Can somebody help me get my feet wet?

Hi Triple,Here is some food for thought. I'm not as intelligent as these other guys, but I just try to use common sense.Time is not eternal and it had a beginning. If it had a beginning, it needs a cause. Also, there could not have been an eternal number of moments before today; otherwise today never would have come, which it has.Tomorrow does not exist; therefore, declaring that time has ended today.We arrived at today, therefore showing that we have been limited to a number of moments before today.Therefore, showing that, "time" had a beginning. If the space-time universe had a beginning, it must have been caused into existence.Everything that has a "beginning" must have a cause. Understanding God's preexistence comes by first understanding that, "there was no time before it was created". There was not a creation "in" time, rather, a creation "of" time.Einsteins's theory of "general relativity" is deemed to be essentially a law. And "general relativity" indicates that time indeed had a beginning.Second, the big-bang model indicates there was a beginning of matter, which is the creation of something out of nothing. As with time, it seems inconceivable that there could have been space with no matter, and then space with matter. Even the first law of thermodynamics contradicts thisThe consciousness cannot be a byproduct of dead matter, considering it has emotions, sensations, desires, free choice, and personal convictions. You cannot get something from nothing. If the universe with dead matter having no conscious, feelings, desires, or any type of choice that involved the thinking process- "How do you get something totally different, which consists of, -consciousness, living, thinking, feeling believing creatures?"Our consciousness has a unique structure, far beyond anyone's imagination. It literally separates us from all creatures. The evidence for consciousness suggests that life after death is credible. DNA is made up of biological information, similar to books, and computers. We have six feet of DNA inside our bodies. No explanation has ever been found, which explains how information got inside our biological structure.Considering that non-living matter, which came into existence by means of nothingness, how could it possibly instruct our trillions of cells inside our DNA, and follow highly complicated instructions? Therefore, producing a very sophisticated human design.Enjoy

Virtual particles are theoretical entities, and it's not eve clear that they actually exist as opposed to being merely theoretical constructs. However, there's a much more important point to be made about this. You see, these particles, if they are real, do not come out of nothing. The quantum vacuum is not what most people nvision when they think of a vacuum-that is, absolutely nothing. On the contrary, it's a sea of fluctuating energy, an arena of violent activity that has a rich physical structure and can be described by physical laws.JThese particles are thought to originate by fluctuations of the energy in the vacuum. So its not an example of something coming into being out of nothing or something coming into being out of nothing, or something coming into being without a cause. The quantum vacuum and the energy locked up in the vacuum are the cause of these particles. And then we have to ask, well, what is the origi of the whole quantum vacuum itself? Where does it come from?Now you got to account for how the is very active ocean of fluctuating energy came into being. If quantum physical laws operate within the domain described by quantum physics, you can't legitimately use quantum physis to explain the origin of that domain itself.You need something transcendent that's beyond that domain in order to explain how the entire domain came into being. Suddenly, we are back to the origins questions.

I wish you wouldn't ask difficult questionslol Let me see.
Subatomic particles keep deviating strangely from predictable paths (e.g, individual particles cannot be accurately followed, various properties cannot always be predicted with certainty, etc..) Unfortunately however the fact remains that however strange the sub-atomic realm might be, it can never provide proof nor even evidece that particles arise uncaused.This is simply because things can be inherently unpredictable and yet still be caused. On the other hand, a completely unpredictable event. Thus, it follows that if sub-atomic events really occur without cause, then no mathematical tool whatsoever would be able to make meaningful predictions concerning them. Yes, even the "Jvery effective" equations of quantum physics would be useless.It does not matter if scientific experiments have revealed that o the smallest scale individual particals display random and unpredictable patterns of behaviour.Quantum theory is able to make meaningful predictions about these very same particles, albeint statistical predictions concerning large numbers of them.this would be impossible if the particles and their behaviour were uncaused. Besides, although individual particles display random, unpredictable moveents, the whole method of scientifically observig the is based on the prediction that the said
particles will be there to observe, and not say cars or elephants.In other words, the very fact that the same old particles keep arising, complete with the sae old recognizable properties, proves that these particles cannot be uncaused.Non-causality is non-discriinatory, and it has the entire infinite range of possible fors for it to randoly choose from.A known statistical distributio is scientifically acceptable, although it's nice to be able to explain it. Many-worlds theory, comined with Borel's theore, gives a good explanation. It is a comprehensible order, as long as you can coprehend that all possibilities occur-they just don't interact, and so in one we cannot observe another.

Now my addition to what I already wrote about it is the following.The way you might understand- quantum mechanics particles appear and disappear in space all the time without a cause. There isn't some set exact time for individual atoms to decay, or a cause that sets it off.
Maybe it only seems that way due to our perspective of a life full of causes and effects. We don't know for sure how or why these atoms pop into existence though, at least I don't think we have an ansewr so far. So, you can't really say yet with "assurance that there is no cause for it.The way I see it, they do not simply evaorate into nothingness but rather their energy is released in the form of photons, yet their energy is still conserved.continuation.........

Let me see if I can get this straight once and for all.:.
This is what I believe.
1)The Big Bang occured and it created time, and space.
2)The Big Bang did need a cause in order to get started.
3)Not everything needs a cause, only things that "exist" need a cause.
4)Since the Big Bang created time and space, then "time" also needs a cause. It goes back to the Bang, but two entities were created at once-time and space.5)The universe has a beginning-The Bang Initiated It- The expansion of the universe declares a singular point( Big Bang).Why I believe the universe started at some point?
Since an infinite past would involve an actual infinite number of events, then the past can't be infinite.Imagine I had an infinite number of rocks in my posession, and that I wanted to give you some. In fact, I gave you an infinite number of rocks. One way I could do that would be to give you the entire pile of rocks.One way I could do that would be to give you the entire pile of rocks. In that case I would have zero rocks left for myself. Another way to do it would be to give you all the odd numbered rocks. Then I would still have an infinity left over for myself, and you would have infinite too.You would have just as many as I would-and in fact, each of us would have just as many as I would-and, in fact, and, in fact, each of us would have just as many as I originally had before we divided into odd and even (emphasise on the basis of infinite) or I can give you all the rocks numbered four and higher.That way you would have an infinite of rocks, but I only have three. These illustrations demonstrate that the return of an actual infinite number of things leans to contradictory results.Example:1) I give all rocks = infinity minus infinity = 0
2) I give all odd number rocks = infinity minus infinity = infinity.
3) I gave all four and greater = infinity minus infinity = threeThe Idea of an actual infinite is just conceptual mathmaticians can deal with infinity quantities and infinite numbers in the conceptual realm.However- and heres the point, its not descriptive of what can happen in the real world. You can't have an infinite numbers of events in the past.Substitute past events for rocks and you can see the absurdities that would result. So the universe can't have an infinite number of events in the past, it must have had a beginning.This message has been edited by NOTHINGNESS, 08-06-2004 08:47 PM