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.

 

Scientific proof of God?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I am sorry but god cannot be proven to exist through "strings". We know the universe is also comprised nothing but energy already and it does not shed any light on a creator.

If anything it would only state what many think already... that there are a set of rules that bind the infinitely small with the astronomically big. Order does not represent creation nor does it represent a creator.

One solid fact.... that most people seem not to grasp or even contemplate is the very notion that god(s) and metaphysical beliefs cannot , by default , be proven or dis-proven under the guise that they are not of a detectable nature.

If god to you is an underlying consistency in the way the universe presents itself to our limiting understanding then you may find YOUR god in YOUR belief. Trying to ever prove the spiritual and metaphysical aspects of that belief is another egg to crack entirely. I am of the opinion that it is also a complete waste of time and energy to try and prove it one way or the other.




posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamwalker74
 


Super-string theory and the quantum connections you talk about in the OP are real, testable things (such as a recent article in which information was sent 10 miles in an instant using quantum tunneling).

One of the problems we encounter today in religion is that many people define God in Western religion themselves, without so much reading the Bible. This leads to people trying to match up their beliefs to the Bible, rather than defining themselves BY the Bible.

Super-string theory is a beautiful work of art, I personally find it limiting (and a little sad) to try and match such a theory to a religious ideal, such as God. God is NOT omniscient and all-powerful based on the bible because He is able to change His mind - an impossible ideal if you know the past, present, and future. The Bible is wrong in many aspects, so taking a known, provable scientific theory and matching it to the Bible, a variably translated subjective book causes an innate problem.

If the theory interests you I'd recommend researching Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddha said, 2500 years ago, "All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else." He basically said hey - superstring theory and quantum mechanics are the truth.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mike6158
reply to post by dreamwalker74
 


I'm not 100% sure of this but I'm pretty sure that string theory has evolved to membrane (or brane) theory.


yes, and this bothers me. after they left their original equations for strings (or the modified "m" theory that sorted out discrepancies) it has gone downhill from there. leaving the realm of verifiable science, and going into la la land. while i think strings could be true,

(maybe if every string had a vibration frequency that corresponded to what type of thing we view it as, say, one vibration frequency is one type of quark, and a different vibration is another quark, their combined frequency's are whatever subatomic particle that formed, in other words, everything we see, and everything that happens is a result of a changed frequency, the universe would be a computer, and the strings are display commands), brane theory seems to be an attempt to avoid declaring a starting point for reality.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
How could "GOD" be anything less than the sum total of everything that exists?

We should stop trying to "pinpoint" God and realize that God simply IS.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by DeReK DaRkLy
 


God can be anything you want him to be .... really. There is no set rules on what a god can be as long as the god worshiped and all that good stuff. YOu can't just tell everyone "just accept god because we should"

What "god "are we accepting? What if the other "god" gets mad? What if "god" is just a concept adapted from our uncanny gravitation towards mystery and wonder?

Just live good . We are advanced enough to know that we can be BETTER than what our gods told us to be and actually better than they claim to be.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
it is always important to remember how personification makes a concept seem surreal. How God could love a human and the same time mercilessly take lives of innocents and permit evil to live. Many people will never understand the concept of a prayer, and unfortunately on the other end of the spectrum, religious fanatics are blindfully faithful (and as opposed to enlightened at the point of understand the science of God (oxy-moron? tee-hee)

So before I display my opinion, I will display my belief.

I believe in the entity that caused matter and energy to bind and create autodependency on life which can exist without the entities initial "bang"

I believe in accordance to what is not presented as evidence but rather scripture (in other words taking what our ancestors witnessed into account)

the one who created human in self image, was a super intelligent being who can be of a race of whom some will refer to as angels or aliens who existed since our creation. This "one" possible could have genetically altered a primitive ape like creature with the race's dna to formulate what you see before you. perhaps the "Gods" as we refer to, outlived their planets life without achieving true end of ultimate evolution, and decided to interfere with another planet with hopes that a cycle may continue so that each time the ones who would become Gods would succeed their predecessors in the conquest of a mysterious desire to reach a goal in evolution in which no being has ever predicted an end.

This desire to succeed technology, eliminate disease, prolong life, create a lifestyle of pure energy, where the brain is at 100% capacity, muscles do not ache because they are never used, death is only failure of reaching "the power" murder would obviously be oblivious at the fact that it does not logically produce a positive income. Mental defects or "impure" thoughts will not exist because the perfect formula which the Entity was failed to have compose to create the perfect life organism, that which does not depend on any other force other than its self.

The proof of God lies within our inheritance of God, of becoming in his image. Every being idolizes a concept of perfection. This inherited will could not have developed from a primitive humanoid who just happened to have had opportune moments of enlightenment to create and develop society as we see now (making fire, tribes, drawings, etc) it is more plausible to believe that a race of beings from a planet far away whos history of evolution exceeds human opinion and has reached the final point of their possible evolution to reproduce and their function as "living" needed to teach their powers, their philosophies.

