SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Yes Darwin’s book was a real embarrassment.
-
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!
The Big Bang Theory is dead.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Yet more running away from the point that you were 'answering'. Why do you keep doing this? What are you so afraid of?
As far as Darwin goes, he wrote several books, but I guess you mean On the Origin of Species, which probably did embarrass people who loved to cling to their myths and also to some others, e.g. Thomas Henry Huxley said "My reflection, when I first made myself master of the central idea of the ‘Origin,’ was, ‘How extremely stupid not to have thought of that!’".
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
It does not.
Causality is a phenomenon of physics at the macroscopic level IN the universe.
It's not a law, nor does it apply at the quantum level or "outside" the universe (whatever that means)
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
But the universe is macroscopic.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Try reading what was said. If there is any sort of cause for the universe (which seems doubtful on current knowledge) then it can't be inside the universe and there is no reason to think that it's macroscopic.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Sure did. but the entire universe is macroscopic.
I said "physics".
Have you ever heared of quantum physics?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
No. The universe consists of both types of physics.
And the origins of the universe is all about quantum stuff.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
First the universe is macroscopic
And the origin of the universe is not all about quantum stuff.
There is no explanation why there is quantum stuff that obeys quantum mechanics.
And the universe within the smalllest fraction of a second after the supposed Big Bang would be macroscopic.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
The whole thing is but not everything in it.
Yet another unargued assertion.
What sort of explanation are you looking for? Even if your god exists, there is no explanation for why it is as it is....
Both another unargued assertion and totally irrelevant.And yet again: if general relativity is a good description of the universe as a whole (and all the evidence we have to date confirms this), then the space-time is a four-dimensional object, with time being an observer dependant direction through it.
With this picture, the universe as a whole (the space-time manifold) is not subject to time, it does not exist within time, so it didn't start to exist, it 'just is'. You know, like many theists claim for their god....
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Doubling down on already corrected mistakes again, I see.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
What was there before the universe existed?The whole thing is but not everything in it.
Yet another unargued assertion.
What sort of explanation are you looking for? Even if your god exists, there is no explanation for why it is as it is....
And yet again: if general relativity is a good description of the universe as a whole (and all the evidence we have to date confirms this), then the space-time is a four-dimensional object, with time being an observer dependant direction through it.
With this picture, the universe as a whole (the space-time manifold) is not subject to time, it does not exist within time, so it didn't start to exist, it 'just is'. You know, like many theists claim for their god....
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
It would really help if you at least read and tried to pay some attention to what a post says before typing a 'reply'.What makes you think that "before the universe existed" means anything? Time is inseparable from space-time and space-time is a part of the universe. Hence "before the universe existed" is nonsensical. It's like saying "before time existed". It doesn't make sense because the word "before" requires time to have a meaning.
exchemist
Veteran Member
"Before Abraham was, I am."The whole thing is but not everything in it.
Yet another unargued assertion.
What sort of explanation are you looking for? Even if your god exists, there is no explanation for why it is as it is....
And yet again: if general relativity is a good description of the universe as a whole (and all the evidence we have to date confirms this), then the space-time is a four-dimensional object, with time being an observer dependant direction through it.
With this picture, the universe as a whole (the space-time manifold) is not subject to time, it does not exist within time, so it didn't start to exist, it 'just is'. You know, like many theists claim for their god....
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
I am just applying conceptual logic to the current theory of evolution to show it is half baked, by virtue of its starting point at t=0. It should be treated as a useful stepping stone, but not an absolute timeless dogma that needs to be obeyed. Forcing feeding the current model, that starts too late; replicators, is as irrational as the casino approach needed to provide the propping up fudge for this stepping stone.
I have suggested using a water model for evolution. Water was there from the beginning, allowing us to move t=0 back, so it can also interface the physical creation/evolution of the Big Bang. Hydrogen was the original reactive element of the universe, while life uses hydrogen bonding, Hydrogen and oxygen are now the two most common reactive elements in the universe, while hydrogen and water are the two most common molecules in the universe. Chemistry uses the terms oxidation and reduction, referencing all to oxygen and hydrogen. Water would go on to become the matrix for life, while the bandwidth of metabolic energy for life, would be between H2 and H20. Only a few bacteria species can use the full bandwidth, while they all still use water.
The stage is set for the water model, able to begin much earlier than the replicators t=0. Water interfaces the formation and nuclear reactions of stars, so the correct curve between physical and biological evolution can be drawn, for the next step upward.
Where the Bible and other religious works come in, is connected to modern human consciousness where the DNA based brain became more than the sun of its parts, allowing a secondary center to form, within the neural water matrix, with will and choice. This can be made to interface the quantum world; go before the t=0 of the BB. The current BB model is connected to space-time, which can bend and curve via mass; Relativity, and appeared at the current t=0 of physical creation. Separated space and separated time can start much earlier, but appear to still overlap space-time in the present. Both consciousness and the quantum world use the same logic of the latter; Heisenberg Certainty Principle. This also applies to aspects of water; hydrogen, oxygen. and electrons.
In terms of consciousness, people who believe in God, can reach conclusions that do not easily interface with the observational theories of science. Science is based on space-time, while the data processing, connected to religion is not fully connected to space-time. In religion, space and time appear more separated, such that the science rules of connected space-time become violated.
We can plan the future while being in the present, and anticipate places outside the range of our senses; two places in space. Similar affects occur in the quantum world. Religion provides deeper insight into the quantum world and a universe from nothing. From nothing is where space-time breaks down and t=0 no longer applies; alpha and omega. The conceptual model is complete.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
I see no evidence that you are applying any sort of logic.
What do you think t=0 even means in this context? Evolution starts when you have the right conditions, namely replication with inheritance and variation in a limited environment.
It was never indented to cover the appearance of the first replicators. To think that it was or needs to to be concerned with that is illogical and/or ignorant of the theory.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
The same stuff you'll find north of the north pole
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
What on earth are you babbling about.
T = 0 is the start of the universe. Evolution on planet earth started some 9 billion years after that, when first life existed.
If you are going to try and apply "logic", at least learn the basics of the subject you wish to discuss.
I'm skipping the rest of your post since it all just builds upon that initial error.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
It is a cosmic mess out there.
Venus rotating the wrong way.
Uranus rotating on its side.
Galaxy 4266 with its arms leading the galaxy's rotation, not trailing it.
Titan retrograde.
And this is just a small sample of this.
Yeah, God is just so sloppy in His handiwork!