Something Must Have Come From Nothing...

[Deadly Sin]

Why does the explanation need to be scientific?

Maybe we are just puppets of some form of advanced race.. imagine we could be the product of advanced intelligence. We may just be an advaced form of in vitro experiment or "tamagotchi" like beings.

As humans we feel disgusted by such thoughts, but how can we prove it wrong? Like all the other theories this may just as well be a possible one.

Imagine the Universe is like a server from an online game.Imagine the advanced technology put computers to think for themselves.. plus Bioengineering... imagine the rest..

All we know is that all of the concepts we master today are concepts created by us, and thus we have onlyour perception of those concepts.. Universe may be huge for us but not to some other races. It also could be that the universe is created by someone else than science..

 

[MasterT44]

As for the universe expanding and collapsing, perhaps the expansion of the universe slows and reverses when the gravity of everything pulling against each other overcomes the kinetic energy of the expansion.

The interesting thing about the concept of the Big Crunch (that is the possibility of the universe coming to an "end" by all the matter being brought back into a singularity by gravity) is that at the time being it is disregarded because the expansion of the universe is actually accelerating, which means some unknown source is contributing a force which is increasing the initial kinetic energy created by the Big Bang. This is being done supposedly by "dark energy." I personally don't know anything about dark energy and really no one does. However, further insight into dark energy might be able to give us more clues as to how the universe began and where it is going.

It is commonly accepted nowadays that the universe will "end" in what will be know as the "Big Rip", where expansion forced by dark energy rips apart matter all the way down to their subatomic particles and theoretically, subatomic particles will even be ripped apart into their components and even farther than that still.

 

[10293847]

Why does the explanation need to be scientific?

Because relying on, "faith" is nonsense. Meaning; there is nothing to fall back on.

Science works because it's consistent. We as humans look for patterns. It's how we know things are going to work, and we can then make solid arguments based on that. Faith requires you to look out into the dark and imagine something there. How reliable is that? Not very.

 

[Resonator]

Yeah, but you're also stating you have no confidence in yourself, but only what you can see, or sense to be more broad, the things you can PROVE exist and work. What if the sun DOES stop shining? And forget the sun, what if someone decides blowing up the moon is a good idea? Who's gonna stop them, the space patrol?

Do your thoughts lie in ruin over such an event? SHOULD they be in ruin over such an event? If your life is evolution, then where is the drive for evolution in such an instance? It would be like saying you don't WANT to evolve, so long as you remain afraid of change. Then the fear goes away because someone explains the solution.

IF the afterlife is based on thoughts, you enter with no confidence, and the lack of ability to have it. Faith is not the explanation to everything, because such a thing is called being "Drunk" in my books. Knowledge is the hidden gap between true faith and you. Denying it would be to call yourself a hypocrite in reference to "Faith is not the explanation to everything" because, quite simply, what have you but faith in what you know? And what do you really know, if you could quantify your knowledge with the bigger spectrum of knowledge?

Do you think I know enough to speak out of wisdom?

 

[10293847]

Um...I'm not sure if what Resonator said was directed at me, but just to assume it is, I'll tackle that post.

Well, of course I only base what I know on my senses and objective life. What other criteria would I use in order to understand this world? And actually, the real beauty to your question is that science provides the confidence for me. It's not me who is making an opinion, it's only me reporting the evidence. I'm not part of the equation at all, I'm only the camera, so to speak. Just observe.

The sun WILL eventually stop shining. In fact, according to the many other stars that have died out, ours will eventually fizzle out as well. Nothing remains constant, at least from the evidence we have seen.

Now clearly, there isn't a space patrol (lol) to stop someone from blowing up the moon, but I would ask this: What is the point in blowing up the moon? In other words; why in the world would someone come up with the idea of blowing up the moon? This goes back to what I said in another post. We innately know what is right and wrong. Destroying something is a negative, and building up is a positive. Someone who is of a sane mind wouldn't ever think about blowing up the moon, because there is no good reason for it.

Destruction is an idea. If I see something destroyed, of course I will be affected by it. I may not know the moon personally, but if it was destroyed, yes I would see that as a negative. Am I going to cry myself to sleep over the event, probably not. But that doesn't mean that it's not going to have a certain amount of impact on me. We aren't separate from evolution. We are a part in the grand scheme of evolution. We're the results of the environment around us. We can't stop change because we aren't in control of it.

Who said the afterlife is based on thoughts? If someone else in this thread said that, I have no response to that question.

Knowledge is based entirely on empirical evidence, and this IS NOT based on faith. I don't need faith to know that if I drop an apple from my hand, it's going to hit the ground. How can I prove this? By doing just that. Now, it's entirely possible that if I happen to do this another time, that the apple may not hit the ground. If that's the case, then we need to change our rules on gravity. But that's why science works: Because we can test it. Faith doesn't require any kind of criticism. All it needs is for someone to believe in it. Now I state again: How in the world can that be reliable?

Anyone can speak out of wisdom, if they are basing that wisdom on evidence. Once you're able to do that, you can speak with confidence.

 

[anatarsisphagist]

First, that was a very philosophical thing to say, Resonator. I feel so much more enlightened by your bombastic way of saying absolutely nothing through contradicting others. (Yes, sarcasm, if you couldn't tell)

My favorite view of this subject comes from String Theory. It states that two strings in higher dimensions, stretched to unimaginable size, came closer to one another naturally (what is natural, anyway) and collided. This caused a huge amount of energy to come from "nowhere" and create the universe as we know it. The energy formed matter, matter formed into different elements through nuclear fusion (we are made of stars, people), and eventually the planets formed. On these planets, the compounds of life formed, and the rest is evolution not history).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
i think you are confused on what string theory is, or at least are explaining some part of it in a very odd way. the basic idea is that particles are themselves vibrating strings. It allows the math of quantum and relativity to work together for the first time. the rest of what you said was right.

 

[dbluntman]

...so the argument is between logic and faith?

 

[astralvision]

Hi,

There is only one logical explanation if you don't believe something can be created 'all of a sudden'.

Here's an infographic explaining why, a logical approach to everything.

 

[NikeGoddess]

Yes, there is something out there that came from nothing. What is it? We don't know. Will wait for that proper time when everything will be discovered and all questions will have an answer.