The secret of the trinity is that we are the not the first nor ever the last. Father (Beings before us) Son (Beings after) and the Holy Spirit (the inherited will of the Entity)

my opinion



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I just have to share this because it was sort of a little Eureka moment for me last night.

I've been watching these shows like Parallel Universes, and Through the Wormhole voraciously the last few weeks. I love Michio Kaku and his thoughts.

My boys had a birthday party this weekend and got some of those little 'glow' sticks (the thin flexible ones).

My six-year old was going to bed and when he turned his light out he was playing with a couple of them.

I sat down on the bed and talked to him and absent-mindedly starting swinging one back and forth with my hand. The faster I swung it or spun it, the more it took on the appearance of a glowing membrane.

Instead of a two-dimensional glowing 'string' it became this magical spinning vortex or torus of light. Very Cool!

Then I took the other one with my other hand and swung it back and forth rapidly. I then moved them closer together until one was sort of swinging back and forth horizontally and the other was oscillating vertically. For the most part it looked like two flat glowing surfaces that were overlapping and intertwined. Occasionally the sticks would hit each other but most of the time it was an amazing 3D lightshow.

It suddenly made (a tiny bit) of sense. These two glowing, vibrating strings could exist seemingly in the SAME PLACE at the SAME TIME (at least in an illusory way) and only occasionally interact.

It made sense, if only for a moment, how multiple universes or dimensions or membranes could all occupy the same location and moment simultaneously but maybe not be aware of each other.

A simple illusion but a powerful experience! :-)



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
and to add,

remember it does not make sense that we are the only beings of intelligence. Science can not prove a theory on what could have specifically created a SPECIFIC SINGLE RACE in this entire planet which could process thought, learning, and production on its own without using the concept of God(not via a religious loony's point of view, but through the concept of what a superior energy that inflicts the inherited will (refer to my previous post) unto such beings.

Opposable thumbs is a weak theory, seeing as our cousins, the apes have not yet caught up to our advances. Evolution can not determine what caused selection within Homo-Sapiens. The thoughts in your heads which cannot be a production of vitamins or any other scientific terminology.

Atheism and Religion is a belief system that argues on past But the inherited will to reach enlightenment is existent in both parallel thoughts. both believe in Perfection, regardless of where it was said, stealing is wrong, lying is wrong. Religion, Science, and Law are philosophies that explain right and wrong.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Not to distract, but this is almost exactly what it looked like:




posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Data_Corrupt
 


Then what "Super God" created the "Gods" that created us? Is it an infinite loop? That explanation answers nothing to be quite honest , all it does is bring about an even tougher question to answer.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Yep, a "Super God" definitely doesn't answer the question. It just extends the mystery.

The bottom line is that we don't have the knowledge or the cerebral ability to even begin to understand how it all began.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by chimneyprocessor
 


Or to even contemplate if it even had a beginning. Eh? THat is what I think !lol



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by IamBoon
 


Well remember in my said theory it possible they were just like humans who just have many more years of advancement.

Today, we fuss over robotics, AI, NWO, etc. All are like I said an inherited will which can not exist from evolution alone.

And yes the truth is, the truth is beyond the systematic approaches of both Science and Religion. It is virtually impossible for life to have come from a being who during biblical times spoke to prophets as it is improbable that intelligence was a privilege only one species managed to obtain. Then again there is always the reptilian theory.


DISCLAIMER: AS IN SCIENCE, THEORIES ARE ALWAYS THEORIES NO MATTER HOW MUCH "EVIDENCE" OR "SUPER PROBABILITY" EXIST IN SAID THEORY, THEY CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED WHAT IFS JUST LIKE IN MY THEORY. AND ALL I CAN EXPECT FROM THE FORUM IS "YEA, THAT MAKE SENSE" RATHER THEN MY OPINION DEPICTED AS CHOSEN PROPHETIC WORDS.

-Proof is strictly a faith with backed up theories. We have observed and used math to determine first the earth was the center, than being the sun, then being a central galaxy (We have faith that the current proof and math formulas are true, but as in statistics, we have been fooled by our own thoughts of Logic). Logic itself is limited at the point one can understand. And if one isn't perfect, one cannot understand True Logic.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
and let me stress. Who are you expecting the answer from? What anyone else can give you is what I have and what many others have, Rhetorical Answers is all you can get. So relax and read into everyones theories and just imagine with all knowledge that you have processed. the burden of an logical thinker who just wants the ONE answer, suffers when someone gives a "What if" conclusion that raises more questions. Of course its going to raise more Questions, thats what makes us like the description of the ultimate entity.

We want to know ALL, We want to have all, We want to be all.

I was told that the first philosophical question ever told was... "why?"

and it was from a child.


We must accept that we will always ask why and we will never find an answer that will ever answer that first question, why.. because "why" is like perpetual reaction that can never satisfy itself, an answer that ends the question.

