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.

 

Why God Exist!!!?

page: 24
13
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


That was a good one. But it is not that hard to answer, but it is very hard to understand and Accept the answer. There is no way we can hide or destroy any information in any way from the infinite. Hiding information from other human being is not hard.

There is no way you will come up With any knowledge that have not been descided for you by the infinite. Our lives are predetermined in Advanced. The expanding singularity is the proof of that. Everything up until today, even Your birth have happened exactly on time and as planned.

That is the hard thing to Accept. And many of you will never Accept it.




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




posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   

spy66
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


That was a good one. But it is not that hard to answer, but it is very hard to understand and Accept the answer. There is no way we can hide or destroy any information in any way from the infinite. Hiding information from other human being is not hard.

There is no way you will come up With any knowledge that have not been descided for you by the infinite. Our lives are predetermined in Advanced. The expanding singularity is the proof of that. Everything up until today have happened exactly on time and as planned.

That is the hard thing to Accept. And many of never will Accept it.





Can I get a link for that?



posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Do you need a link that teaches you about evolution?

Do you need a link to be thought about the past?

Everything and everyone fallows a stright time line. No one gets a second chanse to change or alter their past time line.
There is only now.

Time is one of the fundamentals of expansion. There is no way back, there is only forward.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


I meant a link for the whole predetermined thing. I won't just take your word on that, you know.
edit on 19-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66
 


I meant a link for the whole predetermined thing. I won't just take your word on that, you know.
edit on 19-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Who's Word will you take?
What if none actually knows this but me?
Am i wrong because of that?

Cant you actually understand this on Your own without someone else knowing this for you?

No scientist will ever tell you anything like i have told you. If they ever did, they would have had to explain them selves to their employer "the authority who pays their vages". Even if they know, there is no garanty that you will ever know. So you better start doing som thinking.



EDIT: Learing is a skill. But you will never improve Your learing skills by just Reading the manual or just the right answer. Get it?
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 





The singularity "Our Universe" is not spining. It is expanding. Only galaxies spin around their black hole. It is the Space "the void" between galaxies, stars and planets that are expanding and pushing galaxies away from eachother equally in all directions. What force would make Our universe spin? There is no force present to make that happen. Our universe would not expand equaly in all directions if it was spinning.


That might be or might not be the case, but in any case it's very interesting to know if there's any truth to this as suggested by these findings:


The universe was born spinning and continues to do so around a preferred axis – that is the bold conclusion of physicists in the US who have studied the rotation of more than 15,000 galaxies. While most cosmological theories have suggested that – on a large scale – the universe is the same in every direction, these recent findings suggest that the early universe was born spinning about a specific axis. If correct, this also means that the universe does not possess mirror symmetry, but rather has a preferred right or left "handedness". Led by Michael Longo from the University of Michigan, the team had set out to test whether mirror symmetry, also referred to as "parity", was violated on the largest scales. If a particle violates parity, its mirror image would behave differently, and such particles can be described as right- or left-handed. Parity is violated in nuclear beta decays and there is a strong preference in nature for left-handed amino acids, rather than right-handed.
...
What impact would this have on the Big Bang and how the universe was born? Observers in our universe could never see outside of it, so we cannot directly tell if the universe is spinning, in principle, explains Longo. "But if we could show that our universe still retains the initial angular momentum within its galaxies, it would be evidence that our universe exists within some larger space and it was born spinning relative to other universes," he told physicsworld.com. "I picture the Big Bang as being born with spin, just like a proton or electron has spin. As the universe expanded, the initial angular momentum would be spread among the bits of matter that we call galaxies, so that the galaxies now tend to spin in a preferred direction," he explained. When asked if the preferred spin on a large scale could be induced by some other means, he agrees that, while it may be possible, a net universal spin would be simplest explanation and so probably the best-case scenario.




physicsworld.com...

More to the point, if there's some truth to this, what are the implications of these?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Why are you asking spy specifically? Confirmation bias? I'm sure spy isn't the only one with an opinion to offer in answer to your questions.


