User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 143

  1. #31
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffywolf View Post
    Altho it's just as likely that our universe is a result of a reaction in another dimension of sorts and that there is existance beyond 'ours' as we know it. That would still not explain how that other existance came to exist. :P
    These dimensions wouldn't "exist" as you are thinking. Humans concepts fail to describe them in any sense. They would involve all possible outcomes of all possible initial conditions of all possible mechanics. Given 11 or 16 dimensions, the result is much the same - they are everything. There would be no "came" to exist, no start or end... time or creation doesn't mean anything here - all creations exist at the same 'time'.

  2. #32
    Nips away your dignity Fluffywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    These dimensions wouldn't "exist" as you are thinking. Humans concepts fail to describe them in any sense. They would involve all possible outcomes of all possible initial conditions of all possible mechanics. Given 11 or 16 dimensions, the result is much the same - they are everything. There would be no "came" to exist, no start or end... time or creation doesn't mean anything here - all creations exist at the same 'time'.
    But there is a starting point of reference for all matter as we know it. If you put all natural forces in one big model and trace all forces and movements back you will get to a point of reference in which all movement and time as we know it, came into existance. Ofcourse, that's not enough to explain everything. But it's a good first step for us to take to get some insight. And scientists of today are already tracing back celestial movements and have in fact come to the conclusion that matter as we know it is expanding. But all these forces have to have come from something, somewhere.

    But like I said, it's theoretically impossible for us to find 'all' answers with the limited senses and perceptions that we have. But we might be able to create systems and methods able to communicate and translate other dimensions back to ours for a better understanding. And slowly map out existance as we know it, explained in our context. And I believe we can get quite a few answers in the long run. Even though we'll always stumble on more questions.

    What I mentioned earlier in those easy steps bit, is that we have to assume there was once upon a time (fairytales. ) a point in which there was nothing but that laws of physics make it impossible for that nothing to exist, and counterbalanced that with infinite space. But as far as time and existance is concerned, that never 'existed' and therefor there wasn't a real starting point.

    Doesn't mean there wasn't a beginning however. Just not a beginning that we can describe. But we can describe what happened after that 'beginning'.

  3. #33
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffywolf View Post
    But there is a starting point of reference for all matter as we know it. If you put all natural forces in one big model and trace all forces and movements back you will get to a point of reference in which all movement and time as we know it, came into existance.
    There doesn't have to be a start for everything... Can we define a starting point for a circle?

    Remove time from the equation - that's a human reference. What does "start" mean then? If a being one dimension up can see the entirety of time, the concept "start" has no meaning, however he could only see one possible outcome at a time of all possible outcomes... What would "start" mean then?

    What we sit in is just one small slice of that. It's like taking a tube, slicing it into a 2d object and us walking along this path saying there has to be a start. The "start" doesn't have to exist... and what we see is virtually meaningless in defining the overall conditions of the universe.

    I use the tube analogy because whether or not there is a start and finish depends on which way you cut the tube... and that's exactly what happens from the higher universes.

    What I mentioned earlier in those easy steps bit, is that we have to assume there was once upon a time (fairytales. ) a point in which there was nothing but that laws of physics make it impossible for that nothing to exist, and counterbalanced that with infinite space. But as far as time and existance is concerned, that never 'existed' and therefor there wasn't a real starting point.
    The problem, however, is that the "laws of physics" are only our set of physics. If you go up many dimensions, every possible set of physics exist. It's entirely possible that some of those "slices" (one set of physics) are circular, in which it has "always" existed (to use a lower dimension set), or linear.

    For instance,consider that gravity might be weaker or stronger in those universes - would a universe undergo heat or cold death then? Back in our universe, we might be linear - matter expands once from some set of initial condition, and continues outwards forever. In another, the universe may contract and re-expand over and over.

  4. #34
    Nips away your dignity Fluffywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    For instance,consider that gravity might be weaker or stronger in those universes
    Actually, gravity's strength is based on the density of the matter. Gravity itself can't be weaker or stronger. Density of the present matter however can be different that has an effect on gravity's influence to our perception.

