How did the Universe get here?

[Boss]

Certainly! I posted a picture of their world above. Shame the devil and tell the truth, it is possible that life on earth is merely the result of Liquid Water + Sunshine, Chemistry and Time.

Is that proof of our origins? Of course not - Origins is one of the unprovable subjects.

Do you have evidence that intelligent design is behind it all? Of course you do!

Shame the devil and tell the truth, it is possible that the ancient stories actually were inspired by, for lack of a better word, 'God', the origin stories within are absolute truth, and Heaven awaits those who can figure out how to use those ancient tomes to understand exactly what the deal is concerning The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Koran.

Is that proof of our origins? Of course not - Origins is one of the unprovable subjects.

The questions we each now get to discuss in the privacy of our own minds are, What does the evidence say to ME? What are MY reasons for believing what I believe about Origins, God and Death?

Possibilities!​

Regardless of what your faith is or what incarnation of God you may or may not believe, the question you were asked was about the evidence for chemical/molecular interactions resulting in life and reproduction of life. We're not discussing what is possible, but if you have evidence to support your statement that Earth is such a place where this happened.

Now so far, the only real "evidence" I can see, is that we exist and life exists. That does not prove any speculation about water, sunshine, chemistry and time resulting in life.

 

[007]

Certainly! I posted a picture of their world above. Shame the devil and tell the truth, it is possible that life on earth is merely the result of Liquid Water + Sunshine, Chemistry and Time.

Is that proof of our origins? Of course not - Origins is one of the unprovable subjects.

Do you have evidence that intelligent design is behind it all? Of course you do!

Shame the devil and tell the truth, it is possible that the ancient stories actually were inspired by, for lack of a better word, 'God', the origin stories within are absolute truth, and Heaven awaits those who can figure out how to use those ancient tomes to understand exactly what the deal is concerning The God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Koran.

Is that proof of our origins? Of course not - Origins is one of the unprovable subjects.

The questions we each now get to discuss in the privacy of our own minds are, What does the evidence say to ME? What are MY reasons for believing what I believe about Origins, God and Death?

Possibilities!​

Regardless of what your faith is or what incarnation of God you may or may not believe, the question you were asked was about the evidence for chemical/molecular interactions resulting in life and reproduction of life. We're not discussing what is possible, but if you have evidence to support your statement that Earth is such a place where this happened.

Now so far, the only real "evidence" I can see, is that we exist and life exists. That does not prove any speculation about water, sunshine, chemistry and time resulting in life.

Pages and pages and pages of nothing... no one knows where this all began... NO ONE... and no can PROVE where it all began either.

So why the big discussion about something that can "virtually" never be proven?

 

[Boss]

Pages and pages and pages of nothing... no one knows where this all began... NO ONE... and no can PROVE where it all began either.

So why the big discussion about something that can "virtually" never be proven?

Because the atheistic so-called scientists seem to want to do an end-around and claim they DO know. It hasn't been proven, but yeah... it kinda has. They want to dismiss the possibility of God, intelligent designer, creation, etc. by trying to slyly claim science has answered this question, without actually having to produce any evidence. When they are confronted on this, they clear their throats, straighten their tie, and begin speaking in high-falutin science terms while denigrating the intelligence of others. You see, we're just too stupid to understand the evidence.

 

[edthecynic]

Einstein proved space and time are the same thing....space-time. There is no special way physics 'understands' things. This just seems to be YOUR special way of understanding things. You write these special caveats for yourself whenever needed to avoid contradiction. There was no "singularity" because energy doesn't compress itself. Matter comprised of atoms require space to function. So this "compression" you're dreaming of, never happened. Gravity didn't cause it because gravity is caused by mass, and mass is made of atoms which.... again... require space to exist. We keep running into this problem that physics can't solve, it never has been able to. That's why people like Hawking are questioning the whole idea of Singularity and Big Bang theories and why we're developing quantum mechanics. BUT... the problem with quantum physics is, it renders the possibility of multiple universes with multiple dimensions, all of which can be completely different than our own with completely different functionality. That means things we think of as "spiritual" or "metaphysical" can most certainly exist in the cosmos, and probably do.

No he didn't, he included time as an extra 4th dimension of space he called a space time CONTINUUM.

The more you post the more you PROVE your stupidity.