Hahahaha...


what's with you man?

Should had I asked you instead??? someone who doesn't believe in infinity?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Well, why a god? Which of the thousands of gods are you thinking that did this?

There are several theories as to how this universe began or was formed from either another universe or from a black hole, or from nothing or something else. There are some pretty incredible ideas about this and just because we don't know doesn't mean that there has to be a creator. Check out this lecture from Lawrence Krauss. It's kinda hard to wrap your mind around at times but, it does actually explain how something (the universe) could come nothing. Remember it's actually ok that we don't know everything. If you think about it, it's actually pretty cool. There is so much more to discover!

youtu.be...

Good luck on your search for truth


edit on 20-1-2014 by moresco because: context



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

edmc^2

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Why are you asking spy specifically? Confirmation bias? I'm sure spy isn't the only one with an opinion to offer in answer to your questions.


Hahahaha...


what's with you man?

Should had I asked you instead??? someone who doesn't believe in infinity?





I have a hard time believing in that which my mind is unable to wrap around. You can hardly expect anything else of the rational human intellect, although your eagerness to swallow anything that exceeds your comprehensive capabilities is just a little bit revealing, in my opinion. If you're willing to bring an actual mathematician into the discussion, I'd be willing to observe his/her critique of your armchair expertise.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   

moresco
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Well, why a god? Which of the thousands of gods are you thinking that did this?

There are several theories as to how this universe began or was formed from either another universe or from a black hole, or from nothing or something else. There are some pretty incredible ideas about this and just because we don't know doesn't mean that there has to be a creator. Check out this lecture from Lawrence Krauss. It's kinda hard to wrap your mind around at times but, it does actually explain how something (the universe) could come nothing. Remember it's actually ok that we don't know everything. If you think about it, it's actually pretty cool. There is so much more to discover!

youtu.be...

Good luck on your search for truth


edit on 20-1-2014 by moresco because: context


Thanks for the post moresco but I already found the truth and it's amazingly simple but awe inspiring.

As for the Krauss' idea of "something from nothing" - we've covered that already but it bears repeating that such an idea goes against the very core of scientific logic.

That is, that you can't get something from nothing but rather - something comes something.

Anything beyond this simple logical fact is scientific philosophy - metaphysics.

And as already put forth many times - if something creates something then that "something" OR "someone" MUST of necessity be INFINITE and ALWAYS existing.

Thus, that which is FINITE must of necessity comes from the INFINITE - not the other way around.

It's the fact just as "cold emanates from the hot".



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   

AfterInfinity

edmc^2

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Why are you asking spy specifically? Confirmation bias? I'm sure spy isn't the only one with an opinion to offer in answer to your questions.


Hahahaha...


what's with you man?

Should had I asked you instead??? someone who doesn't believe in infinity?





I have a hard time believing in that which my mind is unable to wrap around. You can hardly expect anything else of the rational human intellect, although your eagerness to swallow anything that exceeds your comprehensive capabilities is just a little bit revealing, in my opinion. If you're willing to bring an actual mathematician into the discussion, I'd be willing to observe his/her critique of your armchair expertise.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


I guess that's the difference between you and I - the ability to wrap around that which is not physical.

As for mathematician here's my favorite Theoretical Physicist Dr. Kaku on the subject of INFINITY and physical laws.




posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

edmc^2

AfterInfinity

edmc^2

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Why are you asking spy specifically? Confirmation bias? I'm sure spy isn't the only one with an opinion to offer in answer to your questions.


Hahahaha...


what's with you man?

Should had I asked you instead??? someone who doesn't believe in infinity?





I have a hard time believing in that which my mind is unable to wrap around. You can hardly expect anything else of the rational human intellect, although your eagerness to swallow anything that exceeds your comprehensive capabilities is just a little bit revealing, in my opinion. If you're willing to bring an actual mathematician into the discussion, I'd be willing to observe his/her critique of your armchair expertise.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


I guess that's the difference between you and I - the ability to wrap around that which is not physical.

