Where did the matter and energy come from?

NoNukes writes: I thought the point to this thread was for you to distinguish between a tailor made universe and an off the rack universe picked out of many universes. You don't really seem to care about that and so far haven't bothered to even make a case for your chosen answer.

jar writes: I am smart enough to understand that the Universe is not created to suit us and that you only mock and blaspheme GOD and the Holy Spirit.

jar writes:It is called Hubris as well, thinking GOD creates for YOU, that humans are somehow the purpose of the Universe.But yet again, I notice that you fail to address the issues raised.The issue is whether or not this Universe is "just right" for humans.Do we build houses, heaters, air conditioners, warm clothing, scuba gear, hats, sunglasses, bifocals?

frako writes:Why because we might understand the universe better, o i forgot you alredy understand it it was made by the snapping of gods fingers 6000 years ago. Well sadly moste of us are not convinced by these bead time stories and we want to know the truth.And who knows maybe one day we will be capable of traversing the distances between stars and knowing where potentialy habitable planets are might be a good thing then or should we first build warp drives and just blindly point at a star and fly there with bible in hand hoping the place will be habitable and close enough.

Catholic Scientist writes:That would indicate that the universe is NOT "just right" for us. What makes you think it is? Especially in light of the fact that 99.999% of it would kill us instantly.And would you also argue that a pothole shows signs of being designed to fit perfectly around the puddle that is in it? That is the same argument as the universe or earth being made just right for our existence.

Catholic Scientist writes:Oh, I get it.Excuse me for mistaking you as staying in the context of planetary travel.But what does that have to do with the topic? And why are you avoiding discussion of it? I did ask you a direct question.Do you have any intention of debating your claims?

jar writes:Then you have a very silly idea of what "just right" means.The sun is not "just right" and in fact varies constantly in just about every possible measurement.The earth is not at the "just right" distance from the sun, and in fact varies by over three million miles every year.The earth does not have the "just right" ingredients for life and in fact has many ingredients that will kill living things.You have been asked time after time to support your assertions and have consistently failed to do so.It appears that you cannot even do simple math as well. If you think that the earth or even the solar system makes up .001% of even this galaxy, you are profoundly ignorant. And this galaxy is only one of billions of galaxies out there.So once again, as before, where is your evidence of this so called "just right" universe?

Percy writes:Not only was your original claim that the Earth's orbit produces the seasons incorrect, not only is your second attempt that "both orbit & tilt combined produce the earth's seasons in the northern hemisphere" incorrect, but even the link you cited contradicts you: You can see that your link states in three different places in three different ways how the Earth's tilt is responsible for the seasons. If you're trying to make sense about why this should be so, consider that (as your link also states) that the amount of sunlight arriving on the Earth varies by only about 6% during the year due to changes in distance, but the length of the day and the angle of the sun vary far more dramatically and hence have a much larger impact, and this is the result of tilt. In the summer the length of the day becomes much longer, 24 hours long as you approach the poles. The sun is not only in the sky for a longer period, but it is higher in the sky and beats more directly downward. And of course the reverse is true in winter, with the days becoming shorter and eventually disappearing altogether as you approach the poles, and the sun sits very low in the sky and only strikes obliquely. I see. So when you say larger you actually mean smaller. So since you still have this backwards, should we also assume that when you say "unfit" you actually mean "fit"? Stop pretending to speak for your Divine Tailor. You have no more idea of his ways than you do of the seasons or math or fitness for life. Congratulations for composing an entire post without making one correct statement. You're obviously an acolyte of Buzsaw in the way you make errors and then have to spend the rest of a thread trying to explain them away. Can you explain to me again how you've decided in your mind that you can be wrong in all the details while being right in your conclusions?--Percy

Percy writes:Hopefully the answers you received mentioned that we have insufficient evidence to choose between these two possibilities. The evidence we have does not allow us to exclude either one.I'm wondering if you haven't misunderstand what people have been trying to tell you. They aren't saying the evidence indicates many universes. They're simply pointing out that it's one of the possibilities consistent with the evidence we have at this time and that it would be wrong to exclude it. Legitimate arguments can be mustered for either alternative, and there's no evidence at this time indicating either one is wrong.But if we were being parochial when we thought there was only one planet, and then only one solar system, and then only one galaxy, and then only one universe, are we perhaps still being parocahial in thinking that there may be only one multiverse?--Percy

Percy writes:I reject what has been falsified. If "this particular reviewer/author" argued that the laws of physics say conclusively that there's a multiverse, then he's wrong. But I don't think he's saying that. I think he's explaining why he thinks current theory makes that the most likely possibility. You're not only putting words in people's mouths, you're trying to pretend you made a reasonable argument when you didn't. You did not claim that the Earth's orbit causes its tilt to change orientation with respect to the sun. What you actually said in Message 258 was this: And of course people have been responding to the argument you actually made, not the one you're pretending you made.--Percy