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.

 

Intelligent first cause: WHY IT IS IMPOSSIBLE

page: 9
21
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


So with your filling in space question, I now think I realize you are asking more towards reality we are familiar with. The one which includes space between planets, and space between solar systems, and space between galaxies.. and you are wondering what that space is made of, what is it. And for that, i am very interested in knowing the answer as well. From what I know from all the supreme physists; that space you are curious about consists of electromagnetic fields, dark matter and dark energy, higgs field, and 'particles that pop in and out of existence'... I personally dont believe many of the conceptions supplied there, and they have not reached a level of comprehension of what fundamental space is yet, like whats in between the particles that appear, or before they appear... The nature of space is a mystery.




posted on May, 31 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
Is a force intelligent? Does one look at the properties of a magnet as being intelligent? Many of the forces at work in the universe are very similar to that of magnets, they attract the repel they combine into all sort of forms and shapes... why exactly does there has to be some kind intelligence behind this process again? Oh right there doesn't need to be any... all you need is an unimaginably large amount of what we call time.


Great metaphor - mind if I use it???

I was thinking about 'intelligence' and how we define rudamentary intelligence. It is the ability to react to stimulus by either getting closer (attraction) or moving away (repulsion) just as in magnets. What I have read of early life the first cells (rather the first cell walls - separating one bit of goo from another bit of goo) came about in just such a manner. Bits of goo being attracted to similar bits of goo and voila - creation.

edit on 31-5-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
This means we have at least two forms of gravity present


So the gravity that acts on matter is different to the gravity that acts on a vacuum? Why would they be different things?

Here I was thinking no one even knows what gravity (itself) is.


What space are you refering to; A vacuum space inside a chaimber or the vacuum space within our universe?


I'm not referring to space. I'm referring, literally, to nothing. Or at least Krauss is, I'm not a theoretical physicist. He is saying that an entire universe from literally nothing, is quite plausible, no need for a creator for this to happen.


-----There is a reason why you cant remove space. The reason is: The absolute infinite empty space takes up all space possible outside the space of our universe.

Really?
That doesn't explain much IMO. It also relies on your own definition of "absolute empty space" which could be wrong and also on an assumption as to what happens outside of the universe.


-----There is a reason why energy can not be destroyed. It is because the absolute infinite empty space is infinite.

Why would this be the reason?

How can you know what exists outside of the universe (if anything does) with such certainty. Or how it can have any effect on what is inside the universe?


edit on 31-5-2013 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it.



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66

You have to look at this at a much bigger scale to see how intelligent the finite system is. Because the whole finite system function together as a unity driven by the absolute infinite empty space "the absolute vacuum".

There is a reason why a vacuum is a very important tool within science. Because all matter exist at different values of vacuum space.



First of all "the absoute vacuum" doesn't exist, it is a theoritical construct.

On the question of 'vacuum': from www.thenakedscientists.com...



There must also be a total absence of energy.

According to QM there is no such thing as absolute nothingness. Even a seeming vacuum is teeming with virtual particles that are created spontaneously and then annihilate each other.

You may have heard of the Casimir effect, which relies on vacuum energy.

This all means that there cannot be any such thing as a total vacuum so, consequently, absolute zero can't be achieved.


"the whole finite system function together as a unity" Finite system? Please define the scope of this system you propose. If you are refering to "all known matter" or "all posible matter" - I refer you to the simple answer above.

I question whether the universe that we can observe is closed (finite) or open. What I read lead me to believe it is an open system.

The behavior of any system can be explained by ever more complex reactions (attraction/replusion) to external (to the system under consideration) stimuli. You don't need an All-Powerful, All-Knowing external (or concurrent) director.

Is the universe as a whole 'self-aware'? Good question but a different thread.
edit on 31-5-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 




First of all "the absoute vacuum" doesn't exist,


I dont agree.




it is a theoritical construct.


