Hi Tangle,
Tangle writes:
Be honest ICANT, you have no understanding at all of what the maths means,
I got into the study of Calculus and decided I would never need it and went no further with it.
Math is not a dimension in the universe. It is a product of the mind of mankind.
So to get to singularity there has to be several assumptions made and numbers applied to events. If the assumptions are wrong then any outcome will be wrong.
Tangle writes:
What you're doing is attempting to impose your own religious interpretation on science's current hypothesises about origins in order to justify an irrational, unevidenced religious belief.
Why would I need to impose my religious interpretation of science's current hypothesis?
Did the universe have a beginning to exist? According to Stephen Hawking it did.
quote:
The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago.,
The page you were looking for doesn't exist (404)
Stephen Hawking stated in his lecture on the beginning of time that the beginning of the universe would be determined by the laws of physics. That would include the first and second laws of thermodynamics.
quote:
The first law of thermodynamics is a version of the law of conservation of energy, adapted for thermodynamic processes, distinguishing two kinds of transfer of energy, as heat and as thermodynamic work, and relating them to a function of a body's state, called Internal energy.
The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.
First law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia
quote:
he second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time, and is constant if and only if all processes are reversible.[1] Isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, the state with maximum entropy.
Second law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia
quote:
physics
a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.
"the second law of thermodynamics says that entropy always increases with time"
Entropy is the condition caused by energy being used to do work and total energy is always reduced by this mechanical work.
ENTROPY | meaning, definition in Cambridge English Dictionary
Since energy cannot be created it must be eternal in existence, or there has to be a never ending source of energy.
Lawrence Krauss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h43G83o5kc
Postulates a universe created from nothing. But his nothing turns out to be something.
About 9 minutes into the video states that Hubble discovered that the universe was expanding away from us in all directions.
Then about 37 minutes into the video he states the universe is flat. That being the case it is not expanding away from us in all directions.
To me that means he contradicts himself and Hubble.
Later he tells us the universe is either curved, flat, or round. Then stating that a flat universe is the only one that could be a zero energy universe and start from his nothing. About 38 minutes into the video.
From what I can determine from listening to the video and reading about his book he qualifies nothingness, though, to mean empty space, and then he fills that empty space with matter and antimatter ruled by the laws of quantum physics.
Tangle writes:
But if I could explain it too you, you would not be able to understand it but would reject it because it does not conform to your beliefs.
What I have referenced above has nothing to do with what I believe. It only has to do with what physicist has had to say.
Did I misunderstand what they said? If so please explain where I fell overboard.
Tangle writes:
The first law of thermodynamics says matter/energy cannot come from nothing. Therefore, the universe itself could not have formed naturally
Yes that is what I said so that makes what I said and your source in agreement.
Tangle writes:
Brown, Walt, 1995. In the beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood.
Yes I have read all about Walt Browns hydroplate theory and I don't think any more about his theory that I do Ellen G. White's theory. They are both a bunch of garbage and not related to what the Hebrew Bible teaches.
So when you are talking to me you are not talking to someone who believes in a young universe. In fact science guess of 13 + billion years old is way off from how old the universe is.
According to science energy has to have existed for eternity past as it can not be created, according to the laws of physics. So there has to be an endless energy supply for the universe and us to exist. If you disagree give me your reasoning and don't give me the excuse it is above your pay grade. You have common sense and an education and should be able to make those kinds of decisions simply by looking at the facts.
Tangle writes:
Formation of the universe from nothing need not violate conservation of energy.
What does conservation of energy have to do with the creation of the universe?
Creating the universe from no thing would have the problem of creating energy which can not be done according to the laws of physics.
Tangle writes:
The gravitational potential energy of a gravitational field is a negative energy. When all the gravitational potential energy is added to all the other energy in the universe, it might sum to zero
Yes Guth did put forth a zero energy universe. How many scientist agreed with him? Krauss also puts forth a zero energy universe. But states that universe would be a flat universe.
According to Hubble's discovery that the universe was expanding from us in all directions disagrees with them as that requires a closed universe.
So observations require the universe to be a closed system which had a beginning to exist from an absence of anything.
There would be no energy, branes, fluctuations, or vacuum, for anything to pop into existence in to be the beginning of the universe.
Now if you disagree with anything I have said above would you take time to copy and paste the entire message in a reply and underneath the parts you disagree with insert your comments starting with your name so I won't get confused about what you are answering.
God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
) He seems to ask "why not in the beginning, math? or...in the beginning chemicals...
™ Version 4.2
