Universe & life coming into existence

[A Thousand Suns]

Well when we think about about how the universe came into existence there are only three things that come to our minds :

a- The universe has always existed.
b.The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause
c.The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.

We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives.

Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe.

Astronomer Hugh Ross in his book, The Creator and the Cosmos, puts the argument this way: "If the universe arose out of a big bang, it must have had a beginning. If it had a beginning, it must have a beginner."

The probability of the universe miraculously coming into existence on its own has probability of almost zero.....see video below

[youtube]5ycnosY3p2s[/youtube]
YouTube - Is there a God Or only chance

Ok lets for the sake of argument agree that the universe came into existence on its own although the chances are very low.Lets see how life on earth came to existence.According to the theory, lifeless atoms formed amino acids by chance, amino acids formed proteins by chance, and finally proteins formed living creatures again by chance. However, the probability of a living creature being formed by coincidence has probability almost zero ,because even the simplest living cell is more sophisticated than any man-made structure in the world.The miraculous ability of blind chance did not stop there, as these cells then just happened to begin to multiply. Then another coincidence then organized these cells and produced the first living thing from them.


So Universe coming into existence and life to exist on Earth has probability something like 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

 

[Gunfingers]

Actually according to the first law of thermodynamics option a is the only one that works. The other two violate the laws of physics.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Lets see how life on earth came to existence according to the theory of evolution.

The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. That's Abiogenesis.

The rest of your post is basically one big argument from incredulity.

1) "I can't imagine how X could possibly be true."
2) "Therefore, not-X."

 

[A Thousand Suns]

According to the first law of thermodynamics 'energy can not be created or destroyed'
this only means that the the universe is not eternal only the energy. To suggest the universe is eternal is to suggest an infinite number of big bangs and collapses

Even the famous scientist like stephen hawking agreed that the universe had a origin
[youtube]nFjwXe-pXvM[/youtube]
YouTube - Origin of the Universe - Stephen Hawking (1 of 5)

 

[A Thousand Suns]

The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. That's Abiogenesis.

The rest of your post is basically one big argument from incredulity.

1) "I can't imagine how X could possibly be true."
2) "Therefore, not-X."

yeah correct---it should be 'theory of origin' instead

 

[Gunfingers]

According to the first law of thermodynamics 'energy can not be created or destroyed'
this only means that the the universe is not eternal only the energy. To suggest the universe is eternal is to suggest an infinite number of big bangs and collapses

Even the famous scientist like stephen hawking agreed that the universe had a origin
[youtube]nFjwXe-pXvM[/youtube]
YouTube - Origin of the Universe - Stephen Hawking (1 of 5)

There are, in the most basic sense, two things in the universe: energy and forces. If energy is eternal and all of the forces are dependent on the existence of some energy then it sounds like everything in the universe is eternal.

And interestingly while Hawking does postulate a "beginning" to the universe, he also postulated an infinite number of bangs and crunches. You should read his books some time, they're very interesting.

 

[Kerr]

According to the first law of thermodynamics 'energy can not be created or destroyed'
this only means that the the universe is not eternal only the energy. To suggest the universe is eternal is to suggest an infinite number of big bangs and collapses

Is energy not a part of the universe?

 

[Kerr]

Well when we think about about how the universe came into existence there are only three things that come to our minds :

a- The universe has always existed.
b.The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause
c.The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.

I can think of more... but they are probably more unlikely then those .

A question, though. What does "the universe has always existed" actually mean? For example, does it imply a static universe or that the universe is dynamic? Would the big bang count as the beginning or would what was before it count as being a part of the universe?

We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives.

Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe.

Astronomer Hugh Ross in his book, The Creator and the Cosmos, puts the argument this way: "If the universe arose out of a big bang, it must have had a beginning. If it had a beginning, it must have a beginner."

The probability of the universe miraculously coming into existence on its own has probability of almost zero.....see video below

[youtube]5ycnosY3p2s[/youtube]
YouTube - Is there a God Or only chance

Ok lets for the sake of argument agree that the universe came into existence on its own although the chances are very low.Lets see how life on earth came to existence.According to the theory, lifeless atoms formed amino acids by chance, amino acids formed proteins by chance, and finally proteins formed living creatures again by chance. However, the probability of a living creature being formed by coincidence has probability almost zero ,because even the simplest living cell is more sophisticated than any man-made structure in the world.The miraculous ability of blind chance did not stop there, as these cells then just happened to begin to multiply. Then another coincidence then organized these cells and produced the first living thing from them.


So Universe coming into existence and life to exist on Earth has probability something like 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

Two points. One, that the universe came into existence on its own does not imply chance. Chance rarely come into account, to my knowledge it is only quantom physics that deals with it.

