lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: The Origin Of The Universe
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 03-27-2009, 12:12 AM   #1
kirk_is_pwn
Rookie
 
kirk_is_pwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Georgia.
Posts: 24
Current Game: none lol.
The Origin Of The Universe

An open debate as to whether the universe was designed by an intelligent creator or came about by some other means.

I'd really appreciate no insulting. And this is open for any theory as to the origin of this universe. :-)


kirk_is_pwn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 12:15 AM   #2
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
What good reason would there be to believe that the universe was created by a deity?


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 12:18 AM   #3
kirk_is_pwn
Rookie
 
kirk_is_pwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Georgia.
Posts: 24
Current Game: none lol.
Well, there is a lot of evidence that points towards intelligent design. Such as the breakdown of the steady state theory and big bang theory.


kirk_is_pwn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 12:20 AM   #4
M@RS
The New Tax Collector
 
M@RS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Thailand
Posts: 1,899
You just lit a fuse... I'm on the side of creation, but last time I didn't do so well... Good luck to you...


Looks like a fruit cake to me. - Brutus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q View Post
I don't want to get my hopes up, but it's like the planets are aligning or something.
M@RS is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 12:23 AM   #5
kirk_is_pwn
Rookie
 
kirk_is_pwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Georgia.
Posts: 24
Current Game: none lol.
Well, thank you sir. I appreciate that.


kirk_is_pwn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 12:51 AM   #6
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
Well, there is a lot of evidence that points towards intelligent design. Such as the breakdown of the steady state theory and big bang theory.
I'm not an expert in either, so perhaps you can cite the peer reviewed literature that explains how these theories are no longer viable? Indeed, even if both theories were completely discarded, this in no way provides evidence for "intelligent" design.

What evidence can you cite for "intelligent" design?


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 01:04 AM   #7
Tommycat
>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinWalker View Post
I'm not an expert in either, so perhaps you can cite the peer reviewed literature that explains how these theories are no longer viable? Indeed, even if both theories were completely discarded, this in no way provides evidence for "intelligent" design.

What evidence can you cite for "intelligent" design?
Actually, neither has been dismissed entirely. That's what the LHC was built for.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 08:40 AM   #8
kirk_is_pwn
Rookie
 
kirk_is_pwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Georgia.
Posts: 24
Current Game: none lol.
Let me explain. The big bang theory suggests that the universe began in a very dense, very hot state. It also states that this very dense hot state was contained in an infinitly dense point. But to be infinitly dense it would have to be non-existant. So already we understand that the point had to be put there if this theory were truth. And this leads to the question of how did this point get there? And because we know from the laws of physics that matter can not be created nor destroyed, something outside the physical laws of the universe had to start it. Natural laws and forces could not have caused the big bang since the big bang states that all matter, time, space, and physical laws started at the initial explosion. Also the big bang is said to have been an explosion. Explosions do not bring order and if an explosion was to bring order, then there must have been a reason behind the explosion. And a bunch of nothing and chance can't make a choice. Chance can't be a cause.

Now for the steady state theory, this theory suggests that the universe is infinite. That it is steadily expanding in all directions and always will. The problem with this theory is if the universe is in a state of expansion, it would need to create more matter to sustain itself. And by physics (matter can not be created nor destroyed) we know this is impossible. And also the law of entropy tells us that the universe is winding down, in order for something to wind down it had to be wound up. Now for the theory to be true matter would always have to be created, the only logical route for one to take on the creating of matter would be something supernatural. Something that is NOT hindered by the natural laws of the universe. Something outside of time, space, and matter.


kirk_is_pwn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 08:59 AM   #9
RoxStar
Moderator
 
RoxStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,411
Current Game: Everything Zelda
10 year veteran! Forum Veteran LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
Let me explain. The big bang theory suggests that the universe began in a very dense, very hot state. It also states that this very dense hot state was contained in an infinitly dense point. But to be infinitly dense it would have to be non-existant. So already we understand that the point had to be put there if this theory were truth. And this leads to the question of how did this point get there?
The Big Bang theory hinges on the fact that our universe is constantly expanding outward infinitesimally. Logically, if the universe is expanding outward, it had to come from somewhere, aka "the center". That's where the "Big Bang" comes from. You must remember that this "point" you are referring too is also infinitesimally small, so small one can't even really describe it. To say it "came" from somewhere is misleading as it is impossible to perceive.

RoxStar is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 09:01 AM   #10
Tommycat
>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Actually, the universe is my thing. I have a few theories of my own, but I'll leave them for some other point.

The answer to your question is simple. If a being such as God can exist before the creation of the universe, why is it so impossible to believe that matter which is tangible can exist before the universe was created.

An alternate explanation is that(as has been observed) in intense vacuum subatomic particles have been formed.

My personal theory is that the matter exists because the universe once it reaches it's furthest point begins to colapse in on itself as supermassive black holes(like the one in the center of the Milky Way) enter into their feeding cycles(hey don't laugh that was how the prof explained t to me). Then the whole process starts over for the next universe... it just takes a while...


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2009, 10:22 AM   #11
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,248
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
The universe is not the end, just as the origin of the universe is not the beginning. Created or not, what does it matter, when the real question is "how?"


