1. Win a $250 shopping spree at Grasscity.com! To enter subscribe to our youtube channel.
    Dismiss Notice

creation

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Mike Oxlong, May 5, 2003.

  1. is their any theories about how the universe started. because energy cannot be made or destroyed so i dont understand how the universe got started.
     
  2. God created it.

    I've always had a problem with the big bang thing because where did the extremely dense ball of stuff that went BANG come from? It had to come from somewhere since it can't be created or destroyed.
     
  3. depends on if u believe in the term "UNIverse".

    i personally do not.

    i think we exist as part of a cyclic-multiverse.
     
  4. I've thought of that same theory myself only not necessarily in toothpaste.

    And also think about how well things we observe work. The math just clicks in such a way that it cant be natural for many things found in physics and math. It's amazing.
     
  5. i don't know where to start. gotta get my thoughts straight...

    1: intelligence

    a natural evolutionary step. we humans are not remarkable in any way, except for our brain to body weight ratio. we needed to develop the ability to think abstract in order to adapt to changing eco-system and available resources. we were smarter than say the neanderthals. we survived, they didn't. that we are sentient, and thus can ask the question "how did we get so darned smart" doesn't mean that some other smart "beeing" made us that way, merely that it was essential for our species survival. there is no designer. i will get back to this.

    2: big bang

    there is no mystery in energy changing form into matter. this have been obseved thousands of times in particle accelerators. quantum mechanics work in mysterious ways. a quantum entity can both be, and not be. this change of state is proven. as such, the question is not was there a big bang, the question is, how did the initial energy spawn. the simple answer is, we don't really know. yet.

    3: multiple / cyclick universes

    this is pure speculation. it doesn' answer much more than the god-reasoning. it's only an extension of the question. if there are multiple universes (or multiverses if you wish), then *still* somewhere it had to begin... to be more clear, if our universe is just a node on a greater universe, then if you follow the hiearchy to the top you meet an all encompassing universe. that must hava had a beginning, right?

    why take it so far, why not just stop at *our* universe. extending a problem towards infinity doesn't make it more probable, quite the opposite methinks.
     
  6. Yet we have not seen this same evolutionary step in any other species. If it was so critical to survival then why are we the only ones to develop it?

    Your argument still comes down to belief, same as religion. I choose to believe in God. You choose to believe in something else that you don't really know.

    That's a very good point. I have believed in the possibility of a multiverse, but I've never seen anything that compels me to believe in its existence.
     

  7. inteligence is just as much a product of evolution as is the ability to see in colour or genetic resiliance to a virus. and if you have any understanding of evolution this is quite clear. this seems particularly obvious in human evolution, largely because it is our inteligence that has seen us survive where many of our "cousins" failed. Another creature where it seems particularly obvious is the Dolphin (2nd largest brain to body mass). They are up against some tough odds for their food chain, and if you've ever seen a nature docu on their hunting methods you start to see how they've stayed as one of the top contenders despite not being as physically suited as some of their competitors.

    just because there is yet no concensus in science as to what came before the big bang does not mean we have to revert to our trusty old "one-answer-fits-all" that "god did it". Just because you cannot see something does that mean it does not exist? and equally so, just because you do not know of something does that mean it does not exist?

    the excessive humanity of "aliens" that have supposed to evolved under completely different circumstances is something that has pissed me of in sci-fi for a long time. But this is not a product of the stupidity of humanity or the creator of such movies/series. Nor is a product of our dessire to be seen as somewhat devine or what highly evolved beings look like as some would suggest. It is simply a product of catering for the audience.. not because we are so wrapped up in ourselves, but because it is easier for us to relate to... and its also often because of budget limitations.

    the possibility of being created by higher beings im quite sure isnt completely ruled out by any scientific mind. I whether this was an intentional, conscious effort or not seems a little easier to argue. WE as humans do (to a certain extent) have the ability to bring life on other planetary bodies within our solar system, and most probably allready have. "huh?" i hear you ask.. the moon. there is little doubt in my mind that we have left bacteria on the moon from our few brief excursions there. The possability that life started else where and was brought to earth is made so much more probable when you consider the possability of it being brought here via asteroids and debri from other planetary colisions. But to put it another way... we are all star stuff, and the sun (and the other stars) were once considered as GOD. so does that mean that we are made of "god" as well as by "god"?

    inferior wang said:
    "Your argument still comes down to belief, same as religion. I choose to believe in God. You choose to believe in something else that you don't really know."

