Atoms as God

Originally posted by FabianFnas
What do you mean by a lucky universe?
Why do you mean by the 'explosion' must be controlled in any way?
If so, by whom?

simply because if the 'forces', that have evidently 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe, had been greater, then is it not true that the universe may have expanded too quickly and it would have 'burst', like a ballon which has too much air in it, and if the 'forces', that have 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe had been any lesser in magnitude, then the universe would never have got started and may have imploded in on itself. therefore if this is the case as i understand it, and hey, i could be wrong, then what is the margin of error? is it just another coincidence that the natural laws of physics were correct, a 'lucky', universe!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
simply because if the 'forces', that have evidently 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe, had been greater, then is it not true that the universe may have expanded too quickly and it would have 'burst', like a ballon which has too much air in it, and if the 'forces', that have 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe had been any lesser in magn ...[text shortened]... coincidence that the natural laws of physics were correct, a 'lucky', universe!

So what you are saying is that we live in a lucky universe of the only reason that we are here and can tell it was lucky? If it wasn't lucky, we wouldn't be here telling about it, would we?
So every universe producing intelligent life telling the the universe is lucky is lucky.
The uncountable unlucky universes wasn't.

Isn't this obvious?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You mean it's annoying to have people refute what you believe in the name of science. But this is what will happen when you believe in the stories from the Bible.

what are you talking about? i do not hold that science in any shape or form contradicts what has been established in the Bible, perhaps you are unaware, that the Bible is not a scientific textbook, yet, when it touches on matters of science, it is accurate. is it not enough that you have you're own misconceptions, yet you want to burden others with these also! please if you are going to hurl insinuations across cyber space, make sure you understand what the others persons perspective is, 🙂

Originally posted by FabianFnas
So what you are saying is that we live in a lucky universe of the only reason that we are here and can tell it was lucky? If it wasn't lucky, we wouldn't be here telling about it, would we?
So every universe producing intelligent life telling the the universe is lucky is lucky.
The uncountable unlucky universes wasn't.

Isn't this obvious?

obvious? obvious to whom? perhaps from your window it is obvious, for was is not Einstein himself who famously stated, 'that God does not play dice with the universe' , therfore if you want to attribute it to 'luck', coincidence, blind chance, inanimate forces, whatever, be my guest, but dont expect others to think of such an approach as reasonable, for as far as i can discern, it goes against every reasonable inclination that i can think of 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
obvious? obvious to whom? perhaps from your window it is obvious, for was is not Einstein himself who famously stated, 'that God does not play dice with the universe' , therfore if you want to attribute it to 'luck', coincidence, blind chance, inanimate forces, whatever, be my guest, but dont expect others to think of such an approach as reasonable, ...[text shortened]... as far as i can discern, it goes against every reasonable inclination that i can think of 🙂

You wrote it yourself: "is it just another coincidence that the natural laws of physics were correct, a 'lucky', universe!"

If the universe wasn't lucky, would you be sitting here and say it? I don't think so.

And that was my point. Obvious, isn't it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what are you talking about? i do not hold that science in any shape or form contradicts what has been established in the Bible, perhaps you are unaware, that the Bible is not a scientific textbook, yet, when it touches on matters of science, it is accurate. is it not enough that you have you're own misconceptions, yet you want to burden others with ...[text shortened]... uations across cyber space, make sure you understand what the others persons perspective is, 🙂

The Bible is accurate on matters of science? Enlighten me please.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Lol, ok point conceded, but its just so annoying to have persons smugly pontificate that because something is a 'scientific' theory, that it is both observable and factual, simply on the basis that its supposed to be 'scientific', when quite clearly we observe something quite contrary in nature, orgasms aside! thus if one is supposed to perceive that ...[text shortened]... admit, that it was a controlled explosion, or at very least and extremely 'lucky', one.

Nope; simply coz there is no Because😵

Originally posted by twhitehead
First of all the Big Bang theory is not about an explosion equivalent to say a bomb, but rather a rapid expansion of space itself, so drawing any parallel to say a bomb is not enough to make any hard and fast conclusions.
Secondly, all events of any kind are controlled by the laws of physics and I see no reason to believe that the Big Bang was an excepti ...[text shortened]... niverse except perhaps in the sound of the explosions going on inside the engine of a Ferrari.

GT3 sounds better😵

Originally posted by FabianFnas
You wrote it yourself: "is it just another coincidence that the natural laws of physics were correct, a 'lucky', universe!"

If the universe wasn't lucky, would you be sitting here and say it? I don't think so.

And that was my point. Obvious, isn't it?

if you notice, the statement was in the form of a question, a rhetorical question, granted it is quite impossible to here the incredulity of voice inflections through text, never the less, as it is, if you want to attribute it to luck, then by my guest! but don't expect others to follow, as for your argument that we are sitting here because we are lucky, pah! i treat it with equal contempt! spit ding! 🙂

Originally posted by black beetle
Nope; simply coz there is no Because😵

yes beetle but you cannot deny that there was a cause!

BTW id love to run over the top of one of them Ferraris in my L200 pickup, woosies!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The Bible is accurate on matters of science? Enlighten me please.

what am i your researcher? times money friend, come up with the readies and ill see what i can do! but just to get you started, we could discuss its accurate portrayal of the earth as a sphere when most persons at the time concluded that it was flat, we could discuss its reference to hanging in space, we could discuss its accurate portrayal of the water cycle, its references to the constellations, etc etc etc

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
simply because if the 'forces', that have evidently 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe, had been greater, then is it not true that the universe may have expanded too quickly and it would have 'burst', like a ballon which has too much air in it, and if the 'forces', that have 'caused', the 'creation', of the universe had been any lesser in magn ...[text shortened]... coincidence that the natural laws of physics were correct, a 'lucky', universe!

I am sure that your birth was due to a large number of co-incidences that brought your parents together etc so your birth was 'lucky' for you. But was it inherently lucky?
Yes the exact laws of physics and an unimaginable number of coincidences lead to use being lucky enough to talk to each other, but inherently lucky? No. It is equally unlucky for all the potential people or universes that have not existed. If anything the unluck outweighs the luck surely.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am sure that your birth was due to a large number of co-incidences that brought your parents together etc so your birth was 'lucky' for you. But was it inherently lucky?
Yes the exact laws of physics and an unimaginable number of coincidences lead to use being lucky enough to talk to each other, but inherently lucky? No. It is equally unlucky for all t ...[text shortened]... l people or universes that have not existed. If anything the unluck outweighs the luck surely.

I and that other great mind Einstein (peace be upon him), beg to differ, for i will say it again, 'God did not play dice with the universe'.😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes beetle but you cannot deny that there was a cause!

BTW id love to run over the top of one of them Ferraris in my L200 pickup, woosies!

Puir Ferrrrari😵

Oh, there is no known cause also -we know nothing about the conditions before the point singularity. So I can surely deny that there was a cause indeed, and on the other hand I can surely claim that even if there were observable conditions that they caused Bing Bang it ain't necessarily mean that we have to accept that "God" created them😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Puir Ferrrrari😵

Oh, there is no known cause also -we know nothing about the conditions before the point singularity. So I can surely deny that there was a cause indeed, and on the other hand I can surely claim that even if there were observable conditions that they caused Bing Bang it ain't necessarily mean that we have to accept that "God" created them😵

yes beetle, simply because something is not known, does not mean that it does not exist (although you could argue the case, i understand), also, we can observe the 'effects', therefore we can 'assume', oh man how i hate assumptions, just forget that last statement, we can deduce that there must have indeed been a cause, surely, if not, i want to know, why not. 🙂