It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I am presenting the fact that that matter and energy have always existed, because they are something, and we know something must always exist, because there was never a time there was nothing. And as I’ve pointed out above, matter seems to have a lot more going for it than the God hypothesis.
originally posted by: toktaylor
a reply to: Out6of9Balance
Then we also have to go about proving that non-material life can exist, and can think, and have knowledge, and create matter from nothing. Why not just say that the what exists is what exists?
Based on the God Hypothesis, we have to forego logic and accept:
Supernatural spiritual beings can exist.
Spiritual beings can exist eternally without cause.
Spiritual beings can create new matter and energy from nothing.
Spiritual beings can exist outside of space and time.
Spiritual beings can store, retrieve, and creatively process information.
Spiritual beings are constantly learning, or are able to somehow have knowledge without ever being educated.
Spiritual beings have needs or emotions that lead them to create things.
Copenhagen interpretation Edit
Main article: Copenhagen interpretation
A commonly held interpretation of quantum mechanics is the Copenhagen interpretation. In the Copenhagen interpretation, a system stops being a superposition of states and becomes either one or the other when an observation takes place. This thought experiment makes apparent the fact that the nature of measurement, or observation, is not well-defined in this interpretation. The experiment can be interpreted to mean that while the box is closed, the system simultaneously exists in a superposition of the states "decayed nucleus/dead cat" and "undecayed nucleus/living cat", and that only when the box is opened and an observation performed does the wave function collapse into one of the two states.
originally posted by: Pachomius
Dear everyone posting here:
Forgive me, but the fact is that you all engage in vain verbiage in order to sound Oh you are so very smart.
Being smart is all vacuity, the more impressive act is to face me and we will exchange thoughts to the enhancement of mutually arrived at facts, truths, logic, and thus becoming better and better gentlemen intellectuals, instead of mere verbose empty words stringers.
Dear readers and posters here, do you have the courage i.e. guts and/or balls to tell me whether you have thought enough, as to have come to the irrefutable certainty that existence is the default status of reality?
Okay, everyone, tell me: Do you concur with me that existence is the default status of reality?
Don't evade answering my question, with either yes or no, and then please explain concisely, cleanly and intelligently i.e. with even just the most meager of IQ – why yes or why no?
Watch out now, dear readers, take notice whether our self-smart verbose words stringers will take on my challenge to them, answer me, Do you concur with me, that existence is the default status of reality?
If you don't understand my challenge, then just let us work together as to agree on a mutually accepted understanding of my challenge to you, namely, do you concur with me that Existence is the default status of reality?
What words in the list below don’t you know the meaning of?
By the way, if you can't or don't know the meanings of the words above, then perhaps you should not be here at all, owing to deficient comprehension of basic English vocabulary.