Big Bang...How Did it Happen?

We do not know why quantum mechanics behaves this way because we do not know why nature behaves this way.It is not that that nature does not actually have a cause it is that there has as yet been no way found to get around the findings of quantum mechanics though you are welcome to try.
Is the world seem crazy according to quantum mechanics? Yes. Does it agree with experiment?Yes and to an incredibly high degree.Theory matches experiment to an accuracy equivalent to measuring the distance from L.A. to New York to within the width of a human hair.

General Nazort You believe in God. What caused God?

Darth Mal LOL Quite possibly but once in a long while a lightbulb sometimes will go on.
The question need not be answered directly and frankly I delight in the cat and mouse of it all.Having been in confused states of mind in my past{and sadly doing the slow dance into senility these days} it is something that allows me to get a perspective on the things I could have studied or the paths I could have and wished I did take.I have been fortunate in my life to have not done the things that some of my contempararies have done.I have lived through drug abuse of my own choosing a failed first marriage and some chance slaps in the face by life that damn near broke me.Some of my friends were not so fortunate. I delight in having kept my mind intact enough to be able to slowly do investigation of the world through the scientific process.
What I really need is to get my math levels up to manipulate formulas so that I can interpret the physical meaning of the relations within the math.I am grasping the basics of relativity and I am actualy having a blast as I "see" the way things relate to the physical within the formulas.I am thinking on getting some books by Martin Gardner and see if I can do the equivalent of a marathon mentally.Thanks for the concern Darth I appreciste it, but you operate with a mind that has not been damaged yet. May that always be the case.

General Nazort Now let us see if I understand you correctly.Before the moment of creation neither space nor time existed.Let us assume for the moment that there was a time of sorts in which god existed.If he does not change then he cannot by any means alter the place in which he lives. Any action he would commence would involve change since,presumably,he ia all there is then.Therefore he can take no meaningful action and creation of the universe wuld not be possible since it would involve a definite change.
Going further let us also assume that he always existed eternally.That means his existence stretches back a never ending amount.How does something that never began ever progress from an infinite past to reach our present day without a beginning? LOL yes poor me. That did sound rather depressing did it not? I did not suffer unduly and those things I mentioned were sufferings I chose of my own accord.
I will eventually get a grip on the calculus and tensors but until then I need to devote time to my kids and make sure they have a better run at the race.This message has been edited by sidelined, 09-22-2004 07:32 AM

General Nazort You need to explain.What laws does God have to follow that apply to him? What is the law of non-contradiction? This is a very vague notion for which I must ask some sort of explanation.What is time of sorts mean? I am sorry you did not specify a change of nature but just change in general for which my statement was aimed. This is what I have been trying to nail down.He is outside of it. How does he affect it then? What allows for actions is time.If god is beyond time then he is by definition unable to effect a cause.
The point of my statement,
"How does something that never began ever progress from an infinite past to reach our present day without a beginning?"
is that you said that god has always existed therefore he never had a begining going back infinitely.How then does something with an infinite past ever reach this point in time?No beginning defines a time that never moves forward since this implies a starting point from which to base a future time.
This is the nastiness inherent in infinities.

1.61803 I never did say no. I simply am trying to get to the bottom of the definitions of what god means that people throw out without critically examining it. I am sorry but belief has nothing to do with something that has an actual existence.Whether I believe or disbelieve {neither of which my atheism requires}has no bearing on a real phenomena or entity.The fact of the matter is a an actual god would to my mind not be deniable.He would be able to converse with me as I would another human being and would not require belief.The fact that such is not the case immediately lends to mind the consideration that it is a construct of the mind. This is plausible explanation and goes along way to the explaining of other such constructs by people through the ages. This atheist cannot show how the universe came to be because this atheist is unable to produce conditions similar to the Big Bang.this does not mean that the physics we have developed does not help to answer anything since it does but the origins of this immense universe are not something that will be discovered by not making n effort greater than belief in something.
As for showing god could exist apart from his creation I am not the one making the claim therefore I need not do so.In the same way as I am not required to show how a person who claims massive winged invisible immaterial dragons guard the earth and help men in their moral decisions as I am not the person claiming it then why should I give creedence to a god that is as ineffeble as the dragons and are just as likely a explanation of anything dealing with reality?

1.61803Damn!I fell that hook line and sinker.I am such a zealot.ROTFLMAOTouche'.

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

GN Yes,you,a material being,can affect a material
item that is outside your existence.However the problem is how a god who is outside of our material world and is thereby immaterial is able to affect the material.

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

General Nazort Do you see how such a statement does not bring any clarity to the issue? You believe that such is the case I am sure,however,what do you mean by this? How does god speak?I hear these comparisons over and over again between god and humans but such does not make sense.
You say that god is nothing like us yet {immaterial} yet you imbue him with qulities like speech {material} and then merely say that it happens because he can do it.How do you know this? Yes by contradicting the very laws of physics and leaving no trace. I am sorry if I seem dense to you but these statements are meaningless in that they do not address the issue of how such a thing is done.We can say such things without qualification as long as we do not press ourselves to explain this absurdity to ourselves.

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

General Nazort Not at all.I am simply asking how such may be explained since we have been given two incompatible situations as regards your god.One,it is cojectured that he exists outside space-time and that leads to the question of how humans can know that something lives outside of spacetime since we cannot access such things or they would not be outside spacetime.Two,we are told that god can affect the universe while remaining outside of it.This is contradictory since a being outside of space-time must be incapable of accessing anything within space-time or the being no longer is outside of spacetime.
The other postulate is that he is both is outside of space-time and space-time is contained within him.So how do we know this? Would there be some way of explaining how something is two mutually exclusive situations at the same time?This goes to the realm of absurdity since without this condition in place{mutual exclusivity} then we may allow for any similar explanation and not refute it in the slightest.Why is it that your god is given free pass on critical thinking and evidence that you would not ,I hope, otherwise allow in your thinking? Again this is not evidenced in any way iI am aware of. Could you share how this statement may be shown to actually have a reality?

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

General Nazort If your god is outside of space-time he cannot create space-time without some means of manipulating it.Obviously a material world must be materially shaped therefore one must ask the means by which such is accomplished.That brings me to the condition I posted at the end of my last post. If we allow for this then there is pretty much any explanation that can be used to explain the origin of the universe since there is no need for the stricture of logic and the adherence to laws of physics.Of course we can fall back and state that it is a matter of faith and thus be done with it but that,to me,is unsatifactory.I contend that the doctrine of faith that is historically inherent in most religion when questions of the existence of god surface honestly strikes me as an escape from having to consider the rather upsetting{to a believer} notion that perhaps all the effort placed in upholding belief is just a house of cards.This is my opinion and one I hold since it easily explains the endless variations upon the theme of a higher power {be it god allah zeus odin great spirit etc.}as a creation of human minds seeking solace from the harshness of lifes" realities.As Isaac Asimov put it, "Ever a thumb to suck, a skirt to hold."

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

General Nazort How would it otherwise be put together? What does it maen to be innate in this arguement? It is a dodge unless we can give some idea of how we come to this conclusion.To contend that god does so we should have some understanding of how this accomplished otherwise it is only a sham defense against the contradiction imposed by mutual exclusion. Your question was To this I said not at all.I am not saying this; the condition of mutual exclusivity makes this untenableLook,we agree to this What we disagree on is that god is given capabilities that we cannot logically allow without allowing for any other explanation however far-fetched to be as equally valid.You accept this on faith while I say faith is not a reliable means of obtaining knowledge of god.

---

"You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

AdminNosyMy apologies for the drift.Euthenized,what a nice way to put it.{shivers uncontrollably}