What's new
By:
Filters

Longest Thread Ever

Siro said:
That's too technical a discussion for me to bother. You simply don't have enough of an understanding of the current state of the art in cosmology. So I don't understand why you feel so confident asking that question. It's not like you studied the various ideas on the origin of reality, and came to the conclusion that some things are unexplainable.
Click to expand...
?? I'm not confident in asking anything or pretend to know things I don't. I'm just coming from a layman perspective, and pondering really a simple question. Science is always about verifiability and causality right? Then where do all matters come from if it cannot create itself?
 
ONE LOVE said:
?? I'm not confident in asking anything or pretend to know things I don't. I'm just coming from a layman perspective, and it's really a simple question. Science is always about verifiability and causality right? Then where do all matters come from if it cannot create itself?
Click to expand...

I gave you an answer. There are responses to your question within the realm of rational thought. But I'm not motivated to try and explain any of them. If you're serious about what the state of knowledge is on the subject, then you can research it. You'd have a deeper understanding of the meaning of your question, and more nuanced ways to think about and formulate questions about the origin of the universe, if nothing else.
 
Siro said:
I gave you an answer. There are responses to your question within the realm of rational thought. But I'm not motivated to try and explain any of them. If you're serious about what the state of knowledge is on the subject, then you can research it. You'd have a deeper understanding of the meaning of your question, and more nuanced ways to think about and formulate questions about the origin of the universe, if nothing else.
Click to expand...
So just give me a straight answer then, what is Science's answer to the origin of the universe?
 
ONE LOVE said:
So just give me a straight answer then, what is Science's answer to the origin of the universe?
Click to expand...

What part of "I'm not motivated to explain" don't you understand? I don't think you're interested. Why would I expend the considerable effort needed to explain to you even the basics of quantum and relativity theories required to start the discussion? I know it won't matter.
 
Siro said:
What part of "I'm not motivated to explain" don't you understand? I don't think you're interested. Why would I expend the considerable effort needed to explain to you even the basics of quantum and relativity theories required to start the discussion? I know it won't matter.
Click to expand...

Well I was expecting you to just say it's The Big Bang or it's the Multiverse, and then I was gonna say, ok, but who created the Multiverse .
 
ONE LOVE said:
Well I was expecting you to just say it's The Big Bang or it's the Multiverse, and then I was gonna say, ok, but who created the Multiverse .
Click to expand...

WHO created the multiverse? Do you know something I don't?
 
Siro said:
It's not a meaningful question. It assumes that things can only be created by an intelligent agent.
Click to expand...
Well if it is observed by Science that 'physical' things cannot create itself (100% proven), then doesn't it follow that we have to look for an 'immaterial' matter/being to be the creator?
 
ONE LOVE said:
Well if it is observed by Science that 'material' things cannot create itself (100% proven), then doesn't it follow that we have to look for an 'immaterial' matter/being to be the creator?
Click to expand...

What gibberish.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Do you agree 100% of the times a physical material cannot 'create' another physical material? i.e., a rock cannot create another rock, a human cannot create a rock, etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious. Are you talking about the conservation of energy?
 
ONE LOVE said:
When you're saying zero there has to be a context. Zero of what? Nothing is simply a void of anything.
Click to expand...

But zero is a representation of nothing. It doesn't need context. Nothing is zero things.
 
ONE LOVE said:
What. is. your. point.
Click to expand...

My point is that there isn't a difference between "something" and "nothing" from a fundamental logic perspective. Zero can be made out of things that aren't zero. What you're saying is some observation about how our existence works (can you magically create things out of nothing??).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top