Yes that is possible but it is not even suggested by the evidence.
Would it not be equally logical that this universe was designed for life as we know it?
Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!”
[/QUOTE]
Did you read my OP? My analogy is very simplistic and does not begin to address the complexity of BBT.
The mudpuddle analogy resembles it.
Sure, but how do you intend to prove it? And who designed the designer? And if both possibilities are indeed equally likely, what basis do you have to prefer design over chance?
Well I am 45 and chances are I will falsify it sooner than later.
But you want observable evidence in this lifetime?
Create life from non-life would do it for me.
Find evidence of the aforementioned billions and billions of universes would do it…for me personally.
How would you falsify inflation?
Well I disagree and we will leave it there for now if that is ok with you. I dont know how much and how long I will hang around here. But perhaps we can have that discussion sometime in the future.
The expansion of space increases with the distance between points. If you pick a point that’s far away from Earth, it’s moving away from us at faster than the speed of light RIGHT NOW. The inflationary period was a time when points that were relatively close together moved apart at greater than the speed of light.
The inflationary period was postulated primarily to explain why the universe seems so homogenous. The CMB is about the same temperature in every direction, even though opposite sides of the observable universe are so far apart light hasn’t had enough time to cross the distance. Inflationary theory says that these distant parts of the universe were once close enough together to equalize their temperatures, and were then carried far apart faster than the speed of light.
Inflation is also confirmed by a couple of other more esoteric observations.
Inflation isn’t really required by the big bang. There’s a lot of evidence that the universe used to be hot and dense and now is cooler and more spread out. It’s a refinement to the theory to explain why the universe is smoother than you’d expect if the expansion of space was proceeding at a constant rate.
What created the intelligent designer?
However unlikely it is that a universe would spontaneously pop into existence, it’s far, far MORE unlikely that an intelligent being powerful enough to CREATE a universe would spontaneously pop into existence.
Well thats a whole other thread isnt it?
I fear that answering this question will not be productive to the narrow focus I was hoping for in this thread but you will get your answer.
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried” – G. K. Chesterton
You see you its not Christians you guys and gals dont like. Its people coming at you with a holier than thou attitude that are obviously living life by the same rules you are…if not more ruthless rules. Who wouldnt have a problem with that? I see it all over this board. I see it everyday at work and the places I hang out. I see it down through history. Inqusition, the crusades etc…etc.
Get everyone in the USA to follow the precepts set forth in the New Testament and all of our national debt problems, hunger, poverty, etc…etc would be solved inside of a year. Get the whole world to follow them and things might get downright boring and I am all for that.
Would you agree with my last paragraph? If the answer is yes then there is my proof. If the answer is no…well like I said before that is a whole other thread.
You are a Christian if you call yourself a Christian. Just because some of the people who call themselves Christians make Christianity look bad doesn’t make them not Christian; nor do you have the authority to just declare that “this is Christianity, and nothing else is!”
No, it would be unworkable. You can’t run a modern society according to the dictates of 2000~ year dead primitives.
When did viruses become life?
It is my understanding that they are basicaly faulty DNA and/or RNA.http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/faculty/michael.gregory/files/bio%20102/bio%20102%20lectures/viruses/viruses.htm
So if I decide I am a professor I am that also?
Der Trihs you are a Christian if you follow the way of life that is set forth in the New Testament. The word literaly means “like Christ” not that most of us believe that it is possible to rise to that high ideal but its not really that hard to tell if someone is working toward that goal or not.
Its a free country I can claim to be Dr. Jon all I want to but until I meet the conditions for the phd its not worth much.
Last one for the night I will try to get to your other comment tommorrow.
If the cosmic egg needs no designer why would the designer need one?
What would make the spontaneous universe more likely?
Its a nice assertion but without proof that is all it is.
The word “Christian” literally means “a person who adheres to Christianity”. And what authoritative body issues “Christian” Licenses?
So you agree the universe doesn’t need a designer.
The universe immediately after the big bang was a chaotic cloud of superheated plasma. It took billions of years for any sort of complicated structure to emerge from that chaos. A being intelligent enough to create an entire universe is a very complicated structure. Complicated structures don’t just pop into existence out of nothing. On the other hand, the natural quantum fluctuations of the vacuum mean that random particles pop in and out of existence all the time.
The idea that a being as complicated as God could just spontaneously appear is as ridiculous as the idea that a warehouse full of parts could spontaneously assemble itself into a 747.
(Sorry, the OP in the other thread was saying inflation when he meant expansion.) I can’t tell you if there’s any specific evidence for inflation. I can tell you that it’s part of the current BBT model based on our observations, but that’s about as much as I know.
There really aren’t any.
Intelligent design isn’t a scientific theory. It doesn’t offer any kind of model, it includes no data, it makes no predictions. It begins and ends with the belief “God did this.” It doesn’t belong in a science textbook. You can believe what you want, but don’t expect scientists to treat it like science. It isn’t. If you want to create a serious ID model, please go for it - you’ll be the first. If not, please don’t advocate spreading confusion to children.
Good. They can save that for religion classes.
Scientists aren’t looking to prove or disprove ID - by definition they can’t because they aren’t scientific theories, they’re just faith. You can interpret the facts how you like, but intelligent design doesn’t belong in a science textbook, and neither does your opinion.
So what?