    But the point is.... he is willing to learn, and adapt his "beliefs" as new information comes in.

    Zy said:
    "why take it so far, why not just stop at *our* universe"

    because "*our* universe" as you put it may not be a universe at all! And to read about such possabilities and how scientists came to such seemingly bizarre and extreme phantastical conclusions is to expand ones consciousness, and perception and understanding of all that is and all that we can percieve. Multiverse theory (or at least the most common one) isnt so much about 'other unverses' more a reclarification (or alternate possability) of the nature of the "universe". much the same can be said for cyclic-universe theory. The theory i subscribe to is somewhat the amalgamation of the two.

    inferiorwang said:
    "That's a very good point. I have believed in the possibility of a multiverse, but I've never seen anything that compels me to believe in its existence."

    do you mean you havent seen any scientific papers, or magazine articles etc that compels you to believe in such, or do you mean you havn't seen anything in reality with your own eyes that would suggest such to be so?





    wow this is a massive and all encompassing thread. it covers tooooo many things in one. :D but i like it.
     
  8. digit wrote:
    ---
    Multiverse theory (or at least the most common one) isnt so much about 'other unverses' more a reclarification (or alternate possability) of the nature of the "universe". much the same can be said for cyclic-universe theory. The theory i subscribe to is somewhat the amalgamation of the two.
    ---

    are you thinking multidimentional universes (i like the word universe. i cannot get myself to write multiverse... )

    i'll just throw out a hypothesis here.

    nature abhores a vacuum. it does everything possible to fill it. if on another dimension / level of universe, a vacuum occured, a break or rift in its "matrix", nature would fill that, could that be what we mean by the big bang?

    just pondering...
     
  9. The dolphin answer to intelligence is a cop out. Everyone knows they are very smart, but they aren't sentient, which is what makes us special. It's this sentience that was being classified with intelligence above. There are many smart and intelligent animals, dolphins being among the smartest, but it is sentience that sets us apart.

    and no I haven't seen those scientific papers about a multiverse, granted I haven't looked that hard. Also, I haven't noticed anything in normal life that makes a multiverse seem like a solution that fits.
     
  10. "nature abhores a vacuum. it does everything possible to fill it. if on another dimension / level of universe, a vacuum occured, a break or rift in its "matrix", nature would fill that, could that be what we mean by the big bang?"

    that is very close to describing a friend's theory on how the creation of "unverses" (his multiverse theory does allow such an existance) occurs.

    i'll get back to you on cyclic-multiverse... i need a bit of psyching up before i tackle that one. :)


    wang...
    you seem quite deluded. on what evidence do you base your conclusion that dolphins are not sentient? sentience is not unique to humans. we really are not that special. I've done quite a bit of looking into what sentience is after seeing the episode of star trek TNG where "data" is put on trial to see if Starfleet can do with him as they please depending on if he can be termed as sentient.

    and seriously... i really feel i must re-iterate (or rather, repeat) for emphasis... dolpins ARE sentient.
     
  11. through some intensive training, dolphins have been known to communicate intelligently using a subset of the english vocabulary consisting of upto 50 words. thus far we humans don't even know a syllable of, erm, dolphin...

    i am however a bit skeptic to the whole "whales are sentient" ordeal. [a dolphin is a whale for all practical purposes.] i'm not saying that dolphins aren't smart. as non-technological creatures go they are only surpassed by gorillas and other simian apes. come to think of it, i'm not all that sure that all humans are sentient.

    the thing is though that we humans have made a huge leap in understanding. that leap is what we call literacy. we can enter the minds of others disregarding distance and time. we can in an effect "record" our thoughts. no other animal than humans have done this. i'm not saying that to read or write is a prerequisite to self awareness, but that self-awareness comes with an urge to make an impact on the future of ones own. so far no animals have shown this trait.

    it's a bit thin, i know. think box...
     
