In response to Kunark (#5)
I believe even if the big bang happened, there had to be a god there to make it happen...

So, you're saying that you could maybe accept that a big bang is how the universe first appeared when it was created, but it would need somebody to have actually created it? I can buy that. That makes sense.

If something exists, it must have been made by somebody. So, there must be someone greater than all of the universe to put it together: God.

So who made God? Somebody greater than God? Oh, God doesn't need a creator? But didn't we just say that if something exists, it must have been made by something? But this doesn't apply to God?

Okay, so now we're saying that it's possible for there to be an ultimate source of everything that obeys its own rules, for an ultimate source to exist that's so ultimate it doesn't have a creator, it simply always has existed and always will exist.

Okay, if that's true, we just threw out the original point: that the universe needs a creator. If we accept the idea that there is an ultimate source of all things that doesn't have an external creator, then the whole, "Somebody had to make things the way they are!" argument goes right out the window. If it's possible for a force to have always existed without an instigating cause, there's no reason that force cannot be the universe itself, expanding and contracting and expanding and contracting an infinite number of times.

Of course, this doesn't leave us any closer to the "truth" than what you said: there's no proof* either way. Even if we were all to accept as fact that there must be an ultimate creator source of everything which does not require its own creator, that wouldn't begin to settle the question of whether that source is our own universe, or the creator of that universe, or the creator of that creator, or the creator of that creator to the trillionth power.




*Speaking loosely.... there is actually plenty of evidence to suggest that there was a big bang... what there isn't any proof of is whether or not somebody actually had to light the fuse... science has no answer for that because it's not a scientific question. Science describes what happens in the physical universe, not who's pulling the strings outside of it.
In response to Theodis (#19)
Theodis wrote:
Who made god though?

God is a being not a creature.
No, God is the working of a small book called the bible.
In response to Critical (#21)
"God" is an invention of mankind. Our "hows" and "whys" drove the human race nuts until one crackpot piped up and said "Hey, what about an ultimate being?".

Arguing such things is trivial anyways. We'll just be debating it for milennia until one party decides to blow the others away.
In response to Enigmaster2002 (#22)
Enigmaster2002 wrote:
"God" is an invention of mankind. Our "hows" and "whys" drove the human race nuts until one crackpot piped up and said "Hey, what about an ultimate being?".

Arguing such things is trivial anyways. We'll just be debating it for milennia until one party decides to blow the others away.

In turn creating wars, because people believe something and want the other party to believe that to.
In response to Hedgemistress (#20)
Don't worry, it's not like I didn't see that point of view alright (That is my way of thinking. I just think it is more likely we have a creator who made a creator who made a creator etc. than it is that a giant rock just appeared out of nowhere, let alone the top creator.). I believe if there is a god, there had to be a god to make a god, and a god to make that god etc. And impossibilities do exist, because logically, nothing can appear out of nothing (it's impossible!), but obviously, we are all here, and it is an impossibility (In our logic, anyways.) for anything to appear out of nowhere, and yet, if a big bang/god existed, somewhere along the line, following our logic, one had to appear from nothing.

Though the only real evidence they have to support the big bang, is how the matter has been scattered throughout the universe. There is evidence against this however (The current big bang theory, anyways.) because a plaanet (or star, I forget) has been found that is much older than when scientists believed the big bang happened.

However, I don't want to start a religious debate with anyone more, so I'll end on that note. :P
In response to Enigmaster2002 (#22)
You just said it is what is driving humanity to kill each other, and yet you join in with the debate by saying "God" is an invention of mankind. A fact with no real proof.
In response to Garthor (#6)
Well, what is a universe? It is not matter, it is not energy... It is just a ball of "nothing", according to scientists, with some of it filled with matter. I'm not even sure why they say "the universe is expanding", because how can you make "nothing" expand? How can nothing (Or "space" if you want to call it that) exist in the first place?
In response to Enigmaster2002 (#22)
Please refrain from stating opinion as fact.
In response to Hedgemistress (#20)
God vs Big bang: Big bang cannot stand alone. Too simply say that there was a big bang and that started the universe is not enough. In order for our universe to exhist in the first place there must be something outside it. All we can possibly know is the laws that govern things inside our own universe. According to these laws, something cannot be made from nothing. So the matter that was part of the big bang, could not have come from nothing, it had to be introduced by something outside of our universe. This is not to say that there is a god who said hmmmm i think ill put matter in that emptyness over there, or that there was any sort of intelligence behind the introduction of matter to our universe. I mean to say only that there is another plane of exhistance, and on that plane things can be created from nothing, and that things can be tranferred from this plane, to other planes. That said, there may have been a god, or the matter may have been tranferred to our plane by a strong wind in dimension X and then things just fell into place. Either way, big bang does not cut it, there has to be something else.
In response to Kunark (#24)
And impossibilities do exist, because logically, nothing can appear out of nothing (it's impossible!), but obviously, we are all here, and it is an impossibility (In our logic, anyways.) for anything to appear out of nowhere, and yet, if a big bang/god existed, somewhere along the line, following our logic, one had to appear from nothing.

