Creation
Geminosity
:3 Join Date: 2003-09-08 Member: 20667Members
:3 Join Date: 2003-09-08 Member: 20667Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">nothing works</div> While I've seen it touched on when I did a search I often find the explanations given by just about any belief system (including science) as to how time and existance started to have such large gaping loopholes in them that they're almost entirely unbelievable to me.
The idea of this thread is that I'll point out the two main theories that come to mind (science and religion) and then point out why, for me, they both lack credibility.
This thread isn't designed to insult or inflame and I hope the writing brings that across... anyone who cares to explain their personal interperatations that can fill in the blanks in my own is welcome to post however =D
<b>Theory of Deity</b>
With only a few exceptions the vast majority of religions are based around a greater power or many higher entities that have created everything.
While on the surface for many people this seems plausible there's often a smart alec somewhere with the question 'who made god?'. Most devout followers will follow with the casual response that their higher power(s) have always existed.
The problem is the reasoning behind this and what it implies. If something so powerful and complex can 'always exist' what's to stop the arguement that reality has always existed and therefore had no need to be built? Going with the 'great architect' ideal this requires that anything of any level of purpose or intricacy would need to be designed by something or someone. This of course validates the question of 'who made god/the gods'. If you find a way to answer even that it then turns into a cycle of creation which will inevitably end with no satisfying answer.
The main crack in the foundation, as you may have noted, is that religion relies on exclusions to rules. The world follows one sense of logic while the deities seem to be allowed another for no genuinely explainable nor adequetely satisfying (to me at least) reason.
Allowing for this to some degree we need the deities to perhaps exist somewhere where they're protected from the oddities of this paradox, and of course... where did that come from?
<b>Theory of Science</b>
By now many athiests who believe in ye olde big bang theory might be sitting back and scoffing but unfortunately the explanation provided there is no more stable. The idea of course is that our universe was created in a large explosion. Ok so to some degree this could explain our <u>universe</u> but sadly it falls on it's face for time and creation. Why? First off the explosion happened... what did it happen from? If you use it as the point of geniune creation then there was nothing <b>to</b> explode; no energy, no matter, nothing. Then this unexplicable detonation created/sent matter flying off in all directions to create our lovely universe. Anyone care to mention where this matter came from or did it somehow come with our enigmatic big bang, which in itself has no adequete explanation for it's 'creation'?
Hopefully I haven't annoyed anyone too much with this little post explaining my observations but keep in mind it's merely my viewpoint on it all.
If you feel you could civilly explain what you feel is correct that I'd need to know to fill in this puzzle then the words of education would be more than welcome ^^
Try to keep the passions below simmering in the topic however please, this is about expanding our ideals, filling in points with the beliefs of others. I'm curious to see how other people view what I believe to be the paradoxes of our very existance and how they come to the conclusions that make them religious, athiest, agnostic or whatever they may be =3
The idea of this thread is that I'll point out the two main theories that come to mind (science and religion) and then point out why, for me, they both lack credibility.
This thread isn't designed to insult or inflame and I hope the writing brings that across... anyone who cares to explain their personal interperatations that can fill in the blanks in my own is welcome to post however =D
<b>Theory of Deity</b>
With only a few exceptions the vast majority of religions are based around a greater power or many higher entities that have created everything.
While on the surface for many people this seems plausible there's often a smart alec somewhere with the question 'who made god?'. Most devout followers will follow with the casual response that their higher power(s) have always existed.
The problem is the reasoning behind this and what it implies. If something so powerful and complex can 'always exist' what's to stop the arguement that reality has always existed and therefore had no need to be built? Going with the 'great architect' ideal this requires that anything of any level of purpose or intricacy would need to be designed by something or someone. This of course validates the question of 'who made god/the gods'. If you find a way to answer even that it then turns into a cycle of creation which will inevitably end with no satisfying answer.
The main crack in the foundation, as you may have noted, is that religion relies on exclusions to rules. The world follows one sense of logic while the deities seem to be allowed another for no genuinely explainable nor adequetely satisfying (to me at least) reason.
Allowing for this to some degree we need the deities to perhaps exist somewhere where they're protected from the oddities of this paradox, and of course... where did that come from?
<b>Theory of Science</b>
By now many athiests who believe in ye olde big bang theory might be sitting back and scoffing but unfortunately the explanation provided there is no more stable. The idea of course is that our universe was created in a large explosion. Ok so to some degree this could explain our <u>universe</u> but sadly it falls on it's face for time and creation. Why? First off the explosion happened... what did it happen from? If you use it as the point of geniune creation then there was nothing <b>to</b> explode; no energy, no matter, nothing. Then this unexplicable detonation created/sent matter flying off in all directions to create our lovely universe. Anyone care to mention where this matter came from or did it somehow come with our enigmatic big bang, which in itself has no adequete explanation for it's 'creation'?
