|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The one and only non-creationist in this forum. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
That is not any example of such. It's a weak inference you still need to demonstrate to be anything more. Stop begging the question. Such a fervent gall in defence of bigbangism!! When you stop ignoring the evidence for expansion perhaps you can be taken seriously.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
quote: CS responded in Message 242 with quote: #1. Universe began to exist.#2. Universe existed in In some manner or to some degree. #3. Is an oxymora as something that is infinite can not be finite. #4. Universe existed in the form of 2 - 1/2 verses. So CS did not present and alternative. Now you're just cheating so you can insist that your's are the only two. Funny how I knew that was going to happen #1 is an alternative to beginning to exist from non-existence, and it doesn't have to be in some form if it begins to exist. #2 is neither existence, nor non-existence as it is quasi-existence. That whole "some form or manner" bullshit isn't flying. You've added to your claim to try to maintain it. That's not you hearing out any alternatives. Look, you can try to challenge your belief to see if it holds up to scrutiny. Or, as you're doing, you can just dig your heels in and do everything you can to hold up your preconceived notion. Just realize that you're lying when you say:
quote: You're not interested at all. You just want people to lob you softballs for you to swing at. And if they ain't slow enough, then you'll just twist them into something you can hit. That's dishonest, ICANT, to both us and yourself.
#3. Is an oxymora as something that is infinite can not be finite. Sure, but perhaps the Universe itself is oxymoronic. This remains an alternative to your 2 scenarios.
#4. Universe existed in the form of 2 - 1/2 verses. But the Universe did not exist. Half-versus existed and they are not a form of the Universe. You're just adding that to it to maintain your position. Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
I'm not talking about an entire universe. I gave a specific example: dew on the grass. How would you determine whether the water previously existed "in some form" or whether it didn't previously exist at all? Now as far as a test to check non-existence I don't know of one. For the simple reason I would not exist and neither would you. The universe would not exist as there would be no atoms, protons, neutrons and electrons. Either way, you still exist and all of the apparatus that you might need still exists. The question is, How can you tell whether something changed form or just began to exist?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
The quacks like Krauss do not say directly that the Universe popped out from pure nothing the ordinary understanding of the term nothing would rigorously imply. I'm talking about heat, not the universe 'popping' out from pure nothing. Do you care to address what I actually said? There doesn't seem any point addressing 'universe from nothing' type theories until we agree what the early universe was like (ie hot and dense). If we disagree on that, it stands to reason we won't agree on whatever might have preceded it. Can you show me any reason to doubt that the early universe was much hotter and denser than it is now?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Goku Inactive Member |
Alfred Maddenstein writes:
Actually that's exactly what I was thought in university. It's standard physics, see Goldstein's "Classical Mechanics", 3rd edition or V.I. Arnold's "Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics", 2nd edition. Good, Son, you are starting to talk rationally. Objects exist and their properties is the sum of their relations to and interactions with all other objects. Unlike what you were taught at the seminary. It's also the case in the Big Bang model see Kolb and Turner "The Early Universe".
Therefore just like I said all the objects in existence could not be compressed so as to require next to no volume. The Universe can neither contract nor expand a single Planck length.
The Big Bang theory does not say everything was compressed into a Planck volume (see Kolb and Turner).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: I gave a specific example: dew on the grass. How would you determine whether the water previously existed "in some form" or whether it didn't previously exist at all? The dew forms on the grass that is cooler than the air which has water vapor in it at what is called the dew point. If you would like to see how it works take two glasses and fill one with ice then add water. Fill the other glass with water and dry the outside of both glasses.Place them on a table in a draft free area and leave undisturbed for 15 minutes. You will notice that the outside of the glass that has ice in the water will be wet on the outside. while the glass with water will not be wet outside. The water in the air is in a gas form and when it cools to the dew point water droplets form on the glass. So in answer to your question the dew on the grass and the water on the glass was in a gas form and changed into a liquid form by the heat being taken out of the air causing condensation. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi CS,
Catholic Scientist writes: I gave a specific example: dew on the grass. How would you determine whether the water previously existed "in some form" or whether it didn't previously exist at all? Was the two 1/2 verses you are talking about made of atoms? If that is true then the universe that would come to be was existing in some form as it existed in the form of the two 1/2 verses. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
The question was: How would you tell the difference between something that changed form and something that instantaneously came into existence?
So in answer to your question the dew on the grass and the water on the glass was in a gas form and changed into a liquid form by the heat being taken out of the air causing condensation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: The question was: How would you tell the difference between something that changed form and something that instantaneously came into existence? Simply by preforming the experiment. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Was the two 1/2 verses you are talking about made of atoms? No. And atoms didn't even begin to exist until some time after the Big Bang.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
What result would you expect if the "something" changed form? What result would you expect if the "something" instantaneously came into existence?
ringo writes:
Simply by preforming the experiment. The question was: How would you tell the difference between something that changed form and something that instantaneously came into existence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6
|
Hi Mod,
Modulous writes: I'm talking about heat, not the universe 'popping' out from pure nothing So you have heat popping into existence in non-existence. How would you propose for that to take place? What mechanism would produce the heat? Remember we are talking about these things beginning to exist in non-existence. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: What result would you expect if the "something" changed form? Exactly what the experiment shows.
ringo writes: What result would you expect if the "something" instantaneously came into existence? I would expect both glasses to be wet as well as the table floor and everything else in the room. Now if you want to talk about the universe beginning to exist by coming into existence instantly when there was non-existence I would expect nothing because I would not be there to see it. It is impossible for existence to begin to exist. It either exists or it does not exist. If you can ever get your mind wraped around what non-existence is then you will begin to understand your problem, as well as the problem of the universe having a beginning to exist without someplace to exist. Non-existence:Webster: Definition of NONEXISTENCE : absence of existence : the negation of being Free dictionary: 1. The condition of not existing. My definition: The absence of the existence of any thing, including a place or dimension for any thing to exist. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
Why? How do you know that something coming into existence spontaneously wouldn't congregate on the colder glass?
ringo writes:
Exactly what the experiment shows.
What result would you expect if the "something" changed form?ringo writes:
I would expect both glasses to be wet as well as the table floor and everything else in the room. What result would you expect if the "something" instantaneously came into existence? ICANT writes:
It isn't "my problem". I'm not taking a position at all. I'm trying to make sense of yours. If you can ever get your mind wraped around what non-existence is then you will begin to understand your problem, as well as the problem of the universe having a beginning to exist without someplace to exist. As far as I know, nobody is suggesting that the universe came from, "The absence of the existence of any thing, including a place or dimension for any thing to exist." What science is telling us, as I understand it, is that we have no way of telling whether there was anything "before" the Big Bang because there as no "before" the Big Bang - i.e. there was no time. Your claim that, "It is impossible for existence to begin to exist," is nonsensical because there's no way to test it. Edited by ringo, : Punk chewation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3991 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
quote: I know you've been busy with many replies, but I'd appreciate a response to my earlier post, quoted above. Thanks."If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024