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.

 

Stephen Hawking: God didn't create universe

page: 15
29
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Confusion42

Originally posted by 11118
reply to post by Confusion42
 


Infinity is a better word in place of 1. Infinity is not a number or many it is everything a singular concept.


Infinity = Proof of God?


Me


In a way it can be. This up for you to decide of course.

For an entity to be eternal or indefinite it must be boundless or Infinite. Infinity cannot be limited to a measurement or concept it must contain everything within it. There cannot be anything other than everything, therefor there cannot be anything other than Infinity - there cannot be anything other than the Creator. This is my view/perspective on the enigma of the Creator.

The concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp when your entire life is filled with limitations.




posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
The Op nor Stephen Hawking know what God is. So then how can you say he/it isn't or is needed?

Just another controversial statement to grab attention.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Wrong, it would exist, because boundlessness exists regardless of humans trying to create a concept of such.

More so, humans cannot mathematically express Infinity - even the concept or symbol of Infinity is a limited watered down version of Infinity.

It's unfathomable.


[edit on 3-9-2010 by 11118]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Hawking might be a genius but a scintific theory or formula cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. It's a matter of personal belief. No one cannot prove there is no God or prove He did not create the universe. I cannot prove there is a God but I know there is and believe he created everything. Like I said it's a matter of personal belief.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Confusion42
Everything we KNOW in the universe CAN be explained my math.


No... it can't. That is a false belief that you fell victim to.

Math doesn't explain anything, it only describes things. It doesn't even describe things accurately either. Most mathematical equations fall apart in the real world because there are too many external factors that can't be calculated because they are uncontrolled and unmeasurable.

Try again.



Originally posted by Confusion42
Next; How did you get the sum of ONE from the sum of what is known and unknown?


ALL that which is known and unknown is only a fraction of the whole Universe. The summation of these fractions will always equal one whole.



[edit on 3-9-2010 by illumin8ed]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by 11118
 


So the concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp yet you still derive a Creator from that?


I think M-Theory deals with situations of "Infinity" by using math as the means of understanding it.

I am not even sure what M-Theory says about the Universe / Multi-Verse being Infinite or Not; I think it's more about perspective.

What we see / observe / understand is just the basics of what the Uni / Multi Verse is.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Armour For Victor

"If everything was created by nothing, then what created nothing?"
Everything wasn't created by nothing, and nothing isn't created.Nothing simply IS.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by illumin8ed

Originally posted by Confusion42
Everything we KNOW in the universe CAN be explained my math.


No... it can't. That is a false belief that you fell victim to.

Math doesn't explain anything, it only describes things. It doesn't even describe things accurately either. Most mathematical equations fall apart in the real world because there are too many external factors that can't be calculated because they are uncontrolled and unmeasurable.

Try again.



Originally posted by Confusion42
Next; How did you get the sum of ONE from the sum of what is known and unknown?


ALL that which is known and unknown is only a fraction of the whole Universe. The summation of these fractions will always equal one whole.



[edit on 3-9-2010 by illumin8ed]


Now your talking about semantics.

Using math to explain things helps describe things just like using math to describe things explains things.

Next up: Are you trying to say that everything you know and don't know is a fraction of the whole Universe? That make's no sense.

Everything that you know and do NOT know does equal the Universe (we all know very little; but what we do NOT know is the rest of the Universe)

This has nothing to do with no Creator much less proofs one even needs to exist.....



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rede2go
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Hawking might be a genius but a scintific theory or formula cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. It's a matter of personal belief. No one cannot prove there is no God or prove He did not create the universe. I cannot prove there is a God but I know there is and believe he created everything. Like I said it's a matter of personal belief.


Just cause media headlines say "Hawkings: God doesn't exist" doesn't actually mean he says this.

It's more like things are taken out of context from his new book, plus the definition he is using when he says God is much different than the norm.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11118
Wrong, it would exist, because boundlessness exists regardless of humans trying to create a concept of such.

More so, humans cannot mathematically express Infinity - even the concept or symbol of Infinity is a limited watered down version of Infinity.

It's unfathomable.


[edit on 3-9-2010 by 11118]


Not true.

Using perspective Infinity can be explained.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11118


The concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp when your entire life is filled with limitations.

The concept of infinity is impossible to grasp PERIOD. You either concede that something started everything at some point, or you concede that you can't explain how everything could have existed in all times in all spaces without beginning or ending. If somebody has claimed they could explain that please link.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I am not sure if it was missed or not but I did make a post (way back on page 5) that details some of the Science that was used to create the new theory that the Professor is proposing.

"new observations such as those made by satellites like NASA’s COBE and WMAP, have brought us closer than ever to that single theory, and to being able to answer those deepest of questions."

He is not just pulling all of this out of his favorite planet Uranus. His theory is backed by hardcore Scientific Experimentation and Data.

The NASA COBE (short for Cosmic Background Explorer) satellite has three different instruments attached to it like the

-Diffuse Infrared Background Experiment (DIRBE) to search for the cosmic infrared background radiation

-Differential Microwave Radiometer (DMR) to map the cosmic radiation sensitively

-Far Infrared Absolute Spectrophotometer (FIRAS) to compare the spectrum of the cosmic microwave background radiation with a precise blackbody

Each of the three instruments yielded a major cosmological discovery

lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov...


* DIRBE - Infrared absolute sky brightness maps in the wavelength range 1.25 to 240 microns were obtained to carry out a search for the cosmic infrared background (CIB). The CIB was originally detected in the two longest DIRBE wavelength bands, 140 and 240 microns, and in the short-wavelength end of the FIRAS spectrum. Subsequent analyses have yielded detections of the CIB in the near-infrared DIRBE sky maps. The CIB represents a "core sample" of the Universe; it contains the cumulative emissions of stars and galaxies dating back to the epoch when these objects first began to form. The COBE CIB measurements constrain models of the cosmological history of star formation and the buildup over time of dust and elements heavier than hydrogen, including those of which living organisms are composed. Dust has played an important role in star formation throughout much of cosmic history.

