English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A non-living thing or a living thing.?

2007-01-10 06:36:06 · 18 answers · asked by doorseeker 1 in Science & Mathematics Biology

18 answers

It started as gasses.You could call it a premortal soup.

2007-01-10 06:40:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

All you will see as answers are individuals' personal opinions. Are you only seeking opinions, and if so to what ends? Does it really matter if some here answer "God" or some others answer something else? Why is it important to you what other people believe about cosmological origins, you likely have made up your own mind, right? Are you going to leave this question to a vote, and if so what do you expect that to accomplish?

Having said that, I like the newer versions of string theory that postulates the membranes of parallel universes brushing up against each other (presumably in the 11th dimension, close but unperceivable to us) creating the universe we live in today. Amazing by-products of this theory, besides giving a causal mechanism behind the "big bang" is that it explains the non-uniformity of matter and gravity in the universe, and more amazing still, follows the flow of time BEFORE the "big bang". Something previous theories could not do.

The question of whether a sentient entity created the universe is a question for theologists (more appropriate for the Religion or Mythology section). Cosmologists and physicists want to know HOW the universe came to be -- the actual mechanisms that created it -- not WHO did the actual creating. Just settling for the notion that God created the universe is to cease inquiring deeper -- something that physicists and cosmologists who do believe in god would not be satisfied with.

Get the picture?

2007-01-12 14:56:56 · answer #2 · answered by Search first before you ask it 7 · 0 0

The question has no answer. Anything that was created when the universe was could not have created it, and before the universe existed there was nothing that could create it. Aristotle and some later philosophers said that the universe is "contingent," that is, it is not a sufficient explanation for its own existence. The early Greeks did not know what we know about cosmology and physics, but the argument seems even better now that we know the universe started in a singularity called the Big Bang and will end in "heat-death," or the end of all matter and energy in the universe. That makes the universe decidedly contingent!

2007-01-10 14:53:20 · answer #3 · answered by thylawyer 7 · 0 1

An axiom of biology is that life only comes from life. Thus we can say with confidence that life did not arise from non-life in the distant past. But we can examine this question further using the mathematical probabilities required for the spontaneous generation of life. When one does, one can say with confidence that spontaneous generation was and is a mathematical impossibility - not merely an improbability.

Now as to the question of the origin of the universe there are ultimately only two viewpoints: that of supernaturalism and materialism. One can push the question as far back as one likes with any number of oscillating universes, but ultimately one comes to one of these two conclusions.

For the Christian, God exists apart from time and space. The materialist must postit that matter created itself, organized itself and eventually became self aware. This is illogicial. But it gets far worse. The materialist cannot explain the creation and presence of information. Natural processes destroy information.

Ultimately, one's belief about the origin of the universe is a matter of faith. No one was there. Yet both logicaly and scientifically the christian faith is a rational one whie the faith of the materialist irrational.

In the end I believe it is not the evidence for or against creation that bothers people the most. It is the implications of the evidence. If there was a God who created the physical laws of the universe, it stands to reason that he created the moral law as well. The latter is what creates a problem for people steeped in moral relativism.

2007-01-11 00:43:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Obiwan Kenobi

2007-01-10 14:39:24 · answer #5 · answered by Europan 3 · 0 0

only God could have created the universe. By God I mean this universal positive energy that had and still has the power to guide us when we are in tune whit it. And keep the world cicles running (like four seasons in a year, the sun coming up and the moon changing like a clock work.) no matter what we Humans do to destroy it.

2007-01-10 14:48:26 · answer #6 · answered by bianca's mom 1 · 0 2

11 dimensional string theory has not produced anything.

It is possible that the 7 dimensions of space that are not perceived are mathematical deception, and therefore string theory is a theory of nothing, as you will find if you read the wikipedia article on string theory all the way to the end.

2007-01-11 15:40:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Doorseeke or is it dork, Why don`t u read the bible and Im sure the scriptures will give all the anwsers u want.

2007-01-17 20:15:06 · answer #8 · answered by JAMES F 1 · 0 0

Spontaneous creation of subatomic particles due to quantum physics.
Or, just blame the giant turtle on whose back the earth resides.

2007-01-10 14:43:57 · answer #9 · answered by Kilroy 4 · 1 1

This is getting pathetic.

Why pretend you're even asking a question? Go preach on a street corner.

2007-01-10 14:48:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers