God is defined as "the one supreme being, the creator and ruler of the universe" I don't believe the universe is ruled by a supreme being, but rather by the laws of physics. That doesn't make the laws of physics "god" since they rule the universe, but didn't create them, the universe's creation hasn't been explained yet, I don't believe in a creation of the universe, I think it has always existed, for an infinite amount of time, there is no such thing as the beginning.
Like I said dude, call it what you want.... physics will do Btw I dont believe in God, im saying if there was such a thing to be defined as God, it should be what ever drives the whole universe, infinitly. Physics. what ever haha Like think about it, this shit never stops and never will. Blows my mind man
Haha yeah man, it is crazy, if you are interested in this kind of thing, I recommend you smoke a joint and read this wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe Try to read all of it if you can, it will blow your mind.
nice man, ill check it out dude, cheers for the link, im currently blazing right now so I shall have a read haha
Now that was some trippy shit!! haha What do think of this theory man? Do you thnk the universe could eventually 'die out'? Obviously our solar system etc will. But like, the whooooooole universe??
Its nearly 5 in the morn where im at, gotta get up in a few hours high as fuck haha People add me, send me trippy links, engage in mad convo about anything and I shall reply, Peeeace and happy toking folks!!!
What do you mean by the whole universe dying out? The most acceptable theories are that either the universe will expand so much that molecules will freeze and the universe will reach extremely low temperatures (which doesn't imply it will cease to exist) or that it will revert back to where it was before expansion started, which may lead to another big bang in the future and the cycle would begin again. Who knows? Maybe mankind or some other species in a different galaxy evolve so much that they will be able to stop the universe from freezing or reverting to a ball of fire :O
yer man I feel ya, Check this.. What do you make of quantum mechanics? The double slit experiment, where there is no outcome untill there is an observer... So there can not be a specific event until it is observed... it is the observer that gives in infinite field of possibilites an outcome and this is science right now btw. So if there is a cat in a box, is it dead or alive, until the moment you open the box it is both, but by your observation, you make one of the possiblities a reality... So if thats the case, then what the fuck observed the big bang for that to become a reality??? Trippy shiiiiiit? And btw this is actual science right now like I said
Yes, I've heard of Shrodinger's cat before, but I don't really agree with that theory, a fact does not occur only after it's observed, that would make no sense, since as you said, the big bang could not have happened, and therefore, we wouldn't exist. The cat is either dead or alive, but you won't find out until you open the box, that's all.
Thats the point, though, thats what actually baffles scientist and they can't explain it, so 'majority' dissmiss it. It cant be explained with logic and reason. Its rather.... 'Mystical' so its ignored by the masses in the scientific commuinity, but its the results they get when do the double split experiment. Its not a theory, its an experiment, that has no reason or logic to it.
I was raised in a somewhat religious household, father was Lutheran, but I never really thought about it much myself until I was in my mid to late 30s. After 9-11 the extremist nuts started running around trying to tell everyone how the world worked from their rather twisted views, the Texas school board, Dover Pennsylvania, and others happened, and it just got too serious to ignore anymore. So I started to read the bible to see what the truth was and rather than truth what I found was that it would support almost any argument you wanted it to taking both sides of most issues. That started the doubt, and everything I've seen and learned since has just increased it. I was probably an atheist for a couple or few years before I even realized that I was one. I used to say agnostic, but agnostic about God in the same sense that I was agnostic about unicorns. I couldn't prove no such thing ever existed but I saw no reason to believe in them myself. Over time though I realized that this was the definition of an agnostic atheist, I accepted the fact that I was one and that was about that. In my experience it isn't other atheists who breed atheists, it's religious extremists who won't leave people alone in their own beliefs but make them look, which is often followed by doubt.
I don't have enough information to contribute to that topic I guess, I'll have to research some more in the future
I'm pretty sure Shrodinger's cat was a thought experiment rather than an actual one, and one that Shrodinger later had regrets about being misunderstood. Just as the elevator in space thought experiments of Einstein were meant to illustrate a point rather than being taken literally so was this, it was a just thought experiment intended to illustrate the quantum world with an example we could relate to. The quantum world is really weird, but in practice it doesn't translate well into ours. So the example, which took on a life of its own over time and became 'real', even though it isn't.
The universe has a beginning, we can measure radiation decay over time because we can detect it and we know the rate of decay. It also has an end because when expansion overcomes gravity we go back to a single infinite point.
The double-slit experiment is a demonstration that light and matter can display characteristics of both classically defined waves and particles; moreover, it displays the fundamentally probabilistic nature of quantum mechanical phenomena. This experiment is sometimes referred to as Young's experiment. The experiment belongs to a general class of "double path" experiments, in which a wave is split into two separate waves that later combine back into a single wave. Changes in the path lengths of both waves result in a phase shift, creating an interference pattern. Another version is the Mach–Zehnder interferometer, which splits the beam with a mirror. In the basic version of this experiment, a coherent light source such as a laser beam illuminates a plate pierced by two parallel slits, and the light passing through the slits is observed on a screen behind the plate. The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing through the two slits to interfere, producing bright and dark bands on the screen-a result that would not be expected if light consisted of classical particles. However, the light is always found to be absorbed at the screen at discrete points, as individual particles (not waves), the interference pattern appearing via the varying density of these particle hits on the screen. Furthermore, versions of the experiment that include detectors at the slits find that each detected photon passes through one slit (as would a classical particle), and not through both slits (as would a wave). These results demonstrate the principle of wave–particle duality.<sup>[11]</sup><sup>[12]</sup> Other atomic-scale entities such as electrons are found to exhibit the same behavior when fired toward a double slit. Additionally, the detection of individual discrete impacts is observed to be inherently probabilistic, which is inexplicable using classical mechanics. The experiment can be done with entities much larger than electrons and photons, although it becomes more difficult as size increases. The largest entities for which the double-slit experiment has been performed were molecules that each comprised 810 atoms (whose total mass was over 10,000 atomic mass units)
How does that contradict the circular time theory? That single infinite point could very well be just a point (that repeats an infinite amount of time) in the history of the universe (which as I said, could very well repeat over and over again)
That's all fascinating, but I'm not sure that I see the point. You do realize that a photon is a particle and a cat isn't, right? Nobody said quantum effects didn't happen, quantum physics is something I've been interested in for ages as a hobbyist and I'd be glad to discuss it with you. The point that's questioned is if quantum effects happen to cats. I don't see how pointing to an unrelated experiment involving actual particles rather than cats is related.
I understood what you mean't. Don't take the cat literally, the point is, its a proven experiment, all I was getting at dude.