Are religions manmade and natural or supernaturally based?

I'm going to have to correct what I said earlier. I found some of the surrounding context from Hawking's book The Grand Design, and here's an excerpt where he's explicitly saying that the universe exists because gravity exists:

quote:

---

"If the total energy of the universe must always remain zero, and it costs energy to create a body, how can a whole universe be created from nothing? That is why there is a law like gravity. Because gravity is attractive, gravitational energy is negative: One has to do work to separate a gravitationally bound system, such as the earth and moon. This negative energy can balance the positive energy needed to create matter, but it’s not quite that simple. The negative gravitational energy of the earth, for example, is less than a billionth of the positive energy of the matter particles the earth is made of. A body such as a star will have more negative gravitational energy, and the smaller it is (the closer the different parts of it are to each other), the greater the negative gravitational energy will be. But before it can become greater than the positive energy of the matter, the star will collapse to a black hole, and black holes have positive energy. That’s why empty space is stable. Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot just appear out of nothing. But a whole universe can."

---

So when Hawking writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity...", he really *is* saying that gravity is responsible for creating the universe. As he says later on:

quote:

---

"Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing in the manner described in Chapter 6. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

---

Hawking appears to be implying precisely what Kbertsche said he was, that gravity existed before the universe, that it isn't just descriptive but an active player.I haven't actually found a complete copy of the book online, just lengthy portions at Google. I don't claim my interpretation is without error and would appreciate corrections and/or improvements.Edited by Admin, : Grammar.

I think you're missing - as kbertsche does - the distinction between a description and that it describes. The distinction between prescriptive and descriptive is to say that the law describes rather than controls. It has no real consequences for the way things actually work.

quote:

---

This negative energy can balance the positive energy needed to create matter ...

---

He is speaking of the quantum fluctuation where energy erupts into a universe. The energy needs to be balanced with an equal negative energy. Space is that negative energy. Since gravity is the geometry of space ...Without gravity the positive energy cannot be balanced and the quantum fluctuation can not occur. The Quantum Fluctuation produces both the energy necessary for creating a universe and the space in which it exists. From nothing.As brilliant as he may be, Hawking suffers from the same shortcomings in communication with the lay person as most other scientists. He knows what he is talking about. The science literate know what he is talking about. The less knowledgeable may misinterpret the meaning and the creationist will latch onto the literal juxtaposition of his words without any consideration of any underlying meaning.He is not saying that gravity existed before the universe or caused the universe to manifest. He, like the rest of us, does not know what might cause, if anything, a quantum fluctuation to occur. Someone with an agenda might hear a scientist talk about the Uncertainty Principle making a quantum fluctuation possible then arguing that scientists say QFT exists outside the universe.Hawking may not have given the extreme pedantic detail he could have, but he is innocent of being stupid. He is not saying that gravity alone caused the universe to come into being.Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.Edited by AZPaul3, : clarity?Edited by AZPaul3, : One more add + title

Ah - that was my original interpretation. But my post was a result of a search for longer excerpts from Hawking's book, some of which I quoted, and even though longer they still stressed only gravity. Does he make the quantum implications of gravity clear elsewhere in the book? But in the portions I read that's exactly what he appears to be saying. Does he make his true position clear somewhere in the book?Or is Hawking writing books that only communicate the right impression to people who already know what he's talking about? This isn't to say that he should communicate a scientist's understanding to laypeople, but he shouldn't communicate impressions to people that when they come to website's like this and repeat what Hawking said are told that that's *not* what Hawking meant when it *is* precisely what he said.Apologies for not sifting through more of Google's partial copy of The Grand Design. Lack of time, plus it's just painful trying to read books in fractured form.

From memory I thought it was quite clear, but that may just be me. Right now I do not have chapter and verse to relay as my copy is out with a friend. One reads so many of these things they all meld together absent to actual text. If I recall correctly they did go into some detail about quantum theory and, specifically, the uncertainty principle as the justification for the existence of quantum fluctuations and virtual particle pairs and etc., like that. The same discussion as Greene, Randall and Krauss in their various books. Thus the scientists' communication problems. If one lays a foundation here and neglects to repeat himself 6 pages or 6 chapters later from where a quote is taken, who's fault is the miscommunication?Everyone's.

