for all eternity. Sounds reasonable.
Personally, I feel that if it gives someone comfort, and they aren't hurting anyone else, then what they believe is a matter for them to decide... And quite frankly, regardless of what I may or may not believe about the matter, when I visit a dying person, or perhaps the parents/relatives of a recently deceased person, I will say words that I hope will give them comfort (better place, no more pain etc). Not that that is what we are discussing here, but it is a bit interlinked...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold
That's true also... who's to say that our laws hold true on some distant planet... Would be odd living there with no gravity though!! :laugh:
Matt Gerrans wrote:
I thought there were some quantum effects where particles (and their antiparticle counterparts) do spring into existence, but usually quickly collide with their counterpart and disappear.
Don't know enough about those to comment, other than to say that just because we didn't observe them prior to them "springing into existance", doesn't mean they weren't there... Of course, it doesn't mean they were either... :shrugs:
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know." As in I don't know, you don't know and even more, none of the religious nutjobs know. Being certain about your dogma doesn't make it true. The truth is the big bang is an extrapolation and our current best guess, not fact and subject to change as more data is found. So going even farther back, our knowledge (and ability to know) becomes even more murky. By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics, unless you can prove it is. Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
Matt Gerrans
Matt Gerrans wrote:
written by primitive desert yokels
What's with the contemptuous 'yokel' meme? The originaters of these books were far from yokels. They were intelligent people born into primitive times. Intellectual prisoners of their environment, as are we all. Position: life-long non-believer.
Everybody is elitist to a certain extent; except me - I'm better than that. Micah
-
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Ah, perhaps I was led astray by your "So something came from nothing?" question
Fair enough... that was my response to the OP saying that there was nothing before the big bang... there must have been *something*... It's a bit like particle physics... what makes up an atom - electrons, neutrons etc... what makes up an electron... quarks. What makes up a quark? Whatever that happens to be... ad infinitum...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
the even more ludicrous idea of an uncreated creator that creates things so he can persecute and torture the vast majority of them for all eternity. Sounds reasonable.
Personally, I feel that if it gives someone comfort, and they aren't hurting anyone else, then what they believe is a matter for them to decide... And quite frankly, regardless of what I may or may not believe about the matter, when I visit a dying person, or perhaps the parents/relatives of a recently deceased person, I will say words that I hope will give them comfort (better place, no more pain etc). Not that that is what we are discussing here, but it is a bit interlinked...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold
That's true also... who's to say that our laws hold true on some distant planet... Would be odd living there with no gravity though!! :laugh:
Matt Gerrans wrote:
I thought there were some quantum effects where particles (and their antiparticle counterparts) do spring into existence, but usually quickly collide with their counterpart and disappear.
Don't know enough about those to comment, other than to say that just because we didn't observe them prior to them "springing into existance", doesn't mean they weren't there... Of course, it doesn't mean they were either... :shrugs:
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
_Damian S_ wrote:
and they aren't hurting anyone else,
But unfortunately, they do. It is religion that drives planes into buildings, and science that drives rockets to the stars. Which is better?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
-
Matt Gerrans wrote:
written by primitive desert yokels
What's with the contemptuous 'yokel' meme? The originaters of these books were far from yokels. They were intelligent people born into primitive times. Intellectual prisoners of their environment, as are we all. Position: life-long non-believer.
Everybody is elitist to a certain extent; except me - I'm better than that. Micah
They were bronze age peasants living in a desert without the comfort of proper hygiene or antibiotics which is why jews and muslims don't eat pork.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
-
He got the data wrong? Yeah right, like believing there is a non-existant space pixie that decides our destiny, rather than a set of universal laws that have existed since the beginning of creation 15 billion years ago. What a c0ck!
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
Yeah right, like believing there is a non-existant space pixie that decides our destiny, rather than a set of universal laws that have existed since the beginning of creation 15 billion years ago.
<devils_advocate> When you say "creation", that implies a creator. Who did the creating? </devils_advocate>
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
Yeah right, like believing there is a non-existant space pixie that decides our destiny, rather than a set of universal laws that have existed since the beginning of creation 15 billion years ago.
<devils_advocate> When you say "creation", that implies a creator. Who did the creating? </devils_advocate>
-
The guy makes me laugh! He hid in a motel with his wife, eh? :laugh: If only feeling "terrible" about a mistake could fix everything and put things right! Getting it wrong...[link]
Almost, but not quite, entirely unlike... me...
