Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Actually it does mean that space and time were created by rules, Einstein.uh, no.
that it followed rules doesnt mean the rules didnt pop into existence when the object of discussion did...thats an assertion..JUST another one
and neil degrasse tyson his fucking self says the laws of physics dont necessarily precede the big bang
not that an appeal to.an authority even has much merit
assertion =/= logical proof
no, it doesnt.
thats the problem when you dont understand what prescriptive and descriptive's differences are...and the implications of said differences.
You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
Actually it does mean that space and time were created by rules, Einstein.uh, no.
that it followed rules doesnt mean the rules didnt pop into existence when the object of discussion did...thats an assertion..JUST another one
and neil degrasse tyson his fucking self says the laws of physics dont necessarily precede the big bang
not that an appeal to.an authority even has much merit
assertion =/= logical proof
no, it doesnt.
thats the problem when you dont understand what prescriptive and descriptive's differences are...and the implications of said differences.
You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
which means nothing.If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.Do you know of anything more complex and advanced in our universe than intelligence and consciousness? Yes or no?no, i didnt claim its NOTUmmm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?
i claim you dont KNOW that it is
HUUUGGGGEEE
BIGLY BIGLY BIGLY difference, ding
its called saving TIME.
Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?
That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?
Actually it does mean that space and time were created by rules, Einstein.
no, it doesnt.
thats the problem when you dont understand what prescriptive and descriptive's differences are...and the implications of said differences.
You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.
Actually it does mean that space and time were created by rules, Einstein.
no, it doesnt.
thats the problem when you dont understand what prescriptive and descriptive's differences are...and the implications of said differences.
You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.
God would be the pinnacle of creation.Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?Can you name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence?uh, no.Ummm... the creation of space and time followed rules (i.e. quantum mechanics and conservation) which means rules existed before space and time. I have not read one cosmologist or physicist that does not believe the universe was created following the laws of nature. So you are wrong, we do know that the laws of nature existed before space and time.1. you dont know what existed before space and time...thats an assertion
2. intelligence is the "pinnacle of creation," is an assertion
you make assertions and believe in your heart of hearts that thats how to prove something....
its nit, all it does is show your lack of logic and reasoning.
and also, imagination
making assertions doesnt prove the impossibility of the contrary, it simply proves your beliefs are not on solid ground, otherwise, the contrary WOULD be impossible.
Name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence.
that it followed rules doesnt mean the rules didnt pop into existence when the object of discussion did...thats an assertion..JUST another one
and neil degrasse tyson his fucking self says the laws of physics dont necessarily precede the big bang
not that an appeal to.an authority even has much merit
assertion =/= logical proof
It means that intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe.which means nothing.If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.Do you know of anything more complex and advanced in our universe than intelligence and consciousness? Yes or no?no, i didnt claim its NOTUmmm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?
i claim you dont KNOW that it is
HUUUGGGGEEE
BIGLY BIGLY BIGLY difference, ding
its called saving TIME.
Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?
That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?
knowing about something or not does not speak to its existence or not
dont you understand that?
uh, no it doesntIt means that intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe.which means nothing.If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.Do you know of anything more complex and advanced in our universe than intelligence and consciousness? Yes or no?no, i didnt claim its NOT
i claim you dont KNOW that it is
HUUUGGGGEEE
BIGLY BIGLY BIGLY difference, ding
its called saving TIME.
Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?
That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?
knowing about something or not does not speak to its existence or not
dont you understand that?
The laws of nature existed before space and time. Space and time were created per the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?no, it doesnt.
thats the problem when you dont understand what prescriptive and descriptive's differences are...and the implications of said differences.
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.God would be the pinnacle of creation.Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?Can you name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence?uh, no.Ummm... the creation of space and time followed rules (i.e. quantum mechanics and conservation) which means rules existed before space and time. I have not read one cosmologist or physicist that does not believe the universe was created following the laws of nature. So you are wrong, we do know that the laws of nature existed before space and time.
