End of the day it is all beyond our knowledge and comprehension at this point in human evolution. I don't believe in god, but like people say the big bang is not "proven" (at this point why isn't 90% good enough for some people!?) and if you look at it like that you will never have a definitive answer one way or the other. But religion is bullshit. Not intended to offend any religious people... sorry but its bullshit.
People need to remember Hawkins isn't just some mad scientist out to cause a ruckus and make false claims for no reason. He's one of the true great physicists, among the worlds smartest and even called the smartest by some. It's his job. He needs to theorize what may seem confusing or out there, if people never did then we would still be stuck in the medieval ages (or earlier). I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but there's been ideas (that at the time were just as crazy) that were scientifically proven to be true. Remember evolution? Last but not least, if a priest can teach people that a supreme being created everything, and not only that, cares for us and can intervene whenever they wish (even though they cannot prove this) then why can't Hawkins theorize?
Where did Gravity come from? Has it always existed? If so, why couldn't the whole universe always exist. Fuck you brain.
I believe in the big bang theory and evolution. Religion is simply there just to confer people so they aren't afraid of death. Now I want to believe that there's something else after death but its just to hard to believe that something in the sky made our universe. Religion is just so your not worried that this is just it and once you die it's over. Now I do kinda believe in something after death but not god.
well if I might say... Cells aren't humans. They are cells. Am I right, please correct me if I'm wrong.
Either from nothing, or space-time has always existed. But if there is a quantum field theory of Gravity, then all other quantum principles such as the Heisenburg uncertainty principle apply to that law. Gravity, time, and space will fluctuate randomly and have a non-zero probability of originating.
I think we're all getting too far away from the main argument of basically "If time did not exist before the universe, then god could not exist becasue there was no time for him to exist." I think mainly, the people that agree with this mostly are athiest/agnostic. The people argueing that god exits outside of this closed timeless system are obviously not. So really I guess the argument solves nothing at all because it dosent really sway anyone's ideas. when its all boild down its just back to the same old belivers vs. non belivers.
Too true. As much fun as I have debating the subject of god there is no true way to ever resolve the argument I believe. You may be able to convince others one side or the other, but never will we be capable of 'proving' either side I don't think.. not anytime soon atleast.
But then which argument is more logical? P1. Mathematics is logical P2. Reality is accurately described by mathematics P3. God is either logical and can be described by mathematics or he is illogical and cannot be described by mathematics C1. If God is not describable by mathematics then he is not part of reality and there does not exist. This is all based on the well tested and supported assumption that mathematics describes reality. But I suppose it very well could be that if we continue to test this we might run into something mathematics cannot describe, but this I think is pretty much an argument from ignorance. Anyways, I do agree that we can never prove something, or anything, with absolute certainty. Rather we can have degrees of confidence. "Doubt is never a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." Voltaire
Does mathematics explain consciousness though? Also, I can prove gravity exists with 100% certainy. Can't prove what it is, but I can definitely prove it's there. And also your argument is already assuming that god is apart of reality. But god is supposedly the creator of reality therefore must exist separately. Does the watchmaker exist within the watch he created and have his life driven by the tick of the gears inside, or does he exist entirely separate?
The same way a sensible person does not trust a priest to give them the 'truth' about God, is the same way one does not trust an astrophysicist.
How exactly? If god created time and space, how can it be limited by it's own creation and how can it be apart of and inside something that it made? Unless you're trying to say god somehow created itself but then god would not be eternal therefore un-defining the very definition of god.
You're beginning from a point of assuming that god exists, that's a supposition, so talking about 'his' qualities and making them up to suit any potential criticism isn't scientific. First prove god, then describe his qualities after analysis, not make them up to suit. MelT
I keep telling you you're in the wrong forum for this cockamamie, GMS. Yes, you forced me to use cockamamie.