  12. why is it that whenever we try to evaluate something we always have to weigh it up against ourselves first.

    sure dolphins use no technology that we can discern... but does that make them uninteligent? does it make you inteligent? has it made us more inteligent? or is "technology a product of our inteligence & oposable thumbs (and of course our ability to learn ontop of the previous generations examples giving the occasional leap of thought)?

    we know dolphins can comunicate, so is it not possible that they can concieve of ideas and comunicate these ideas? When did they start "fishing" in the manner that they do? it had to start some time, and the rest must have learnt it somehow, either by example or though explanation.

    and if we are sentient and they are not how is it that they can learn some of our language but we cannot learn theirs? are you to tell me this is due simply to the quality of the teacher?

    and where did you learn that gorrilas are smarter than dolphins?... this is quite debatable. It is far easier to put a gauge on how smart a primate is due to the similarity to humans so perhaps we have just guessed that more accurately, and our understanding of dolphins has yet to even scratch the surface. I had actually seen somewhere that dolphins were the second smartest creatures on the planet, but that could perhaps have just been based on brain size.

    now if i am right that dolphins are smarter than primates, and primates have been seen to partake in human activities (drinking, smoking, washing clothes, wearing clothes, rowing boats, etc.) who is to say that dolphins, if given the ability to overcome the physical difficulties could not acheive more?

    and to through this whole topic ever further afield... what about life forms that aren't mamal, or even animal at all! perhaps the greates inteligenc on planet earth are aspen tree plantations, or massive fungal growths, or even the great barrier reef!?!?!!! is it that impossable to concieve that inteligence may have a very different face? have we become so dumbed down by the ever present humanity of the "alien creatures" we see on TV? Perhaps it has no face at all, perhaps not even an existance in our physical plane, existing in our space-time as only a consciousness.

    maybe we created the greatest sentient inteligence and have yet to realise it, as we continually bash away at our keyboards filling it with yet further information. :D ;) :p
     
  13. hahahahahah! oh nice one!

    i cant believe i didnt spot that hypocracy in religious arguments!

    the disbelieve the big bang theory because they ask "what came before to cause it?" and use that question as reason enough for disbelieving it... yet.... when asked, "What came before god to create his existance?" they simply have to fall back to their old """"GOD"""" responces.

    thnx smokin&tokin... i needed something like that. :D
     
  14. it really comes down to what you define as intelligence.

    i interpret it as beeing able to think and communicate abstract thoughts.

    an addition to that definition would be to be able to create, be creative. putting abstractions into practice.

    as animals go (and to make this perfectly clear to those few who might be in doubt, humans are animals too) dolphins are smart. i believe gorillas are smarter. the dolphin brain to weight ratio is bigger than a gorillas, but you also have to keep in mind that that dolphin brain is also used to navigate in true 3d space (as opposed to landlubbers 2.5d) and a fully built in sonic echolocator.

    in addition, gorillas use tools.

    to be able to communicate is not a sign of high intelligence. all living creatures communicate with another in varying ways. dogs, cats, wasps and trees all communicate.

    beeing able to learn commands only shows memory, not actual intelligence.

    not only dolphins are great hunters. lions and wolfes show the same team effort when it comes to hunting down prey.

    that ants create complex structures and societies anly means they are highly self-organizing. like life itself. not that they are intelligent.

    i don't believe sentience is limited to humans on a universal (or galctic for that matter) scale, but here in sol, and earth at least, we are the only beeings that can ask "who are we?".

    --
    on a side note, how would we recognize intelligence if we met it? it might be so unhuman we would not even stumble upon it...

    it might not even be carbon-based. it might not even reside on a planet, instead living in nebulas or whatever. could even be extra-dimensional?
    --
     

Grasscity Deals Near You

Loading...

Share This Page