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.

 

Is physicist Stephen Hawking right that physics, not God, created the universe?

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Here is why I slide from atheism to agnosticism to Buddhism. We (think) we can trace the beginning of the Universe back to the Big Bang. Well, what caused that? G*d? Ok, well, what created god? And what created that which created god? etc.. That is called an infinite regress. There is no end.

Now, from what I gather, Hawking is saying that as far as THIS Universe is concerned, there needn't be a Prime Mover that got everything started. It could have been the inevitable spontaneous reaction of some M-branes slipping in to each other in some Quantum Foam (or something like that). There is no evidence, and more to the contrary, that some "being" set all that we see in motion. It is much more probable that the laws of physics gave rise to everything that we know in this Universe.

If you want to argue that g*d created the Quantum Foam and the M-branes that allowed all of this to occur, then refer to paragraph one. Who/What created g*d? Is g*d just the end of the Infinite Regress? Since we can't fathom or understand it we just call it g*d? How terribly unscientific and unsatisfying.




posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by IKnowKungFu
 


Your right he isn't talking about god of the bible. In Physics there was some unanswered problems with the big bang. Hawkins is filling those gaps as well as linking several theories together to explain the creation of the universe. In physics stuff that is considered unknown is attributed to god (bad joke in physics) but when he said god is not needed means he can fill those gaps nothing more. He in no way means there isnt a god in fact has nothing to do with it. I believe sometimes he forgets the world isnt all professors.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crimelab
Here is why I slide from atheism to agnosticism to Buddhism. We (think) we can trace the beginning of the Universe back to the Big Bang. Well, what caused that? G*d? Ok, well, what created god? And what created that which created god? etc.. That is called an infinite regress. There is no end.

Now, from what I gather, Hawking is saying that as far as THIS Universe is concerned, there needn't be a Prime Mover that got everything started. It could have been the inevitable spontaneous reaction of some M-branes slipping in to each other in some Quantum Foam (or something like that). There is no evidence, and more to the contrary, that some "being" set all that we see in motion. It is much more probable that the laws of physics gave rise to everything that we know in this Universe.

If you want to argue that g*d created the Quantum Foam and the M-branes that allowed all of this to occur, then refer to paragraph one. Who/What created g*d? Is g*d just the end of the Infinite Regress? Since we can't fathom or understand it we just call it g*d? How terribly unscientific and unsatisfying.


If there was nothing, not even the laws of physics would be there to pull itself out of its bootstrap. Whatever exists beyond time must have caused time to start. If something exists out of time, there was no point in time that it was ever created. It was, is, and always will be. If one argued for a God that's not bound by time or space, it can be eternal, omniscient, and omnipotent all at once, since it can be all places at once, manipulate matter however it wants, and knows the end from the beginning, treat tomorrow as yesterday, and not have to be created to exist, since it came to be in eternity, outside of the constraints of time (it can't be created, since that implies a past to a state of existence that has no such thing as a past, present, or future).

Either way, to explain the beginning of time, you have to argue for something eternal, whether it's God, or something else outside of time that caused it to exist. Gravity had to exist due to a structure that's eternal to pull something out of nothing. If there was truly nothing, there wouldn't even be gravity.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Isn't this all based off Hawking say that God isn't neccessary?

I don't believe he's saying he knows everything, or saying that God is a complete impossibility, he is just stating God is not 'neccessary'.

It would be like saying ... a bazooka is not neccessary to cause a fire. It's an opinion is it not? I think he is entitled to that opinion, and I don't know why so many people feel the need to comment on it.

Furthermore I won't let a 'vote' influence my own thoughts on this subject. You can vote on all kinds of things and people will get it wrong.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke
It would be like saying ... a bazooka is not neccessary to cause a fire. It's an opinion is it not? I think he is entitled to that opinion, and I don't know why so many people feel the need to comment on it.


The problem I have is when scientists blur the line between their scientific opinion, and their personal opinion.

I do not necessarily blame Professor Hawking for this, as he may well have made it clear that he was stating his personal opinion, rather than a scientific one, and it was sensationalised by the media.

Like it or not, Professor Hawking's personal opinion is going to carry more weight with other people, than yours or mine, even so he is expressing his opinion about something that he has no more or less knowledge of than anyone else.


Most people would already realise that saying that ''God must have created the universe !'' is a fallacious line of reasoning, so he isn't really saying anything new.

Equally, saying that ''God'' is not necessary for the universe's existence is also faulty reasoning, as none of us have any understanding of why or how something can and does exist.