Hopefully I haven't annoyed anyone too much with this little post explaining my observations but keep in mind it's merely my viewpoint on it all.
If you feel you could civilly explain what you feel is correct that I'd need to know to fill in this puzzle then the words of education would be more than welcome ^^
Try to keep the passions below simmering in the topic however please, this is about expanding our ideals, filling in points with the beliefs of others. I'm curious to see how other people view what I believe to be the paradoxes of our very existance and how they come to the conclusions that make them religious, athiest, agnostic or whatever they may be =3
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The big bang has always loosely revolved around the idea that there was some sort of pre-matter that always existed but didn't give off life or energy.
Think of it this way, before the big bang the universe was a tub of gasoline, the big bang was the torch that lit the tub. Now onto your concern of how something that was inactive suddenly became active, there are several theroies to explain this. One popular one is that a sort of evolution was always taking place and that finally something evolved that could act as a catalyst and cause the big bang.
Now before you say "But where did the pre matter come from", that's also explained by the collapse of the previous universe, and yes the previous universe came from the previous big bang, and no there is no start to this cycle because time can't really play a role in an infinite situation.
Religious aspects aside for the moment, since time looks to be only a problem for you from the scientific aspect, here's an explination. You're stuck on the subject of time because you're thinking something like this: "Alright, so say this big bang happened. It happened at this point in time, so many billion years ago. What happened before that? Why did it happen at that particular point in time?" You're willing to assume that before the big bang, there was literally nothing. In such a state, time would not exist. Time is a concept, something that's relative to the observer, like a horizon. Time is not a constant. Before creation, time did not exist, because there was nothing to observe its passage. At the moment of creation, time started to exist, and pass, at speeds relative to the various observers (note that I include inanimate objects, atoms, particles, and the like as "observers".) If you like, the moment of creation was the very first thing, <i>ever</i>. Or, if you like, a literally infinite amount of time passed before the moment of creation. It makes no difference. Since there was no time before the creation of the universe, it would be correct to say that it has always existed, and always will, for if the universe were to be utterly destroyed into complete nothingness again, there would once more be no time.
Now, on to the issue of creation. I'll start with the science aspect. Say that the big bang was a sudden explosion of matter spontaneously created from literally nothing. There is an <b>extremely</b> tiny chance of matter being randomly created from nothing, due to certain scientific uncertainy principles. But, before the creation of the universe, there was an infinite amount of "time" for this to happen in, and, given infinitely long, everything that is possible will happen, so the universe was suddenly and spontaneously created out of complete nothing. Note that at the instant of creation, time would start to exist, and infinity would end, so the possibility of the universe being suddenly blotted out would be signifigantly delayed. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You could claim a similar occurence for the creation of god/gods. There's a small possibility that a being of limitless power and the ability to create from nothing. This being would be able to observe time, and thus, time would be created, and all other possibilities suspended, save for those the god chooses to create via its power.
I'm sure these explinations are wholly unsatisfactory. These are the only ones that I can concieve regarding creation from literal nothing. Note that they also depend on the idea of probability as an infinite constant; the idea that it transcends time and existence. So really, you could say that I haven't explained creation from pure nothing at all.
I think you may just have to lean back and accept that there are things that are impossible to know.
The prematter thing is new to me... I suppose I should really read up on a book or site on it. Any links to useful stuff would be appreciated ^^
Time's existance started with creation, I don't think we have any worries on the understanding of that R2, but thankies for the explanation anyways. Going with infinity theories such as the pre-matter one then there is the question if time exists between reality cycles, but that's more of a philosophical curiosity than anything majorly important regarding the topic I suppose =3
One thing that might be kinda of interesting to debate though is whether or not in a period of timelessness if this is akin to a frozen, unchanging moment which can never generate an outcome( unlikely considering we're here), one possible screenshot which generates a god or universe outcome or if it's a strange amalgamation of all possiblities which every single possibility is generated from. After all if there's no time then nothing can have a sequential order correct?
Wouldn't this then mean that both every diety plus more we don't even know of has always existed along with the universe that didn't need them to create it in the first place? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless you perhaps consider every single variant was thrown off in it's own unique direction... using that as a base the only real question you'd then have to wonder is which direction we're travelling in; which reality is the one we exist in o.O
Buuut that's kinda delving into alternate universes now ~scratches head~
pre-matter that always existed but didn't give off life or energy.
<snip> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
How does matter give off life?
