God did not create the universe...

Terry · 03-09-2010 08:50PM

Wibbs wrote: »

That line is so full of holes in another way though. Its like the old saw "if god created everything, what created god?" and so forth. Equally daft. Where and how did gravity itself arise? It's like he said a law(though even there...) but that law arose somehow. If the universe arose because gravity exists, he seems to be suggesting that gravity, or the parameters of the law of gravity existed "before" time. Therefore it had to spontaneously appear, along with every single quanta of information. Why should it exist? Why should that energy expand from a singularity, why should there be a singularity at all?

Those questions I suspect will forever be just out of reach, mostly because as children of the universe and the experience of it we bring too many preconceptions to bear. Even the simple notion of before the universe. There was no before. Time didnt exist yet. Time may not exist in the way we think anyway. In the sense that it is but a part of the universe as we perceive it.

If you could stand out side the universe and see it in all dimensions, it may just look like an impossibly dense singularity, containing all the information states(in time and movement) of every single quanta that exists. To the outside it may not have ever gone bang in the first place. It just appears to us to have and we're just movements on the surface of a infinitely unsteady state singularity. Maybe gravity is the "sound" of those movements?

Ah feckit my head hurts and I had some after work beers so I beg your indulgences :D

Gravity exists. I sit here typing on a keyboard. The fact hat every single thing on my desk is not stuck to the ceiling is a testament to the existence of gravity.

That this planet has not floated off into space is a testament to the gravitational pull of the large piece of mass that is the sun.

The existence of god (or lack thereof) is a testament to human imagination, fear of the unknown and our innate quest to explain that which we do not comprehend.
As we have progressed as a species, we have found ways to understand that which we previously put down to acts of God.

Let's take a simple bible story for example. Jesus walks on water.
Science has shown that the sea of Galilea was prone to freezing over in the time of Jesus. Ice is water in its frozen form. Jesus may have just walked across a frozen portion of the sea. Does that make him the son of God? I think not.

As for the creation of the universe, Hawkings' theories may indeed hold weight (and mass

), but as they are only theories, we cannot be sure.
Unlike either of us, he has devoted his life to studying the creation of the universe, so would know infinitely more than us. That's not to say either of us are clueless on the matter. It's just that he would know quite a lot more than both of us.

I would be more inclined to believe Hawking than the average preacher.
Hawking studies facts. Religious people study parables.

Terry 1: Wibbs 15,000.

Wibbs, you need to drink more and i need to drink less.

Sticky_Fingers · 03-09-2010 08:52PM

Hawking better watch out or Gods wrath will strike him down with a terrible vengean .... oh wait

Swampy · 03-09-2010 08:54PM

God invented the law of gravity. Also chicken wings.

laugh · 03-09-2010 08:54PM

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Hawking better watch out or Gods wrath will strike him down with a terrible vengean .... oh wait

Hawking is all like "come on bitch!"

Sticky_Fingers · 03-09-2010 08:57PM

laugh wrote: »

Hawking is all like "come on bitch!"

lol I just had an image of Hawking and God squaring up for a drag race like in Rebel Without a Cause

Voltex · 03-09-2010 09:06PM

anyone who read a brief history of time will know that at one time Hawking figured that given the utter precise nature of our Universe that allowed us to exist , that something of a higher power must have had a hand....but since the development of M Theory...it was only a matter of time before that given the infinite number of Universes created that one with the ability to form particles, atoms, elements, stars and us!

So Hawking is right...

imme · 03-09-2010 09:09PM

you mean there is a God:eek:

enfant terrible · 03-09-2010 09:21PM

Voltex wrote: »

anyone who read a brief history of time will know that at one time Hawking figured that given the utter precise nature of our Universe that allowed us to exist , that something of a higher power must have had a hand....but since the development of M Theory...it was only a matter of time before that given the infinite number of Universes created that one with the ability to form particles, atoms, elements, stars and us!

So Hawking is right...

String Theory is more a hypothesis than a theory.

Its actually a hypothesis without any evidence, philosophy more than science.

noura · 03-09-2010 09:27PM

I don't know

we must be still waiting till die to know there is a real God

I have just this Question if you just thinking of it

*Do humen create the God if God does'nt create you?