Well who says there had to be a beggining? The universe could have just always been expanding and contracting with no begginging or end.

Though the only real evidence they have to support the big bang, is how the matter has been scattered throughout the universe.

That and the fact that the galaxies are still moving away from each other which wouldn't happen unless they were pushed in that direction since gravity only pulls in one direction.

There is evidence against this however (The current big bang theory, anyways.) because a plaanet (or star, I forget) has been found that is much older than when scientists believed the big bang happened.

So they got the date wrong or their measurements for calculating the stars age are wrong. Still doesn't really do much to disprove the big bang theory.
In response to Abra (#28)
You can't really think that the rules of our universe apply to the rest of the multiverse. And who says our universe is in space? What if our universe is within the atom of a much much bigger universe?
In response to Critical (#23)
you know in a way it's almost like adaptation and animal packs in the wild, one party (pack) develops an idea they find superior and better suited for life then the other parties, so that party tries to kill the other party in order to remove the "sick" members of the pack.

Never thought of it that way :) hehe

I do agree that a lot of ideas are manifested in our minds, and a lot of these questions, like if there is a god we'll spend are whole entire lives not knowing 100% sure if there is or not, and we'll keep trying to prove something. It's a pity really, we all have this desire for such an answer and yet we will never have the pleasure at the end of the road of knowing, unless we find out after death.

I do not doubt however that a lot of answers are manifested for the reason of survival and adaptation. I don't believe that we'd question anything if we were completely happy/satisfied though... So maybe the reason we look for a god is because our lives are not completely satisfying? Almost like an adaptation, we have to find meanings and answers to cope with the hardships. That reminds me, Big Fish was a good movie. I'll probably never watch it again, but was worth seeing atleast once :)
In response to Crispy (#16)
Nooo, crispy, join in the fun!

-falls down and spasms, then foams at the mouth-

%.%;;
In response to Abra (#28)
According to the laws which govern our universe, nothing is created or destroyed, so judging by the laws of our universe alone, it is not only possible that there is no creator but it is in fact necessary. According to the laws which govern our universe, the universe and all the energy within must have always been there. It's only necessary to envision an outside force which is exempt from our laws if you're envisioning a creator to begin with... "If something created the universe, then something must have created the universe."

So where ddi the bundle of matter/energy that became the big bang come from? It was always there. Well, not necessarily right in that exact spot... things can change form, after all, and that's possibly what it's been doing for all of eternity... explode, implode, explode, implode, explode, implode... like a ball that keeps bouncing forever. But you might say, a ball can't bounce forever... no system is perfectly 100% efficient. There's friction. There's gravity. There's outside forces that will slow it down over time.

And that's the key word here: outside. Inside the physical universe, there are no "outside forces" that are outside to the whole universe. Unless we imagine another plane of existence that directly affects this one, the universe is unique in the universe: a perfectly closed system. There's nowhere for wasted energy to go... energy that is "expended" affecting one part of the universe merely goes into another part of the universe. What we call "entropy" applies to this part of the universe or that, but not the whole universe at once... when the universe collapses back in on itself, all that "used" energy becomes potential energy again.

Of course, once you imagine that there is an outside force, that changes everything, but Occam's razor entreats us to not multiply entities beyond the immediate necessity. We can either assume there is one eternal entity, the universe, or we can assume there is one non-eternal entitty, the universe, and one eternal one, the creator. We can observe this entity that is the universe. We cannot observe the entity that is the creator, and the only "proof" that the creator exists hinges on the assumption that it's necessary for the creator to exist.

