then how did that creator get created if something always has to come from something? You answered your own question unknowingly!!
Everyone knows energy and anti matter just are they do not die and cannot be destroyed only dispersed so try again, next?
Seriously I would restate your question, it is flawed slightly though i know what you are trying to say it is not coming out correct as i already showed you the hole in it.
OR the answer is 42.
2007-10-02 16:21:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Legend Gates Shotokan Karate 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Science makes no claims on why there is something rather than nothing. And there are fundamentally no questions that science can answer that either prove or disprove the existence of god(s). I guess that's why they call it faith.
But, as a scientist, I start with accepting the universe exists. I don't know or care why because that is not a question that I can provide a scientific explanation for. I don't accept the stipulation that the existence of the universe implies the existence of a creator. Mostly because I don't see any difference between that and saying "the existence of a creator implies the existence of a being the created the creator." At some point I just have to accept that there is in fact something rather than nothing, and I have no explanation why that is so.
After that we can start looking at the laws that govern the universe. Again, these laws simply are the way they are. We can't, for example, really explain why gravity doesn't go like 1/r^3. I can tell you it's a damn good thing it doesn't though. In some ways it might seem that everything was designed just right for life to flourish on earth. Consider every physical constant and law that exists, if any of them were substantially different life almost certainly wouldn't exist as we know it.
In fact, if there were nothing in the universe outside of our solar system, then I would say that the odds of this coming about accidentally are virtually zero. And I would be forced to accept that the universe was designed in some fashion by a creator of some sort.
But that's not the case, instead there's a lot of other stuff out there. I'm pretty sure there's more stuff than I can imagine or conceive of, and I'm pretty sure I can imagine a lot of stuff. And given enough stuff, and enough time, pretty much every possible scenario would be played out, including the existence of a solar system like ours, containing a planet like ours, with conditions like ours that are just right to nurture life.
So, I'm coming back to append something to this after reading the answers posted while I was writing mine. I've always found it amazing how both theists and atheists get so defensive about this kind of question. And really, although I can't believe I'm about to say this, I have to say the answer right before my own is the only other really rational response here.
Honestly I think it takes more faith to be an atheist than to be a theist. I think that it takes much less faith to believe in a god that created a universe that looks like ours than to believe that no such god exists.
2007-10-02 16:57:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by mcmahon.shane 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, you could make the argument for God that "for anything to exist, something has to have ALWAYS existed." But that can be used for simple matter too. So we have matter and energy having always existed, or we have God having always existed. One or the other. That argument isn't any proof of either theory.
And by the way, have you ever heard of vacuum energy? Basically, it's theorized that the vacuum of space is actually not truly empty. Vacuum is simply space itself, and therefore has an infinite amount of energy (going down an infinite number of levels of strength, but still infinite), though nobody has yet figured out a reasonable way to harness that energy.
But then, if you want to have fun and come up with another theory, you could consider the "Technological Singularity." The theory of the technological singularity states that at some point in technology, we will be able to create artificial intelligences that are capable of making themselves smarter and smarter exponentially until we as humans can no longer meaningfully participate in the scientific advancement of the human race.
So let's go a step further. Let's assume that this artificial intelligence is never ultimately hindered in it's progress. Let's assume that this artificial intelligence decides to incorporate planets, stars, solar systems, black holes, galaxies, galactic clusters, galactic superclusters, dark matter and whole sections of the Universe and then, finally, the entire Universe...into the operation of it's by now monumental computing abilities (don't laugh! :P). Suppose there are more Universes than this one and it cannibalizes those for it's own purposes too. Now we have something that is so close to God as to be indistinguishable.
By this point, having far surpassed the complexity of any mere human brain, this artificial intelligence has a conscience and feelings and morals even. Now let's make another assumption and say that time (although many scientists differ in this belief, such as the ones that believe in "Presentism") is a dimension that can be traced backwards or forwards if you had the ability. This superintelligence could then trace time as far back as it wanted and make itself exist at all points backwards in eternity, and for that matter, forward too.
Now we have an eternal God. Made by man (or, if you've considered this further already, made by something else completely...we're talking about another sentient race for those who haven't)
Who can say it hasn't already happened? Can you disprove it? Can you prove that your God does exist?
Can you prove that your God isn't actually the result of the very first (and naturally very last) Technological Singularity.
Think about it. All of eternity. Whether we can fathom it or not, eternity IS. In all of time, is it not possible?
Can you prove that your God is NOT...
THE LAST GREAT ROBOT???
the alpha and the omega...the first and the last
:O
... :P Wow I'm feeling really long-winded today.
2007-10-02 16:51:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the beginning, instead of writing 'nothing', insert energy and you have an equation that is much more sensible than a fully formed deity that is able to design this ornately complex system that's w/in the universe. All w/o being created himself. Plus, aren't individual rulers called dictators? I also can not equate the term 'loving' with a deity who creates a place of torture; neither is the concept of a perfect being having any motivation to create anything but hypocritical. Besides, there is evidence of nature and the rule is single males do not create life on their own.
2007-10-02 16:38:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by strpenta 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You assume a creator god (but where did god come from?) because the human mind can't grasp the concept that matter may have come from energy. The human mind seems to get stuck on the idea that everything has a creator because it is not agile enough to envision a universe that does not have a beginning.
Flies on a cowpie have no idea how the cowpie came to be. If they had human perception and observed a cowpie dropping from a cow, they would think the cow was god.
2007-10-02 16:24:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by BAL 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
It's hard to understand why some people are so consumed with this question.
You weren't there, I wasn't there, there's no way of knowing what went on. And however it went down, it's actually not even that relevant today. Well not unless you're planning to re-enact it sometime.
Believe whatever you want, but how you can seriously call someone else's point of view wrong about an event you did not personally witness or participate in is beyond me!
Cheers :-)
2007-10-02 16:25:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by thing55000 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Er..... no one's saying that we started with "nothing".
If you really want to know about the origins of the universe (and I doubt you do, but just in case), you might try looking up information from NASA or Harvard, not propaganda websites run by Creationists bent on misinformation.
And by the way, it's pretty well accepted that matter and energy are "eternal", can be neither created nor destroyed. If you don't struggle with the concept of God existing "always", what's so hard about accepting that about the building blocks of all things.
2007-10-02 16:21:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
Nope. Not even close. See, this is why religious people think concepts like the big bang and evolution are stupid. It's because they know NOTHING ABOUT THEM.
Anyway to answer your question, all the matter currently in the universe existed when it began. The big bang was merely a rapid expansion of said matter, not the creation of it.
We know a little about what existed before our current universal plane, but not very much. What we do know is that some fully-developed, super power-wielding ultraman didn't zap us into existence.
2007-10-02 16:18:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
13⤊
0⤋
Potential + Intention + Opportunity = Manifest Universe
2007-10-02 17:58:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Champion of Knowledge 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Creation by magic - the formula for making everything exist by mere wishing it.
Definition of God:
A non-physical conscious entity, all-powerful, all-knowing who predates the existence of reality and the universe, who is the intentional cause of the universe and is responsible for everything in it and everything that happens.
If that isn't magic, I don't know what is. Well we learned that in preschool along with magic wands and appearing and disappearing acts. Who needs science when we have access to such profound KNOWLEDGE of reality!
2007-10-02 16:31:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by DrEvol 7
·
1⤊
0⤋