The problem is with how textbooks are written. My wife wrote part of a high school biology text, and she was given a long list of concepts which had to be mentioned to meet the guidelines of the various states, and a very small number of words to do it in, to keep the cost down and to make room for all the damn pictures. Nuance and transitions had to be sacrificed. The kind of language you are looking for might be find in papers on new concepts, but in a high school text there isn’t room and it would confuse most of the students anyway. In any case, at this point there is enough evidence that everyone treats the BB as a fact, but if evidence against it ever shows up, opinions will change quickly.
If you read Brian Greene’s books on string theory, he is always saying how it needs to be experimentally confirmed. Multiverses are just a concept - I’m not sure they’ve worked their way up to hypothesis yet.
You should have sent her to a better school, then.
I find that hard to believe, though. Which text books were these?
What the hell have they to do with evidence for the big bang, or with dark energy?
You’re now arguing against the Big Bang by referencing other, completely unconnected, hypotheses. Moreover, hypotheses which scientists strenuously and repeatedly point out are only hypotheses.
jon,
i read this whole thread, but i’m confused on a few things:
- what are you debating against your christian friend? are you pro BBT and he’s pro creationism?
- do you find the BBT to be unlikely or otherwise a tough pill to swallow?
- do you believe in a creationism universe?
- does the BBT and a creator-God conflict each other? do they have to be mutually exclusive of each other? (note: not ‘God’ in the judeo-christian sense, just “higher power/creator”)
my unsolicited two sense (get it? i only have two): if i read all this correctly, it seems you cannot reconcile God existing and the conflict of modern theories of reality.
this of course is narrow minded.
my personal stance–and it’s personal, so i’d never seek to impart this on anyone. it’s simply my mechanism to understand reality–is that everything makes just a little too much sense for there not to have been a pre-requisite design. i cannot back that up with any empirical evidence nor do i need to–i’m not here to convince anything to anyone. i will say i didn’t arrive at this by any faith-based process, tho. it is founded in logic insomuch as i can be “logical”–i’m not all that smart, afterall.
it all started with me misunderstanding Spinoza’s assertion of a “perfect reality.” i interpreted that to mean reality is perfect insomuch as it works. it’s not chaos. there’s order. human babies come from humans, they don’t hatch from eggs, blink into existence or rain from clouds.
this doesn’t seem to actually be what Spinoza meant.
we are governed by process and order, and it keeps things from being chaos.
because of that, everything is pretty much able to be evaluated and tested via a scientific method.
which is wonderful.
so from where i’m standing, if there is a creator “it” would be natural–not supernatural–and thus would someday be nothing more than a scientific theory or suposition.
maybe the theory of everything will pan out. or maybe God is something in quantum mechanics. or maybe God is the BBT, or whatever else. in a judeo-christian sense, their version of “God” would really conflict with the order of existence. a God who can intervene or meddle in reality would create ripples that would amplify outward, affecting more things than we can imagine, and it would at some point create a bit of chaos.
every miracle i’ve heard of either 1. had no implications outside the moment and people involved. that is to say, it’s inarguable as much as it’s temporally meaningless. my father was in a traumatic accident and a “doctor” materialized to tell him exactly what was wrong and exactly why everything was going to be ok. that doctor didn’t exist–it was either a hallucination, a mis-memory, or as he calls it “a miracle” that doesn’t affect anything except his level of stress in that exact moment. either way, who cares? it essentially affects nothing. i have a friend who was in a very bad roll-over car accident in a convertable. a woman manifested instantlly to hold her hand while she waited for the abulance. ostensibly, the woman never existed. again, who cares? am i saying angels are real? not even almost. but if you can self-create such comforting anomalies and they don’t affect anything on an existential scale, i’m certainly not going to waste time calling bullshit. to the contrary, i’m quite happy we have such anomalies.
2. every other type of temporally consequential ‘miracle’ have a natural explanation. most “miracles” are simply improbabilities, but usually no real statistical analysis is applied. people just think “wow that’s unlikely” and chalk it up to miracles. flipping a coin and getting heads right when you need it isn’t a miracle, it’s a thing that totally can happen in the realm of reality flipping a coin and it falling to he ground as a new car when yours is shot would be a total miracle.
at any rate, regardless of the low odds, it was a natural occurrence. i’d really reserve the term “miracle” to be something falling outside parameters of reality. so far, there’s not been well documented, cross reviewed miracle, not one scrutinized (and thus perplexing) science. cancer going away in a patient who really wanted to get rid of his cancer is fortuitous, not miraculous.
this leads me to believe that if there’s a God, he’s not out meddling in significant ways.
nothing logical indicates He could.
on the other hand, i, just ME as a feeble artistic minded dilettante, cannot grasp the concept of the golden mean, mathematics, or the human circulatory system without having to default to a purposeful and intentional reality.
i don’t know what God is–energy, or a particle, or simply “step 1” in the big bang. all i know is you extrapolate backwards and you get to a point where you have to make a leap of faith and believe in one thing or the other, because we can only delineate backwards so far before evidence is lost and theories kick in. for me, order and “a reason” is how i can relax and not spend every waking second obsessed with “why.”
what created that creator? impossible to say until we figure out what that creator even IS. which, again, i believe will happen if said creator is real.
so. i’m a deist.
i’m a deist and it affects nothing and no one but me. i’m a deist for the same reason my dad thinks that doctor showing up was a miracle: it just helps me feel better.
Gosh, you sure are honest.
I may not agree with you, but I have to admire your guts.