Why did our universe begin? (Split from Atheist wins Nobel Prize thread)

[fromderinside]

Based on their statement, a fart would qualify. Non-solid, non-physical, invisible, but deadly.

Really? A fart, something that makes both sound and has odor is immaterial?

Care to review your Physics !?

 

[steve_bank]

Donald Trump gets credit for the biggest cosmic expansion ever.

Non physical is a label for alleged phenomena beyond our science. Ghosts and so on. Something other than what we would call causality. God is everywhere, omnipresent, all powerful, and beyond what we call natural laws. Jump off a building and if god wills it you do not fall.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Non physical is a label for alleged phenomena beyond our science.

The only thing that is "beyond our science" is pretending that there are things beyond our science, and that happens because of simple human ignorance. I don't think that is what Learner meant anyway, so still waiting.

 

[Jarhyn]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

I mean shit, even neutrinos are physical, even DARK MATTER is physical, even though we don't know what it is, even though it's interactions are weak as shit.

Right. I mean we can use a beam of light to push things. So I don't know what he means. If he responds at least I'll know. How would one even go about detecting and measuring something that is non-physical? It would be impossible I would think, and axiomatically so. Non physical would be the same as non-real.

Waiting...

Of course, we all know the reason that no believer will ever pony up on it: because if they implicated a physical phenomena, something real, then their claims would be testable and falsifiable, and promptly falsified.

 

[steve_bank]

Non physical is a label for alleged phenomena beyond our science.

The only thing that is "beyond our science" is pretending that there are things beyond our science, and that happens because of simple human ignorance. I don't think that is what Learner meant anyway, so still waiting.

I Havre no doubt there are aspect of reality we may never be able to see or understand. The idea that science can know all and see all is akin to theism.

The first inkling of the infrared spectrum came when someone noticed a hand go warm near a prism without visible light.

Serendipity has always been part of advancement. Look for one thing find another.

The CMBR was discovered when people testing an antenna could not resolve where noise was coming from. U Of Illinois I believe.

 

[Treedbear]

...
Serendipity has always been part of advancement. Look for one thing find another.

The CMBR was discovered when people testing an antenna could not resolve where noise was coming from. U Of Illinois I believe.

The CMBR:

The discovery of the background radiation was a serendipitous one. In 1964, Bell Laboratories technicians Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias racked their brains for an explanation of the noisy signal recorded by their radio antenna. When it turned out that the “noise” was actually radiation from the CMB, the two engineers found themselves unexpectedly pulled into the growing field of modern cosmology. The detection of the CMB earned them the Nobel Prize.

Yet the discovery wouldn’t have been possible without the work of physicists at Princeton, 40 miles down the road from Bell Labs.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Non physical is a label for alleged phenomena beyond our science.

The only thing that is "beyond our science" is pretending that there are things beyond our science, and that happens because of simple human ignorance. I don't think that is what Learner meant anyway, so still waiting.

I Havre no doubt there are aspect of reality we may never be able to see or understand. The idea that science can know all and see all is akin to theism.

The first inkling of the infrared spectrum came when someone noticed a hand go warm near a prism without visible light.

Serendipity has always been part of advancement. Look for one thing find another.

The CMBR was discovered when people testing an antenna could not resolve where noise was coming from. U Of Illinois I believe.

The accelerating expansion of the universe was found when astronomers were trying to measure the deceleration of the universal expansion.

 

[Learner]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

Sure, but you do see physical water.

I guess I should say, I don't see the invisible spirit in humans either.


(Sorry for the wait, need to ge a new seperate device, one of these days)

 

[Coleman Smith]

One day god was bored sitting around flipping burgers and was looking for something to do to entertain himself so............

 

[Learner]

Burgers existed and started flipping before the universe began? That's a thought

 

[Learner]

*poor joke deleted.*

 

[Learner]

Some people may just like to curiously know, discuss or debate about the possibilty.

Or come up with false dilemmas to help justify their arbitrary solution to said dilemmas.

The question isn't "Why did the universe begin?" We have no evidence to suggest there is a beginning of the universe. The question is "Why is the universe?" This question is less satisfying for theists, especially theists with agendas, because the same question can then be transitioned to their agenda... "Why is their god?"

Fairpoint to the OP - going off track.

 

[steve_bank]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

Sure, but you do see physical water.

I guess I should say, I don't see the invisible spirit in humans either.


(Sorry for the wait, need to ge a new seperate device, one of these days)

Can you see water vapor? The question of material-immaterial is purely pre 20th century philosophical thinking. Natural Philosophy was surpassed by modern empirical and observational math model based science.

There are models that can be tested and there is philosophical-religious speculation on experiment.

The basis of most modeling is covered n undergrad math. Fields, curl, divergence and other etches that are ommon across all areas from engineering to physics.