As for mathematician here's my favorite Theoretical Physicist Dr. Kaku on the subject of INFINITY and physical laws.







It's not that you have an ability I don't. It's that you are willing to make connections that I feel are intellectually dishonest. To use an example from a story I read recently, you wrote "God exists because infinity exists" at the bottom of a paper, then went to the top and wrote all sorts of clever arguments designed to support that predesignated conclusion. I like to ask questions, propose an answer, test that answer, and revise until I have THE answer, and continue onward until my list of answers has outlined the FINAL answer. That's how science works, and that's what I don't feel you doing here.

One, you have no established set of parameters by which to identify a deity. I mean solid, reliable, scientifically established check points by which to determine that an entity is in all actuality a deity.

Which leads to point two: you have no basis by which to declare that a deity possesses infinite anything as an attribute, and can therefore be determined as a deity by determining the infinite nature of that attribute.

Three: you have not convinced me that the infinite actually exists. I don't know for a fact that this universe is infinite, and I'm not going to assume just because it make one answer or another more true.

In short - believe what you want to, but your approach to theistic problem solving has left me extremely unimpressed. Suffice it to say that your confidence in your final solution is wholly undeserved, in my humble opinion. In any case, I do believe that I am done here. Have fun.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   

AfterInfinity

edmc^2

AfterInfinity

edmc^2

AfterInfinity
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Why are you asking spy specifically? Confirmation bias? I'm sure spy isn't the only one with an opinion to offer in answer to your questions.


Hahahaha...


what's with you man?

Should had I asked you instead??? someone who doesn't believe in infinity?





I have a hard time believing in that which my mind is unable to wrap around. You can hardly expect anything else of the rational human intellect, although your eagerness to swallow anything that exceeds your comprehensive capabilities is just a little bit revealing, in my opinion. If you're willing to bring an actual mathematician into the discussion, I'd be willing to observe his/her critique of your armchair expertise.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


I guess that's the difference between you and I - the ability to wrap around that which is not physical.

As for mathematician here's my favorite Theoretical Physicist Dr. Kaku on the subject of INFINITY and physical laws.







It's not that you have an ability I don't. It's that you are willing to make connections that I feel are intellectually dishonest. To use an example from a story I read recently, you wrote "God exists because infinity exists" at the bottom of a paper, then went to the top and wrote all sorts of clever arguments designed to support that predesignated conclusion. I like to ask questions, propose an answer, test that answer, and revise until I have THE answer, and continue onward until my list of answers has outlined the FINAL answer. That's how science works, and that's what I don't feel you doing here.

One, you have no established set of parameters by which to identify a deity. I mean solid, reliable, scientifically established check points by which to determine that an entity is in all actuality a deity.

Which leads to point two: you have no basis by which to declare that a deity possesses infinite anything as an attribute, and can therefore be determined as a deity by determining the infinite nature of that attribute.

Three: you have not convinced me that the infinite actually exists. I don't know for a fact that this universe is infinite, and I'm not going to assume just because it make one answer or another more true.

In short - believe what you want to, but your approach to theistic problem solving has left me extremely unimpressed. Suffice it to say that your confidence in your final solution is wholly undeserved, in my humble opinion. In any case, I do believe that I am done here. Have fun.
edit on 20-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


First off - please stop saying " In any case, I do believe that I am done here. Have fun" because you're just repeating yourself over and over and keeps coming back.

Secondly, like you, I too...

"like to ask questions, propose an answer, test that answer, and revise until I have THE answer, and continue onward until my list of answers has outlined the FINAL answer. "

And the fact supports my conclusion that INFINITY exist as proven by science and mathematics. Otherwise we live in a FINITE space-time continuum! Thus we should have seen the "boundary" or END of space by now. But the fact that since the universe IS expanding, thus it follows the fundamental fact that SPACE must then be an INFINITE SPACE!