Yes it is and it always will be. Because we will never ever be able to observe such vacuum. But that does not mean it dosent exist. There are no proof or facts to show that it dosent exist. Its only a conclusion based on scientific limitation.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by FyreByrd

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
Is a force intelligent? Does one look at the properties of a magnet as being intelligent? Many of the forces at work in the universe are very similar to that of magnets, they attract the repel they combine into all sort of forms and shapes... why exactly does there has to be some kind intelligence behind this process again? Oh right there doesn't need to be any... all you need is an unimaginably large amount of what we call time.


Great metaphor - mind if I use it???

I was thinking about 'intelligence' and how we define rudamentary intelligence. It is the ability to react to stimulus by either getting closer (attraction) or moving away (repulsion) just as in magnets. What I have read of early life the first cells (rather the first cell walls - separating one bit of goo from another bit of goo) came about in just such a manner. Bits of goo being attracted to similar bits of goo and voila - creation.

edit on 31-5-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)


Nope have at it.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   
A perfect vacuum cannot exist... no more than some grey bearded man in the clouds waiting to incarnate as the second coming or first if you happen to be Jewish.

There is no way to remove all particles in a vacuum created or natural, particles are everywhere some can randomly appear in a pin point of space and time and vanish just as easy anywhere including vacuums, there are some that pass through everything unimpeded so the perfect vacuum you propose simply cannot exist. I think the concept you may be fishing for is a perfect void... not perfect vacuum.

But still if even such a thing as a perfect void could exist, it wouldn't exist for very long... but then again how are you going to define a boundary to this vacuum or void? The walls or boundaries make it not a perfect vacuum or void because they are part of a whole... you see for a void or vacuum of nothingness there has to be a container or place for this nothingness to exist... making it a logical paradox. This is why I reject the singular big bang theory for the reason behind all that exists... it's just as bad as creationism.

There is space lets call it empty something moves into the space now it is occupied, the space did not cease to exist it was just occupied, and when the something moves off of that space.. that space was not created.

You had a thought... from where did it arise? You moved onto something else, to where did the thought pass? When you sleep where is the reality of the world and all in it contained, when you awake back into waking consciousness from where does the the continuity keeping things the same arise and to where does the dream reality go? They all are just states of being. It's the same with matter or not matter becoming space, and space that is not space becoming matter.

Space and matter are the same thing with two different properties, occupied and unoccupied. How many states can water be in? It can be a liquid it can be a solid it can be a gas. The property of space is matter or not matter the property of matter is space or not space... eventually space will just be called dark matter and it's force called dark energy... just as matter is called matter and it's force gravity.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
It can be a liquid it can be a solid it can be a gas.



Oh, Oh, Oh - speaking of water - really,really kewl. New phase of water - ordered and not the 'structured water' stuff.

Gerald Pollack of The University of Washington has discovered, by team effort and clever experimentation, a new state of water - Ordered:

faculty.washington.edu...



Water Science:
Water has three phases – gas, liquid, and solid; but recent findings from our laboratory imply the presence of a surprisingly extensive fourth phase that occurs at interfaces. This finding may have unexpectedly profound implication for chemistry, physics and biology.



and
faculty.washington.edu...



The impact of surfaces on the contiguous aqueous phase is generally thought to extend no more than a few water-molecule layers. We find, however, that colloidal and molecular solutes are profoundly excluded from the vicinity of hydrophilic surfaces, to distances up to several hundred micrometers. Such large zones of exclusion have been observed next to many different hydrophilic surfaces, and many diverse solutes are excluded. Hence, the exclusion phenomenon appears to be quite general.


Here is a link to video of a lecture by him on the subject titled "Water, Energy, and Life: Fresh Views From the Water's Edge" - fascinating:

www.youtube.com...

Know it's off topic (well maybe not) but I get excited when there is 'water talk'. Now water is a real mystery - it breaks all the rules. Personally - I think water is a mediator between matter ( and I include energy as a form of matter) and spirit. That belief stated, please note that my belief in Spirit doesn't mean a belief in a god or gods any more then my belief in Faith requires a god to work.