Second, if there is a very low chance that life arose on the Earth, and we then look at the size of the universe and assume that there are a couple of hundred billion planets (since there are billions of stars in our galaxy and millions, if not billions, of galaxies this is not a too unlikely number) like the Earth, then statistically it is probably life will appear on some of them. Or to put it like this: If we have a 0.5% chance for every plane to crash today and we have a few 1000 planes then there will at least 50 plane crashes today. It is a small chance that it happens when you fly a plane, yes, but some planes will crash and for those people it did not matter how small chance it was. What matters is that it happened.

 

[HonestJoe]

a- The universe has always existed.
b.The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause
c.The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.

We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives.

I don't think we know anything like enough to be able to dismiss any of the options. The whole field is still widely debated and largely speculative.

Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe.

Possibly, though it's worth noting that we can say absolutely nothing definitively about such a cause, even if it were sentient or still exists.

The probability of the universe miraculously coming into existence on its own has probability of almost zero.....see video below

The probability of any given structure of the universe coming into existence also has a probability of almost zero - that's because there is almost an infinite number of ways a universe could exist.

The fact the video automatically jumps to the question of there being a God (with a capital "G") demonstrates a confirmation bias which strongly challenges it's independence. I didn't watch the entire thing but were there any interviews at all with anyone who disagrees with the theme?

However, the probability of a living creature being formed by coincidence has probability almost zero

Almost but not completely, therefore it is possible. Given the time and scope, it is unreasonable to dismiss it as impossible.

So Universe coming into existence and life to exist on Earth has probability something like 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

True, but then so is that chance of any specific God existing and creating it all exactly as it is. There are so many ways we could have reached to point we are now at and, given the limited evidence we have, they're all pretty much equally unlikely. One of them must have happened and we can only speculate as to which one actually did.

Or, you could have blind faith in the existence of a God and pretend that magically makes all the other options impossible. It's really up to you.

 

[Walkntune]

Is energy not a part of the universe?

From what I have been gathering from different scientific views is that energy is just a property of materialism. But how can that be??
I believe material universe is the property of energy.Will have to wait and see where string theory takes us.

 

[Kerr]

From what I have been gathering from different scientific views is that energy is just a property of materialism. But how can that be??
I believe material universe is the property of energy.Will have to wait and see where string theory takes us.

I got the impression energy and matter are two sides of the same coin rather then one being a property of another, but I really do not know.

 

[Gunfingers]

I got the impression energy and matter are two sides of the same coin rather then one being a property of another, but I really do not know.

One property of energy is mass. As energy gains mass it becomes baryonic matter. Certain chemical reactions can cause matter to lose mass, which will become energy. This is expressed in the famous equation e=mc^2

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well when we think about about how the universe came into existence there are only three things that come to our minds :

a- The universe has always existed.
b.The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause
c.The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.

Is time a property of the universe?

If so, can you please explain what "cause" means without using the concept of time in any way?

 

[Twig pentagram]

I think options a and b are more believable than option c.

 

[Kerr]

One property of energy is mass. As energy gains mass it becomes baryonic matter. Certain chemical reactions can cause matter to lose mass, which will become energy. This is expressed in the famous equation e=mc^2

Ok, thanks for the clarification .

 

[A Thousand Suns]

Well the biggest question remains unanswered, Who or What triggered The Big Bang ??

In my mind the only logical explanation that comes is when something is created it must have a creator------and the creator of this universe has given many signs of his existence which is more than overwhelming for me

 

[Gunfingers]

Well the biggest question remains unanswered, Who or What triggered The Big Bang ??

In my mind the only logical explanation that comes is when something is created it must have a creator------and the creator of this universe has given many signs of his existence which is more than overwhelming for me

Interestingly, contained within the singularity that gave rise to the Big Bang were all of the properties and dimensions of the universe. That's why there are objects more than 14 billion lightyears away, despite the universe only being 14 billion lightyears old, because space has expanded.
Another dimension included in that singularity was time. This is why applying a cause to the Big Bang has no meaning, because there was no "before" the big bang. It's a tough concept to wrap one's head around, but it's true.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well the biggest question remains unanswered, Who or What triggered The Big Bang ??

In my mind the only logical explanation that comes is when something is created it must have a creator------and the creator of this universe has given many signs of his existence which is more than overwhelming for me

Why do you need to seize an explanation? If you really don't know what happened (and it sounds like you don't), what's wrong with simply saying "I don't know"?

 

[A Thousand Suns]

Interestingly, contained within the singularity that gave rise to the Big Bang were all of the properties and dimensions of the universe. That's why there are objects more than 14 billion lightyears away, despite the universe only being 14 billion lightyears old, because space has expanded.
Another dimension included in that singularity was time. This is why applying a cause to the Big Bang has no meaning, because there was no "before" the big bang. It's a tough concept to wrap one's head around, but it's true.

I will rephrase the question in better words---What caused the universe to start expanding ---Whats the cause??

I am talking about the instant of the big bang

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I will rephrase the question in better words---What caused the universe to start expanding ---Whats the cause??

I am talking about the instant of the big bang

Pixie magic.

How is this not as good an answer as "God"?