Since General Relativity proves time and space share a common origin like the biblical account, shouldn't we give God the credit for creation? "In the beginning..." - Time "God created the heavens... - Space
General relativity proves no such thing.
At best, laws of relativity and quantum mechanics break down at a singularity. Therefore, we can't say anything about the state of the universe at, or possibly before, the big bang.
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually—from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint—it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly... timey-wimey... stuff."
2. Matter does not 'create itself'... probably. It is possible, though unlikely, for an event to preceed its cause, so that matter could 'create itself' or simply appear to create itself. Go consider the inflexions of a Feynman diagram for a graphical explanation.
"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually—from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint—it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly... timey-wimey... stuff."
Dark Energy. It can be found in the observable Universe. Found in ratios of 75% more than any other substance. Dark Energy. It can be found in religious extremists, in cheerleaders. To come to the conclusion that Dark signifies mean and malevolent would define 75% of the Universe as an evil force. Alternatively, to think that some cheerleaders don't have razors in their snatch is to be foolishly unarmed.
We've been over this before and you got your rear end handed to you. Would you like to go over it again?
Apparently not. Neither he nor our OP.
Pity.
The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe. The belief in supernatural religion will kill us all if we don't outgrow it.
When I first read "End of Faith" I thought Sam went too far. The more I read and listen to these "believers" the more I wonder if maybe he wasn't right after all.
Since General Relativity proves time and space share a common origin like the biblical account, shouldn't we give God the credit for creation? "In the beginning..." - Time "God created the heavens... - Space
NO. That's not how scientific method works. While it seems logical to you, the conclusion you posit cannot be proven via scientific method, so it cannot be accepted as valid.
Science is mostly about 'how' and doesn't usually involve 'who' or. 'why' except in a very mechanical sense. For the same reason, Science does not concern itself with 'why are humans here?' in the sense of 'what is our 'job'?'
Science makes a poor religion - and religion is execrable 'science'.
57: Nobody. God always was...never was God..not. We've been over this before and you guy got your rear ends handed to you. Would you like to go over it again?
Well, if it's allowed to posit the eternal existence of something without a lick of evidence, then I say that the universe has always been and it just goes through natural phases; the Big Bang was the boundary condition between the last phase and this one.
It makes just as much sense as an a god that always was --- and I have the advantage of at least being able to show that the universe exists right now, which is more than theists can do with god!
ROATFLMAO
The universe is matter...which requires a creator. Matter can't create itself from nothing. It can't be and not be at the same time.
I've notice before that you aren't well up on the last 80 years or so of physics, and you don't, oddly, remember any of the explanations given to you about physics.
1. Matter does not require a creator. Matter comes into existence, spontaneously, all the time. If it didn't, you'd probably be dead, and if not you would be a completely different form of life.
2. Matter does not 'create itself'... probably. It is possible, though unlikely, for an event to preceed its cause, so that matter could 'create itself' or simply appear to create itself. Go consider the inflexions of a Feynman diagram for a graphical explanation.
3. Nothing is such an interesting concept. Quantum physics pretty much requires 'something from nothing' to happen all the time. Check out a good simplistic book on quantum physics.
4. Either something can 'be and not be at the same time' or there are a near infinite number of universes, with myriads more all the time. The first is called the Copenhagen School Interpretation, and the other is the Many Worlds Interpretation. Again, see a good book on quantum physics, and place your bets - but if the leading quantum physicists haven't settled that question in three quarters of a century, you're not going to nail it down unequivocvally, either.
5. Modern cosmology can explain the universe as we see it with no requirement for Gods. If you think you, personally, can overthrow an entire branch of science, let's see your proof. And I do mean proof, not 'I refuse to believe in any scientific explanations because, dammit, Goddidit'.
The universe exist right now...is a bad argument for you to use. There had to have been a creator.
For that matter, the physics may well allow a state with no boundary conditions, which means it doesn't have a beginning or an end. As well as all the issues above... Have fun trying to find some 'proof'.
"I am the soul of nature that gives life to the universe."
57: The universe is matter...which requires a creator. Matter can't create itself from nothing. It can't be and not be at the same time. The universe exist right now...is a bad argument for you to use. There had to have been a creator.
You didn't read the article? A shame. If you had, you would know that as predicted by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the conversation of energy can be violated for very, very short periods of time such that so-called virtual particles can appear/disappear, creating quantum froth. At the quantum level, there is a huge sea of these particles appearing from nowhere and disappearing again all the time --- this has been observed and measured using the Casimir Effect. More, the good folks at Chalmers University of Technology pulled "photons out of the void."
So, the laws of quantum mechanics and observed data trump your opinion; believe in creators if you want to, but your argument that they are required is contradicted by evidence and thus fails.
(I have never understood the YEC delusion that other people are going to elevate baseless YEC opinions over actual facts and data.....)
The universe is matter...which requires a creator. Matter can't create itself from nothing. It can't be and not be at the same time.
The universe is mass-energy. A well-known law of physics states that mass-energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Mass-energy is therefore uncreated, which means it has always existed. It is eternal.