Let it be known that I'm as religious as... I can't think of a good analogy here... something not religious at all.
There are a number of theories as to where all the matter came from to create the big bang. Some scientist postulate that the singularity that exploded might have been a black hole that had reached a critical mass.
In truth there is <b>no way</b> to see back in time before the big bang as everything that could possibly be observed was created then.
I really do not understand people that can place their faith in the existence of $DEITY without any material proof. Completely and utterly illogical.
That being said I have a belief: "People can believe whatever they want to believe as long as it doesn't adversely affect me or anyone I care about."
--Scythe--
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is actually a bad way of putting it. 'Always' implies the object is linked to time. God (for example) is outside of time. The word 'always' doesn't really apply to him. God was the person who created time when he made the universe. All matter and energy is bound by time, and all energy is gradually evening off into less useful forms of energy. If matter and energy had always existed, this state would have been reached an infinite time ago, which clearly it hasn't. Therefore, matter and energy must have come into existance, along with time. The infinite number of collapsing and expanding universes falls into the same difficulty. Besides, the universe has been shown be Albert Einstein that is it of just the right proportions that it will keep expanding, at an ever decreasing rate, for as long as it exists. In otherwords, if there were an infinite number of universes before this one, this one is the last. That statement is completely illogical as, by definition, infinity has no end in any direction.
As for energy, supposedly it can never be destroyed going by the rules of physics but it can be converted into other types. Therefore theoretically is it really possible to make energy into a form that cannot be converted into one that's not useful?
Also this begs the question of whether energy truely is bound to time... after all if it cannot be destroyed does that mean it can even be created? If it can't be destroyed but it could be made would that not mean that the universe would eventually be flooded with excess energy either resulting in it's destruction or something we can't even imagine?
If it can't be created then of course this immediately hits into the whole idealogy of existance; after all how can something 'be' without first being made? In the mess of timelessness perhaps it makes sense, but inside the fragile understanding we can build up within time? It doesn't does it?
Of course you could say that energy was made along with time... which is convienent enough I suppose ^^
Ponderings in that direction aside, the timeless diety thing is a bit of a mind breaker.
First off you have this period without time. Because there is no sequence of events without time it's probably somewhat safe to assume that all possibilities happen or none do... after all none of them can happen before the others without the constant we refer to as time right?
because either nothing or everything can happen that means either a diety couldn't exist because it has no creation or... going by the 'everything happens' theory of timelessness the deity does exist with everything else that didn't need the deities because they came into being at the same time (time being 'started' by creation of course).
Unless you argue that every possible combination has it's own unique existance then you would have a creation that would be made by a deity but it wasn't because it already existed at the same time as that higher entity.
You could argue perhaps that the deities formed and moulded the existance that came to be along with them but in many ways that goes against the religious teachings of most religions and in the infinite wouldn't there also be an existance that shaped itself without guidance from any consciousness?
Ignoring all that, we have the deity itself. If a deity exists outside of time then you have the problem of non-sequentiality. Everything the deity could do has already been done and every thought it could have potentially had as already been processed. Can something like this even be considered alive or conscious or even understand the alien idealogy of time needed to devise plans (which need sequences of events to be built; something that, for the sake of this making any kind of sense, does not exist without time.)
There is also the matter of influence... if something exists outside of time where every possibility is done how does this connect with time? do all possibilties happen the minute time is done meaning that the ones that don't sequence out because the things they need to happen first aren't there simply fail... or do they come in at the appropriate part of time? If that's true then would it not be that the deity wouldn't be an entity nor essense in any understanding we could percieve but timelessness itself; a amalgamation of events without a will or purpose of it's own because every thought it could have or every action it could do is already done, or should I say will be done regardless because of the absense of time to tear these apart into something understandable? ^^;
While I know that train of roving thought will immediately appeal to many religions teachings (omnipotence, the higher lifeforms being totally impossible to understand (we think sequentially, they don't), etc) there is still the problem as outline previously of the entity's creation. R2 pointed out that time started with creation, but did creation start with time? Regardless would the arguement not then be every possibility and impossibility was created? The existance of time is the only thing that keeps things from all happening at once and even the need for things to make sense in our limited understanding. If we existed without time our entire family off into infinity would already exist... the fact that they need to be born is irrelevant because it already happened in the state of timelessness... the possibility charted and created before it even happened because... gah... you get the picture =3
<b>edit:</b> Somewhere in all that meandering I think I might have missed your point boggle... sorry, I think I just got carried away ^^;
In my post I explained how a previous reality couldn't exist, so I don't realyl see what you re getting at there.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for energy, supposedly it can never be destroyed going by the rules of physics but it can be converted into other types.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Therefore theoretically is it really possible to make energy into a form that cannot be converted into one that's not useful?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, because eventually that form of energy will change into a form that is not useful. Let me give an example
The sun is a big nuclear reaction at the centre of our solar system. It gives out Light energy (useful), heat energy (vital) and other forms of energy. However, most of the energy is gives out it lost, traveling to a far corner of the universe, doing nothing on the way, wasted energy. The heat and light gradually dissipate until you cannot see or feel it at all. Of the energy that does reach earth, lots of it is reflected back into space, again, lost as it dissipates. Some of the light energy is taken in by plants to make food, which is eaten by animals, which are eaten by other animals and so on up the food chain. Energy is lost at each stage, as some of the energy is used for growing, some is lost as heat in warm blooded mammals and so on. Eventually, all energy will be spread evenly over whole universe.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Also this begs the question of whether energy truely is bound to time... after all if it cannot be destroyed does that mean it can even be created? If it can't be destroyed but it could be made would that not mean that the universe would eventually be flooded with excess energy either resulting in it's destruction or something we can't even imagine?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No.
