Summations Only

Since this is the free for all forum, I guess i'll stick my nose in.Im not too fimiliar with the LoTs. The first I think is the law of conservation of energy. The 2nd is entropy,Where as things are supposedly breaking down. I have no clue what the 3rd is but it's kinda like the second but not really? Trying to get to absolute zero?Well, here's my stupid question- do these laws deal with closed or open systems? How do we know if the universe is an open system? I know the earth is a closed sysyem therefore the laws apply to it. I assume were talking about the universe when it comes to these laws( in this discussion anyway). So how can anyone know if the universe is an open system or a closed one? This entire argument depends on weather or not it's opened or closed. How does one determine which it is? Maybe it has already been determined im not sure. It's free for all so I thought i'd ask. Thanks

*EDIT*I meant I "know" the earth is an OPEN system since the moon, sun, etc... have an effect on it. Sorry for the error. Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This thread is going down the road of the "Creation theory for light" post. Im not at all as knowledgeable on the Lots as the members here are, but I think this thread is looking to mix the supernatural with the natural. If the universe is open, as ICANT says, then the (from what I gather) 2nd Lot's does not apply(i.e. a cup of hot water in a room eventually becoming room temp?). So, if it means, in order for the universe to be open, then God is overiding the Lots(it seems).If as Buz writes, it's closed, and God is the source that influences it, then his direct involvment in the universe would mean that it's actually open or he wouldnt be able to affect it. If God is affecting the closed system then by definition of the lot's it's not closed, it's open.IOW, If God has an impact on the 'closed" universe then it's really open if he's outside of it affecting it. If you're trying to seperate the two saying God has an influence on the "closed" system then your arguing against yourself and unable to prove it either way. It's mixing faith with science and there's no bridging the gap unless you suspend the Lot's entirely to prove your point.I admit, none of what I said may make any sense and Im not trying to stir anything up here between myself, Buz or ICANT, im just making an observation based on faith and science. It's seems nonsensical.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Hi ICANT, I fully understand what you are saying,(because im a Christian) but the point here ( I hope) is to try to explain the Lots to prove the existance of God or that they are "compatible" with Him, but you are doing a very poor job( if that's what you're trying to do).Of course, any diety if you believe in one (which I do) would be able to suspend whatever the hell he wants to. Try explaining that to an astrophysicist and you'll be shown the door right after you bring up the angels cruising back and forth from earth to heaven suspending the natural laws of physics.It's two entirely different worlds you guys are arguing. You may as well say the tooth fairy isn't bound by the laws of the spiritual world of teeth. Even tho I somewhat agree with you on a few things, your trying to prove a supernatural being exists using physical/natural laws to do it.(even if God DID set those laws in motion-he is not bound by them as being compatible with the supernatural- that's like saying you can tell who designed the software in your computer simply by understanding how it works, just because someone designed something doesn't mean they are compatible with it, they could be using a foriegn concept, to them that they may not agree with. Im not saying God did this but it debunks your point) When those laws don't allow for certain things you simply say "well God suspends them". That's not an argument it's a faith/suggestion. All your doing is saying laws do not apply to the creator of the universe because he well, created it. Which is fine, but this is theolgy, not science.The main point of this thread in the beggining was to bring cavediver into a debate about this very thing. I can't imagine he will want to talk about angels going to and fro as proof that the lots are compatible with God.Well, for here it is a discussion, I suppose, as it's not the Science section, so, carry on.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

I counted eight members debating Buz on JUST the last two pages alone. Eight.For someone who apperantly doesn't know jack squat about what even the Lots mean he sure garners much attention. Keep it up boys. When you think you have someone down don't let up. It's what all the best debaters do, well, not really but it sure is amusing to watch.

I'll try and understand Buz' argument better so I can get involved. Im not totally sure what He's arguing for yet. Tho, I think you should remember that this isn't the science section. So, maybe not everything Buz is arguing is totally Scientific in nature and will not comply with the current laws in the universe as applied. That's why this thread is here. He's trying to propose HIS theory and not one that is in agreement with mainstream science.

For the record, I wasn't implying that Buz didn't know anything about the lots when I said: What I meant was "for someone who apperantly" meaning as viewed by others as not knowing what he's talking about, not me. I may not know everything he means but why it takes atleast eight people in a non-science section to try to talk science to Buz about a theory that doesn't comply with the lots anyhow (I think) is what is perplexing.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

Yes, the multitudes pointing out that his theory, as he sees it, that overrides the lots due to a prime mover (Jehovah God) which is his right to theorize is being challenged because it doesn't line up with current theories is perplexing, you got it. It's his theory.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.