"it's been determined that the creation of the universe was caused by the collision of two other universes that had already exited before this one" some one hare say, "well those two universes had existed for ever in some way. IN SOME WAY??? exited for ever ???, this theory as the same of big bang are bull crap, there is no way something "become" just because..., so we can say to scientist "God had existed for ever in some way" and they can't argument us! I found more logical a divine creation by a God, that the magical becoming of TWO universes that create another! (???) what do you think? any good critical opinion is accepted...
2007-10-29 04:47:07 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Well if God created our universe, who are we to argue that God did not create multiple universes. Nothing is too much for Him. There are 6 billion people alive on earth now. How many people have lived throughout history? If He can manage this planet, then He can manage countless others (assuming life exists in other universes). By saying that multiple universes is an impossiblity, then you are giving limits to God. God is without limits. So, multiple universes with or without life is a possibility for God.
2007-10-29 05:00:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is why M actually means Magic among the mathematicians working on it. They are trying to figure out a way to explain gravity and think they have a way to make the math work out across both Quantum Mechanics and Relativity.
What they are hunting for is not the beginning of the universe. They are hunting for a Grand Unified Theory of mathematical physics. Even the brilliant Steven Hawking was unable to integrate the two big theories of physics and they remain mutually exclusive. It seems to be believed that if somebody can formulate a way to explain gravity they might be combined.
Keep reading and stay sceptical
2007-10-29 04:59:30 · answer #2 · answered by Y!A-FOOL 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OK WHOA, you really didn't understand M-theory that well. its not universes which collided its multidimentional MEMBRANES which an infinite of these membranes exist in parallel to each other and that they oscillate (think quantum theory infinite worlds theorm). when one membrane colides with another through these oscillations, there is a massive energy released in each of the membranes, which is what they say the big bang COULD be. this is not a theory of creation, but rather a theory of how our present incarnation of our universe came to be. it says nothing about how the membranes came to exist. It is NOT inconsistent with the Theory that God existed forever, and created these things. It is meerly a theory of physical interaction of preexisting things. Read some stephen hawking or something... the universe in a nutshell is a great place to start if you truely want to understand what these theorys are, not just read some hack article on a christian science website...
2007-10-29 04:58:32 · answer #3 · answered by nacsez 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I was thinking that scientists have forgotten more about astrophysics that you will ever learn, but I might just decide to not trust science, and listen to you instead. On second thought, no, scientists are way better at knowing how scientific things work.
There are two ways to look at the world. The first way is to say a low pressure surge caused the moisture in the air to cool rapidly and cause freezing collections to fall to the ground. The second way is to say God must be making snowflakes again.
2007-10-29 04:56:56 · answer #4 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The problem is that you are assuming that something (this universe) *had* to come from nothing. There simply is no reason, or supporting evidence, to suggest that there ever was just nothing. I suggest looking into M-Theory a bit more and trying to understand not only the theory but why it's being considered. The basic thing you need to understand about any theory in science is that it must be supported by facts and reviewed and validated by others.
2007-10-29 04:54:55 · answer #5 · answered by Pirate AM™ 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Aesity means self-existence. Aesity explains the metaphysical nature of God as a purely self-existent being that exists in complete actuality. God is not a being that is created by another god; neither does God create himself into existence. Rather, God has always existed as an unchanging, completely actualized being.
God has his Being of himself and to himself such that he is Absolute being and the definition of existence.
Since God’s essence is his nature and God’s existence is the same as his essence it follows that God is existence.
2007-10-29 06:29:47 · answer #6 · answered by cashelmara 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You're talking utter gibberish.
If you were interested in the physical theories you're discussing so crudely you'd have asked this in physics or astronomy and space.
M-theory explains data, it is consistent, it is logical, none of which can be said about god or any ideas about a person who would make the universe. Its so childish I'm constantly stunned that people buy it.
If we really are floating in higher-dimensional space that larger 4- or 5-brane (depending on if you're including time) would be considered the universe, not another universe.
2007-10-29 04:52:10 · answer #7 · answered by Leviathan 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
the best anyone can do is speculate as NO ONE knows for certain the origins of the universe. These theories will change once again...
2007-10-29 04:52:11 · answer #8 · answered by Hope 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
you misunderstand m-theory, just as you misunderstand evolution...your feeble mind cannot grasp advanced physics, so "god" is your all encompassing answer...
thats fine, you're not a scientist...
but if the bible mentioned m-theory, there would be no way you would question it, right?
2007-10-29 04:51:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 3⤋
hey, quit stealing my questions and twisting them to push your fear agenda...
2007-10-29 04:56:23 · answer #10 · answered by just curious (A.A.A.A.) 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