Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/25/2011 10:27:34 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

I don't recall offering any interpretation whatsoever

Huh? Sorry, I don't recall who you are.

K.

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/25/2011 10:56:48 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

I have faith in the mathematics even if they can't physically prove what the numbers tell us.

Hey, that's okay. I guess it just came as a bit of a shock to learn that a guy who always made a stink about how foolish people were to believe in the existence of things for which there was no proof had gotten baptised.

K.

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 12:22:10 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

How so...it just opens up the possibility of more than one God in multiple universes...Rather than reduce complexity it increases it... Who is to say each of these theorized universes have the same or even close to the same properties?

Butch


Youre joking right?

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 12:24:06 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

K.


Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 2:17:44 AM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

My favoritist is:

You were created from a mans rib that you might lay you beside him and blow him.


Oh that is taking just a little bit too much license there. *LMAO*

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 5:53:40 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

I don't recall offering any interpretation whatsoever

Huh? Sorry, I don't recall who you are.

K.
Are you trying to say something? Spit it out, don't be shy.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 6:21:32 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		God or nature...creating is creating...one no less complicated then the other the results are the same.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 11:50:41 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Are you trying to say something? Spit it out, don't be shy.

I've made myself clear. I was just trying to toss it off on a humorous note at this point.

I guess that didn't work. I'll make a note.

K.

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 12:55:17 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.

That's what I was getting at. Your original statement didn't say, "any theory that includes a god who creates the universe increases complexity." That changes things materially, from "any theory that includes a god" to any theory that includes a particular conception of god. And I think that's an important distinction, because not all conceptions of god introduce claims that compete with physics.

Some conceptions of god, for example, present a situation comparable to the one we face with regard to consciousness. From the point of view of neuroscience, consciousness has no explanatory value. Most of us are pretty sure that consciousness is real, but some people argue quite seriously that it is an illusion. Either way, our knowledge of the physical functioning of the brain is unaffected.

The intuition that there is something more to the universe than what our physical sciences are able to reveal to us neither contradicts science nor requires the revision of any scientific laws. The only thing it offends is an obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism that asserts a metaphysical claim about the ultimate nature of reality which it is prepared to defend with all the vigor of the Medieval church.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 5/26/2011 1:03:17 PM >

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 2:38:11 PM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Or completely sane and rational in that one.


Oh, I kinda doubt that... he's been seriously messed with ever since Frank oz won that suit and cleaned him out. He had to flee to Wisconsin to hide  from the creditors cause he knows nobody wants to go there any more.


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 9:36:20 PM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.

That's what I was getting at. Your original statement didn't say, "any theory that includes a god who creates the universe increases complexity." That changes things materially, from "any theory that includes a god" to any theory that includes a particular conception of god. And I think that's an important distinction, because not all conceptions of god introduce claims that compete with physics.

Some conceptions of god, for example, present a situation comparable to the one we face with regard to consciousness. From the point of view of neuroscience, consciousness has no explanatory value. Most of us are pretty sure that consciousness is real, but some people argue quite seriously that it is an illusion. Either way, our knowledge of the physical functioning of the brain is unaffected.

The intuition that there is something more to the universe than what our physical sciences are able to reveal to us neither contradicts science nor requires the revision of any scientific laws. The only thing it offends is an obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism that asserts a metaphysical claim about the ultimate nature of reality which it is prepared to defend with all the vigor of the Medieval church.

K.

Yes, and that "obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism" is called "sound science", what you are talking about is called "making shit up".

If it exists, there will be evidence of it's existence, period - you can't get past that point without making shit up.



(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 11:17:57 PM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

K.


Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.


Maybe. Say the universe is a part of him. The way it operates and combines may simply be a function of his body or essence. The same way making blood is simply a function of our body. We aren't more complex that our body because we are our bodies.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/26/2011 11:22:51 PM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.

That's what I was getting at. Your original statement didn't say, "any theory that includes a god who creates the universe increases complexity." That changes things materially, from "any theory that includes a god" to any theory that includes a particular conception of god. And I think that's an important distinction, because not all conceptions of god introduce claims that compete with physics.

Some conceptions of god, for example, present a situation comparable to the one we face with regard to consciousness. From the point of view of neuroscience, consciousness has no explanatory value. Most of us are pretty sure that consciousness is real, but some people argue quite seriously that it is an illusion. Either way, our knowledge of the physical functioning of the brain is unaffected.

The intuition that there is something more to the universe than what our physical sciences are able to reveal to us neither contradicts science nor requires the revision of any scientific laws. The only thing it offends is an obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism that asserts a metaphysical claim about the ultimate nature of reality which it is prepared to defend with all the vigor of the Medieval church.

K.

Yes, and that "obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism" is called "sound science", what you are talking about is called "making shit up".

If it exists, there will be evidence of it's existence, period - you can't get past that point without making shit up.





Evidence of something existing does not mean you will find it.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 12:27:36 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Yes, and that "obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism" is called "sound science", what you are talking about is called "making shit up". If it exists, there will be evidence of it's existence, period - you can't get past that point without making shit up.