Water - really kewl. Flow Forms - oh boy there goes my day.......
edit on 1-6-2013 by FyreByrd because: Just had to add another link and quote.

edit on 1-6-2013 by FyreByrd because: wrong term -

edit on 1-6-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness
 





A perfect vacuum cannot exist... no more than some grey bearded man in the clouds waiting to incarnate as the second coming or first if you happen to be Jewish.

There is no way to remove all particles in a vacuum created or natural, particles are everywhere some can randomly appear in a pin point of space and time and vanish just as easy anywhere including vacuums, there are some that pass through everything unimpeded so the perfect vacuum you propose simply cannot exist. I think the concept you may be fishing for is a perfect void... not perfect vacuum.


A absolute vacuum does exist. Its just that we can not create it in a chaimber. Because the vacuum will always be bomarded with particles from the chaimber or the chaimbers surroundings.

A vacuum in a chaimber is also not even close to be like a vacuum that surrounds matter in a open space.

A vacuum in space always surrounds matter. That is a very big difference than a vacuum in a chaimber.

Man i which you people could start to understand what you read when you read science.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


You're saying an absolute vacuum exists? Then go even further to say that science backs your belief up
feel free to cite science articles that back this up, and I don't mean wikipedia, yahoo answers or forum drivel. For every one you could find... good luck with that I could find 10 saying the opposite from top universities and people working in the field.

Ok let me quickly debunk this notion for you, you say "A vacuum in space always surrounds matter." my dear friend there are particles that pass through matter all the time; easier than your arm can wave through the air in front of you. Where exactly is this absolute vacuum of your's supposed to be located? Are you suggesting that it is everything in the universe that is not matter? Is your notion of a vacuum a pressure variance? Or an absolute void of anything at all? Come on I'm giving you a way out here to save face... choose wisely.

Lets get basic for a second; most peoples concept of space is that it is like the space between you and say the furthest wall.. you can see through it, sometimes you can see things floating in it, but it's pretty much empty... that's the average concept of space. Ready for the reality of it?

Now lets take a look at the reality... if what is perceived as empty space in the room around you's particles were all to suddenly turn into one type lets say all the particles were to change into atoms of gold, you would be encased in a solid block of gold. Space is exactly the same; when a vacuum is created in a lab they have a really good idea of all the particles contained within that space and delete them from the equation not the vacuum then look for anomalies that do not belong... because absolute vacuums cannot exist.

Man I wish people not only read science but comprehended it...



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


I've seen various demonstrations of this before, here's an interesting one... the effect that is. I wouldn't bite down too hard on any theories as to what is occurring just yet; although it isn't a whacked out concept given by the presenter at all but a very good theory on what's occurring. So my suggestion is to watch the video without sound and just observe, so you don't pick up any bias in the observation as to what's occurring... the title may create a little taint of it, but not as much as if the sound is on along with it at first view. Think about it, in relation to your studies then watch and listen is my advice.

The actual demonstration begins at around 45ish



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness
 


The thing is i dont take all science for being the absolute fact. The fact is that we cant produce a absolute empty space. And the scientists also explain why. Dont use this as your argument.

Science have a value set for their absolute vacuum. And it is agreed upon within the scientific comunity.
Dont use this as your argument.

Science can not observe the outher rimes of the space of our universe. They can only speculate.

Within the space of our universe you will never be able to find a absolute empty space. I have said this more than once. The reason is: the space within our universe is made up of matter, particles/dark matter. But there is no way in hell science can state that all space byond the space of our universe is filled with matter, particles or dark matter. They can only speculate.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Now, imagine that I popped into a realm of absolute nothing. When I try to move my hand I am going to have a serious problem. I can't push NOTHING out of the way. NOTHING has no qualities. Also, if I could move my hand, NOTHING cannot fill in the space that my hand previously occupied. If something DID fill in that space, then that something is SOMETHING and not NOTHING.

So, if I were to pop into a realm of nothing I would be totally stuck and couldn't move. But, the truth of the matter is that I wouldn't even be able to pop into a realm of nothing. What in that nothing realm would move aside to allow my body to exist there? NOTHING can't move aside. NOTHING has no qualities that can be manipulated.


