So you believe the Universe created itself? Yes or no?
I used the word "created" haphazardly. The universe before the big bang was condensed to a singularity. That singularity may have always existed. When that singularity underwent the big bang, the known universe began.
So, in short, no. "To create" implies intent. The universe didn't require intent to undergo the big bang, it just happened.
I used the word "created" haphazardly. The universe before the big bang was condensed to a singularity. That singularity may have always existed. When that singularity underwent the big bang, the known universe began.
So, in short, no. "To create" implies intent. The universe didn't require intent to undergo the big bang, it just happened.
I'm asking if you believe matter came out of nothing.
The big bang was the origin of time, space, matter - all of the laws of physics. Before that, the entire universe, and everything in it, was condensed to a singularity.
it wasn't a singularity. it was some dense and hot material.
As used by cosmologists, the term Big Bang generally refers to the idea that the universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past, and continues to expand to this day. would you please say me where did so-called "dense and hot material" come from?
my dear friend Big Bang isn't the beginning of time/space. that is only the start of spreading of mass into space.
I'm asking if you believe matter came out of nothing.
Well no, I thought I already made that clear.
SickJoke said:
The universe before the big bang was condensed to a singularity. That singularity may have always existed. When that singularity underwent the big bang, the known universe began.
That singularity contained all of the matter of the known universe, it was incomprehensibly dense. The singularity itself may have always existed before the big bang.
it wasn't a singularity. it was some dense and hot material.
As used by cosmologists, the term Big Bang generally refers to the idea that the universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past, and continues to expand to this day. would you please say me where did so-called "dense and hot material" come from?
Umm, yeah, that material was condensed into a "singularity." It may have always existed.
my dear friend Big Bang isn't the beginning of time/space. that is only the start of spreading of mass into space.
Yes, the big bang is the beginning of time, space, matter, and the laws of physics. Do a quick google search for an explanation of the Big Bang Theory.
That singularity contained all of the matter of the known universe, it was incomprehensibly dense. The singularity itself may have always existed before the big bang.
So matter and therefore the Universe has always existed?
And if it has, where did the matter come from? It had to come from nothing, right? But if it always existed...that makes no sense. How can something just always have existed?
And if it has, where did the matter come from? It had to come from nothing, right? But if it always existed...that makes no sense. How can something just always have existed?
It's fascinating, isn't it? We don't know yet. Humans may never know. There are higher dimensions which we can't even comprehend. Check out this explanation of the 4th dimension, it's really amazing:
DON'T TALK ANYMORE ABOUT QUANTUM SINGULARITIES OR SUBATOMIC PARTICLES OR SLIPSTRING TECHNOLOGIES OR SPACETIME CONTINUUMS OR GASTROATHROSCOPIC SURGURIES OR DUEL ENTENDRES OR...
i wonder how Dawkins know himself advocate of science while he is only a biologist/ethologist and at the best he knows less than 0.00001% of science.
he can say "i'm not sure" or "i don't know" or "i'm an agnostic" as Sagan said:
In reply to a direct question in 1996 about his religious beliefs, "Sagan gave a direct answer: 'I'm agnostic.'"
definition of Agnosticism:
Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of gods, ghosts, or even ultimate reality — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove.
In reply to a direct question in 1996 about his religious beliefs, "Sagan gave a direct answer: 'I'm agnostic.'"
definition of Agnosticism:
Yes, I'm aware of the definition of agnosticism, thank you. We all know that it's impossible to disprove the existence of a god. It's also impossible to disprove the existence of unicorns, but we don't believe in them, simply because THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THEM, AND NO NEED TO BELIEVE IN THEM.
It's fascinating, isn't it? We don't know yet. Humans may never know. There are higher dimensions which we can't even comprehend. Check out this explanation of the 4th dimension, it's really amazing:
The Universe existing forever makes no sense to me at all.
It's beyond the human mind's capabilities. In terms of time, we're only equipped to deal with the span of a lifetime.
The thing is - how can the thought of a god existing forever make any more sense? All that does it add another, MORE COMPLICATED step, requiring much more explanation.
We don't know how many dimensions there are, there could be infinite for all we know.
It's beyond the human mind's capabilities. In terms of time, we're only equipped to deal with the span of a lifetime.
The thing is - how can the thought of a god existing forever make any more sense? All that does it add another, MORE COMPLICATED step, requiring much more explanation.
Yes, our monkey brains didn't evolve to comprehend vast numbers or spans of time.
I remember a show talking about how the Universe will burn out in 10 trillion or 100 trillion (or some other incomprehensible number) of years. All the stars will die and the Universe will be dead. At that time, when the last star dies, we will have to escape to an alternate Universe, if we wish to survive. I'd love to see that day. But I guess we would be so highly evolved by then to not even be recognizable, or what are the chances we wouldn't have already died out. I can't even imagine a million years, much less a billion, much less a trillion...much less 100 trillion.
Why are you insulting Richard Dawkins? He's an absolute genius, and a gift to science and humanity.
sorry, i didn't intend to offend him. There are millions of genius scientist all over the world and none of them knows further than 0.00001% of science coz science has so many fields.
Yes, our monkey brains didn't evolve to comprehend vast numbers or spans of time.
I remember a show talking about how the Universe will burn out in 10 trillion or 100 trillion (or some other incomprehensible number) of years. All the stars will die and the Universe will be dead. At that time, when the last star dies, we will have to escape to an alternate Universe, if we wish to survive. I'd love to see that day. But I guess we would be so highly evolved by then to not even be recognizable, or what are the chances we wouldn't have already died out. I can't even imagine a million years, much less a billion, much less a trillion...much less 100 trillion.
But for that to happen we would need to be some incredibly evolved beings. It's impossible to say if the human race will even survive another 100 years 😮
---
Ehsan said:
sorry, i didn't intend to offend him.
No problem.
Ehsan said:
There are millions of genius scientist all over the world and none of them knows further than 0.00001% of science coz science has so many fields.
That's the beauty of communication. Scientists share their knowledge with each other and the public, so we can educate ourselves and move past our ancient fairy tales of religion.
#541
Report
#542
Report