There is a fixed amout of matter and energy in this universe. You can change between forms of matter and forms of energy, you can even change between matter and energy but you cannot create more of one without reducing the amount of the other.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
If it can't be created then of course this immediately hits into the whole idealogy of existance; after all how can something 'be' without first being made? In the mess of timelessness perhaps it makes sense, but inside the fragile understanding we can build up within time? It doesn't does it?
Of course you could say that energy was made along with time... which is convienent enough I suppose ^^<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A humans, we cannot create matter or energy, but there is nothing to stop an omnipotent being creating it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Ponderings in that direction aside, the timeless diety thing is a bit of a mind breaker.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quite frankly, it is not worth thinking too hard about, because as being made of matter and energy, we are bound by time like all other matter and energy. Thinking about timelessness will only give you a headache, but carry on...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->First off you have this period without time. Because there is no sequence of events without time it's probably somewhat safe to assume that all possibilities happen or none do... after all none of them can happen before the others without the constant we refer to as time right?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is, of course, assuming that things can happen at all without time. For something to happen as we know it, it needs to have happened in a certain time period. Without time, events as we know them cannot happen, as there is no time for them to happen in.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->because either nothing or everything can happen that means either a diety couldn't exist because it has no creation or... going by the 'everything happens' theory of timelessness the deity does exist with everything else that didn't need the deities because they came into being at the same time (time being 'started' by creation of course).
Unless you argue that every possible combination has it's own unique existance then you would have a creation that would be made by a deity but it wasn't because it already existed at the same time as that higher entity.
You could argue perhaps that the deities formed and moulded the existance that came to be along with them but in many ways that goes against the religious teachings of most religions and in the infinite wouldn't there also be an existance that shaped itself without guidance from any consciousness?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I said, being bound by time, we cannot speak for beings that are outside of time.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Ignoring all that,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sounds like a plan
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> we have the deity itself. If a deity exists outside of time then you have the problem of non-sequentiality. Everything the deity could do has already been done and every thought it could have potentially had as already been processed. Can something like this even be considered alive or conscious or even understand the alien idealogy of time needed to devise plans (which need sequences of events to be built; something that, for the sake of this making any kind of sense, does not exist without time.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe that us why God is omnipotent. Being outside of time, he can see everything that has ever and will ever happen. Being free from causality and the chain of events, he could also see what would have happend had you chosen to have 2 rashers of bacon instead of just 1 for breakfast this morning.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is also the matter of influence... if something exists outside of time where every possibility is done how does this connect with time? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because he created it. You may be outside of your house but you can still chuck snowballs at it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->do all possibilties happen the minute time is done meaning that the ones that don't sequence out because the things they need to happen first aren't there simply fail... or do they come in at the appropriate part of time? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For us, being bound by time, they happen in order. For a being outside of time, he would see them as happening all at once.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If that's true then would it not be that the deity wouldn't be an entity nor essense in any understanding we could percieve<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are right. We cannot fully understand God because he exists in a fasion that we do not, he is outside of time, something that we cannot fully comprehend
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->but timelessness itself; a amalgamation of events without a will or purpose of it's own because every thought it could have or every action it could do is already done, or should I say will be done regardless because of the absense of time to tear these apart into something understandable? ^^;<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is timelessness an entity? It is anything at all?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->While I know that train of roving thought will immediately appeal to many religions teachings (omnipotence, the higher lifeforms being totally impossible to understand (we think sequentially, they don't), etc) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You said it yourself actually: <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If that's true then would it not be that the deity wouldn't be an entity nor essense in any understanding we could percieve<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> there is still the problem as outline previously of the entity's creation. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why? A being outside of time would not need to be created, as creation needs a time period to be linked too.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->R2 pointed out that time started with creation, but did creation start with time? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Creation is a word used to describe the coming into being of matter, energy and time. Matter, energy and time all started together at the moment of creation, "in the beginnning".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Regardless would the arguement not then be every possibility and impossibility was created?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. Once time is there, things happen in order. Things that would happen happen when they happen, things that were not going to happen do not happen at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The existance of time is the only thing that keeps things from all happening at once and even the need for things to make sense in our limited understanding.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If we existed without time our entire family off into infinity would already exist... the fact that they need to be born is irrelevant because it already happened in the state of timelessness... the possibility charted and created before it even happened because... gah... you get the picture =3<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Notice the <i>if</i>. If we were outside of time, yes the whole family would exist at once. But we are not, so it doesn't
----
Phew.
