God is not in the Big Bang

[michel]

This is sort of... offtopic, but I have a friend who thinks that the Big Bang was G-d exploding and that we´re all G-d Guts.

: )

:biglaugh:

Science could never prove the existence or non-existence of God. It's a fool's errand to even try and you have to ponder the motives and ethics of a scientist ensconced in this endeavor. To that end, the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a much more probative argument to disprove God.

I agree; but I do think you are being hard and unkind on the scientist; he doesn't try to disprove the existance of God; his only aim is to prove what he can, scientifically. God isn't in his equations because there is no real evidence of God. It's not his fault; he is only doing what he knows best.

 

[Fatmop]

I agree; but I do think you are being hard and unkind on the scientist; he doesn't try to disprove the existance of God; his only aim is to prove what he can, scientifically. God isn't in his equations because there is no real evidence of God. It's not his fault; he is only doing what he knows best.

I think Netdoc might have meant that a scientist ensconced in the endeavor of disproving God should have his motives checked out. He probably didn't mean to say that scientists excluding God from their equations are trying to disprove Him... that's what I got out of his post, anyway. Don't mean to speak for you or anything, Netdoc...

 

[Scuba Pete]

Thanks FatMop! That is precisely what I meant!

 

[AtheistAJ]

You can't have something just by imagining it either. And if "can't have something from nothing" is true, then what did gods become of?

 

[Scuba Pete]

You can't have something just by imagining it either. And if "can't have something from nothing" is true, then what did gods become of?

I am sure actual thought was put into these statements, but somehow there was a logical disconnect when the pixels hit the screen. Someone call maintenance: we got another disconnect here!

 

[AtheistAJ]

I am sure actual thought was put into these statements, but somehow there was a logical disconnect when the pixels hit the screen. Someone call maintenance: we got another disconnect here!

First sentence was a fact, followed by a contradiction of "creationism" with a question. I hope that helps.

 

[michel]

I am sure actual thought was put into these statements, but somehow there was a logical disconnect when the pixels hit the screen. Someone call maintenance: we got another disconnect here!

Wonderfull.:biglaugh:

 

[blueman]

It's an exciting theory.

But not a fact. Right?

 

[JerryL]

But not a fact. Right?

Do you know the difference?

 

[blueman]

Do you know the difference?

Why don't you explain it for me?

 

[Fatmop]

'Fact' means observation, in this sense. It is a fact that I am wearing khakis.
'Theory' means generally scientifically accepted explanation for how things work in the universe.

 

[JerryL]

'Fact' means observation, in this sense. It is a fact that I am wearing khakis.
'Theory' means generally scientifically accepted explanation for how things work in the universe.

Exactly. Identifying something as "fact" says nothing about it being true or false; though identifying something as a "scientific theory" means that it's been reviewd and tested and attempted to be falsified, and has been found true.

Facts will never be laws will never be theorms. They are just different critters.

 

[mr.guy]

You can't have something just by imagining it either.

Not true. I can have fantasy .

 

[AtheistAJ]

Not true. I can have fantasy .

Fantasy, but religious people do not accept their gods and heavens as a fantasy. You imagine a castle, and just because someone imagined it is not physical, and if it is not interactive to others in this Universe, it isn't real because it is just "real" in one's mind, as you will not accept it otherwise. If you claim it is real only because you believe in it others will say you're crazy.
However "fantasy" is a foundation to a reality, but if you don't create it in real life it is still non-existent. You can't have a house only with foundation.
I'm sorry if these metaphors are hard to understand, but I tried my best to explain it.

 

[Ryan2065]

Really? Is it a mathematical theory or a mathematical proof - or don't you know?

Just to elaborate... I believe math has prove this would be possible... That is the extent of maths play in it... Now it is up to the philosophers and other scientists to prove that it happened in our universe =) As far as math is concerned, its mathmatically possibly so we are done with that, on to the next problem!

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor...]

Without time god cannot exist without time and man the inventor of time has invented god. It is mathematically impossible to go before Planck time 10 -60 currently. Unless you are a physics genius it is impossible to say that god existed before the big bang and therefore ever existed.

Einstein once said "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings." I agree

 

[Ryan2065]

Without time god cannot exist without time and man the inventor of time has invented god.

Man is the inventor of time? So before man, time did not move foward?

Or is it true that man came up with a measurement of time? Something that existed before man, and we just came up wtih a way to measure it...

 

[Fatmop]

Without time god cannot exist without time and man the inventor of time has invented god. It is mathematically impossible to go before Planck time 10 -60 currently. Unless you are a physics genius it is impossible to say that god existed before the big bang and therefore ever existed.

Einstein once said "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings." I agree

"Harmony" seems kind of subjective. I certainly wouldn't call deadly earthquakes, tornadoes, etc. as harmonious, nor would I describe a universe that contains black holes and other freaky 'objects' as harmonious.

So... what kind of physics genius would say that God existed before the Big Bang? Also, how would (s)he say it?

 

[spacemonkey]

"Harmony" seems kind of subjective. I certainly wouldn't call deadly earthquakes, tornadoes, etc. as harmonious, nor would I describe a universe that contains black holes and other freaky 'objects' as harmonious.

Just because something is inconvienent to our lives, or destructive, doesn't mean that is not part of the natural harmony of things.

 

[Fatmop]

And what is this natural harmony? What is 'harmonious' about the universe? How can a universe be 'in harmony' when sound can't even be transmitted through most of it??? Hello?? I don't hear any perfect fifths out there in space!!!