Now if or since INFINITE SPACE exist,who or what created it then? IT can't! For how can something INFINITE - create itself? It's mathematically and scientifically impossible to say INFINITY created INFINITY.

So the ONLY alternative is to conclude that INFINITY (as the name implies) must ALWAYS exist!

But if this phenomena -INFINITY- exist then what prevents other phenomena from existing?

What prevents "someone eternal" to exist IF "something infinite" exist?

What say you?

I say, NONE because all evidence POINTS to fact that the universe is governed by laws. And laws, especially the laws that govern the universe cannot exist on their own apart from a law maker.

Unless of course none of these makes sense to you then you will never find the answer you're looking for.

Good luck though.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Well, the problem here is that edmc and spy have been talking through a path of unrelated ideas to distract everyone, then stating their opinion. Sleight of hand, persuasion-style. The statements aren't supported well enough and the ideas aren't connected well enough to be worthy of an intellectual debate.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

twsnhr013
Well, the problem here is that edmc and spy have been talking through a path of unrelated ideas to distract everyone, then stating their opinion. Sleight of hand, persuasion-style. The statements aren't supported well enough and the ideas aren't connected well enough to be worthy of an intellectual debate.


Look at all the evidence and sources and links they have failed to present. In fact, before I remove this thread from my subscriptions, I issue a challenge: let Edmc or Spy66 post a thread inviting all currently residing mathematicians and science majors in ATS to discuss with us ATS'ers, and perhaps educate us, in the realities of INFINITY. Oh, and link that thread in this one. That is the only way I will be satisfied with the conclusions laid out in this thread.

Your move, guys. I'll be looking for your thread.
edit on 21-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 




And the fact supports my conclusion that INFINITY exist as proven by science and mathematics. Otherwise we live in a FINITE space-time continuum! Thus we should have seen the "boundary" or END of space by now. But the fact that since the universe IS expanding, thus it follows the fundamental fact that SPACE must then be an INFINITE SPACE!

When reading this I find a problem with the statements. You and I both are making assumptions as to the answer at hand. Stating that we should have seen a boundary just isn't true. We have no idea of the universes size nor what it is expanding into. We have theories that estimate it and guesswork as to whats at the edge but nothing concrete. I do see your stance and agree its possible if not probable but it is not fact. There isn't enough data available to do the math to make it a fact.



I say, NONE because all evidence POINTS to fact that the universe is governed by laws. And laws, especially the laws that govern the universe cannot exist on their own apart from a law maker.

The universe is governed by laws. But, again your working from a point where you just like me don't have enough information to state facts. The universal laws may be constant and unbreakable. That seems to be the case the way the universe is now. But, your trying to make the assertion that this would be true in all instances in areas that have never been encountered such as the edge of our universe, outside of it, or during its initial beginning. Since there isn't any known information about what was before the start of this universe you and I and everyone on this planet is left with a guess.



What say you?


There is nothing to prevent what your saying from being true at all. It may very well be that there is some eternal whatever that actually created everything. You stated you have the ability to "wrap around that which is not physical" then it should be no problem for you to see the fact that the opposite side of the argument here has the same amount of chance to be true as well. So what your saying to me makes sense, but, it carries no more merit than the opposite side of the coin. The reason for this is purely looking at it for "evidence" or either side. When your dealing with before the beginning there isn't proof of either nor does the information we have show more support for either imo. It really doesn't matter how much math you do if you don't have all the data it will remain incomplete.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by drivers1492
 


Thanks driver' for your balanced post. I admire your way of looking at things - right in the middle. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) it doesn't work for me. Like you said, there are two sides of the coin. True statement, BUT there's only one truth and both "sides of the coin" can't be true.

And here lies the conundrum:

If God Exist thus He must be the ultimate source.

But if God does not exist thus all of these are just products of chance events.

One of these is the truth, can't be both - otherwise they will cancel each other. There's no other way around it.

So the question really is, how do we know which one is the truth? Who is to say which one is the truth?

On this - the evidence (at hand) coupled with logic IS the one that will tell us which side is the truth.