Fields are a general concept. A field around a charged particle interacting with other fields. .

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

Sure, but you do see physical water.

I guess I should say, I don't see the invisible spirit in humans either.


(Sorry for the wait, need to ge a new seperate device, one of these days)

Are you saying the only way we can determine physicality is by sight?

 

[skepticalbip]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

Sure, but you do see physical water.

I guess I should say, I don't see the invisible spirit in humans either.


(Sorry for the wait, need to ge a new seperate device, one of these days)

You can't see water vapor (humidity) but it is easily detected and measured so we know it is real.

You can't see a human soul or spirit but you also can not detect or measure it which should cause you to question if it is real or just a wishful idea.

 

[steve_bank]

Bumpity bump bump...

Hoping Learner tells me what he means by non-physical. I can't see the water molecules floating around in front of me but I take them to be physical.

What say you, Learner?

Sure, but you do see physical water.

I guess I should say, I don't see the invisible spirit in humans either.


(Sorry for the wait, need to ge a new seperate device, one of these days)

You can't see water vapor (humidity) but it is easily detected and measured so we know it is real.

You can't see a human soul or spirit but you also can not detect or measure it which should cause you to question if it is real or just a wishful idea.

Simple and to the point.

 

[Learner]

Are you saying the only way we can determine physicality is by sight?

Physicality as in the structural stars, planets, organic birds, bees, trees, you and me etc.. Meaning, there is NO issues wth the Science ... which says these observable things have beginnings (one of the points). No contradictions to the bible either - stars, sun and moon began.

Would you therefore be saying these structural forms have always existed? Unless of course you're using a different context "philosophy," that these physical heavenly bodies have always existed ... only in different forms?

 

[bilby]

Are you saying the only way we can determine physicality is by sight?

Physicality as in the structural stars, planets, organic birds, bees and trees. you and me etc.. Meaning, there is NO issues wth the Science... which says these things have beginnings.

No. Absolutely not. Patterns of matter and energy can have beginnings and ends, but the mass/energy itself doesn't.

The First Law of Thermodynamics is that energy (of which mass is a form) is not created nor destroyed.

(No contradictions to the bible either - stars, sun and moon began)

In contradiction of the First Law, the Bible doesn't suggest that God built these things from existing materials, but that he spoke them into existence from nothing.

Are you saying these structural forms have always existed ? Unless of course you start using a different context "philosophy," that these heavenly bodies existed ... only in different forms.

That's not merely philosophy, it's science. The sun was a cloud of (mostly hydrogen) gas spread over a very large area, before gravity caused the gas to fall together and become a star. All the matter/energy in the sun today (plus some that has since been lost as radiation and 'solar wind') existed for as long as we are able to know; Certainly for many billions of years.

 

[Learner]

No. Absolutely not. Patterns of matter and energy can have beginnings and ends, but the mass/energy itself doesn't.

The First Law of Thermodynamics is that energy (of which mass is a form) is not created nor destroyed.

Thank you, but I haven't argued against energy at all, having beginnings or endings. Well, it's down to whether or not, we're on the same-page, in regards to physicalities in context - which seems like we're not from the looks of the posts. So who's arguing against the above? Besides formed structures CAN be destroyed i.e. planets collide or Super Novas explode.

(No contradictions to the bible either - stars, sun and moon began)

In contradiction of the First Law, the Bible doesn't suggest that God built these things from existing materials, but that he spoke them into existence from nothing.

The concept is God IS the energy source!

Or putting aside the theists concept - Energy is the source of existing materials!

Are you saying these structural forms have always existed ? Unless of course you start using a different context "philosophy," that these heavenly bodies existed ... only in different forms.

That's not merely philosophy, it's science. The sun was a cloud of (mostly hydrogen) gas spread over a very large area, before gravity caused the gas to fall together and become a star. All the matter/energy in the sun today (plus some that has since been lost as radiation and 'solar wind') existed for as long as we are able to know; Certainly for many billions of years.

Philosphy I'm afraid, runs parallel with science. It has alsways been a useful pondering method for scientists, and always will.

 

[Learner]

Can you see water vapor? The question of material-immaterial is purely pre 20th century philosophical thinking. Natural Philosophy was surpassed by modern empirical and observational math model based science.

There are models that can be tested and there is philosophical-religious speculation on experiment.

I would not be surprised that philosophical specualtion is not entirely a religious affair, when any experiments take place. Like for example having more than one model - all having some desired results. Correct me if I'm wrong, IIRC I think you mentioned you were not a proponant of the Big Bang or expanding universe or perhaps both.

The basis of most modeling is covered n undergrad math. Fields, curl, divergence and other etches that are ommon across all areas from engineering to physics.

Fields are a general concept. A field around a charged particle interacting with other fields.

No dispute here.