What's Happening in the UK?

[TheObsoleteMan]

I guess it just doesn't make sense to me. I mean it had to start somewhere....**** it seriously just makes my mind go When I try to think about it.

Maybe like the universe itself, there was no God, and then *BANG!* there was. I find the idea of a God that has always existed and a universe exploding into existence on it's own equally confounding. How can something always exist (God), and if it doesn't ( the universe), where the hell did the matter come from? At some point, you've got to have something coming from nothing.

 

[Duck]

Maybe like the universe itself, there was no God, and then *BANG!* there was. I find the idea of a God that has always existed and a universe exploding into existence on it's own equally confounding. How can something always exist (God), and if it doesn't ( the universe), where the hell did the matter come from? At some point, you've got to have something coming from nothing.

Thats what just boggles my mind. How did we get something from nothing?

 

[Vitus]

Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex, England?

Because they couldn't find three wise men and a virgin!

just kidding mates!

 

[pixletwin]

Maybe like the universe itself, there was no God, and then *BANG!* there was. I find the idea of a God that has always existed and a universe exploding into existence on it's own equally confounding. How can something always exist (God), and if it doesn't ( the universe), where the hell did the matter come from? At some point, you've got to have something coming from nothing.

This is something I never understood. What existed before the big bang? Where did the materials that may have resulted in the big bang come from? I don't think science has ever believed that you can create something from nothing. Therefor we can assume that the universe has always existed in some form. Perhaps the Big Bang was just one event in an eternity of universal evolution.

 

[Duck]

This is something I never understood. What existed before the big bang? Where did the materials that may have resulted in the big bang come from? I don't think science has ever believed that you can create nothing from nothing. Therefor we can assume that the universe has always existed in some form. Perhaps the Big Bang was just one event in an eternity of universal evolution.

I can create nothing from nothing In all seriousness how does something just exist? There has to be a beginning right? If I am granted one answer from a Genie this would be it

 

[pixletwin]

Oops. I mean "something from nothing".

I don't think anything is created. Things happen which takes them from one state of being to a different state of being.

 

[Duck]

Oops. I mean "something from nothing".

I don't think anything is created. Things happen which takes them from one state of being to a different state of being.

Haha I figured thats what you meant this discussion is going to be never ending since no one can explain it

 

[pixletwin]

Haha I figured thats what you meant this discussion is going to be never ending since no one can explain it

True. But it sure beats talking about what's happening in the UK.

 

[Duck]

True. But it sure beats talking about what's happening in the UK.

 

[Darth Cruel]

However...if you follow it back far enough...the events in the UK can be found to have their roots in "The Big Bang".

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex, England?

Because they couldn't find three wise men and a virgin!

just kidding mates!

 

[devilof76]

The Big Bang makes no sense to me whatsoever. Space is a terrible concept if what it's meant to denote is an empty place into which something will move. Nothing does not exist, period. There are no empty spaces. For the entirety of the universe to be contained in a single loction and then to expand into a vast nothingness is gibberish. Physicists have to be relying on a false premise somewhere in there.

Another terrible concept is infinity. Same problem. If you keep adding 1 to the total, you have to keep moving out into a previously unoccupied space. At the same time, infinity isn't a thing that can grow. It is already limitless. How do you have a universe composed of limited entities go on forever in space?



I'm settling (so to speak) for a limited universe with no empty spaces, and no edge. There's nothing beyond it. It wasn't created. It can't be destroyed. It is what there is, and that's all there is. "Where did it come from?" is an invalid question. There isn't anywhere for it to come from. If you insist that it had to have a source, and that God is the placeholder for that source, then you are begging the question of where God came from. If God 'just is' then why is it sufficient for God to be primary, but not the universe? You are surrounded by clear, inescapable evidence of the existence of the universe. The best 'evidence' for the existence of God is the inability of people to accept that the universe needs an explanation. Or what? If it can't be explained, it doesn't exist?



Bunch of simple tricks and nonsense.

 

[Lejuan]

The Big Bang makes no sense to me whatsoever. Space is a terrible concept if what it's meant to denote is an empty place into which something will move.

The big bang created space as we know it. Before the big bang, space did not exist.

Nothing does not exist, period. There are no empty spaces. For the entirety of the universe to be contained in a single loction and then to expand into a vast nothingness is gibberish. Physicists have to be relying on a false premise somewhere in there.

The entirety of the universe wasn't contained in a single location - it was contained within a singularity, which has no location.

Another terrible concept is infinity. Same problem. If you keep adding 1 to the total, you have to keep moving out into a previously unoccupied space. At the same time, infinity isn't a thing that can grow. It is already limitless. How do you have a universe composed of limited entities go on forever in space?