Voltex · 03-09-2010 09:29PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

String Theory is more a hypothesis than a theory.

Its actually a hypothesis without any evidence, philosophy more than science.

im not even going to pretend i know anything useful about M theory or string theory...but what i do know is that m theory is the only set of theorims that has any potential to unify physics and quantum physics...which is basically the holy grail of theoretical physics

Duggy747 · 03-09-2010 09:44PM

Fine I admit it, I created the universe! It was only supposed to be a part-time thing but when there's an intergallactic recession going on I was bored. 1,002,476,230,001 species on the dole is quite a hefty number :pac:

Now I spend my time eating moon cookies and roaming around Boards.

philologos · 03-09-2010 09:46PM

Another one, SRSLY! :pac:

candlelover wrote: »

Damn right! Scientists know better!:)

What about the scientists who are Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and so on?

Should I even bother? :pac:

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Based on verifiable scientific data, Jakkass will arive soon.

Agreed. I'm being disillusioned by the concept admittedly.

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 09:48PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Another one, SRSLY! :pac:

What about the scientists who are Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and so on?

Should I even bother? :pac:

Not unless you want to hear how well they can compartmentalise yet again.

philologos · 03-09-2010 09:53PM

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Not unless you want to hear how well they can compartmentalise yet again.

Fortunately that's also nonsense. For many scientists it is their awe in Creation that leads them to study further about it.

Theists are merely open to the idea that maybe, not everything is material. Indeed, if everything isn't material, and if science is what deals with the material rather than the immaterial. That has intriguing consequences for epistemology doesn't it?

Indeed, an idea that not only has been in mainline religion, but also in metaphysical philosophy. This means that theism, and science can be perfectly compatible, as one is dealing with different content matter than another.

I hope the philosophy hasn't flown by anyones consideration :pac:

Donkey Oaty · 03-09-2010 09:53PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Agreed. I'm being disillusioned by the concept admittedly.

Don't give up! It's a hard thing being outnumbered, but as a non-believer in Ireland I'm used to it.

philologos · 03-09-2010 09:56PM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Don't give up! It's a hard thing being outnumbered, but as a non-believer in Ireland I'm used to it.

It's not by the numbers, it's by wondering if I spend X amount of days contributing on this thread, how much percentile of it will be tangibly thought about? Indeed, how much will be useful to posters, and how much won't be useful? Are some posters just unwilling to consider it to begin with?

The last question is probably the most important!

mfceiling · 03-09-2010 09:57PM

Eh wrong hawkings....it says in the bible that he did create the universe and because the bible is also known as the gospel and gospel is another way of saying absolute truth then we must conclude that god indeed did create the universe.......stop having a go at god hawkings just because he put you in a wheelchair and gave you a funny voice

laugh · 03-09-2010 09:59PM

mfceiling wrote: »

Eh wrong hawkins....it says in the bible that he did create the universe and because the bible is also known as the gospel and gospel is another way of saying absolute truth then we must conclude that god indeed did create the universe.......stop having a go at god hawkins just because he put you in a wheelchair and gave you a funny voice

Richard Dawkins

Steven Hawking

GarethWA · 03-09-2010 10:00PM

mfceiling wrote: »

Eh wrong hawkins....it says in the bible that he did create the universe and because the bible is also known as the gospel and gospel is another way of saying absolute truth then we must conclude that god indeed did create the universe.......stop having a go at god hawkins just because he put you in a wheelchair and gave you a funny voice

So if something is called 'gospel' it is automatically true?
'The gospel according to GarethWA: There is no god!'

Uh oh...paradox!

Myrddin · 03-09-2010 10:02PM

Kasabian wrote: »

I am still waiting for science to disprove God.

Which God?

GarethWA · 03-09-2010 10:03PM

EnterNow wrote: »

Which God?

The Morgan Freeman-y one!

mfceiling · 03-09-2010 10:04PM

GarethWA wrote: »

So if something is called 'gospel' it is automatically true?
'The gospel according to GarethWA: There is no god!'

Uh oh...paradox!