Name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence.
that it followed rules doesnt mean the rules didnt pop into existence when the object of discussion did...thats an assertion..JUST another one
and neil degrasse tyson his fucking self says the laws of physics dont necessarily precede the big bang
not that an appeal to.an authority even has much merit
assertion =/= logical proof
But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.God would be the pinnacle of creation.Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?Can you name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence?uh, no.
that it followed rules doesnt mean the rules didnt pop into existence when the object of discussion did...thats an assertion..JUST another one
and neil degrasse tyson his fucking self says the laws of physics dont necessarily precede the big bang
not that an appeal to.an authority even has much merit
assertion =/= logical proof
The laws of nature existed before space and time. Space and time were created per the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.You are arguing with a world renowned cosmologist, not me. Did you even listen to what he said?
i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
You and your slightly drunk friend in the video don't know what there was in the very beginning.
The laws of nature existed before space and time. Space and time were created per the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
You and your slightly drunk friend in the video don't know what there was in the very beginning.
You can't watch a 6 minute vid in 2 minutes. It's not possible.
Alexander Vilenkin
Director, Institute of Cosmology, and
L. and J. Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science
Alexander Vilenkin
Alexander Vilenkin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Виле́нкин,Ukrainian: Олександр Віленкін; 13 May 1949, Kharkiv,[1] Ukraine, Soviet Union) is Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, Vilenkin has written over 150 papers. Soon after Paul Steinhardt presented the first example of eternal inflation, Vilenkin showed that eternal inflation is generic.[2] Working with Arvin Borde and Alan Guth, In 2003, he showed that a period of inflation has to have a beginning and there has to be a period that precedes it.[3] This is a problem because, without a theory to explain the conditions before inflation, it is not possible to determine how likely it is for inflation ever to occur. Some considerations suggest that the probability is very small, resulting the "initial conditions problem.”
He also introduced the idea of quantum creation of the universe from a quantum vacuum. His work in cosmic strings has been pivotal.
Vilenkin received his undergraduate degree in physics in 1971 in the former Soviet Union (University of Kharkiv). He later moved to the United States, where he obtained his Ph.D. at Buffalo. His work has been featured in numerous newspaper and magazine articles in the United States, Europe, Soviet Union, and Japan, and in many popular books.
Vilenkin sometimes wears sunglasses when giving seminars which give him a characteristic appearance. Apparently these are because his eyes are sensitive to bright projector lights.
Alexander Vilenkin - Wikipedia
Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.God would be the pinnacle of creation.Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?Can you name something more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence?
The laws of nature existed before space and time. Space and time were created per the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.i stream cosmologists, physicists, astrologers and philosophers in lieu of music in my headset for most of my waking hours
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
You and your slightly drunk friend in the video don't know what there was in the very beginning.
You can't watch a 6 minute vid in 2 minutes. It's not possible.
Alexander Vilenkin
Director, Institute of Cosmology, and
L. and J. Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science
Alexander Vilenkin
Alexander Vilenkin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Виле́нкин,Ukrainian: Олександр Віленкін; 13 May 1949, Kharkiv,[1] Ukraine, Soviet Union) is Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, Vilenkin has written over 150 papers. Soon after Paul Steinhardt presented the first example of eternal inflation, Vilenkin showed that eternal inflation is generic.[2] Working with Arvin Borde and Alan Guth, In 2003, he showed that a period of inflation has to have a beginning and there has to be a period that precedes it.[3] This is a problem because, without a theory to explain the conditions before inflation, it is not possible to determine how likely it is for inflation ever to occur. Some considerations suggest that the probability is very small, resulting the "initial conditions problem.”
He also introduced the idea of quantum creation of the universe from a quantum vacuum. His work in cosmic strings has been pivotal.
Vilenkin received his undergraduate degree in physics in 1971 in the former Soviet Union (University of Kharkiv). He later moved to the United States, where he obtained his Ph.D. at Buffalo. His work has been featured in numerous newspaper and magazine articles in the United States, Europe, Soviet Union, and Japan, and in many popular books.
Vilenkin sometimes wears sunglasses when giving seminars which give him a characteristic appearance. Apparently these are because his eyes are sensitive to bright projector lights.