I will admit that I had to read some parts of you post several time before I understood what you wer getting at. Even now, I am still not quite sure, so if there is anything I misunderstood, please enlighten me.
While I have trouble associating a deity as an essense/being that exists outside of time, I think the application of timelessness being the deity/gods of religions makes more sense to me considering the way the theories link up. The multiple gods of some religions could even be put down as a way of describing individual facets of timelessness for easier understanding =o
The thing with the infinite cycle still seems viable to me as well now despite the explanation of dispersed energy, as when the universe somehow collapses or whatever else causes it to cease it's existance then it reaches a period of timelessness once again where everything or nothing can happen... not to mention that if reality no longer exists does space? If not then the energy is no longer dispersed (assuming even that exists anymore, going with the non-destructabilty of it) as there is no 'distance' or even form for it to be dispersed as =D
Perhaps you've already explained why that wouldn't work though... I'm still a little fuzzy on your posts regarding einstein's expansive theory to a little degree boggles ^^;
If I'm still missing the point just put me in line.
The point of the thread is at least being fufilled somewhat... both theories of creation don't seem so 'broken' to me now thanks to the input you guys have put in =3
Thanks for posting so far but if anyone feels the need to add or perhaps think my train of thought is still awry then join in!
oh... um... one little favour however... if you're posting quotes to something could you please, for my sake, keep it as one big quote rather than breaking it down into points spread throughout your posts. While I know some people find this an easier way of talking about individual things within a post I find it rather difficult going when it comes to reading it =s
Perhaps you've already explained why that wouldn't work though... I'm still a little fuzzy on your posts regarding einstein's expansive theory to a little degree boggles ^^;
If I'm still missing the point just put me in line. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The infinite cycle, or oscillating model is an endless sequence - Big Bang, Big Crunch, Big Bounce. It all seems very neat, but unfortunately, it contradicts the known laws of physics. In an oscilating, even though mathematics says the universe oscilates, there is no known physics to reverse th collapse and bounce back to a new expansion. Even scientists supporting the oscillating model have admitted 'There is no understanding of how a bounce can take place... We have nothing to contribute to the question of whether and/or how the univerese bounces'.
Enstein showed through lots of complicated maths that the universe will never stop expanding. It had the right mass at the big bang, the perfect speeds after the explosion, gravity was spot on. All these (and many more) factors were just right for the universe to carry on expanding indefinitely. It's rate of expansion will decrease, but it will never stop. If gravity was much stronger, the universe would have collapsed ages ago. If it was any weaker, stars would not have formed, and there would be no planets and no life.
No he didn't.
He assumed that the cosmological constant was non-zero so that the Universe could be static for the sole reason that "it makes sense"(this was before the big bang theory). Something he later in life called his biggest mistake if that is what you are reffering to.
Most cosmological theories today are inflation theories(and there are quite a bunch of them). These attempt to solve some of the problems of the big bang theory(<- a theory is not set in stone and will change when it's found to be incomplete or just an approximation in certain circumstances.)
<a href='http://www.duke.edu/~mjd/chaos/chaos.html' target='_blank'>just a quick link</a>
thats just a tidbit of information on them both, and they can and have been tied into creationism by many people. I found it pretty interesting, and if nothing else, theres a fractal creator online somewhere(sorry, couldnt find the link, ill update this post if i can) that made really pretty fractals.
[Edit] I found this fractal generator, kinda sucks, but you get the idea
<a href='http://greenfield.fortunecity.com/healing/195/fractal.html' target='_blank'>fractal generator</a>
<span style='color:red'>***Locked.***</span>
Edit: *Does a dance* Look who got in AFTER a lock!
Edit II: Can I get an award or something?
<span style='color:white'>You asked for it.</span>