If you start at any given point on the earth, and travel forward in one direction, you will eventually arrive back where you started. WTF is up with that?

I'm settling (so to speak) for a limited universe with no empty spaces, and no edge. There's nothing beyond it. It wasn't created. It can't be destroyed. It is what there is, and that's all there is.

A prevailing theory is that the universe must inevitably collapse back on itself.. into a singularity.

"Where did it come from?" is an invalid question. There isn't anywhere for it to come from. If you insist that it had to have a source, and that God is the placeholder for that source, then you are begging the question of where God came from. If God 'just is' then why is it sufficient for God to be primary, but not the universe? You are surrounded by clear, inescapable evidence of the existence of the universe. The best 'evidence' for the existence of God is the inability of people to accept that the universe needs an explanation. Or what? If it can't be explained, it doesn't exist?



Bunch of simple tricks and nonsense.

It's nonsense because the concepts of 'when' and 'where' - or 'time' and 'space' - are not the right concepts in which to frame notions of the nature of the universe... but that's all we got. Humans just aren't intellectually or physically equipped to properly understand something so profoundly counter-intuitive. I heard somewhere that a lot of physicists have a belief in God, probably because they'd go crazy trying to understand stuff without it.

 

[devilof76]

The big bang created space as we know it. Before the big bang, space did not exist.

That's what physicists believe? That's retarded.

The entirety of the universe wasn't contained in a single location - it was contained within a singularity, which has no location.

Right, because there was no space in which to establish a point of reference. Until afterwards, at which point everything references the origin. It's a pretty theory, but I think it's horse****.

If you start at any given point on the earth, and travel forward in one direction, you will eventually arrive back where you started. WTF is up with that?

That makes perfect sense, except that with everything in constant motion, you wont be in the same place for it to return to you. However, if you move faster than everything else, you might be able to do it. Could be messy...

A prevailing theory is that the universe must inevitably collapse back on itself.. into a singularity.

It's nonsense because the concepts of 'when' and 'where' - or 'time' and 'space' - are not the right concepts in which to frame notions of the nature of the universe... but that's all we got. Humans just aren't intellectually or physically equipped to properly understand something so profoundly counter-intuitive. I heard somewhere that a lot of physicists have a belief in God, probably because they'd go crazy trying to understand stuff without it.

Concepts do not fall out of the sky. They are derived from the data provided to us from the senses. Where did they come up with ideas that are impossible to integrate into a rationally comprehensible framework? Were they thinking with their dicks or something?

And that's rich that God makes the whole thing sane for them. Personally, they need to get that chocolate out of the peanut butter before they have everyone believing crazy **** like big bangs or something.

Oh, wait...

 

[devilof76]

And if it's of any reassurance, Einstein though the early quantum physicists were crazy. So, I'm not just whistling Dixie.

 

[Lejuan]

That's what physicists believe? That's retarded.

High-functioning Aspergic maybe, but not retarded

Right, because there was no space in which to establish a point of reference. Until afterwards, at which point everything references the origin. It's a pretty theory, but I think it's horse****.

It gets worse... there is no 'origin' per se in an isotropic universe. The centre is everywhere

That makes perfect sense, except that with everything in constant motion, you wont be in the same place for it to return to you. However, if you move faster than everything else, you might be able to do it. Could be messy...

The example of walking travelling around the earth and eventually arriving where the journey began makes perfect sense to us, but imagine relating the scenario to some pre-Pythagorean scholar. It'd blow their mind.

Concepts do not fall out of the sky. They are derived from the data provided to us from the senses. Where did they come up with ideas that are impossible to integrate into a rationally comprehensible framework? Were they thinking with their dicks or something?

They operate on mathematical theories that they then attempt to test in a physical world environment. The Higgs boson particle, for example, was only theoretical until it was 'discovered' at Cern a few years ago. The math is never wrong, but can easily flummox human brains or willies.

And that's rich that God makes the whole thing sane for them. Personally, they need to get that chocolate out of the peanut butter before they have everyone believing crazy **** like big bangs or something.

Oh, wait...

God is just filling the gap until they can get the right math happening

And if it's of any reassurance, Einstein though the early quantum physicists were crazy. So, I'm not just whistling Dixie.

Einstein just didn't like the idea of certainties being replaced by probabilities

 

[devilof76]

High-functioning Aspergeric maybe, but not retarded

Kantian, I reckon.

