but who created the atoms, energy?

[satay]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Life is but a dream? Hope the "dreamer" never awakens...

Did I wake you?

satay

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by satay

Did I wake you?

satay

No, no...I'm still in lala land. But I stir from time to time...really messes things up dream wise.

v/r

Q

[florian]

Going back to the comment about the Catholic Church being quick to accept the big bang theory , I read somewhere that the scientists who had been working on this were rather embarassed by the Church's enthusiasm , (Stephen Hawking even went to meet the Pope to discuss his theories ) . Some physicists felt that the church was eager to accept the theory for reasons of self interest and not because the Scientific evidence was good . They had had their fingers burnt in the Galileo affair (though obviously not as much as Galileo did if he was consigned to everlasting punishment )and were anxious to avoid appearing stuck in the middle ages .It must have seemed a 'Godsent' opportunity to the Church .The big bang offered them a way out of the embarassment of having to accept the steady state theory.i.e. a universe that had existed unchanging for an infinite time . Clearly they could come to some accommodation with a cosmos that had an origin of some sort rather than one that had existed for an eternity and therefore had no need of a creator .

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by florian

Going back to the comment about the Catholic Church being quick to accept the big bang theory , I read somewhere that the scientists who had been working on this were rather embarassed by the Church's enthusiasm , (Stephen Hawking even went to meet the Pope to discuss his theories ) . Some physicists felt that the church was eager to accept the theory for reasons of self interest and not because the Scientific evidence was good . They had had their fingers burnt in the Galileo affair (though obviously not as much as Galileo did if he was consigned to everlasting punishment )and were anxious to avoid appearing stuck in the middle ages .It must have seemed a 'Godsent' opportunity to the Church .The big bang offered them a way out of the embarassment of having to accept the steady state theory.i.e. a universe that had existed unchanging for an infinite time . Clearly they could come to some accommodation with a cosmos that had an origin of some sort rather than one that had existed for an eternity and therefore had no need of a creator .

Is this speculation, or fact?

v/r

Q

[florian]

My sources (as far as I can find them) are as follows :

re the Church and the big bang .G. Smoot (who worked on the detection of echoes of the big bang in the cosmic background radiation) writes " Fred Hoyle [the leading proponent of the steady state universe ] accused advocates of the big bang of being 'culturally motivated' by which he meant swayed by unscientific motives .He goes on to say ' other critics claim the Big Bang is popular because in the view of Christian apologists it resembles the creation as depicted in the first pages of Genesis .. critics also point out that the first big bang theorist ; Lemaitre was a Catholic priest .('Wrinkles in Time' p80)

Re Hawking's visit to the Vatican , he describes this on p46 of 'A Brief History of Time' how "the Catholic church seized on the idea of the big bang ..on p.116 he describes his visit to the Vatican and how he felt about Galileo's treatment by the church .He says that the Pope told him 'it was all right to study the evolution of the universe after the big bang but Scientists must not inquire into the big bang itself as that was the work of God .

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by florian

My sources (as far as I can find them) are as follows :

re the Church and the big bang .G. Smoot (who worked on the detection of echoes of the big bang in the cosmic background radiation) writes " Fred Hoyle [the leading proponent of the steady state universe ] accused advocates of the big bang of being 'culturally motivated' by which he meant swayed by unscientific motives .He goes on to say ' other critics claim the Big Bang is popular because in the view of Christian apologists it resembles the creation as depicted in the first pages of Genesis .. critics also point out that the first big bang theorist ; Lemaitre was a Catholic priest .('Wrinkles in Time' p80)

Re Hawking's visit to the Vatican , he describes this on p46 of 'A Brief History of Time' how "the Catholic church seized on the idea of the big bang ..on p.116 he describes his visit to the Vatican and how he felt about Galileo's treatment by the church .He says that the Pope told him 'it was all right to study the evolution of the universe after the big bang but Scientists must not inquire into the big bang itself as that was the work of God .

1. Actually that makes sense. The Vatican cautioned scientists to not speculate past the Big Bang, since they have no data, for reference past that single point in time. Unless one suggests scientists use their imagination to explain the before the "Big Bang"...but then would not scientists be as guilty as "theologians", in filling in gaps in history with no reference to facts?

2. What? Scientists have copyrights to the beginning of our time theories, that the church can not seize upon? I find it ironic that the world of science would not welcome a "religious affiliation", for acknowledging their theories, as nervously as they deal with those religious affiliatons that attempt to debunk science, concerning the beginning.

