but who created the atoms, energy?

Discussion in 'Science and the Universe' started by nomanshake, Jun 18, 2005.

  1. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Correct, as matter is nothing more than energy at a slower level of vibration (not frequency).

    Perhaps your thought about how so much "energy" could be packed so tightly into a 'seed' became the Big Bang, has a pseudo answer. Just look at the energy packed into an Atomic bomb...

    Consider also a 'singularity' pulling all that material and energy into it, building building....What would happen if it reversed itself and released all it had absorbed, all at once? And still that is miniscule compared to the Big Bang.

    My thoughts.

    v/r

    Q
     
  2. florian

    florian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    In fact it may not require much matter to make a universe. It was once suggested that there is in fact only 1 individual electron (& possibly one individual example of each of the other particles ) but because it zips back and forward in time it is able to appear in many places simultaneously (to us ) as if there are countless multitudes forming all the atoms in the universe .
    Perhaps a bit like the way a tv works , a tiny stream of electrons vibrating back and forth gives the illusion of an entire visible world .
    So you don't need much actual matter ,all that is needed to create the illusion of a universe is a series of simple vibrations in time and an observer with a nervous system wired in such a way that confabulates from its restricted view a moment to moment continuous cosmos.
     
  3. capthowdy

    capthowdy foresaken

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    To answer one of the question about who created atoms or energy......according to one of einsteins' theories energy can not be created or destroyed, only proccessed.......but that still doesn't answer the question of origin.......definetly a thought worth pondering..
     
  4. florian

    florian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    The law of conservation of matter and energy only applies to a closed system and not if the singularity of the big bang was a linked to another universe . It also seems that virtual particles ( i.e. pairs of particles and anti-particles that spontaneously appear for very short times can also violate the law of matter/energy conservation for the minute period of time that they exist .
     
  5. InLove

    InLove at peace

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    3,267
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hi, Peace,

    Or "processing", eh, cap'n?;)

    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
     
  6. InLove

    InLove at peace

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    3,267
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well, now, that did not make a whole lot of sense, did it?

    Will it be sufficient for me to say that I just appreciate you both, and thanks for the posts?:)

    I hope someone knew what I was trying to say...

    (by the way, in case you did not notice, it did not sound very scientific...)

    Anyway...on with the thread!

    InPeace,
    InLove
     
  7. satay

    satay New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    God and creation are not separate. God for one is not an object. It's an idea, a philosophy, a thought.

    We can not say God created the world or universe. Because that naturally leads to the question of who created God then. There is no "creation"...There just "is"

    Get it? :p

    satay
     
  8. Awaiting_the_fifth

    Awaiting_the_fifth Where is my mind?

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hear Hear !!!!
     
  9. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Life is but a dream? Hope the "dreamer" never awakens...;)
     
  10. human1111

    human1111 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    What about G-d being a "general law of everything, including everything and everyone where everything we see is G-ds effects?"

    In my mind scientists who are working hard at finding the "Theory of Everything" are actually true religious people searching for G-d. They just use different terms and methods, that is it.

    As such it is indestructible, imortal, perfect, etc.
     
  11. satay

    satay New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did I wake you? :D

    satay
     
  12. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    No, no...I'm still in lala land. But I stir from time to time...really messes things up dream wise. ;)

    v/r

    Q
     
  13. florian

    florian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    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 .
     
  14. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Is this speculation, or fact? ;)

    v/r

    Q
     
  15. florian

    florian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    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 .

     
  16. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    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...:eek:

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

    LOL

    v/r

    Q
     
  17. florian

    florian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2005
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    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 .

     
  18. mee

    mee Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    6,363
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.

     
  19. capthowdy

    capthowdy foresaken

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    hehe...yeah, I don't always check spelling...so thanks


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


    anyways back to the topic at hand..
     
  20. InLove

    InLove at peace

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    3,267
    Likes Received:
    4
    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:D ?

    InPeace,
    InLove
     

Share This Page