God and the Big Bang

[dimreepr]

26 minutes ago, Lasse said:

On this we disagree. I think phenomenas as religion, love, hate, motivation, performance etc. are digitally scaleable attributes (information). See a bit with the economists eye. Everything is data. Everything is information. You can recognize that or you do not count with some part of it. Than you have incomplete theories with a lot of uncertainty. 

90% is enough to start with. 100% never can be i.e we will always miss some part of the information.

This is getting ridiculous, look, if God wanted publicity it would do some impossible shit that can be verified and tested; it doesn't so it can't. I think it's about time you stop invading multiple threads, with even a tenuous link to religion, with this unfathomable drivel. Please please, please...

[Lasse]

15 hours ago, dimreepr said:

This is getting ridiculous, look, if God wanted publicity it would do some impossible shit that can be verified and tested; it doesn't so it can't. I think it's about time you stop invading multiple threads, with even a tenuous link to religion, with this unfathomable drivel. Please please, please...

The topic is god and it has nothing to do with me being religious. 

For the question to get answered first one should try to recognize what it could be.

My whole point is that the only "supernatural" could exist is the state of physically nothing.

It is "outside" of the realm of Nature. It not even has information.

Anything/everything exist in proportion to this state. Interestingly you can recognizie its functions in space time. The physical reference point with-in I can recognize something. The "thing" gives the moment of existence, in present time, to everything. Ever since anything exist, it has at least measurable space and time of existence. 

Did I just say God is Nothing...

At least basic information...

The origine of Consciousness maybe...

In proportion to 0 the starting evolution of space time could be sensed as a singular event specially if it is c2...

 

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by Lasse

[Strange]

2 hours ago, Lasse said:

The topic is god and it has nothing to do with me being religious. 

And yet every thread gets dragged down to your beliefs.

2 hours ago, Lasse said:

Did I just say God is Nothing

If only you believed that you might stop spouting your ludicrous beliefs all over the forum.

[koti]

2 hours ago, Lasse said:

In proportion to 0 the starting evolution of space time could be sensed as a singular event specially if it is c2...

 

 

What?!

Your incoherent drivel is starting to devour Relativity and BB now?

Edited April 20, 2018 by koti

[Scott of the Antares]

Hello all! I am a new member here and am a lifelong pursuer of universal truths and its process’s and patterns. It is great to see other people with passion for knowledge and understanding exploring this amazing reality we experience! My background is that of a lover of science throughout my life since a small child that has lead to into a career as a mechanical engineer working in the machining, tooling and moulding industry. Throughout my 45 years I have also delved into other methods of exploring the nature of our reality, but I am largely just a well read & enthusiastic layman, although my scientific knowledge will not match some on these boards who probably are professionals in their respective fields. That said I do try to keep abreast of the latest developments and theories.

Having read this thread I would like to say that as human beings we have several modes of trying to make sense of the universe, and hopefully to determine some of its nature &/or laws along the way.

Science is the vanguard of knowable truths and explores the mystery of the universe through observable and repeatable measurements. Any other method of arriving at knowledge cannot contradict a scientific observation unless it replaces it with a better observation, that is again scientific  (observable and repeatable).

Art could be said to be a personal interpretation of that said same mystery.

True religion is the attempt to determine the best path for human beings to harmonize their actions with the laws/nature of the universe so as to achieve a better quality of existence experientially.

Philosophy and religion deal with questions that relate to our human experience, but stray into areas that science has no remit or method for measurement. Even if the answers to these questions can never be answered due to the limits of the human brain/mind/logic, they are still valid questions. If there were no questions that science couldn't tackle then we could dispense with philosophy and religion completely (and the world would be a calmer place!)

Any perceived truth in any of these modes of investigation has to acknowledge the primacy of valid scientific results (or the ‘truth’ risks becoming invalid itself), yet we cannot with certainty state that science can account for all phenomena in the manifest universe.

With that in mind I would say that science points the way in our material universe, but there are elements of the universe that are not physical and/or measureable and that opens the door for the legitimate discussion of the framework, patterns & process’ of these phenomena.

So to comment on the OP’s point; ’Why is it that God and science are separated so often?’, I would say that at some point in the remote past they probably where one and the same, and over time as we have developed fantastic systems for interrogating the measureable world, the methods of these lines of enquiry have diverged and formed their own schools of investigation. From reading other threads on these boards I see other examples such as when Philosophy split from science, a few hundred years ago, followed by the engineering breaking away from science, and some people say that technology is now also a break away form of science.

Also, specialization in a specific line of enquiry enables more focus, but one has to be careful not to ignore other aspects of reality when postulating a complete hypotheses/theory. There may be some areas where science and religion can test and support each other such as in the mystery of consciousness which neither can offer any real truths on. Merely labeling consciousness as ‘emergent’ or’ divine’ is simply putting label on it and does nothing more. Can a scientist accurately describe the patterns, process’ & mechanisms of the emergent behavior of manifest consciousness?  Probably no more than the clergy man can define the same phenomenon though a magical divinity; both are beyond current understanding which means that neither mechanism can be proved or disproved. We can just attest to the fact that it exists and continue searching for the truths that bear it. That honest and impartial search is the true meaning of science to me.

I hope this is a legitimate observation?

 Peace and love to you all.

[Phi for All]

43 minutes ago, RjMaan said:

I am not in favor of the big bang because how it is possible that the whole system in such a mechanized way came in to existence due to big bang. There is must be some force behind it who has created this whole system and is managing it.

Your reasoning is fallacious. It's an Argument from Incredulity. You're saying, "I don't understand how it could be possible, therefore it isn't."

Events and phenomena that happen all by themselves are still governed by the physics that seems to work everywhere we look. It can seem managed and mechanized, but you could say the same thing about how the ocean regularly and mechanically manages to wear down mountains. 

[beecee]

3 hours ago, RjMaan said:

I am not in favor of the big bang because how it is possible that the whole system in such a mechanized way came in to existence due to big bang. There is must be some force behind it who has created this whole system and is managing it.

 Whether you are in favour of it matters not. That's where the evidence leads us. And with your incredulity of which I would say you don't fully understand, my incredulity balks at this supposed "force" or "creator" you seem at peace with.....You know, where did it/she/he come from? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4a7F6dOdlc

 

[Markus Hanke]

13 hours ago, RjMaan said:

I am not in favor of the big bang because how it is possible that the whole system in such a mechanized way came in to existence due to big bang. There is must be some force behind it who has created this whole system and is managing it.

While I understand what you are saying, in terms of logic it is not a valid argument. Just because we do not yet know the full picture of what went on at the time of the Big Bang (but we know some parts of it), does not imply that there must be an outside agent acting on it. For example, in the old days people would get cholera, and put it down to an act of God punishing them for their sins, because they did not know any better. Nowadays of course we know that they got cholera because the water they drank was contaminated.

Note though that this does not allow any truth statements either way - the Big Bang (or any other part of science) does not imply a personal God exists, but neither can it definitively rule out that notion. So there is still room for a concept of God, if you so choose. Essentially it always comes down to a personal choice of how you wish to understand the world you live in.