Stephen Hawking lays out case for Big Bang without God

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by spy66

 

A infinite space does not allow extensions, because this space is as large as it can get.

infinity covered the rest, but "extension" was meant in the philosophical way meaning "something can occupy space because space exists".

there is simply no such thing as absolute empty infinite space. infinite space can exist if it is the highest dimensional space (no time would exist in it, only in lesser dimensions), but it cannot be empty. it has substance and laws that govern it, even if the substance isn't directly perceivable to us.

There is no way you are going to understand this if you can think past finite space and what scientists can do.

There is no way science can create a absolute empty space within our universe. Do you know why? They do explain why. And because of their inability to create such a vacuum they have agreed on the absolute value/purity of the vacuum they can create. Scientists have a standard value of "their" absolute vacuum.

And because of this we start to argue that there is no absolute empty space. Jesse's, scientists can observe or create a empty space. That dose not mean it doesn't exists. It means science is limited.

All relgions think thier religion is the 'truth'. But in the bible, it says "Let us creating man in our image." Explain that.

Also, explain the fact that the bible, as it is today, is plagiarized from much older religions. Christmas, Easter; all the jehova-worshippers holidays are stolen from older religions. Even the story of Moses and the Flood. Ever heard of the Epic of Gilgamesh?

Well, my own beliefs are this: Beings called Gods may, or may not exist. Organized religion however, is a evil thing. More people have died in religious causes then all other causes combined. From the Crusades to the Jyhad. And science is no better. Any thoughts, or theories presented by scientists that aren't part of the 'generaly accepted' are immedeatly ridiculed, and whatnot.

There is a middle ground somewhere, it just has to be found.

reply to post by spy66

There is no way you are going to understand this if you can think past finite space and what scientists can do. There is no way science can create a absolute empty space within our universe. Do you know why? They do explain why. And because of their inability to create such a vacuum they have agreed on the absolute value/purity of the vacuum they can create. Scientists have a standard value of their absolute vacuum.

i do actually understand what you're saying, which is why i disagree. a perfect vacuum cannot exist in our universe, you're right about that. but why not?

nothingness cannot have properties. there is nothing to ascribe properties to, however, space by definition has properties. it has rules that govern it and the other dimensions. even if it were to be infinite, it would have form and shape.

reply to post by jjsr420

you're incorrect. the holiday easter is taken from a pagan fertility goddess named ishtar (to accomidate pagans converting to christianity). where did the idea of ishtar come from? practically all mother goddess worship can be traced back to queen semiramis and king nimrod of assyria/babylon.

hmmm...nimrod..ring any bells? he was the great grandson of noah, credited with building babylon. the epic of gilgamesh describes noah and his wife, it does not "predate" them. nimrod and his wife proclaimed themselves gods, they eventually turned on each other and she had him sacrificed. he is also known as baal and molech.

reply to post by Phoenix267


The implied flaw in the entire argument (which is really about discrediting religion) is that Science is a series of techniques that expands from building on the experimental results of previous credited experimenters. I hope that we can all agree on what science is.

Hower

What becomes a massive problem for the implied critiicism of religion is that there are a significant number of researchers who are religious. I know because I was one and had a chance to observe many.

Fundamentalism and science are probably incompatible. Frankly the average sceptic is comparable to the average fundamentalist because they both use very crude arguments. However a skeptic can be an excellent scientist. But then what about Newton????? Mendel, etc.

Rgds

Tiger5

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


According to what? The bible?
Well here, read this:
www.opposingdigits.com...

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by spy66

 

There is no way you are going to understand this if you can think past finite space and what scientists can do. There is no way science can create a absolute empty space within our universe. Do you know why? They do explain why. And because of their inability to create such a vacuum they have agreed on the absolute value/purity of the vacuum they can create. Scientists have a standard value of their absolute vacuum.

i do actually understand what you're saying, which is why i disagree. a perfect vacuum cannot exist in our universe, you're right about that. but why not?

nothingness cannot have properties. there is nothing to ascribe properties to, however, space by definition has properties. it has rules that govern it and the other dimensions. even if it were to be infinite, it would have form and shape.