It gets worse... there is no 'origin' per se in an isotropic universe. The centre is everywhere

The center being everywhere makes sense to me, being that there's no edge. The only problem is that the term 'center' becomes meaningless in that context. It only gains meaning if you delimit the area you're referencing. The center of the solar system is the Sun, etc.

When I say origin in terms of Big Bang theory, I mean the place from which the whole is expanding. Are you saying that everything is expanding from everywhere?

Where is it going?

The example of walking travelling around the earth and eventually arriving where the journey began makes perfect sense to us, but imagine relating the scenario to some pre-Pythagorean scholar. It'd blow their mind.

But you could explain to them that the planet is a roughly spherical object. It seems like modern astrophysicists would have a harder time with it, being that they insist on looking for something beyond the 'edge'.

They operate on mathematical theories that they then attempt to test in a physical world environment. The Higgs boson particle, for example, was only theoretical until it was 'discovered' at Cern a few years ago. The math is never wrong, but can easily flummox human brains or willies.

That is a disastrous methodology, even if they do get lucky from time to time.

God is just filling the gap until they can get the right math happening

When I stop and think of the concepts that modern physics has abandoned (causality, identity, consciousness, free will, matter, sense perception) I have to wonder if they'd even need God as a placeholder had they not abandoned common sense. No matter how complex sub-atomic and astonomic science becomes, it's still just rocks and stars and gravity.

Einstein just didn't like the idea of certainties being replaced by probabilities

Smart man.

 

[Lejuan]

The center being everywhere makes sense to me, being that there's no edge. The only problem is that the term 'center' becomes meaningless in that context. It only gains meaning if you delimit the area you're referencing. The center of the solar system is the Sun, etc.

When I say origin in terms of Big Bang theory, I mean the place from which the whole is expanding. Are you saying that everything is expanding from everywhere?

Where is it going?

Yes, this is what people say... there's no place from which the whole is expanding. The universe is expanding insofar that the distance between any two points is growing larger relative to one another.

But you could explain to them that the planet is a roughly spherical object. It seems like modern astrophysicists would have a harder time with it, being that they insist on looking for something beyond the 'edge'.

Spherical object? What manner of sorcery is this? Everything on the bottom half would fall clean off.

(discussion on Newton and apples ensues)

That is a disastrous methodology, even if they do get lucky from time to time.

You've just described academia in a nutshell

When I stop and think of the concepts that modern physics has abandoned (causality, identity, consciousness, free will, matter, sense perception) I have to wonder if they'd even need God as a placeholder had they not abandoned common sense. No matter how complex sub-atomic and astonomic science becomes, it's still just rocks and stars and gravity.

Rocks, stars and gravity behave in pretty weird ways at different scales though.

Smart man.

Loads of other smart men reckon he's wrong though. I have trouble multiplying two digits, I couldn't argue the case or even understand it beyond basic concepts.

 

[devilof76]

Yes, this is what people say... there's no place from which the whole is expanding. The universe is expanding insofar that the distance between any two points is growing larger relative to one another.

Spherical object? What manner of sorcery is this? Everything on the bottom half would fall clean off.

(discussion on Newton and apples ensues)

...and then the Spanish Inquisition breaks down the door.

You've just described academia in a nutshell

Rocks, stars and gravity behave in pretty weird ways at different scales though.

Which doesn't change the way they behave on the level at which we perceive.

Loads of other smart men reckon he's wrong though. I have trouble multiplying two digits, I couldn't argue the case or even understand it beyond basic concepts.

I'm not that bad, but I'm not much better. Math makes sense to me, and a lot of times I can pull answers out of my backside that I shouldn't be able to on account of how clear my foundations are. That said, I sure as hell can't do quantum mechanics.

But, you don't need to be able to do higher math to understand that anyone claiming probability is the best you can ever expect to attain is either not being completely honest, or does not understand what he's actually talking about. I blame philosophy for this. (I blame philosophy for pretty much everything.)

 

[a-dev]

I'm settling (so to speak) for a limited universe with no empty spaces, and no edge. There's nothing beyond it. It wasn't created. It can't be destroyed. It is what there is, and that's all there is. "Where did it come from?" is an invalid question. There isn't anywhere for it to come from. If you insist that it had to have a source, and that God is the placeholder for that source, then you are begging the question of where God came from. If God 'just is' then why is it sufficient for God to be primary, but not the universe? You are surrounded by clear, inescapable evidence of the existence of the universe. The best 'evidence' for the existence of God is the inability of people to accept that the universe needs an explanation. Or what? If it can't be explained, it doesn't exist?

Thats what I come back to every time I'm even tempted to think there could be a God on account of how incomprehensibly old and huge and amazing the universe is.