Why God Exist!!!?

spy66
Well there are fraction within the Scientific cummunity that state that Our universe will expand outwards indefinetly.

How can they do that if they know what finite is?

Are you putting 'universe' in the finite' bracket?
Then what does 'universe' consist of?
The things like planets and suns, to me, would be the finite - the things.
The space in which the planets move and appear in, to me, would be the infinite.

The space has to be present prior to any thing.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

You will degrade one way or another. Nothing lasts forever. Absolute destruction, for another. Nothing can be completely destroyed, only transmuted.

As a coment to this;
There is a reason why finite cant be complete atter destroyed. And that is because of the infinite. The infinite takes up all Space possible.

Finite can only transform into what it used to be before it became finite. And that is the infinite. All finite must come from the infintie. Where else can finite come from; if finite is not infinite it self?

So the next question is, if the universe is finite, what's outside of it? Iunno. Wait a few thousand years and see if they find out. Science doesn't happen all at once.

You can read up on and learn that the Space outside Our universe must be a absolute vacuum. The medium that makes up the Space of our runiverse, the Space between Our galaxies,stars and planets are very colse to a absolute vacuume, And are still expanding. The Space can only do that if the Space surrounding Our universe is a absolute vacuum. Our universe would never expanding out wards into a Space that have more or equal presure as Our universe have.

That would mean there are no mater an particles pr square meter of Space outside our unverse, if one square meter of Our universe With its particles and dark matter is expanding outwards.

Itisnowagain

spy66
Well there are fraction within the Scientific cummunity that state that Our universe will expand outwards indefinetly.

How can they do that if they know what finite is?

Are you putting 'universe' in the finite' bracket?
Then what does 'universe' consist of?
The things like planets and suns, to me, would be the finite - the things.
The space in which the planets move and appear in, to me, would be the infinite.

The space has to be present prior to any thing.

edit on 3-12-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Our finite universe With everything within it; is the famous singularity. The Space between all planets, Galaxies and stars, and the planets,galaxies and stars makes up the expanding singularity.

It is the Space between the galaxies, stars and plates that are expanding and pushing the galaxies, stars and planets appart from eachother equally in all directions at the same time.

It aint just the large bodies within Our universe that are finite. The medium that make up the Space between these bodies are also finite.

reply to post by spy66


Why be concerned with infinity at all? Something so intellectually ephemeral is a waste of time. It has no practical value for us. Or for me, at least. Maybe you've some semantic attraction to it.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66

 

Why be concerned with infinity at all? Something so intellectually ephemeral is a waste of time. It has no practical value for us. Or for me, at least. Maybe you've some semantic attraction to it.

edit on 3-12-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Well that Depends on how you view this. Isac Newton brought up the same question to the Scientific cummunity a long time ago, but they said exactly what you are saying. The infinite dosent have any practical value concerning Our universe.

But it does.

Our universe came from it, and is expanding and changing because of it. It means everything to us.
It the reason why humanity/life will not exist for ever. But again, the infinite is the reason why we exist in the first Place.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66

 

Why be concerned with infinity at all? Something so intellectually ephemeral is a waste of time. It has no practical value for us. Or for me, at least. Maybe you've some semantic attraction to it.

edit on 3-12-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Too bad you don't get it. I think you should change your avatar name to NonInfinity or something besides Infinity.

Deny Ignorance.

reply to post by edmc^2


I don't get it because all you can do is dream about it. You'll never actually lay a finger on it. The infinite, if it does exist, is beyond your reach. It's beyond all of our reach.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2

 

I don't get it because all you can do is dream about it. You'll never actually lay a finger on it. The infinite, if it does exist, is beyond your reach. It's beyond all of our reach.

See the reason why you can't "lay a finger on it" is because you're using that which is tangible, that which is fleshly, that which is finite. No, you must use one of the most powerful tools in existence - the mind.

Consider. Stephen Hawking - a prisoner in own body, yet his mind is able to penetrate the vastness of the universe and beyond. Why? because he understands that the mind can go where the physical body can't.

And this is what we've been telling. Infinity is not just a vague concept but a reality in which the universe operates. It's a concept that has no end as the word implies. As such, it implies a possibility of an UNENDING existence for it offers the possibility of Something or Someone Eternal who has COMPLETE control of his creations.

Just like the sun. As long as spacetime exist and continue to exist 'ad infinitum', the universe will exist - even forever, to eternity.

That's odd considering Hawking is a major backer of the big crunch.If you want to spout spiritual nonsense go ahead but please don't pretend science and scientists back your viewpoint.

reply to post by edmc^2

See the reason why you can't "lay a finger on it" is because you're using that which is tangible, that which is fleshly, that which is finite. No, you must use one of the most powerful tools in existence - the mind.

That which is only real in the mind is called a psychosis. And an impractical psychosis is a handicap.

Consider. Stephen Hawking - a prisoner in own body, yet his mind is able to penetrate the vastness of the universe and beyond. Why? because he understands that the mind can go where the physical body can't.

'Heaven is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark' - Stephen Hawking

Huh. Imagine that.

And this is what we've been telling. Infinity is not just a vague concept but a reality in which the universe operates. It's a concept that has no end as the word implies. As such, it implies a possibility of an UNENDING existence for it offers the possibility of Something or Someone Eternal who has COMPLETE control of his creations.