The absolute empty infinite space is a property in it self. It is the very first dimension.

It can not be governed by our scientific laws, because this space is not a finite. Our universal observed laws are governed by finite/time.

Nothingness can have properties governed by our scientific laws. Because this space is not empty. Observing the matter within this space, and determining their place on the other hand is a different matter.

reply to post by spy66

The absolute empty infinite space is a property in it self. It is the very first dimension.

So the very first dimension is a vacuum? Vacuums have properties?!

Nothingness can have properties governed by our scientific laws. Because this space is not empty. Observing the matter within this space, and determining their place on the other hand is a different matter.

I have this very strange yet distinct feeling that you don't know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by jjsr420
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

According to what? The bible?
Well here, read this:
www.opposingdigits.com...

edit on 19-4-2013 by jjsr420 because: adding a link

Any effort to trace the origins of the myth, legend, and lore of goddess-worship will eventually lead one back to a single historical figure---Semiramis, wife of Nimrod and queen of Babylon, and this is especially true when considering the goddess/planet Venus.

ldolphin.org...

the bible and the information available at the time are congruent. many said sodom and gomorrah weren't real. turns out they have been found in the areas mentioned as their locations in the bible. they were even destroyed by meteors.

not only is discounting a source simply because you disagree a logical fallacy in principle, evidence has arisen that confirms facts listed in the bible.

anyways, this is off topic. we should stick to the topic at hand.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66

 

The absolute empty infinite space is a property in it self. It is the very first dimension.

So the very first dimension is a vacuum? Vacuums have properties?!

Nothingness can have properties governed by our scientific laws. Because this space is not empty. Observing the matter within this space, and determining their place on the other hand is a different matter.

I have this very strange yet distinct feeling that you don't know what you're talking about.

No a absolute vacuum does not have properties. It is a property. And its absolutely neutral.

reply to post by spy66

No a absolute vacuum does not have properties. It is a property. And its absolutely neutral.

What property does a vacuum possess? It is literally nothing. It is a space filled with nothing. There is nothing in it. All you can do with it is put stuff in it. And then it's no longer a vacuum.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66

 

No a absolute vacuum does not have properties. It is a property. And its absolutely neutral.

What property does a vacuum possess? It is literally nothing. It is a space filled with nothing. There is nothing in it. All you can do with it is put stuff in it. And then it's no longer a vacuum.

Wrong, it becomes a vacuum when you put something into it. Initially a absolute vacuum is a neutral space until something enters it, than it becomes a vacuum.

The absolute empty space "the vacuum" consists of a void that is different than finite matter. That is the only reason this space seams absolute empty.

You say that this space does not exist. But what kind of space do scientists try and create when they build a vacuum chamber?

And if the space does not exist! does the particle scientists want to observe take up all the space within the vacuum chamber?

And why would they bother to observe the matter/particle in a vacuum state if it doesn't exist?
And what value does E=mc2 have if a absolute empty space does not exist?

What do you say??? Why is it so bloody important to observe things in a vacuum state if this state doesn't exist?

It must exist if it is this important to science.

reply to post by spy66

Wrong, it becomes a vacuum when you put something into it. Initially a absolute vacuum is a neutral space until something enters it, than it becomes a vacuum.

No, you are wrong on that count:

1vac·u·um
noun ˈva-(ˌ)kyüm, -kyəm also -kyü-əm
plural vac·u·ums or vac·ua
Definition of VACUUM
1
: emptiness of space
2
a : a space absolutely devoid of matter

Notice where the word 'absolutely' is used in the definition? That means that you have no wiggle room to backpedal without admitting your ignorance in the subject. And now we can conclusively determine that you have not a bloody clue what you're jawing about. Thank you for settling the matter for us - we no longer need concern ourselves with your gross inaccuracies and ill-founded opinions. A good day to you, sir.

Don't let the forum door hit you on the way out.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DrunkYogi

 

Well what has he gotten right? His theory about Black Holes was wrong. He spent most of his life racking his brain to come up with the wrong answer....lol. What a joker! These people are so wrapped up in their own Ego's that they cant see beyond their own self-righteous attitude and puny ideas.