Well that's a given....
God did everything and it only took him 6 days...he chilled and had a beer and a sunday roast on the 7th
You can keep your science with all your laws and theories - gravity,realtivity,evolution - what have you ever done for us!!

GarethWA · 03-09-2010 10:08PM

mfceiling wrote: »

Well that's a given....
God did everything and it only took him 6 days...he chilled and had a beer and a sunday roast on the 7th
You can keep your science with all your laws and theories - gravity,realtivity,evolution - what have you ever done for us!!

Gravity- stops your a** falling into space!
Relativity- eventually time-travel (fingers crossed)
Evolution- do you use your opposable thumbs to type???

Terry · 03-09-2010 10:08PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Fortunately that's also nonsense. For many scientists it is their awe in Creation that leads them to study further about it.

Theists are merely open to the idea that maybe, not everything is material. Indeed, if everything isn't material, and if science is what deals with the material rather than the immaterial. That has intriguing consequences for epistemology doesn't it?

Indeed, an idea that not only has been in mainline religion, but also in metaphysical philosophy. This means that theism, and science can be perfectly compatible, as one is dealing with different content matter than another.

I hope the philosophy hasn't flown by anyones consideration :pac:

Yeah, that's great.
Here's an explanation by the band Rush:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV9yUvNp6z0

Donkey Oaty · 03-09-2010 10:09PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Are some posters just unwilling to consider it to begin with?

Yes. But be fair - I could very well ask you the same question about some other threads.

Terry · 03-09-2010 10:10PM

EnterNow wrote: »

Which God?

An Morrigan. The one true god(des).

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 10:10PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Fortunately that's also nonsense. For many scientists it is their awe in Creation that leads them to study further about it.

Theists are merely open to the idea that maybe, not everything is material. Indeed, if everything isn't material, and if science is what deals with the material rather than the immaterial. That has intriguing consequences for epistemology doesn't it?

Indeed, an idea that not only has been in mainline religion, but also in metaphysical philosophy. This means that theism, and science can be perfectly compatible, as one is dealing with different content matter than another.

I hope the philosophy hasn't flown by anyones consideration :pac:

It's a lovely philosophical sound-bite but unfortunately completely bypasses the point I made. Unless they conduct their science always inserting the proviso that their results are completely unreliable as god may have intervened at some stage then compartmentalising theist scientists are anything other than nonsense.

mfceiling · 03-09-2010 10:11PM

GarethWA wrote: »

Gravity- stops your a** falling into space!
Relativity- eventually time-travel (fingers crossed)
Evolution- do you use your opposable thumbs to type???

Gravity - have you seen the arse on my missus - it's on the floor
Relativity - time travel - meet me here last tuesday to discuss this
Evolution - opposable thumbs to type - not me i'm a one finger guy!!

By the way Gareth i'm firmly tongue in cheek here - science FTW!!:D

philologos · 03-09-2010 10:15PM

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It's a lovely philosophical sound-bite but unfortunately completely bypasses the point I made. Unless they conduct their science always inserting the proviso that their results are completely unreliable as god may have intervened at some stage then compartmentalising theist scientists are anything other than nonsense.

Hardly a "sound-bite" (I don't think three paragraphs could be considered a "sound-bite" :pac:)

There's some serious reasoning there that calls into question your assumptions.

If I agree with you that the world is only material, anything immaterial is beyond consideration. Therefore, God can't and doesn't exist.

However, since I am open to the possibility that there is more apart from this material world. The idea of God doesn't seem all that inconsistent, as this universe could really be a part of a grander picture including the immaterial, and the supernatural.

It is the latter that allows me to wonder, what caused this universe to exist. It is possible that some force external to the universe itself brought it into being.

To recap: If I assume only this material universe exists, logically following from said assumption God can't exist. If I don't assume this, God is very much a possibility.

The question is, why on earth should I assume that what is material is all that exists?

Ickle Magoo · 03-09-2010 10:18PM

I mentally shortened it having heard it so often...

You are still missing the point I made about science which is the point you responded to as being "nonsense" and waxing lyrical about philosophical "stuff"...

God did not create the universe...

Comments