It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: rockintitz
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
If something exists, it had a beginning.
If something exists, there was a time that it did not exist.
Infinity is an impossibility.
You would have to first prove there is a finite number of things. Until that is proven you could never assume there was ever a time prior to a thing.
No.
You need to prove that infinity as a concept is possible.
Which is impossible.
I don't have to prove infinity just because I was proofing the logic of your statement.
What you said requires proof of a finite number of things. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm pointing out that your logic didn't prove your premise.
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: rockintitz
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: rockintitz
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: ancientthunder
a reply to: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
There is no/thing that has no cause, therefore no/thing has no beginning.
When you say "no/thing" do you mean the emptiness, the void - absolute no/thing?
The human mind cannot fathom the concept of nothing. No matter what you tell yourself.
Of course. How can you fathom nothing if there's nothing to fathom?
But was there really 'no/thing' to begin with?
I notice your quote is from Albert Einstein.
He admitted that the biggest blunder of his life was introducing the cosmological constant into the theory of relativity.
He had a hard time believing the universe wasn't static.
Realizing that everything in our universe had a beginning was troubling. To a lot of people.
Yup. I agree with you there my friend. Einstein's theory on relativity is questionable based on new findings and understanding.
Hence, math based theories are always suspect until proven to be true.
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: rockintitz
And I say that's no different than invoking God, or a creator.
We can't know.
There is a difference in whether there is intelligent design or not. Suggesting God means something beyond infinity since God would be the creator of that too...
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: namelesss
originally posted by: edmc^2
...But first let me please state this scientific and incontrovertible fact:
What you have just said, is that you know little to nothing about 'science', and that you have some 'belief' that you need to feed/propagate.
Science does not deal in 'facts', it deals in 'tentative theories'.
Note the difference;
"New study of the brain shows that facts and beliefs are processed in exactly the same way."
www.newsweek.com...
Everything that has a beginning has a cause. If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
What say you?
First, I see no 'facts' offered, simply a syllogism.
Your premise that
"Everything that has a beginning has a cause."
must be accepted, whether true or not. (a problem with 'formal logic')
But it makes sense to me, I'm willing to tentatively equate the two.
Upon that 'valid statement, the next follows/asks;
"If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?"
Which would obviously be 'no', since 'cause' is equated with 'beginning', no one equal no other.
A is a function of B, no B = no A.
Causality is a refuted theory, as is 'beginnings' and ends', ultimately.
As is 'motion'.
As is 'time'... *__-
Nameless one, you're going deep on me here. I'm just stating the simple fact and the obvious.
originally posted by: moebius
originally posted by: edmc^2
There's a question that had been asked around. But somehow, it's baffling why smart thinking people are unable to give a straight answer.
They go round and round explaining how stuffs work and how science work but never giving an answer. Sometimes they say the question doesn't make sense. Some say we don't know the answer. But some protest that it's a leading question. But really, are they being honest as to what they know or is it that they don't want to admit the obvious?
Well let's see where you stand.
But first let me please state this scientific and incontrovertible fact:
Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
So, what's the answer to this simple question:
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
What say you?
You might call me an atheist and evolutionist, and I am not stumped at all. The question might seem very simple to you, but it's not.
Classically the universe looks deterministic. But when you try to look closer there is the uncertainty principle that gets in your way. So from my understanding no one knows.
Now to get back to your mockery of atheism and science. As an atheist I have no problems to admit that there are things that I don't know or understand. But in contrast to believers I don't make up deities to fill these gaps of knowledge.
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
If you look at our universe it is basically within a bubble of laws, so how do we establish a beginning if there is no beginning outside of our universe? Can we suggest that the singularity of our universe is the beginning for us, but it is also part of infinite possibilities. In this case we can have a beginning due to the laws of our universe but the bigger picture has no beginning.
Maybe time, beginning etc is just a function of our little bubble floating inside of infinity...
In a roundabout way whether you're aware of it or not you gave part of the answer - infinity.
Question is - does infinity exist? If so then it must have no beginning.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
If you look at our universe it is basically within a bubble of laws, so how do we establish a beginning if there is no beginning outside of our universe? Can we suggest that the singularity of our universe is the beginning for us, but it is also part of infinite possibilities. In this case we can have a beginning due to the laws of our universe but the bigger picture has no beginning.
Maybe time, beginning etc is just a function of our little bubble floating inside of infinity...
In a roundabout way whether you're aware of it or not you gave part of the answer - infinity.
Question is - does infinity exist? If so then it must have no beginning.
Now you are a assuming infinity is a 'thing' rather than a concept. Infinity is a way to express a concept. Even if the universe is infinite it doesn't mean it wasn't broken off from another infinite universe. What you're doing is discussing infinity in the 3rd dimension.
originally posted by: edmc^2
Question is - does infinity exist? If so then it must have no beginning.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: edmc^2
I don't see whats complicated about this question...
Without a cause there isn't a beginning to anything
what is the issue?
Without a cause there isn't a beginning to anything
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
If you look at our universe it is basically within a bubble of laws, so how do we establish a beginning if there is no beginning outside of our universe? Can we suggest that the singularity of our universe is the beginning for us, but it is also part of infinite possibilities. In this case we can have a beginning due to the laws of our universe but the bigger picture has no beginning.
Maybe time, beginning etc is just a function of our little bubble floating inside of infinity...
In a roundabout way whether you're aware of it or not you gave part of the answer - infinity.
Question is - does infinity exist? If so then it must have no beginning.
Now you are a assuming infinity is a 'thing' rather than a concept. Infinity is a way to express a concept. Even if the universe is infinite it doesn't mean it wasn't broken off from another infinite universe. What you're doing is discussing infinity in the 3rd dimension.
originally posted by: Idreamofme
You sound smart. how do you know hydrogen came first? Science book?
originally posted by: rockintitz
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: rockintitz
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: edmc^2
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
If something exists, it had a beginning.
If something exists, there was a time that it did not exist.
Infinity is an impossibility.
You would have to first prove there is a finite number of things. Until that is proven you could never assume there was ever a time prior to a thing.
No.
You need to prove that infinity as a concept is possible.
Which is impossible.
I don't have to prove infinity just because I was proofing the logic of your statement.
What you said requires proof of a finite number of things. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm pointing out that your logic didn't prove your premise.
You do though. Asking me to prove the universe is finite would require an amount of data that the entire human race hasn't amassed yet.
So I'm asking you to make this easy, and give me any example of where infinity is an observable reality.
If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?
originally posted by: flatbush71
Not really, after seeing what I've seen, heard and learned in 70 years, you reach a point where you realize that there is a limit and many things are better left alone. When you get old and gray it will make much more sense than it does now.
Buck