Alexander Vilenkin - Wikipedia
I believe that a god is possible, but not yet proven. But in the religious story of Creation, god is the most complex being. Not intelligence or being self-aware.Do you believe in God? If not, you are making an argument even you don't believe.But the painter is the most complex thing in the room. Isn't that what you're going after?Painters are not the painting. Besides, you don't believe in God so you can't believe that God is the pinnacle of creation.God would be the pinnacle of creation.Ummm... yes, since you claim it is not the pinnacle of creation. Surely, you must know something that is more advanced or complex in the universe than consciousness and intelligence, right?does its existence, or non existence.....depend on my knowledge of its existence or non existence?
thats what i do do, but i also pry others FOR theirsG.T. Just look at what information you've been presented with, and draw your conclusions from there, k?
Mine may be different than yours.
Grr. I gotta get a mobo with a ps2 keyboard.
knocking info back and fro duddnt hurt nobody..
shouldnt
anyhoo, whats a mobo? ps2 like the gaming platform?
Actually that is a fact, GT. You don't know of anything in the universe which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness.uh, no it doesntIt means that intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe.which means nothing.If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.Do you know of anything more complex and advanced in our universe than intelligence and consciousness? Yes or no?
its called saving TIME.
Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?
That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?
knowing about something or not does not speak to its existence or not
dont you understand that?
it just means "that we currently know of"....not ultimately
thats an assertion, the thing you dont know is a flaw, in your reasoning capability.
No you have not rationally proven that it's a fact and I sincerely doubt you're going to and if you think that you've done so then you should start there with fixing your uhhh... reasoningActually that is a fact, GT. You don't know of anything in the universe which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness.uh, no it doesntIt means that intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe.which means nothing.If you don't know anything which is more complex and advanced than intelligence and consciousness, then intelligence and consciousness is the most advanced and complex thing that you know about in the universe, right?i asked you the question that pre-refutes the line of reasoning you're attempting to follow.
its called saving TIME.
Does their existence, or non existence, DEOEND ON ME OR YOU KNOWING they exist, or dont?
That eliminates that line of reasoning before it even starts. Do i need to EXPLAIN THAT TOO?
knowing about something or not does not speak to its existence or not
dont you understand that?
it just means "that we currently know of"....not ultimately
thats an assertion, the thing you dont know is a flaw, in your reasoning capability.
The laws of nature existed before space and time. Space and time were created per the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation.No one can know what was before the Big Bang. Only fools pretend to know.
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
"In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential.." Leon Lederman, American experimental physicist and Nobel Laureate
You and your slightly drunk friend in the video don't know what there was in the very beginning.
You can't watch a 6 minute vid in 2 minutes. It's not possible.
Alexander Vilenkin
Director, Institute of Cosmology, and
L. and J. Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science
Alexander Vilenkin
Alexander Vilenkin (Russian: Алекса́ндр Виле́нкин,Ukrainian: Олександр Віленкін; 13 May 1949, Kharkiv,[1] Ukraine, Soviet Union) is Professor of Physics and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, Vilenkin has written over 150 papers. Soon after Paul Steinhardt presented the first example of eternal inflation, Vilenkin showed that eternal inflation is generic.[2] Working with Arvin Borde and Alan Guth, In 2003, he showed that a period of inflation has to have a beginning and there has to be a period that precedes it.[3] This is a problem because, without a theory to explain the conditions before inflation, it is not possible to determine how likely it is for inflation ever to occur. Some considerations suggest that the probability is very small, resulting the "initial conditions problem.”
He also introduced the idea of quantum creation of the universe from a quantum vacuum. His work in cosmic strings has been pivotal.
Vilenkin received his undergraduate degree in physics in 1971 in the former Soviet Union (University of Kharkiv). He later moved to the United States, where he obtained his Ph.D. at Buffalo. His work has been featured in numerous newspaper and magazine articles in the United States, Europe, Soviet Union, and Japan, and in many popular books.
Vilenkin sometimes wears sunglasses when giving seminars which give him a characteristic appearance. Apparently these are because his eyes are sensitive to bright projector lights.
Alexander Vilenkin - Wikipedia
putting aside that an appeal to an authority doesnt make a good logical argument...
because anyone can appeal to an authority thats an atheist and say herrr deee deerrrr seeeee!!!
but putting that aside, you dont even understand what hes saying.
if the laws of nature are DESCRIPTIVE, they are in effect patterns that nature follows and how we commuicate them..
not literal LAWS in the sense youre implying.
aye yaye yayeee