1+1 = 2, why? because one after another one succeeds into the sum of two. why? because numbers were created to be consecutive and addition was developed to measure the point of where one variable reaches once it has moved in the consecutive distance referenced by the other variables. why? because consecutive numbers and addition help us determine many factors such as how many quarters are needed in a dollar (25+25+25+25) for example. why? because if you do not know how many quarters are in a dollar you may distribute too many or too little quarters to equal a dollar. why? because solving things to an exact point creates an objective solution to which no one would ask why are you giving me 4 quarters to buy something that cost a dollar if, which would be chaotic if no one knew addition. why?

because you touch yourself at night



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Data_Corrupt
 


Theories in Science are not "what ifs" They are repeatedly demonstratable hypothesis that form a solid framework for understanding . Are you saying germ theory is a what if? I certainly hope not What about atomic theory? I hope not , Quantum theory? See what I am getting at? They are so solid in their experimental information that if and we are talking almost NO mathematical chance they can be wrong. Other Theories, like string theory are kinda like religion except with numbers.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by IamBoon
 



The germ theory is a good example of my statement. At one point before a hypothesis is formed, someone had to had said, after germs were discovered, what if germs are what caused bacteria? then someone would approach him and say prove it, another would say impossible if you do not have proof to begin with it is not science. The man who said prove it, does not accept the "what if" as a theory yet, which is just fine, until formulas and facts back up this what if.

The theory of God (or the "what if it WAS a God that made us "GUESS")
comes from what is REASONABLE imagination. a REASONABLE idea that can explain many miracles that science cannot. And science will always argue with a math formula... AND YES YOUR MATH IS UNDENIABLY TRUE, but is it Answer we look for. obviously you can mathematically explain the big bang theory, but you can not prove that it was the formula of events that occurred.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
I was raised a catholic and stopped believing in God. Now I see so much evidence of the Illuminati/NWO wanting us to stop believing in God and not being religous I think it is time to start reading the bible again. I think regarding God they know something we don't. Plus if God does not exist why do they worship satan? Surely for satan to exist God must exist?



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Very interesting thread ...

I just wanted to say i know next to nothing about all that you are sharing but find it fascinating & thank you all for starting this thread ...

the one thing i wanted to add that all of you seem to be missing .. is the idea that we can't know .. that assumption is what keeps us from knowing ... i believe we can know & as a result i now know & understand & most importantly am experiencing things i never would have thought possible ... bcuz i do feel a sort of entitlement to knowing ... i have a kinda faith that the universe is kind & That there is a loving god in existence ... the opposite of religion BTW ... i have experienced that if you seek with all your heart a relationship with this creator then you will begin to know Him/Her ... now that doesn't exclude any of the science you are speaking of but actually provides answers to all your questions ...

I also agree God & science will coexist one day ... possilbly soon .. i hve never felt that they oppose one another ...



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Data_Corrupt
 


It is not ONE answer I want it is a good logical answer. One that describes the phenomenon in a broad sense and shows where these ideas might come from.

If you read ANY of my posts about religion you would find out I am a strict believer in that you cannot prove "god" nor disprove the concept. That DOES NOT make it true! You cannot prove a blue gnome controls the rotation of planets and directs them through his fairy dust in a dimension beyond our senses either. Doesn't make it a good idea!

Trying to raise proofs by invoking more unidentifiable evidence that is ALSO more extreme is not how you solve a problem and that is especially true with logical loops (i.e. Post-modern humans created us or whatever created us). You are stating a unsubstantiated assertion in the very question. How can you say without reasonable doubt that we were created in the first place by an outside willful force? You can't.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by dreamwalker74
 




The level of intelligence of this all encompassing being would be well beyond our comprehension


Than it is purposeless to speculate on the existence of such a being. This is a statement of agnosticism: "God might exist but if God does it is beyond our ability to comprehend or perceive". If we cannot perceive the existence of this being or any of its characteristics its pointless to even believe it exists as said belief would still be based on faith and still have no practical purpose.

We don't know whether String Theory will pan out to be correct yet, its an extremely young theory (its barely even a THEORY in the scientific sense of the word).

The idea that the Universe or Multiverse might in fact be a massive organism or "God" is one I've pondered quite a bit - at least as a philosophical topic. Some scientists now believe the Big Bang was actually a Big Collision with another Universe. These two Universes colliding started the expansion of time space that birthed our Universe. This idea is almost reminiscent of sexual reproduction, the egg and sperm (two Universes) meet and the resulting Universe has a mix of their characteristics as it expands and grows according to a sort of life cycle. I prefer this idea to be more an analogy comparing the two, our understanding of the beginnings of the Universe and of the Universe as a whole aren't far enough along to claim that the Universe is an organism in the literal sense.

A very interesting idea but it still doesn't prove the existence of God because although we might perceive the Universal organism as a God and our cells might perceive US as God there is always something bigger than that Organism, making it an endless stream of Gods and their inner Universes which kinda makes the term God pointless.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join