That is, if the evidence doesn't make logical sense and/but will require enormousness amount of explanation to justify its existence (and still doesn't make sense) then (to me) it is NOT the truth.

So in this case, the logical explanation for the existence of the Universe is that "Something" was already there rather than "Nothing" (Krauss). In addition there's nothing logical about "Nothing" producing something (universe - energy matter). Nothing at all, not in math, not in science, not in physics, not even in day to day life experience! Try as hard as you can, it can't be done.

Simply put - "Nothing produces - nothing" - not even Energy the source of matter.

Hence with this simple logic, I/we now can confidently say that if "Something" produce the something else (the universe - energy matter), we should expect and predict then that, that "Something" MUST be by necessity Always Existing. It must! For how could this "Something" produce something else (universe - energy matter) if it was created by another "Something" (a higher "Something")? It's highly illogical to think that way.

So, simply put, an Always Existing "Something" produced everything else (the universe - energy matter).

There's NO other alternative but to conclude it this way, otherwise we're back to the highly illogical notion / idea that "Nothing can produce something" - impossible.

In addition, one has to have an enormous amount of "faith" and willing to delve into the world of metaphysics or scientific philosophy in order to accept that "Out of Nothing comes something". Whether you believe this or not, that's where you will be at if you go that route.

On the other hand - to accept that an Always Existing "Something" produced everything else (the universe - energy matter), one has no need to explain the impossible because we ALREADY have one that can easily explain it - the concept of INFINITY.

And since the concept and the word INFINITY implies boundless/timeless/endless thus the concept of an Always Existing "Something" fits nicely in the picture.

Thus, that which is INFINITE produced the finite.

But as a Theist, rather than an "Always Existing "Something" created the Universe/matter/energy, it's much MORE logical and makes more sense to me to conclude that an Always Existing "Someone" created the Universe/matter/energy.

Why?

Precise Order and Intelligence! These are not attributes of "Something" but "Someone". And the Universe is just smack dab full of it.

Of course if one doesn't see the order and intelligence in the universe then might as well conclude that "Out of Nothing comes something".

So which side of the coin are we in/at? Which side makes logical sense? Which one holds merit? What does the evidence show? What does the data lead us to?

"Someone/Something or Nothing" created everything?


my 2 cents.



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Are you going to make that thread? Or are you just going to satisfy yourself with the "knowledge" and "facts" that you already have? Because I think we need some actual experts in here, some actual EXPERT OPINIONS. Do I have to make the thread for you? Would you attend if I did? A thread on whether or not infinity exists and in what capacity according to leading experts, and whether such information substantiates the existence of a deity. That's what the thread would be about.
edit on 21-1-2014 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 


I have readabout this some time ago. There is no doubt that there is motion in the space between galaxies. That is because there are pockets of space out there with different pressure's "with less matter and particles pr.square meter of space" than other places.

If our universe was spinning or rotating it would have been observed a long time ago. It would also have been possible to project the spin mathematically. Our universe would not expand in a stright line either. The expansion would seam curved.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 06:48 PM
link   

moresco
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Well, why a god? Which of the thousands of gods are you thinking that did this?

There are several theories as to how this universe began or was formed from either another universe or from a black hole, or from nothing or something else. There are some pretty incredible ideas about this and just because we don't know doesn't mean that there has to be a creator. Check out this lecture from Lawrence Krauss. It's kinda hard to wrap your mind around at times but, it does actually explain how something (the universe) could come nothing. Remember it's actually ok that we don't know everything. If you think about it, it's actually pretty cool. There is so much more to discover!

youtu.be...

Good luck on your search for truth


edit on 20-1-2014 by moresco because: context


-Can a black hole exist without matter and particles.
-What kind of energies does the black hole produce.

If you understand Mr Krauss; what time would nothing have compared to finite.

If you get the time right ask Mr. Krauss how he's theory kan hold up. The reason this sponsored Mr. Krauss can make living of he's theories is because peopel are dumb as hell.


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

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



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join