History of the universe in 10 minutes

Better question ! What is the IQ of someone who asks someone what their IQ is on an anonymous internet forum in relation to post that had nothing to do with IQ.

And then later when the question is answered state " I doubt that".

 

To know nearly nothing about the christian religion and not to be very good in questions of natural science is somehow "outside" - but this is not "better"!

Sometimes - depends on the problem how to think. Not every problem is a religiuos problem.

What is not insane and irrational on this sentence? Looks to me as if you are fighting against your own shadow. Sigmund Freud called a similiar psychological mechanism "projection"

I never heard that sheep have a brain outside of their body.

I asked you - and you answered.

"people inside" is another word for "evil people" I guess.

To whom do you speak?

The central figure of the christian religion is Jesus Christ.

So you suggest I should become a buddhist?

What is "the church" in this context?

You are a man - that's why you are thinking this simple way. For a woman the problem is much more complex because she has to give the order also to kill her own baby because no one is able to kill the genetical information of the man only.

The words "marriage", "family" and "children" are the loosers in this very strange game.

http://youtu.be/nWDqG0IvGRc

 

What exactly do you like to know?

http://youtu.be/nWDqG0IvGRc

 

What does this have to do with looking from the outside on religion?

Try 99% of the time, not sometimes. Very few christians think like Giftedone and even fewer muslims think like Giftedone. He seeks out evidence, whether or not that conflicts with Christianity.

Most problems are religion problems, due to the thinking that religion causes. You will never gasp this while you are a christian because you have the “Not in my back yard” syndrome. Any kind of thinking that is controlled is inherently dangerous.

Are you hear to debate or throw Ad homs?

It was a rhetorical response.

Whatever.

You seem like smart bloke, you figure it out

Is this the 'son of god', that promotes, rape, genocide, hatred, etc? Or isnt jesus and god the same?

Oh jeez....But now that you mention it, it would be better than following a myth.

Well than you for demonstrating exactly what is wrong religion and its thought process. Its generally accepted by non-religious people that abortions are perfectly acceptable in the case of rape, incest or when the woman’s life is in danger.

Only religious people are cruel enough to even suggest that a woman who was rapped should keep that child. BRAVO!

Like the 50% divorce rate doesn't?

I always love it when the christians bring up like the sanctity of marriage defense. It just just how out of touch they really are ond how possessed by their dogma they are. Religious Sheeple. Thank you for proving my original contention:

 

I know that.

I never argue about the Big Bang because the Bible never said that the universe did not started out as a Big Bang.....It only said that God created it and He could have done it via the Big Bang. So my initial question is still valid and which is, what experiment did scientist do that would explain where matter came from? If one cannot explain what brought matter into existence then the explanation that comes after the Big Bang about the origin of life would collapse since it would have no foundation to stand on.

The article did not provide any information that I already was not aware of.

 

LOLWUT? Wait, you're saying that if we can't prove WHERE matter came from, then we can't possibly understand some of the things that some of the matter did?

Really?

 

Err...I have a question on the very first image. Where is it that all that blackness existed...before the 'bang?'

 

I am saying that you cannot say that God does not exist and or did not create the universe since you have no idea how matter came into existence. And since you don't know how it all came into existence then the theory of evolution is nothing more than a theory based on the imagination of men.

 

Classic logical fallacy known as the God of the gaps at its finest on display.

 

ARBITRARY measurements...... Live with it.

 

That's a non-sequitur.

You DO know the Big Bang Theory and Evolution are not related in any way What. So. Ever. Right?

Whether all the matter in the universe pooped into existence as a giant quantum fluctuation, was the choice of a god, or is all a figment of our imagination, none of that has or could possibly have any real bearing on evolution in any way, shape or form. All that is important is that whatever the reason, matter exists.

 

You see I was going beyond the Big Bang.

It would because there is no evidence of matter coming into existence by itself. And since matter cannot bring itself into existence then someone had to create it, and whoever did would also be responsible for what we see today.

 

That's just another non-sequitur.

Edit: wait, sorry, not quite. It's TWO non-sequiturs. You seem fond of those.

 

Who said anyone should or would be required to even accept or give a rats butt about your imaginative 'non-sequitur' titles that you are so fond of placing on what others say? That issue of yours relating to non-sequiturs seems to be just another rationalization (making of excuses) to avoid the truth.... IMHO.

 

We have never really observed matter being created. We have Quantum Foam, but usually theists say that that doesn't come from "nothing". Well in that case, we have never observed a true "nothing", and to speculate about it, like you are doing, is intellectually dishonest.

Since one of the few examples we have of something being "created" from "nothing" (Quantum Foam) doesn't require a creator, it is logical to conclude that perhaps the universe didn't have one either. Their are models for the Universe that do not require a creator, Stephen Hawking is a big supporter of one.

Your claim that God exists HAS NO evidence, and claims without evidence can be dismissed WITHOUT EVIDENCE.

 

This is what I found.

What is 'quantum foam'?

This is an idea that was originally proposed by Nobel physicist John Wheeler back in the early 1960's to describe what space-time 'looks like' at scales of 10^-33 centimeters.

The basic idea is that gravity is a field with many of the same fundamental properties as the other fundamental 'force' fields in Nature. This means that the state of this field is, at some level, uncertain and described by quantum mechanics. Since Einstein's general theory of relativity requires that gravitational fields and space-time be one and the same mathematical objects, this means that space-time itself is also subject to the kinds of uncertainty required by quantum systems. This indeterminacy means that you cannot know with infinite precision BOTH the geometry of space-time, and the rate of change of the space-time geometry, in direct analogy with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle for quantum systems.

Wheeler imagined that this indeterminacy for space-time required that at the so-called Planck Scale of 10^-33 centimeters and 10^-43 seconds, space-time has a foaminess to it with sudden changes in its geometry into a wealth of complex shapes and textures. You would have quantum black holes appear at 10^-33 centimeters, then evaporate in 10^-43 seconds. Wormholes would form and dissolve, and later theorists even postulated 'baby universe' production could happen under these conditions.

The problem is that we have no evidence that 1) gravity is a quantum field and 2) that space-time has this type of structure at these scales.

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast123/lectures/lec17.html

To me that's grasping at straws because isn’t that happening in a universe which already exist? For all you know it could be coming from our universe and not from nothing. To answer my question you would have to get outside of this universe.

When you or anyone can demonstrate that what we see around us can create and design itself and not only that, show me where such a thing is happening elsewhere as we speak, then you will have a point.

 

I am only using logical reason here.......but I have something that is by far bigger than reasoning that only the individual that has it will understand and that is God's Spirit. You can only see with your physical eyes but in addition to that I have spiritual eyes and you can never hope to see or understand what someone with spiritual eyes can see and know.

 

Would that be something like a "non-quantum universal entity?"

 

Not even close.

 

Wait a min, BFS!

non-quantum---unmeasurable

universal---everywhere

entity---a being as a fact of existance

I diff to begger with you....

 

Universal implies within or as big as our universe......God is infinitely bigger than our universe. God is bigger than just everywhere.......He is where our universe is not.

 

Yes....and, No.

Another def for 'universal' is:

3. Applicable or common to all purposes, conditions, or situations

How about I get 'partial credit?'

 

All those definitions is describing our world and reality......the word universal comes from the word universe, and that is limited to our universe or existence. So sure God existence is everywhere in our physical universe but He is not confined to it.

 

So Hell is not part of the universe? I know he 'visited' there once (altho that is up to debate), but He is not there NOW! Or shud we look at it as spiritual & not a physical location, as you qualified your above statement as the 'physical universe.?'

 

I assume you are referring to when Jesus died. If that is what you are talking about that is referring to the place of the dead. Jesus' spirit was at the place of the dead and the Bible says at death all human being's spirit goes back to God. The place of the dead or the place of the spirit of those who have died is called Hades but many translators mistakenly use the word Hell.