We know the universe's existence is necessary, and based on observable laws (that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed), it would seem to be eternal. We don't know any such thing about a creator. It's psychologically comforting to believe the less likely possibility, the one that requires an external creator, and not simply from a theological standpoint. Contemplating infinity is a dizzying experience. Imagining our universe to be infinite and infinitely recycled, imagining our environment a pseudo-random permutaiton of the nth iteration of a constant, is enough to induce a bout of temporal agoraphobia.

Imagining our universe has a discernible age, a definite starting point, and a presumptive ending point, imagining that eternity belongs to another, foreign plane of existence, is easier to deal with.

That having been said, God vs. Big Bang was a pretty good movie, although it can be hard to appreciate this unless you can find a copy with the original Japanese dialogue and English subtitles instead of the poorly dubbed version in mass circulation.
In response to Hedgemistress (#33)
u rule hedgemistress, well argued. I was basing my assumptions off of the idea that matter was introduced into our universe durring the big bang, but your idea that the matter already exhisted seems more plausable. This does simplify things a great deal. Without the need to create matter our universe can exhist alone. Not to say with any certainty that it does, but it at least seems possible now.
In response to Abra (#34)
Yes, and anybody who says they know with certainty is certainly a fool... the most I'll say about my model is that it's simplest possibility.

Of course, it does also provide a ready solution to another seemingly thorny problem: the vanishingly small chance of a planet with the right conditions arising, the exponentially smaller chance of live randomly arising from the elements of that planet, and the smaller still chance of it surviving long enough to become intelligent. Pure creationists scoff at the odds and say that we're an impossibility.

Some of them will pull out a calculation of the odds based on a number of assumptions that are all reasonably sound, and the odds are very small indeed. What do I say in response? I say, forget those odds and imagine odds a billion times smaller.

If we suppose the universe is on an infinite cycle of expanding, contracting, and expanding again, then it doesn't matter how unimaginably teeny tiny the odds against intelligent life are... having an infinite number of do-overs still makes the tiniest odds an inevitability. It might have taken more than 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000... 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 cycles of sterile and desolate universes to produce us on this one planet, and it might be a similar number of cycles until another comparable planet arises. What does it matter? Time without anybody to observe it is like idle server time. What happens in between is not measurable in any way and has no discernible effect on anything that might come after. It might as well never have happened.
In response to Kunark (#26)
It is the direction in which the objects are moving around us. They can tell that the other stars are moving in such a way that we and they are moving out from a center point.
In response to Kunark (#26)
Kunark wrote:
Well, what is a universe? It is not matter, it is not energy... It is just a ball of "nothing", according to scientists, with some of it filled with matter. I'm not even sure why they say "the universe is expanding", because how can you make "nothing" expand? How can nothing (Or "space" if you want to call it that) exist in the first place?

Nothing is pretty much the universal constant. Regardless of whether there was a Big Bang -- something I'm inclined to believe, but my preference tends towards a universe which is infinite in all directions such that an infinite number of "Big Bangs" are all happening at once -- there was always space, which is just the absence of matter and energy.

The expansion of the universe, as Scoobert mentioned, isn't space expanding, it's matter moving away from a central point, thereby implying that something happened at that central point.

(Some people think that there wasn't anything except the first dimension -- an inquantifiable scalar quantity. But to say that the Big Bang created the third dimension is pretty inconceivable to me.)
In response to Hedgemistress (#35)
I do hope there is a heaven, but I must say, if we do get thrown into oblivion after death, I am a bit more comforted with the thought than I used to be... It's not like my conciousness will be around to observe an eternety of nothingness :P
In response to Scoobert (#36)
Well, I tried to imply that in "the position of matter"... But that wasn't really my point. To our logic, "nothing" would be impossible to exist.

There is so many questions that will never get answered through science, so I wish people would just leave them be... They will be happier... Though in saying this, I am a bit hypocritical, since I ask the same questions myself... But I also know that likely, that stuff like this just cannot be answered, for our logic probably will not allow it.

If somebody could come up with the actual number, "Infinite", say in their heads, the next thing they would probably see would be a "Alien-dows has performed an illegal operation.", followed by blackness :P

Maybe our universe is simply a quark in a larger universe? We could be part of the structure of a giant, inter-galactic can of SPAM.
Page: 1 2 3