That sounds an awful lot like one "religious" affiliation, wanting other religious affiliations to stay away from their "religious" turf...

Imagine that...scientists being "priests" of their faith...

LOL

v/r

Q

[florian]

I agree that scientists can be influenced (perhaps unconsciously) by their "religious affiliation" and background but still produce good science .It may even be beneficial if their religion gives them a context for ideas which make them receptive to the development of original theories .
In addition to the Catholic Lemaitre and big bang theory , I could mention string theorist Michio Kaku who, Zen-like was watching carp in a Japanese garden and became fascinated by the idea of multiple universes . Hindus claim their Vedic tradition of maths makes them at ease when dealing with vast numbers and calculations and their scientists have made great contributions to science .
Ideologies can also hinder reception of new ideas (we mentioned Galileo's treatment by the Catholic church.) Nazi scientists initially refused to study the neutron as it was considered somehow 'Jewish'. Chinese scientists were able to discover an important plant for treatment of malaria , it was rejected by western science initially as they associated Chinese herbal medicine with ancient superstition .Soviet era science suffered when it had to conform to Marxist-Leninist principles and went down many blind alleys .

[mee]

God is dynamic energy, Jehovah means he courses to become

Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power,

"Raise your eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? . . . Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing."—Isa. 40:26.

[capthowdy]

Originally Posted by InLove

Hi, Peace,



Or "processing", eh, cap'n?

hehe...yeah, I don't always check spelling...so thanks

Originally Posted by InLove

Don't know why (yes I do) I decided to stop by this thread tonight. Anyway, I just wanted to say that I appreciate the way you put that.

I would also like to say that I really appreciate florian's presence here--there are places in this forum now which are going through some transitions, so I just want you both to know, if you don't already, that this is a place of ongoing change and consistency.

Betcha knew that anyway--just needed someplace to hang out for a few minutes.

InPeace,
InLove

Thank you, comment appreciated, it's always good to meet nice people....


anyways back to the topic at hand..

[InLove]

Hey Cap'n--

I didn't notice any speeling problems--I was actually commenting on your comment--I thought it was comment-worthy. (And I was feeling a bit displaced at the time, which I suppose I made quite obvious.)

Anyway, like you say--back to the topic at hand...ummm...what was the question ?

InPeace,
InLove

[shagger]

well it wasnt god that is for sure he dont even exist evolution and billions of years it took to make and substain this wonderful amazing uiniverse we are so so lucky to be aware of and have that understading of how lucky we are .......... but do we appreciate it ............ those of you who honestly do believe in god your insane believe in yourself

[human1111]

Originally Posted by shagger

well it wasnt god that is for sure he dont even exist

Prove that.

evolution and billions of years

Evolution is just a theory and not the most perfect one.

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by human1111

Evolution is just a theory and not the most perfect one.

actually...

Evolution is both a fact and a theory.

the Facts of Evolution have already been stated on previous threads so we needn't go into those here.

the various theories are concerned with the methodology or the mechanism for evolution, of which there are several, such as Darwins original proposal of a gradual evolutionary ladder to Gould and Eldridges view of punctuated equilibrium to everything in between.

metta,

~v

[Silverbackman]

Guys it is so obvious who God is. God is nature or the universe. God is all things visible and invisible. God contains the universe within him in a sense, and natural forces of the universe are like the circulation of the body.

I mean think about it! Before modern times when a natural disaster occurred people used to say "God created that tornado" or "God made that famine occur". If we look at the way modern science describes things they use a universal force too, that force is called nature! Mother Nature did this, and Mother Nature did that. Scientists cannot explain things without using the term "Nature". Nature herself is a God (or in this case a Goddess) and if we were to really look at it the universe is the most complex thing there is along with all its laws, and probably has been here for eternity. Yes I said eternity, have you guys ever heard about the Cyclical Universe Theory? According to it the universe has been big banging and big crunching for eternity, although recent evidence is starting to prove otherwise.


Anyways the only God we can ever really know about is the Goddess Nature. There is no way to ever know any other God, because we have not found any proof of the realms where the divine one lives, probably the husband of Nature . I do have faith that there might be this God, but we have no idea at the moment, and only through Eastern Meditation can we get more in touch with both Nature and her divine husband .

Satay, you bring up something interesting, is the Hindu notion of the Brahman and idea or concept? That would make sense, although I did not understand how it relates to dreaming, perhaps you can explain?

[photon]

Your question assumes there must be a creator.