Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,838 Year: 3,095/9,624 Month: 940/1,588 Week: 123/223 Day: 2/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   rational people only (no yecs)
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 46 (6347)
03-08-2002 11:37 PM


i was thinking about the universe and i thought of this
if the laws of physics were created at the moment of the big bang, wouldn't that mean that all time was decided from that point forward? if you think about it, the laws of physics have total control over every inanimate object- they move it- they make it- they destroy it.
so that means that time was nothing- that is until living beings were factored in- we can are not controlled by the laws of physics, we are only restricted by them.
so basically, the moment our universe was created, it was built in with the instructions to evolve, and that the moment living beings were created, which could govern themselves, time began. so when living organisms emerged, a new chapter in reality was opened up. we can manipulate the futrue, and we can change time.
and we developed from inanimate matter, and the laws of physics instructed this matter to develop- would it be too far-fetched to assume that our univierse may also be evolving into something else, if you understand me?
or maybe we are built in with instructions to create the next chapter. think- life has always been expanding- the fish from the sea- the apes from the trees- the humans from the earth- hmmm. could this mean something- certainly- we just have to think outside the box.
[This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-08-2002]
[This message has been edited by quicksink, 03-08-2002]

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by quicksink, posted 03-08-2002 11:41 PM quicksink has not replied
 Message 3 by Joe Meert, posted 03-08-2002 11:51 PM quicksink has not replied
 Message 17 by joz, posted 03-09-2002 10:41 AM quicksink has not replied
 Message 28 by Peter, posted 03-11-2002 8:39 AM quicksink has not replied
 Message 30 by jennacreationist, posted 06-22-2002 8:49 PM quicksink has not replied
 Message 35 by Martin J. Koszegi, posted 06-25-2002 4:08 PM quicksink has not replied
 Message 46 by Brad McFall, posted 11-15-2002 11:09 AM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 46 (6348)
03-08-2002 11:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by quicksink
03-08-2002 11:37 PM


so basically- there was no time before the existence of life, or matter that can actually govern their own actions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by quicksink, posted 03-08-2002 11:37 PM quicksink has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by doctrbill, posted 03-08-2002 11:55 PM quicksink has replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 46 (6352)
03-09-2002 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by doctrbill
03-08-2002 11:55 PM


i don't know
look at it this way
if a tree falls in the forest, and no one sees it or hears it, does it make a sound? or better yet- does it even fall until someone sees the fallen tree...
my point is that beyond a conscious being, or before a conscious being, no time existed. the moment something comes into existence that can observe and have a tangible effect on another piece of matter, all time atarted.
before life, everything was predetermined, because each piece of matter, which can be traced back to the big bang, was created, moved, and destroyed by principles that exist in the universe, ie gravity.
no asteroid decided to slam into earth- the laws of physics made it.
cause and effect only exists in a universe where matter can determine its own actions.
i do not believe that the laws of physics existed before the big bang- before the big bang, nothing existed.
the laws of physics allow nothing to move faster than the speed of light, and yet the initial explosion must have been travelling well beyond the speed of light, through a vaccuum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by doctrbill, posted 03-08-2002 11:55 PM doctrbill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by RetroCrono, posted 03-09-2002 6:19 AM quicksink has replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 46 (6353)
03-09-2002 12:09 AM


and einstein's principle that the speed of time is relative to the observer can be used in my argument- if there was no observer, than there was no time. time was moving at an infinite pace because nobody could define its speed.

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by joz, posted 03-09-2002 10:34 AM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 46 (6354)
03-09-2002 12:15 AM


and how are the laws of physics not instructions?
they were created randomly during the big bang, let us agree on that. they did not exist in a vacuum.
now the moment the universe began (i'm reluctant to say that, as time would have been moving infinitely fast), every piece of energy was governed by these laws. am i wrong about that?
hydrogen formed under these laws. atoms formed under these laws. etc.
then these pieces of matter evolved into the first living beings. the moment a piece of matter made a decision was the moment that time became relative, or actually attained an observable speed.

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by TrueCreation, posted 03-09-2002 1:31 AM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 46 (6356)
03-09-2002 12:39 AM


let me put my point this way
>take a rock and throw it into the air so that it hits the surface of a pond. throw it at a 45 degree angle, and the laws of gravity will determine where it lands. throw it at a 50 degree angle and the laws of gravity will ensure that the rock lands somewhere different in the pond.
now gravity determines where the rock lands, but the human determines at what angle the rock has thrown, and what the laws of gravity will be applied to.
now, you are able to pick up this rock because you have a brain and muscles and bones, etc. and these bones were created by the big bang, because from the big bang forward, matter was created and manipulated.
but before there was matter that could do things independently, the only thing that could move an object were the rigid principles of nature. that rocl will only move because when the laws of nature are applied to its position, it moves in such a way. and not only that, from this position, it can only be thrown into the air on one angle, and it can therefore only land in one place.
and that rock was put in the position it was by a previous event, and this previous event occurred do to a previous effect. the ultimate effect is the big bang.

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 46 (6368)
03-09-2002 3:45 AM


TC-
please don't be slanderous
"obvious point"
there are plenty of people who believe that the laws of physics were created randomly during the big bang. but then again, the big bang never happened.

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by TrueCreation, posted 03-09-2002 11:39 AM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 46 (6381)
03-09-2002 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by RetroCrono
03-09-2002 6:19 AM


ok- ill slow down- sorry.
as for the god thing, i think you misinterpretted my point. the laws of physics formed randomly, yet the moment they didm time was set, that is, until one piece of matter could voluntarily apply force to another piece of matter. From their, a new course would set in, yet this to could be changed based on another action from life. how long these actions take to have an effect on space and time is unknown.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by RetroCrono, posted 03-09-2002 6:19 AM RetroCrono has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 46 (6382)
03-09-2002 7:04 AM


and finally, i disclude creationists from this topic because their presence is irrelevant. the subject of this topic is based on the assumption that the universe did form with the big bang, so therefore this theory is not being debated.
i am bringing up an issue that is founded on the assumption that the big bang is truth, and you yecs do not agree with that.
if there is a more decent place to put this thread, by all means, i will.

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by doctrbill, posted 03-09-2002 10:48 AM quicksink has not replied
 Message 24 by Cobra_snake, posted 03-09-2002 11:40 AM quicksink has not replied
 Message 44 by compmage, posted 09-06-2002 1:26 PM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 46 (6401)
03-09-2002 10:56 AM


i guess my theory is wrong... oh well- at least i was thinking out of the box
BTW- i have now done research on the special theory of relativity and understand it completely.

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by joz, posted 03-09-2002 11:00 AM quicksink has replied
 Message 25 by TrueCreation, posted 03-09-2002 11:43 AM quicksink has replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 46 (6404)
03-09-2002 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by joz
03-09-2002 11:00 AM


well cut me a little slack
i'm 12 years old for god's sake!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by joz, posted 03-09-2002 11:00 AM joz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Peter, posted 03-11-2002 8:42 AM quicksink has not replied

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 46 (6408)
03-09-2002 11:46 AM


refresh problem again

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 46 (6409)
03-09-2002 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by TrueCreation
03-09-2002 11:43 AM


i'm sorry-
i guess i stated it incorrectly... i understand the underlying concepts completely
of course, i don't know all the technical details.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by TrueCreation, posted 03-09-2002 11:43 AM TrueCreation has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024