To my understanding, it implies that someone has the emotional insecurity and intellectual fallibility to exploit their own blind spots for the comforting ray of hope it offers in absence of their own positive initiative.

In other words, some people simply lack the testicular fortitude to rely on their own character.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

That which is only real in the mind is called a psychosis. And an impractical psychosis is a handicap.

You mean since ALL imaginations starts in the MIND therefore they are not real?

If so then EVERYONE is a "psycho", including you.

If not, then please quantify and qualify your statement because E=mc2 comes from a brilliant mind as well as the many symphonies of Mozart and Beethoven!

Or the many inventions and masterpieces of Leonardo Da Vinci, et al!

As for Dr. Hawking who stated:

'Heaven is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark' - Stephen Hawking

In your book, is his mistaken belief about heaven disqualify him as a "theoretical physicist, cosmologist, author and Director of Research at the Centre for Theoretical Cosmology within the University of Cambridge"?


If so - by what criteria do you discredit him?

As these:

To my understanding, it implies that someone has the emotional insecurity and intellectual fallibility to exploit their own blind spots for the comforting ray of hope it offers in absence of their own positive initiative.

In other words, some people simply lack the testicular fortitude to rely on their own character.

To the contrary, those who can peer through spacetime / infinity is NOT a sign of an "emotional insecurity and intellectual fallibility" or "lack the testicular fortitude" but someone who achieved (a good) understanding of the unfathomable.

bastion
That's odd considering Hawking is a major backer of the big crunch.If you want to spout spiritual nonsense go ahead but please don't pretend science and scientists back your viewpoint.

I merely used him as an example of how the mind can't be imprisoned by the body.

Hence, the mind as one of the most powerful tools in existence!

Yeah, this thread is a huge waste of time for everyone involved. We've come down to a circular debate in which we attempt to debunk or quantify the precise nature of a concept which our minds are incapable of grasping in its entirety.

And this is why your silly thread has in no way proven anything but the human propensity for getting hung upon on the details involved in figuring out a problem that doesn't make a damned bit of difference anyway. Infinity has no bearing on a species that lives for less than 150 years and can't fly any further than the next planet.

The cart goes BEHIND the horse. By which I mean, figure crap out here on Earth before you start worrying about the universe. Either way, I'm out.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Thank you.

All I can say is this: if you know your past then you'll have a much better idea to predict your future.


And as Einstein said:

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

End thread for you then.

reply to post by edmc^2


Indeed it is and he's and of my 'favoutire' scientists for want of a better word.

I just find it odd you choosing him as an example as he states all his Physics discredit the idea of a creator and finds the notion of god infantile at best.

bastion
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Indeed it is and he's and of my 'favoutire' scientists for want of a better word.

I just find it odd you choosing him as an example as he states all his Physics discredit the idea of a creator and finds the notion of god infantile at best.

Mine as well along with Dr. Kaku, late Dr. Carl Sagan and others in the scientific field.

But as to what they say/said, I make a differentiation and take the ones that makes logical sense.

As to their philosophical ideas - that's where I depart.

Hence when Dr. Hawking talks about Heavens and God in philosophical manner, I always look at it with a big ??? & a - especially if not scriptural.

Bottom line is - as I've always stated: true science is not in question but only the ones that don't make logical sense.

But his ideas on Physical laws meaning the Universe/Big bang would always occur are not philosophical. It's why something comes from nothing.

bastion
But his ideas on Physical laws meaning the Universe/Big bang would always occur are not philosophical. It's why something comes from nothing.

A prime example of an illogical concept - not supported by facts and common sense.

to me such idea resides in the realm of metaphysics. In fact it takes an EXTRA Ordinary amount of FAITH to believe that "something comes from nothing".


And I don't quite understand why Dr. Hawking even promoted it.

But the fact is - it's easier to believe and conceptualized that "something infinite" or "someone eternal" exist beyond the physical as the foundation of anything material.

I have more confidence on this concept as it's supported by reality.

edmc^2

bastion
But his ideas on Physical laws meaning the Universe/Big bang would always occur are not philosophical. It's why something comes from nothing.

A prime example of an illogical concept - not supported by facts and common sense.

to me such idea resides in the realm of metaphysics. In fact it takes an EXTRA Ordinary amount of FAITH to believe that "something comes from nothing".


And I don't quite understand why Dr. Hawking even promoted it.

But the fact is - it's easier to believe and conceptualized that "something infinite" or "someone eternal" exist beyond the physical as the foundation of anything material.

I have more confidence on this concept as it's supported by reality.

So Science and Hawking are illogical now? If you don't think it's supported by facts you need to read some Astrophysics.

Just because something is difficult to understand and takes years of work doesn't make it illogical.

Just because there's an easy answer doesn't mean it's right, plus it's in no way supported by reality.

Read Hawking's - The Grand Design and see if you can come up with any counter arguments instead of inventing sky gods to fill in gaps.

edmc^2

To all unbelievers, here's a simple yet profound question that merits an honest answer.

That is:

Should not the existence of "something" uncreated and infinite proves the existence of "someone" uncreated and infinite - God?

No , lack of knowledge is not the best method to obtain a valid answer. You can only use logic by deduction if you know all the variables in the equation. We know very little variables in regards to the universe and how it all works.

Even so, who is to say that the God you reference is not an Alien teenager doing a science project?