Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   If you believe in god, you have to believe in leprechauns.
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5937 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 82 of 150 (166378)
12-08-2004 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by robinrohan
12-08-2004 9:21 PM


robinrohan
The first cause argument. All events have a cause. If we trace all events back far enough we get to a First Cause, whom we assign the name of God.
Science unfortunately is,at present,unable to state what occured at T=0 since the laws of physics do not advance beyond the limit imposed by the planck time of T=10*-43 seconds which is such a vanishingly minute speck of time that one would be tempted to consider it not really different from T=0.However since science hinges upon what it can say about the world we cannot say one way or the other just what occured.It may be that the laws of nature prevent a T=0 in the same way that absolute 0 cannot be reached.
In fact,as I think about it,{wrongly no doubt}would not T=0 violate the uncertainty principle in just the same way that absolute zero does?
This message has been edited by sidelined, 12-08-2004 11:31 PM

"A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."-

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by robinrohan, posted 12-08-2004 9:21 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 1:39 AM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5937 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 107 of 150 (166474)
12-09-2004 6:17 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by robinrohan
12-09-2004 1:39 AM


robinrohan
Something made nothing into something.
You do even see the contradiction in terms here do you?
We have adequate proof of that.
Really? Perhaps you would like to present the proof.
This message has been edited by sidelined, 12-09-2004 06:27 AM

"A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."-

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 1:39 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by robinrohan, posted 12-09-2004 11:32 AM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5937 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 147 of 150 (167057)
12-10-2004 8:03 PM


I am curious as to the application of cause and effect as concerns the big bang.
If the effect of first cause is the universe itself does this not mean that all subsequent events are therefore determined by that first cause since the universe is the given result of it?
If not, then any effects that occur after the first cause are necessarily not a result or effect of the first cause and constitute something seperate from that first cause within the universe.
This appears to me to be paradoxical.One is also drawn to wonder what is meant by first cause.How can it organize the given effect of the universe without previous effects occuring?

"A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."-

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024