* DMR - The CMB was found to have intrinsic "anisotropy" for the first time, at a level of a part in 100,000. These tiny variations in the intensity of the CMB over the sky show how matter and energy was distributed when the Universe was still very young. Later, through a process still poorly understood, the early structures seen by DMR developed into galaxies, galaxy clusters, and the large scale structure that we see in the Universe today.

* FIRAS - The cosmic microwave background (CMB) spectrum is that of a nearly perfect blackbody with a temperature of 2.725 +/- 0.002 K. This observation matches the predictions of the hot Big Bang theory extraordinarily well, and indicates that nearly all of the radiant energy of the Universe was released within the first year after the Big Bang.


The WAMP that he refers to is the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WAMP).

map.gsfc.nasa.gov...


* The WMAP team has reported the first direct detection of pre-stellar helium, providing an important test of the big bang prediction.
* WMAP now places 50% tighter limits on the standard model of cosmology.
* WMAP has detected a key signature of inflation.
* WMAP strongly constrains dark energy and geometry of the universe.
* WMAP places new constraints on the number of neutrino-like species in the early universe.
* WMAP has detected, with very high significance, temperature shifts induced by hot gas in galaxy clusters.
* WMAP has produced a visual demonstration of the polarization pattern around hot and cold spots.


(I hope I am not using too many external sources but I find it necessary to point out the Science behind this theory).

Professor Stephen Hawking is proposing a theory that is based off mountainous amounts of data retrieved from Scientific Equipment studying the precise intricacies of the observable universe. It is not like he is saying "Durp a durp no believy in god kk thnxs bye".



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix
Everything wasn't created by nothing, and nothing isn't created.Nothing simply IS.


If nothing IS, then it's not nothing, it IS something.

It's a place, an area describing emptiness.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Confusion42
reply to post by 11118
 


So the concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp yet you still derive a Creator from that?


I think M-Theory deals with situations of "Infinity" by using math as the means of understanding it.

I am not even sure what M-Theory says about the Universe / Multi-Verse being Infinite or Not; I think it's more about perspective.

What we see / observe / understand is just the basics of what the Uni / Multi Verse is.


It is the Creator. The pure motion is Infinite, boundless. Where ever you stand there is boundlessness in all direction.

When I describe Infinity I describe everything - this is the Creator. But even the word Infinity and the word Creator are limited, because like I said Infinity cannot be explained or expressed mathematically or with words it's unfathomable.

I'm talking in circles but words are limited.

The Creator itself seeks to know itself, Infinity seeking to know Infinity. That is why it has to seek to know itself in finite continuums or many-ness, because Infinity cannot be experienced as a whole it must be experienced in portions, and due to the amount of these finite continuums being endless - the Creator experiencing itself in this fashion is free to continue in an eternal present.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by idonotcollectstamps
 


Great post! Nice to see some of that "proof" being passed around. I use the term lossely because it doesn;t actually prove anything as far as the existence of god goes, but it's solid scientific data that reinforces things we are learning about the universe. We're getting there, a way to explain things without having to give credit to thousands of possible gods.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to 11118
 


How old?

A quick approximation for the age of the Universe can be approximated by the inverse of the Hubble constant. The calculated age turns out to be



Current best estimates of h0 are



so the Universe is most likely somewhere between 12 and 16 billion years old, at least according to this method of estimation.
But recall that according to relativity, time is relative.
superstringtheory.com...



[edit on 3-9-2010 by Confusion42]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigatronix

Originally posted by 11118


The concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp when your entire life is filled with limitations.

The concept of infinity is impossible to grasp PERIOD. You either concede that something started everything at some point, or you concede that you can't explain how everything could have existed in all times in all spaces without beginning or ending. If somebody has claimed they could explain that please link.



The only explanation is that there no such thing as linear time but simply a present not a past nor a future.

Meaning quite literally, that Infinity never begin nor will end but has always existed in a present state. The Creator (which is us included) has always existed in a present state.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11118

Originally posted by Gigatronix

Originally posted by 11118


The concept of Infinity is almost impossible to grasp when your entire life is filled with limitations.

The concept of infinity is impossible to grasp PERIOD. You either concede that something started everything at some point, or you concede that you can't explain how everything could have existed in all times in all spaces without beginning or ending. If somebody has claimed they could explain that please link.



The only explanation is that there no such thing as linear time but simply a present not a past nor a future.

Meaning quite literally, that Infinity never begin nor will end but has always existed in a present state. The Creator (which is us included) has always existed in a present state.



The only explanation?

Thats a logical flaw.

My mind hurts cause reading crap about string / m-theory causes a headach, I admit....


It's a lot easier to just say "God."

Also ignorant to.

This explains what I am trying to say;

superstringtheory.com...



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by illumin8ed

Originally posted by Gigatronix
Everything wasn't created by nothing, and nothing isn't created.Nothing simply IS.


If nothing IS, then it's not nothing, it IS something.

It's a place, an area describing emptiness.
No, nothing is the absence of anything, giving it a name or describing it doesn't turn it into something. How can you say its a place when you can't go there? How can you call something an area when you have no means to measure the perimeter of somethign thats not there, youd have to measure the edges of "something" compare it withe measurements and location of another similar "something" then verify that there is absolutely nothing in between. then you might know what the "area" of nothing is.

Everyone, raise your hand if you've ever seen nothing, let alone been to it.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Gigatronix
 


Giga, I'd like you to think of Nothingness.

How do you describe it?



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join