As I said previously, my personal opinion is that whatever the true explanation ( if there is one ) is likely to be unfathomable to the human brain, and any idea that is put forward is nothing more than a guess.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:14 AM
link   
While I have every respect for Stephen Hawking, I still say nothing comes from nothing.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
the UK is essentially mostly atheist, and the US is essentially mostly Christian. in fact, many countries in Europe are now no longer religious.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:54 AM
link   
I see it as him basically saying that there is no need for God/Gods for things to be the way they are, it can be explained through physics and without any supernatural means added. Much like evolution does not need God/Gods for it to be explained.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by Solomons]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


No way, a lot of European countries are still religious.

Think about all the Roman Catholic countries.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Yes, we do not need God, but we do need something I think.

So what I am asking is - where did that spark come from?

Nothing comes from nothing - ask any philosopher.

And by philosopher, I mean thinker.

Where does something come from? It does not come from nothing.

And if there is not something, there is nothing.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by catwhoknows
 


The only reason you think something has to be created or 'come' from somewhere is because the brain works in patterns, hence very difficult for us to imagine how something is just infinite. Energy for example can't be created or destroyed, only converted...it didn't 'come' from nothing it simply exists.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by Solomons]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
I dont get how something can come from nothing. I mean think about it.. nothing is nothing, if something was created then obviously it wasn't nothing was it.

Maybe its not possible for nothing to exist which is evident by the fact that we exist and that is something.. maybe whatever was there in the 'beginning' was always there and there was no beginning.

In my oppinion there is no beginning but just eternal existence because thats just what it is and 'nothing' doesn't exist except as an abstract concept of the something (consciousness).



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Wrong.

I know that nothing comes from nothing for two reasons.

1. My brain tells me that that is a fact.

2. I majored in philosophy at university, which also told me so.

And I would like to meet anyone who tells me that something can come from nothing.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by catwhoknows
 


I think you misunderstood my post, or i didn't type what i meant better...but i basically mean that energy for example has always existed, it wasn't created and it didn't come from anywhere.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Sorry, you also misunderstood me.

Nothing comes from nothing.

Energy and everything else.

Where do you start energy if there is nothing?

Energy must first exist. So where did it come from?



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Stephen Hawking couldn't even tell you about anything located in a wheelchair non accessible area, much less something that is outside of our universe. This gives some of you hope?



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Religion has done things like say the world is flat and call ppl
heretics against the church for saying otherwise.

Religion has had the Inquisition, and ppl Honor killing their children
and mutilating their sex organs.

Religion has had holy wars for year after year over holy dirt.

Religion in modern day has protected pedophiles from prosecution.

Science has made some mistakes and some of it has cost lives.

Science has also saved millions of lives, and some of the kinder
folks under religion have as well.

I am going to say some day science will figure it out, and religion
will have to keep apologizing for some colossal screw ups.

I highly recommend the link on the front page to the movie
"stupidity" it covers a lot of this in fair detail.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by catwhoknows
 


I think your are simply playing with words, a sentence can be dissected and the words twisted around but it is simple..energy cannot be 'created' or destroyed, you see? it cannot be created...if it cannot be created then what does that mean?

[edit on 5-9-2010 by Solomons]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
Well, we know the universe is not eternal, that it definitely has a beginning and so an end. But whatever caused it had to be outside of the parameter of time. I think that thing is God.


We used to think the world was flat, and anyone who said otherwise was
a heretic and they could end up on trial.

Most were cowards and smart and simply recanted to avoid the stake
or the rope.

But in private they talked with like minded folk.

There are ppl that are starting to realize that over the years science
got a few things wrong as well, and over time it gets worked out.

We are still a Tech 0 society, and we have been Industrial for less
than 200 years, Computers less than 100 years.

In the scale of the universe that is very small.

The equipment we sent up with a budget smaller than sports or
religion may just not have the ability to sense or see the real edge
of the universe and this just may be a pocket of it in one area.

It may have always been, and always be, and it may be infinite.

Going on forever in all directions.

Because if it ended what would be there ?

A road closed sign that is 15 billion light years wide ?

I think I will go with some of the newer theories that say it
very likely goes on and on forever.

bigbangneverhappened.org...

If you are wondering if this guy is all that then consider he is
the closest to making a Fusion Reactor that could cheaply
power the entire earth on a much smaller budget than the
Tokamak crowd.


Google Video Link


Just because a lot of sheep say the earth is flat does not mean
that is the truth, just because a lot of ppl have a concept of
the universe does not mean it will stand the test of time.

I put my faith in facts and results.

If this fusion device is ALLOWED to be built the human race will
never be the same.



[edit on 5-9-2010 by Ex_MislTech]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Ex_MislTech
 


In the modern era it's the science enthusiasts that persecute heretics. If you don't shut up and listen to what the scientists say you're ignorant.

It really depends on the nature of time really. Did time ever begin?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join