I realize you're pissy over being called out for making up definitions, faking an understanding of texts that you haven't even bothered to read, and being a lying little shit. But adding to your string of achievements isn't the way to get ahead.

Materialism is a philosophy, not science. And claiming that there must of necessity be physical evidence of a non-physical reality is like claiming that fish don't exist because if they did we'd have found evidence of their nests in trees.

Have you ever considered getting a hobby? Maybe you're good with your hands.

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 5/27/2011 12:38:15 AM >

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 7:28:13 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Yes, and that "obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism" is called "sound science", what you are talking about is called "making shit up". If it exists, there will be evidence of it's existence, period - you can't get past that point without making shit up.

I realize you're pissy over being called out for making up definitions, faking an understanding of texts that you haven't even bothered to read, and being a lying little shit. But adding to your string of achievements isn't the way to get ahead.

Materialism is a philosophy, not science. And claiming that there must of necessity be physical evidence of a non-physical reality is like claiming that fish don't exist because if they did we'd have found evidence of their nests in trees.

Have you ever considered getting a hobby? Maybe you're good with your hands.

K.

You're making all that up, it's a slippery slope.

What exactly is "non-physical reality" BTW? Maybe you should look up the existing definition of "reality" before you start making up your own.

BTW, Christopher Lash uses "pathology" in that sense throughout Culture of Narcissism.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 8:13:46 AM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Yes, and that "obnoxious brand of dogmatic Materialism" is called "sound science", what you are talking about is called "making shit up". If it exists, there will be evidence of it's existence, period - you can't get past that point without making shit up.

I realize you're pissy over being called out for making up definitions, faking an understanding of texts that you haven't even bothered to read, and being a lying little shit. But adding to your string of achievements isn't the way to get ahead.

Materialism is a philosophy, not science. And claiming that there must of necessity be physical evidence of a non-physical reality is like claiming that fish don't exist because if they did we'd have found evidence of their nests in trees.

Have you ever considered getting a hobby? Maybe you're good with your hands.

K.

You're making all that up, it's a slippery slope.

What exactly is "non-physical reality" BTW? Maybe you should look up the existing definition of "reality" before you start making up your own.

BTW, Christopher Lash uses "pathology" in that sense throughout Culture of Narcissism.



Reality is said to be an illusion. Predicated on your ability to recognize and understand. If you can't recognize it, you can't see it. If you can't understand it then it doesn't exist.

Reality may make up more than just the physical. Whether a photon acts as a wave or a particle can be altered by looking at it. Is the act of watching a physical act upon the photon? If so then where is the physical act? If not then how does it affect it at all being non-physical?

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 9:21:38 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline 		You cannot observe a photon without some type of apparatus, the apparatus will interact with the photon.

quote:

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or may be thought to be.[1] In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. A still more broad definition includes everything that has existed, exists, or will exist, not just in the mind, or even more broadly also including what is only in the mind.


Wikipedia: Reality

Thus, there is a "reality that isn't real", but it exists in reality, only in your head.

I usually break it into four basic realities for the sake of clarity:

Objective Reality: the state of all energy in the universe (or multiverse, if you like) - our perception of which is strictly limited by time, space, and other perceptual limitations we are heir to, described by:

Objective Consensus Reality: a symbolic consensus model of what we currently know or suspect about objective reality, subject to consensus, testing, revision, etc., the scientific method basically.

Subjective Reality: an internal model of what an individual imagines reality to be, which often engenders:

Subjective Consensus Reality: a consensus model of reality, which is not supported by evidence (though parts of it may be), but by subjective considerations: perceptual errors, political influence, etc. Religions for example, each of which presents a distinctive subjective consensus model of reality, often split into myriad subsets reflecting perceptual, philosophical and political differences.

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 9:23:01 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

That's what I was getting at. Your original statement didn't say, "any theory that includes a god who creates the universe increases complexity." That changes things materially, from "any theory that includes a god" to any theory that includes a particular conception of god. And I think that's an important distinction, because not all conceptions of god introduce claims that compete with physics.



Given that the creation of the universe is the topic of the thread I am surprised you could read it any other way.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 9:26:39 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Any theory that includes a god increases complexity.

Okay, I'll bite. Why is that?

K.


Because a god that can create the universe is by definition more complex than that universe.


Maybe. Say the universe is a part of him. The way it operates and combines may simply be a function of his body or essence. The same way making blood is simply a function of our body. We aren't more complex that our body because we are our bodies.


Nonsense. There are parts of our body that are more complex than other parts of our body. Just because they are in the same organism doesnt make them equally complex.

You also miss the entire point, perhaps you need Kirata's clarification. If the universe is "just part of him" then he didnt create it, so your example doesnt address my statement.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Paralle... - 5/27/2011 10:44:00 AM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline 		At the big bang space and time were created... before the big band in a non-spatial universe perhaps all that existed was consciousness. If this is true then there could be no universe without consciousness its creator.

HERE is a short interesting discussion of that possibility.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094