What a cr@ppy prophet! Has he even read the ******' maual?!? He should have said "God spoke to me at five, on Saturday, saying that, because of his boundless forgiveness, he would not make the sinners suffer for five months." Look, since I'm obviously better at this prophet game than he is, I shall have to take over. Ten minutes before the Rapture (at 16:43 on 19th August), the number seven will pop into the head of every true believer! You heard it here first. Keep watching for updates. Send money.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
_Damian S_ wrote:
and they aren't hurting anyone else,
But unfortunately, they do. It is religion that drives planes into buildings, and science that drives rockets to the stars. Which is better?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
It is religion that drives planes into buildings, and science that drives rockets to the stars.
:thumbsup:
-
Ah, perhaps I was led astray by your "So something came from nothing?" question -- I've often heard this used by Christians to claim that the universe must have been created by the Christian god. Of course, not one of the gods invented by the thousands of other religions. Any rational person realizes it simply leads to an infinite regress, but the faithful will jump to the even more ludicrous idea of an uncreated creator that creates things so he can persecute and torture the vast majority of them for all eternity. Sounds reasonable. Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold; inside our universe, we don't often see things created out of nothing, but we don't know it to be impossible; I thought there were some quantum effects where particles (and their antiparticle counterparts) do spring into existence, but usually quickly collide with their counterpart and disappear.
Matt Gerrans
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Of course, since we weren't around 13.7 billion or so years ago to observe anything, we don't know how far back the laws of physics hold;
We can observe waaay back into the history of the universe through deep field images taken by Hubble and other telescopes, and we've seen nothing yet to show that the laws of physics that we observe then could have been more than a minute amount different from what they are today.
-
They were bronze age peasants living in a desert without the comfort of proper hygiene or antibiotics which is why jews and muslims don't eat pork.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
They were bronze age peasants
Are you implying that the semetic peoples had a society in which there was no-one of sufficient intellect to memorise, and, in later ages, record, Leviticus and the like?
Dalek Dave wrote:
without the comfort of proper hygiene
Well in advance of European Mediaeval hygiene, though.
Dalek Dave wrote:
or antibiotics
Really?
Dalek Dave wrote:
which is why jews and muslims don't eat pork
Or any animal that was (in their opinion) likely to have eaten carrion [excrement, etc.]. Leviticus shows intelligent minds at work, observing that which mitigates disease and codifying it.
Everybody is elitist to a certain extent; except me - I'm better than that. Micah
-
Matt Gerrans wrote:
The correct answer to the question ("what existed before that?") is not "nothing;" it is "we don't know."
Exactly. Hence my flippant reply...
Matt Gerrans wrote:
By the way, the old "creating something out of nothing" canard isn't a law of physics,
The first law of thermodynamics (which I paraphrased to physics) is that matter can neither be destroyed nor created, only transformed from one form to another. (again, paraphrased).
Matt Gerrans wrote:
Moreover, if your answer is the even stupider proposition that some sky god invented by men is the only thing that is allowed to violate that "law" then you need to justify that with something more than self-contradictory nonsense from "holy" books written by primitive desert yokels.
ROFL... Nice leap of faith there... (pun intended). Amazing that my flippant remark about creating something from nothing has led you to this conclusion... do tell us the steps you went through to get there, as it might be interesting... ;)
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
_Damian S_ wrote:
and they aren't hurting anyone else,
But unfortunately, they do. It is religion that drives planes into buildings, and science that drives rockets to the stars. Which is better?
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
_Damian S_ wrote:
and
You know... AND. ;-)
Reminiscing just isn't what it used to be!! Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
They were bronze age peasants
Are you implying that the semetic peoples had a society in which there was no-one of sufficient intellect to memorise, and, in later ages, record, Leviticus and the like?
Dalek Dave wrote:
without the comfort of proper hygiene
Well in advance of European Mediaeval hygiene, though.
Dalek Dave wrote:
or antibiotics
Really?
Dalek Dave wrote:
which is why jews and muslims don't eat pork
Or any animal that was (in their opinion) likely to have eaten carrion [excrement, etc.]. Leviticus shows intelligent minds at work, observing that which mitigates disease and codifying it.
Everybody is elitist to a certain extent; except me - I'm better than that. Micah
Which underlines my point exactly... Leviticus was fine for the era and location, but to implement that doctrine in this world is just perverse and against common sense.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
-
Which underlines my point exactly... Leviticus was fine for the era and location, but to implement that doctrine in this world is just perverse and against common sense.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
And my point was merely that the originators of the books were not 'yokels'; that the contemptuousness was misplaced; that they were intelligent people born into primitive times.
Dalek Dave wrote:
Leviticus was fine for the era and location, but to implement that doctrine in this world is just perverse and against common sense.
I never suggested their implementation. (Although, the habits of many British males suggest that the adoption of the washing rituals would not go amiss. ;) )
Everybody is elitist to a certain extent; except me - I'm better than that. Micah