Are you a functional illiterate?

CONTINUUM:
1. a coherent whole characterized as a collection, sequence, or progression of values or elements varying by minute degrees.

Yes, Time is a dimension of space. Space without all it's dimensions is like your brain, it doesn't exist in reality. Singularity is like your intelligence, a figment of imagination.

Space without time is still space, Euclidian space. Space still exists at t=0, but there is no relative movement. You already made a fool of yourself several times in this thread on this very issue.

Since you are so fond of Wikipedia:

In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Mathematically it is a manifold consisting of "events" which are described by some type of coordinate system. Typically three spatial dimensions (length, width, height), and one temporal dimension (time) are required. Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined "space".

 

[YellowBird]

In fairness to them, sometimes, especially here, ignorance is preferable. Like with UFOs. I'm far happier not knowing if aliens are buzzing around our atmosphere. They either are, and that'd be terrifying, or they aren't and that'd be disappointing (ironically.) But knowing with certainty isn't always preferable. If I knew for sure one way or the other God existed or didn't that'd be like knowing about UFOs. If I knew God existed I'd hate Him for being a hands-off, do-nothing deity not worth my worship. Conversely, if I knew it didn't exist nor anything anywhere akin to it, that'd kinda suck cause then we're all just microbes and nothing ultimately matters. But existing in the fog of uncertainty allows me to allow for the possibility and taking some comfort that maybe there is and all indications to the contrary are simply by design.

Yes, double-think almost. We can take the best of both possibiliites. I do the same. I think we all do.

However, I don't think I would have a problem with a hands-off God. Free-will is worth that.

 

[Boss]

In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Mathematically it is a manifold consisting of "events" which are described by some type of coordinate system. Typically three spatial dimensions (length, width, height), and one temporal dimension (time) are required. Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined "space".

Nothing here says you can have space without time, or time without space. This is what makes spacetime a continuum. You can imagine something else, there are all kinds of theoretical probabilities, and this was indeed one that had some degree of consideration for a long time. However, there are unresolved problems with the theory, which is why Hawking and others have had a problem accepting the theory.

It seems like you have just not updated recently. You're clinging to a 1980s theory that has basically fallen out of favor with theoretical physicists. Now I see you have the observatory in your avatar, so I imagine you fancy yourself as some kind of cosmologist, and maybe there is some competitive disagreement between physics and cosmology that I am not aware of? Perhaps you've invested time and energy arguing for this theory and you're just not ready to see it give up the ghost? But physics has no reason to lie, Hawking isn't some religious fanatic trying to prove God... these are just scientific problems that people much smarter than either of us are dealing with.

 

[Boss]

Space without time is still space, Euclidian space.

Jeeeshhh... You're all over the board with this stuff! Euclidian space is basically a mathematics or geometry concept of space without the component of time. It's used to calculate and measure things in three dimensions, where time isn't a factor. It has little to do with the universe or cosmology. When we're discussing the physics of the universe, we're dealing with Minkowski space.

 

[Boss]

Space still exists at t=0

You have NOT proven this.

You keep saying it, but if it's true, let's see the evidence?

 

[PostmodernProph]

There are plenty of examples of both elements and molecules interacting with each other randomly and building both toward the more complex, and toward the less complex.

'Chemistry' should be a verb! LOTS of action there!​

and yet there are no examples of elements and molecules interacting with each other randomly and resulting in anything living......let alone something complex enough to reproduce.....

No?

lets be honest.....you claimed there were plenty of examples.....when pressed for just one you had to opt for humor......be both know there is nothing you can point to as an example.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

do you know that for a fact?

calculating the odds that life could begin by chance

lol, dude.....you want to calculate odds?......under your theory, in any given event life may not happen (0) or it may (1).......now, create any type of formula you want that determines how many instances of such possible events there might be in a billion years......multiply that number times 0 and tell me what result you have.......

42?

so, you suck at math AND science?.....

 

[AVG-JOE]

and yet there are no examples of elements and molecules interacting with each other randomly and resulting in anything living......let alone something complex enough to reproduce.....

No?

lets be honest.....you claimed there were plenty of examples.....when pressed for just one you had to opt for humor......be both know there is nothing you can point to as an example.....

Dude, I said that there were plenty of examples of elements and molecules interacting with each other to form more complex molecules - read any decent chemistry book and you are guaranteed examples out the wazoo.