I don't read the statements as necessarily saying gravity created the universe. I read them as saying that gravity was required for creating the universe. Sorta like saying clay is required for creating a sculpture.As I understand what has been discussed here, gravity plays the role of providing negative energy so that the sum total of the energy of the universe might be zero. It could still be the case that the cause of the quantum fluctuation that created the universe has a natural cause separate completely separate and unrelated to gravity.Short summary: gravity is an enabler but the cause might be nothing, or some other natural phenomena, or even possibly God did it without having to violate conservation of energy.

Hi Tangle, I answered this question in my first post. I said:

quote:

---

Now whatever caused the universe to have a beginning to exist from an absence of anything would be a supernatural power.

​

I call that supernatural power God, what do you call it?

---

I have answered this question in just about every post I have posted in this thread.Every post that I have said Supernatural power I have answered the question of where the power came from that produced the energy and mass.The problem is that no one is able to understand what a supernatural power is. BTW I have asked that question several times.A supernatural power is not a natural power.
A supernatural power is not limited by nature or any force of any kind.The only limitations a supernatural power would have would be the restrictions imposed by that supernatural power.A natural power would require a creation.A supernatural power would not require a creation as that supernatural power would have all power.I hope that is plain enough for everyone to understand.I know it will not be accepted by most natural minds on this site, as those minds do not believe in anything that is supernatural.Except.Branes that can pop into existence in non existence and create the universe we live in.Or an instanton which requires a vacuum (that would not exist in non existence) to pop into existence and create a universe like we live in.For either of those to accomplish what is said they may have accomplished they would have to be a supernatural power.God Bless,

Hi Admin, I did not make the statement Straggler stated, and you quoted.I stated: Message 198Straggler said: Message 200My exact words:
"If that supernatural power did not exist we would not exist."
Straggler's exact words:
"I doubt he will take much solace in your answer that he exists because we do."Straggler stated my words in reverse order.
I said we exist because that supernatural power exists.Straggler said "He exist because we do". That is exactly what he believes. Because he believes mankind has created God in his imagination.God Bless,

And what, created the supernatural power? Or have you simply invoked the causeless cause? No kidding! What question?

I think Hawking's wording is pretty clear that gravity is the cause. But for argument's sake, let's assume your interpretation is correct. It seems to me that there is still a glaring problem.As I understand it, there were no forces or force carriers (including gravity and gravitons) until a split second after the Big Bang. So how could gravity be an "enabler" of the Big Bang?

I didn't say you did. I said that your answer is equivalent to it. You said: All one has to do is follow the very simple logic: If you're having trouble following the logic, let me illustrate the same logic but with different objects: The logic is *extremely* familiar and *very* old, usually attributed to William Paley over a couple hundred years ago.The original question to you was, "Why does God exist rather than nothing at all?" You seem to have provided an answer in Message 277: That seems pretty clear to me. You don't seem to be claiming to have physical evidence supporting this belief, so discussion should focus on the theological evidence behind it.

Hi Admin, Straggler's words: "He exist because we do".Straggler is saying if we did not exist the Supernatural power would not exist.The problem with that is that the supernatural power would exist whether we existed or not. We just would not be here to know anything about it.Your watch makers only makes watches. The supernatural power created the entire universe. Not just mankind, which makes the comparison no comparison at all. There is just as much physical evidence supporting the supernatural power as there is for two branes bumping together in non existence and starting the universe to exist. Or and instanton popping into existence in non existence and creating the universe.

Really ? Break out the math then - show us your evidence for a supernatural power.

He *does* say physical evidence.

Hi Tangle, No kidding.

quote:

---

Full Definition of SUPERNATURAL. 1. : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil. 2. a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature.

---

Supernatural Definition & Meaning - Merriam-WebsterFor two branes to bump together and cause the universe to begin to exist out of non existence would be a supernatural event.You can use the circular reasoning that the branes existed in the universe and banged together and caused the universe to begin to exist. But for that to happen the universe had to already exist.For the Hartley/Hawking instanton to pop into existence in non existence and create our present universe would be a supernatural event.You could make the same circular reasoning argument about the instanton popping into existence inside the universe and creating the universe. But for that to happen the universe had to already exist.The same goes for the God particle, gravitons/gravity or any other such hypothesis.I think all of these would be in the realm of philosophy.

quote:

---

the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

---

Google In Message 244 I asked Straggler:

quote:

---

What do you think a supernatural power would be like?

---

This was not the first time I had asked this question just the latest.So far there has been nothing but a supernatural power proposed as the cause of the beginning to exist of the universe.God Bless,