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-30-2009, 04:40 PM   #12
kirk_is_pwn
Rookie
 
kirk_is_pwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Georgia.
Posts: 24
Current Game: none lol.
well because the big bang states that when it took place that all natural things such as matter, time, space, and physical laws were created. matter cant be created nor destroyed according to the physical laws of the universe. God is immaterial, and also outside of time and space.


kirk_is_pwn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-30-2009, 07:22 PM   #13
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
matter cant be created nor destroyed according to the physical laws of the universe.
Which law is this?

I think that if you go back and re-read the law you think you're citing, you may find that it actually says something different.

Hint: if matter can become energy and vice versa, then it would seem that one could argue that there was a tremendous amount of energy released during the big bang and then look for evidence that would support this. If one were to then happen upon something like, oh say, cosmic microwave background radiation, then it would do much to bolster confidence in such a hypothesis.

If I may suggest some materials which might help to shed some light on the subject:

The Big Bang and Cosmic Microwave Background
More Evidence for the Big Bang

You can either listen to the podcast (IIRC, they run about 30 minutes each), or just read the transcripts. I really do think these will answer just about any question you could have about the big bang.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
God is immaterial, and also outside of time and space.
Ok. How do we know this though?

And if god gets to be immaterial, outside of time and space, then we get to extend that same argument to whatever conditions might have been necessary for the big bang. Lest we be guilt of special pleading.

Thanks for your post.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-31-2009, 02:19 AM   #14
Astor
It's Thornhill!
 
Astor's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Warwickshire, UK
Posts: 3,631
Current Game: The Old Republic
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
God is immaterial, and also outside of time and space.
But, isn't that against the hallowed physical laws of the universe?






Astor is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-31-2009, 02:17 PM   #15
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,248
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk_is_pwn View Post
well because the big bang states that when it took place that all natural things such as matter, time, space, and physical laws were created.
No. It was all there already.

Quote:
matter cant be created nor destroyed according to the physical laws of the universe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy. I think you mix things up a bit.

Quote:
God is immaterial, and also outside of time and space.
It would be quite surprising if you show me something immaterial inside time and space, or vice versa. Since the material is defined through time and space your argument is a pleonasm at best. .


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-31-2009, 06:14 PM   #16
GarfieldJL
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones View Post
No. It was all there already.
There is evidence to suggest the big bang did occur.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy. I think you mix things up a bit.
You both have it wrong, mass and energy can be swapped with each other.

E=mc^2

However, there are some things where the laws of physics tend to break down, such as a quantum singularity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
It would be quite surprising if you show me something immaterial inside time and space, or vice versa. Since the material is defined through time and space your argument is a pleonasm at best. .
How about Dark Matter and Dark Energy, I couldn't show you either of those in real life yet both are argued by scientists to exist. Just because you can't see something or readily observe something does not mean it doesn't exist.
GarfieldJL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-31-2009, 06:51 PM   #17
SkinWalker
Anthropologist
 
SkinWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Dark matter and energy can both be seen mathematically, which is why they are argued to exist. Indeed, they are referred to as "dark" because they only show up in the maths. So far.


A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-01-2009, 01:58 PM   #18
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,248
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarfieldJL View Post
There is evidence to suggest the big bang did occur.
But I didn't say it didn't occur?


Quote:
You both have it wrong, mass and energy can be swapped with each other.

E=mc^2

However, there are some things where the laws of physics tend to break down, such as a quantum singularity.
But I didn't say it couldn't be swapped?


Quote:
How about Dark Matter and Dark Energy, I couldn't show you either of those in real life yet both are argued by scientists to exist. Just because you can't see something or readily observe something does not mean it doesn't exist.
Huh?


"Composite image of the Bullet cluster shows distribution of ordinary matter, inferred from X-ray emissions, in red and total mass, inferred from gravitational lensing, in blue."


Quote:
The first person to provide evidence and infer the existence of a phenomenon that has come to be called "dark matter" was Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky, of the California Institute of Technology in 1933. He applied the virial theorem to the Coma cluster of galaxies and obtained evidence of unseen mass. Zwicky estimated the cluster's total mass based on the motions of galaxies near its edge. When he compared this mass estimate to one based on the number of galaxies and total brightness of the cluster, he found that there was about 400 times more mass than expected. The gravity of the visible galaxies in the cluster would be far too small for such fast orbits, so something extra was required. This is known as the "missing mass problem". Based on these conclusions, Zwicky inferred that there must be some non-visible form of matter which would provide enough of the mass and gravity to hold the cluster together.
[...]
Eventually other astronomers began to corroborate her work and it soon became well-established that most galaxies were in fact dominated by "dark matter"; exceptions appeared to be galaxies with mass-to-light ratios close to that of stars. Subsequent to this, numerous observations have been made that do indicate the presence of dark matter in various parts of the cosmos. Together with Rubin's findings for spiral galaxies and Zwicky's work on galaxy clusters, the observational evidence for dark matter has been collecting over the decades to the point that today most astrophysicists accept its existence. As a unifying concept, dark matter is one of the dominant features considered in the analysis of structures on the order of galactic scale and larger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ma...ional_evidence


Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > The Origin Of The Universe

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.