If you were to pop into a space of absolute nothing, you would be totally unable to perceive anything but yourself. Any concept of motion would be meaningless except relative to yourself, so you would be able to move your arms, legs, spine etc. but there would be no concept of going anywhere. The circle centered on your core which encompasses your range of motion would cease to be nothing and would become "space". Consider the diagram of the Vitruvian Man; within that circle is space, beyond is nothingness. The circle itself is the limit of your own personal universe.




If there was ever a time of nothingness, there would still be nothing because this state wouldn't have the qualities necessary to move aside to allow the universe to fill it in.


Perhaps "nothing" has exactly the right qualities to allow "something" (i.e. the universe) to take its place





Thanks for reading.
edit on 5/28/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)


It was my pleasure, thanks for posting



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Nice pandering retraction of your original assertion. Speculation on theories are a given; speculating on what science has pretty well dis-proven so far; as existing anywhere at all. Is the same thing as saying a group of robotic seahorses may live outside the known universe, and their flatulent exhaust creates the magical absolute vacuum that may be out there too.

In theoretical science there is roughly 99% of fact that the roughly 1% that is theory is tied too. You can't just toss out the known 99% when making scientific assertions.

P.S. The known universe is just the observable universe, it could be going on and on and on billions of times larger than what we observe the known universe size to be... the speed of light for objects to come into observable view is pretty fast but it still takes time.



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Unfortunately, to say that anything is absolutely impossible without absolute data is considered absolutely naive...
We mere humans have NO IDEA what is possible and what isn't...
A2D



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


If I am free falling in space where there is no "air" pretty sure I can move



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness
 





Speculation on theories are a given; speculating on what science has pretty well dis-proven so far; as existing anywhere at all. Is the same thing as saying a group of robotic seahorses may live outside the known universe, and their flatulent exhaust creates the magical absolute vacuum that may be out there too.


No, what i am stating is not the same things as saying robatic seahorses may live out side our known universe. And you know it to. The odds of there being sea horses outside our known univere is less posssible than there being absolute empty space there. You know this to. That is why you use that argument.
Just like you people like to speak on christians behalf and state that we like to believe in a 8 leget sea monster. There are no christians who call God a 8 leget sea monster. You people do.

If you people think God is a sea monster how can you understand science? Because stating that God is a sea monster is not very scientific. Neider is your argument above.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


No I say god doesn't exist, never has existed and never will, outside of fantasy... and in those wishing to control the masses, with fear of some everlasting damnation waiting and lurking so ya better be good, except when killing and maiming in this made up beings name; as justification for all horrible actions against humanity. Many people are fine and do good on their own; without all the judgement of each other, because of their separate chosen spiritual paths or choice of none at all.

If a god is what you need and like to believe in; and it helps you through life... have at it. Personal belief structures do not concern me at all.



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
reply to post by spy66
 


No I say god doesn't exist, never has existed and never will, outside of fantasy... and in those wishing to control the masses, with fear of some everlasting damnation waiting and lurking so ya better be good, except when killing and maiming in this made up beings name; as justification for all horrible actions against humanity. Many people are fine and do good on their own; without all the judgement of each other, because of their separate chosen spiritual paths or choice of none at all.

If a god is what you need and like to believe in; and it helps you through life... have at it. Personal belief structures do not concern me at all.


Only to you will God not exist. To me God exists, and always have and always will. You have no right to state the non-existence of God when there is no way you can porve it. I wont take yours or science word for it until you or they can prove it without doubt.

The misuse of religion is a human idea, It has nothing to do with God. God doesn't want us to misuse religion. Only people can missuse religion, and they do. People misuse science as well. Moste people have moral and ethical weaknesses.
Why blame religion for the crap we do with it. You dont even have to be religious to misuse religion. You can be a non believer and do just has much harm.


edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2013 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by noissucnoc16
reply to post by jiggerj
 


If I am free falling in space where there is no "air" pretty sure I can move


In which direction would you be "free falling" in space?



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join