You asked for an example of that process resulting in 'life' and we know of only one: Earth


Since origins is an unprovable subject, and you can no more prove that Life happened by a wave of God's hand than I can prove that it happened through random chemistry over Time, all we have left is our opinions.

In my opinion, your question was answered as seriously as you take your religion. The fact that I made it entertaining for our dear readers is just gravy.

 

[PostmodernProph]

You asked for an example of that process resulting in 'life' and we know of only one: Earth

the point is, we do NOT "know" that the earth is an example.....so yes, it was just a flip off response.....and I pointed at it and called it what it was......if that makes you upset?.......shove it.....

 

[Derideo_Te]

You have proof that God is bound by our laws of nature built on mans very limited knowledge ?

Onus is on you to provide proof your God actually exists first!

Until you can do that the Laws of Physics take precedence over your "lawless" mythical beliefs.

Did you see his comment ? You feel the same about the law of Biogenesis ?

So you have conceded that you have zero proof that your mythical God actually exists. Have a nice day.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Here I must take a moment to apologize to our dear future readers for my primitive ignorance and arrogance.

Ass-U-Me-ing some future chemist does come across an experiment in which she can prove, by repeatability, how basic chemistry resulted in living things over time, origins may indeed come off the unprovable list.

 

[AVG-JOE]

You asked for an example of that process resulting in 'life' and we know of only one: Earth

the point is, we do NOT "know" that the earth is an example.....so yes, it was just a flip off response.....and I pointed at it and called it what it was......if that makes you upset?.......shove it.....

I've said that. Opinion, opinion, opinion.

Upset? Why would I be upset? It's just a conversation, Bro' - not a pelvic exam.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So are you suggesting the universe is eternal ?

According to the Laws of Physics the matter/energy of the Universe has always existed and will always exist because it can neither be created not destroyed.

The current matter/energy state of the Universe where we exist is transitory but the matter/energy will continue to exist throughout eternity in some form or another.

Well then you've solved the question. GOD is the universe. GOD is energy/matter.

Well done!

BZZZT Wrong again!

The Universe is the Universe because the proof of it's existence is tangible. Your mythical God is imaginary and you have zero proof that it exists.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Here I must take a moment to apologize to our dear future readers for my primitive ignorance and arrogance.

Ass-U-Me-ing some future chemist does come across an experiment in which she can prove, by repeatability, how basic chemistry resulted in living things over time, origins may indeed come off the unprovable list.

good to see you still have faith in something......as for me, I expect to find my proof much sooner, likely within the next twenty years or so......and if you hear of my demise, just imagine that one of two things is happening.....either I am in a void and nothing will ever happen again, or I am shouting back over my shoulder "I told you so!........

 

[AVG-JOE]

You asked for an example of that process resulting in 'life' and we know of only one: Earth

the point is, we do NOT "know" that the earth is an example.....so yes, it was just a flip off response.....and I pointed at it and called it what it was......if that makes you upset?.......shove it.....

Besides... I know that Chemistry, Time and Evolution are the source of life just as much as you know that you have a friend in Jesus, and the God of Abraham, as described in The Torah, The New Testament and The Koran, spoke life in to existence.

Opinions. Opinions. Opinions.

Apparently, we both know what we know, in spite of our disagreements. Since the subject is currently unprovable, our choices now are to go all Sunni -vs- Shiite on each other, OR to agree to disagree and have a beer.

I vote for the beer. I much prefer beer to blood.

 

[edthecynic]

Space without time is still space, Euclidian space.

Jeeeshhh... You're all over the board with this stuff! Euclidian space is basically a mathematics or geometry concept of space without the component of time. It's used to calculate and measure things in three dimensions, where time isn't a factor. It has little to do with the universe or cosmology. When we're discussing the physics of the universe, we're dealing with Minkowski space.

And time is only a factor when two observers are moving at two different speeds. If two observers are moving at the same speed, and thus time is not a factor, space still exists!!!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Space still exists at t=0

You have NOT proven this.

You keep saying it, but if it's true, let's see the evidence?

You were given the evidence over and over again, you choose to play dumb. Remember the car sitting in the garage, it still exists before it starts moving!!!!!! It still exists before time becomes a factor!!!!!!