  5. #35
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffywolf View Post
    Actually, gravity's strength is based on the density of the matter. Gravity itself can't be weaker or stronger. Density of the present matter however can be different that has an effect on gravity's influence to our perception.
    It can't in our universe. One theory goes that in higher dimensions, every possible set of universal constants exists.

    (Hence in a parallel universe* gravity might be different, and that "2d" slice of the universe might be a circle, with no start or end, while another "2d" slice of another universe may have start and end.)

    * It would be a parallel universe different than the one normally referred to -every single possible outcome of our universe - but three sets of dimensions removed... giving all possible different constants, and within each, giving all possible initial conditions, giving all possible outcomes of each condition.
    Last edited by ptgatsby; 04-21-2009 at 05:20 PM.

  6. #36
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    Before I ask, I would like to say that I'm agnostic, and that I basically have my own philosophy/faith and I couldn't peg it on anything specific besides some form of Paganism (hence the jewelry if you would think to say something about that). That is a different topic though. You may like to note that I give science a lot of merit (I'm an evolutionist etc).

    So, what makes science work? What makes reality able to function the way it does?
    First two mistaken assumptions:
    You assume either,
    • All atheists prefer science
    • All scientists are atheists


    And that this is a question of science.
    If not, you probably would be best off having the thread title changed, or avoid directly referencing science.
    I don't think anything could just *poof* here, not at all. What is it that started everything? If you say the big bang etc, what made THAT happen?
    Everything you say about the universe can be said about God.

    That's how ultimate entities work.

    I imagine most responses to this thread will be met with a reiteration of your original question. You'd go back to the premise that something had to create the universe. But then, who created God? Like you said, nothing can just "poof" here.

    But at some point, there had to be an ultimate creation. But that's impossible (right?)! From there we have to conclude that God always existed. But then, why couldn't the universe have always existed?
    The big bang idea has actually evolved into what's called the big bounce, meaning that the universe expands and contracts, and was never actually created: It just always was. Like "god" was.

    Third mistaken assumption:
    Everything must have a cause...

    But something must be causing things to work/happen the way that they do.
    Standing only on the fact that everything you've seen and experienced thus far had a cause doesn't prove that the universe had to be caused by something.

    Cause and effect could very well be a fixture exclusive to this sector of existence.

    I don't want to be flamed, I want answers. I have been curious about this for a while.
    Fourth mistaken assumption:
    People on this site are flamers.
    we fukin won boys

  7. #37
    Senior Member Jeremy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nozflubber View Post
    Science works because we are our own Godsthat can exert themselves on the world, and if you're a non atheist you might consider the possibility the God wants us to be Gods. If you doubt the bolded proposition, I would gladly introduce you to the atom bomb and the basic mechanisms of how and why it works the way it does.
    The atomic bomb, regardless of the way it works, is the testament to the foolishness of mankind, not to it's "godliness". I'd rather think of how people have learned more and more over time as a testament to godliness as opposed to having the ability to destruct. The ability to destruct may inflict awe, but it is not something I would consider godlike.
    "Can you set me free from this dark inner world? Save me now, last beats in the soul.."

    Fonewearl and proud of it!

    I (85%) - N (80%) - F (35%) - P (90%)
    O: 94% C: 18% E: 21% A: 94% N: 38%
    9w1 (SP, SX, SO)
    (9, 5, 4)
    RCUAI (Primary Calm)

  8. #38
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    The ability to destruct may inflict awe, but it is not something I would consider godlike.
    Wrath does seem fairly important to most religions.

  9. #39
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    I find it hard to believe in the Big Bang because I can't find the centre of the Bang.

    Wherever I stand seems to be the centre.

    And so the centre of the Big Bang is everywhere and nowhere, just like God.

  10. #40
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I find it hard to believe in the Big Bang because I can't find the centre of the Bang.

    Wherever I stand seems to be the centre.

    And so the centre of the Big Bang is everywhere and nowhere, just like God.
    Is this in reference to the cosmic microwave background?



Similar Threads

  1. A question for Atheists AND Agnostics
    By CopyPaste in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 105
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 04:38 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Question for sensors?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 03-12-2009, 03:30 AM
  3. [NF] Question for NFs.
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 02-09-2009, 01:24 AM
  4. A question for all
    By disregard in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-03-2007, 08:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO