No, that went out of vogue after the discover of the acceleration of the expansion of the universe in the 1990's.
Nope! New evidence for the Cyclical Universe was recently provided by the eminent Dr Roger Penrose himself https://physicsworld.com/a/new-evidence-for-cyclic-universe-claimed-by-roger-penrose-and-colleagues/
I like Penrose, but he's kind of out there and also 87. Unless something we discover contradicts or compensates for the cosmological constant, it's either going to be a heat death or Big Rip. There's not enough mass to collapse back in on itself.
Dark energy condensing back into matter could have sufficient mass to result in another Singularity IMO.
Well, 95% of the universe remains a mystery, so anything is possible. We're probably in a simulation anyway.
Nope I meant evidence and evidence is not subjective. Belief is subjective when based on no facts or evidence. Observing nature could be proof of the flying sphaghetti monster but that doesn't make that " proo There is no written history that provides any evidence that supprts the existance of a god. There are thousands of written histories that refer to thousands of different gods. And the big bang theory as I understand it doesn't claim that this universe has always existed.
Matter is created through an evolutionary process. Matter becomes more complex over time and it is still evolving. The time cycle is so long that we are not aware of the process. When stars first go nuclear they are composed of celestial hydrogen. Over time the star makes new elements from that hydrogen. The same thing happens inside some planets.
Yes, matter can and does evolve and even degrade such as helium being produced from the radioactive decay of uranium. However it is never "created" out of "nothing".
You have to follow the process all the way back. Stars produce heavy elements. Celestial hydrogen produces stars. Elemental particles produce celestial hydrogen. Quantum foam produces elemental particles. Strings produce quantum foam. Branes produce strings. Point particles produce branes. Nothing produces point particles.
[1] There is no such thing as "scientific evidence", there is just "evidence". Evidence means the same thing inside and outside of science. [2] To answer your question, yes, evidence can be posted here that supports the existence of an afterlife. It's quite easy to do, actually, as evidence is merely "any statement that supports an argument". Evidence is, essentially, a predicate. Now, that does NOT mean that anything is proven or disproven, as evidence is NOT a proof in any way. Belief in an afterlife is based on circular reasoning, thus it is a religion. I DO accept that it is a matter of faith. The existence of an afterlife can only be accepted/rejected on a faith basis. (ie, an "argument of faith", which in other words is "circular reasoning") Correct, NDE's do not prove anything. They are not proof. However, they ARE evidence, which is what you claim you are looking for in your OP... You simply choose to reject that evidence, which is fine. You still have faith that there is no afterlife.
Great post! Absolutely correct... There is no proof; it is believed through faith. The alternative to this is to believe that we live short lives and then it's the end of the road. Nothing more. If that is the case, then I have a hard time fathoming what our purpose here on Earth would be if God didn't exist and there wasn't an eternal existence with God in an afterlife of some sort.
Even if somebody were to "come back with some", it still wouldn't be proof. That person would still be ridiculed and rejected, just as The Bible claims that Jesus was ridiculed and rejected (to the point of crucifixion) for his assertion that HE was the Son of God, the Messiah. Jesus was labeled a blasphemer, and this person would be labeled likewise. This can only be accepted/rejected on a faith basis.
Well if you don't like " scientific evidence" then perhaps fact based or empirical evidence will work for you. And yes I accept that evidence is anything that supports an arguement with the operative term being " supports". And no, NDEs support absolutly nothing concerning what happens after death unless one is foolish enough to believe that " near death" and " death" are the same. And no I don't chose to reject the evidence since there is no evidence to reject.
There is no need for there to be any deity in order to determine your own purpose in life. All you need to do is ask yourself the following two questions. 1. After I die how do I want to be remembered? 2. What am I doing now to achieve the end result in the first question?
Why would it matter how you are remembered? It's not like you're coming back to "face the music" in any way...
I believe that 'faith' is a personal thing. And for many, it does not require scientific evidence. As long as they are not trying to force their faith or beliefs upon others, they should be left alone to enjoy them. If it makes them a better person, all the better.