How about you post some of your work, as recognized by prestigious science communities and lauded by established researchers everywhere? You talk a lot of crap but don't seem to have anything of your own on the table. What degrees do you have? What books have you published? What lectures have you given? For all your bluster, you have nothing to show.

You're a chihuahua barking at a genius from behind the fence of your own ignorance. Either substantiate your claims or be quiet. Those who pretend to know stuff annoy those who actually do.

As recognized by The Prestigious Science Communities and lauded by researchers. everywhere..Wooooooooooooooo, that's great maybe he would be more lauded if he actually got something right!
So you need to waste most of your life being stunningly wrong to get in the club eh? I bet your a member! It doesn't matter if i have any degrees or have books out or given lectures because he has done all of this and let's face it friend he has been spreading lies and rumor hasn't he? Eh? Answer that one mate!!! Their hero was spreading nothing but nonsense for years................lol. If you laud someone like this no wonder their profession is being looked upon by the people as nothing but money grabbing scavengers. People are waking up to the fact that at the end of the day they know nothing, they are guessing, hypothesizing and colluding and in the future they will be looked upon the same way as the Bankers of this era.

reply to post by DrunkYogi


Yeah, keep touting your arrogance on a conspiracy website. Meanwhile, Hawking will continue to blow people away with his genius. I can see who's getting further in life.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DrunkYogi

 

Yeah, keep touting your arrogance on a conspiracy website. Meanwhile, Hawking will continue to blow people away with his genius. I can see who's getting further in life.

i don't think anyone can deny that hawking is brilliant, but as with all humans, he is prone to bias.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

i don't think anyone can deny that hawking is brilliant, but as with all humans, he is prone to bias.

There is no bias in math, and he doesn't work alone. Just as three snipers can cover a 360 degree area, three scientists can curb a wide range of bias. Three scientists crunching numbers tends to invite a startlingly slight amount of bias.

And really, that's the best you can ask for. Especially when it's more like 300 scientists and a few kick-ass computers that can handle the work of ten physicists.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

There is no bias in math

there is bias in how numbers are interpreted, and what math is and isn't done. math is a language like any other.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

there is bias in how numbers are interpreted, and what math is and isn't done. math is a language like any other.

Did you deliberately ignore the part about a ton of scientists working from a variety of different angles to cover all possibilities and limit bias to no more than is absolutely impossible to avoid? Or do you make a habit of underestimating the scientific community that is held responsible for the condition of everything you take for granted?

he's a cosmologist

his 'religion' is that of matter and space/time, this universe.

research information systems, its a whole science unto itself.
It states that intelligent self forming systems(information) does not come about by itself, EVER, it always has a precedence.

I understand he has a brilliant mathematical mind, and we are all in awe and woo over it when comparing it to our own limited thinking, right?

He understands more so he must know more.

If you widen your field, and stephen hawking does not, you will see that through different forms of science we are coming to understand that consciousness comes before matter. The great Max Planck figured this out. Other scientists who first thought matter was of the utmost important after a lifetime of research have come to the conclusion that perhaps their original ideas of the way the universe works might have been wrong.

Religion of God is no better though. Its spiritual, but it lies too heavy on the other end of the spectrum. And unfortunately, just like science is being used as a means for power and control, religion came first and is being used as a means for power and control.

Dont get stuck on either side of the spectrum, but know that truth is in the middle. Without the collapse of the wave function we would not know matter. Consciousness is what collapses the wave properties into quanta, or packets of discreet information for our brains to be able to make sense of it. Its a sea of information, all of it, but it is resonances which group the bits together, and its these resonances that give these things similar math space to exist next to each other and branch off of each other so our brains can compile the information accordingly.

Our universe is very real, but its symmetry. As above so below.

Question to ask is, what is the consciousness that collapses the infinite into the finite space our universe exists in?

Multiverse theory is correct. M Theory will prove to be on the correct track. Everything is sound, or 'strings.'

But it is still an incomplete theory, and un-testable as of yet.