• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

science vs religion?

Repox

Repox

Truth Seeker
Gerry said:
I read something a while back, I think by Stephen Hawking,
where he said that empty space actually has a lot of “something “ in it.
Click to expand...
I think he meant "virtual particles," they are the soap which physicists claim matter and energy emerged. However, no one can explain where empty space came from. Thus, we have the "only God could have done it" theory.
 
Repox

Repox

Truth Seeker
It may be possible to compute the significance for the design for the universe, which indirectly proves God. In other words, if we have just random outcomes with no particular design, we have an argument for accidental events and no God. However, based on what we know about the universe vis-à-vis physical laws, we have highly significant evidence for a supernatural design.

If you use points of origin for expected outcomes, you can calculate degrees of probability for particular events based on logical outcomes. As for the big bang, it is not subject to laws of probability inasmuch as there is no data or information of preceding conditions or circumstances of the event. We do however have information concerning forms of matter and energy following the big bang, which allows one calculate probable outcomes. If would be based on probable outcomes from points of origin for virtual particles, or for mature formulations of matter and energy interacting on time lines for those interactions.
 
Last edited:
Kuzcotopia

Kuzcotopia

If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
syo said:
are you one of those guys who think they know everything?
Click to expand...

Nope. I usually don't claim knowledge about stuff that happened billions of years ago, or assume knowledge of an entity that exists outside the universe who must have created it.

You seem to know a lot more than me, and you're proclaim that knowledge without offering any reasonable argument as to why you justify your claim.

I am one of those guys who appreciates a good joke thread, so if you want to make another unsubstatiated claim, I'm all ears.
 
Kuzcotopia

Kuzcotopia

If you can read this, you are as lucky as I am.
Repox said:
It may be possible to compute the significance for the design for the universe, which indirectly proves God. In other words, if we have just random outcomes with no particular design, we have an argument for accidental events and no God. However, based on what we know about the universe vis-à-vis physical laws, we have highly significant evidence for a supernatural design.

If you use points of origin for expected outcomes, you can calculate degrees of probability for particular events based on logical outcomes. As for the big bang, it is not subject to laws of probability inasmuch as there is no data or information of preceding conditions or circumstances of the event. We do however have information concerning forms of matter and energy following the big bang which allows one calculate probable outcomes. If would be based on probable outcomes from points of origin for virtual particles, or for mature formulations of matter and energy interacting on time lines for those interactions.
Click to expand...

That's not how probability works. Probabilities are predictions of future incidences based in past incidences.

There is only a single instance of a universe we can measure, so what would your math look like exactly? Can you actually lay out your probabilities. . . I might be able to help you through your errors.
 
ChristineM

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Repox said:
I think he meant "virtual particles," they are the soap which physicists claim matter and energy emerged. However, no one can explain where empty space came from. Thus, we have the "only God could have done it" theory.
Click to expand...

No physicists doesn't claim matter and energy emerged from soap. Some cosmologist believe energy (not matter, which came later) came from a quantum foam.

There are far more cosmologists who think differently.
 
syo

syo

Well-Known Member
Altfish said:
How come god gets a free pass and can be eternal.
Why can't the universe be eternal? Without a god.
Click to expand...
glad you asked.

in my religion there are two types of life. the first is the invisible eternal life (god), and the second type is the forms that we see (mortals). you ask why the universe isn't eternal. well actually the universe is eternal because the core of the universe is eternal and unchangeable (god, or should i say the formless universe). everything else that consists of the universe such as stars for example is of the mortal world. the big bang is just the beginning of us mortals (the second type of life) that the formless universe (god) has triggered.

i hope that made some sense.
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
syo said:
glad you asked.

in my religion there are two types of life. the first is the invisible eternal life (god), and the second type is the forms that we see (mortals). you ask why the universe isn't eternal. well actually the universe is eternal because the core of the universe is eternal and unchangeable (god, or should i say the formless universe). everything else that consists of the universe such as stars for example is of the mortal world. the big bang is just the beginning of us mortals (the second type of life) that the formless universe (god) has triggered.

i hope that made some sense.
Click to expand...
Nope, no sense at all. But you are welcome to believe that.
 
Repox

Repox

Truth Seeker
ChristineM said:
The god magic idea is not a theory in the scientific sense of theory because there are no facts to base it on.
Click to expand...
I am proposing a theory based on statistics for proving the likelihood of intelligent design. It is not religiosity, it is mathematical.
 
syo

syo

Well-Known Member
Kuzcotopia said:
Nope. I usually don't claim knowledge about stuff that happened billions of years ago, or assume knowledge of an entity that exists outside the universe who must have created it.

You seem to know a lot more than me, and you're proclaim that knowledge without offering any reasonable argument as to why you justify your claim.

I am one of those guys who appreciates a good joke thread, so if you want to make another unsubstatiated claim, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...
you sound like one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top