How Critical Thinkers Lose Their Faith in God

[wolfie_cr]

Please explain to me how you can make something from nothing. I would like to see you or anyone else on this planet can pull it off.

you stated that matter cant be created, all you need is a BUNCH of energy and something like a nuclear reactor (converting energy INTO matter)

you can also take matter and make it "disappear" into energy, of course, the guys in Hiroshima and Nagasaki saw a demostration of this

there, explained

(besides you could go fancy with quantum mechanics if you want , look "quantum mechanics vacuum fluctuation" but I am an engineer not a physicist )

 

[wolfie_cr]

QL, I was just watching the news and they were showing this smart guy http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pastor-suggests-parents-hit-kids-stop-gay-article-1.1071264

(he already retracted his comments but still)

 

[DesertDevil]

you stated that matter cant be created, all you need is a BUNCH of energy and something like a nuclear reactor (converting energy INTO matter)

you can also take matter and make it "disappear" into energy, of course, the guys in Hiroshima and Nagasaki saw a demostration of this

there, explained

(besides you could go fancy with quantum mechanics if you want , look "quantum mechanics vacuum fluctuation" but I am an engineer not a physicist )

Well maybe Im ignorant and my HS science teacher lied to me then...

So, please educate me here.

Post some video proof of this so I know you are not just talking out of your ass. And Im not talking about matter changing form. I am talking about matter being created from absolutely nothing.

 

[DesertDevil]

And also, seperate question.

How can a "bunch of energy" (as you say) be created without something or someone creating it?

 

[DesertDevil]

you can also take matter and make it "disappear" into energy, of course, the guys in Hiroshima and Nagasaki saw a demostration of this

The matter of any human's body (i assume this is what you are referring to) from a nuclear explosion does not jus "disappear" into energy. The matter just changes form. Unless my high school science teacher lied to me....

 

[wolfie_cr]

Well maybe Im ignorant and my HS science teacher lied to me then...

So, please educate me here.

Post some video proof of this so I know you are not just talking out of your ass. And Im not talking about matter changing form. I am talking about matter being created from absolutely nothing.

perhaps you just didnt learn the lesson well



Einstein came up with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence , it shows that you can convert matter into energy and viceversa, this has been experimentally confirmed specifically in nuclear reactions.

You can look at this part from the link I posted, if you have further doubts pay a visit to the physics department of the closest university. Or give them a call, I am sure they will be happy to give a short explanation.

But all of this is ACADEMIC because what follows next is that you say "ok fine you may destroy matter into energy" but you cant create things that were not there before (be that matter or energy)....so SOMEONE "surely" put the energy and mass that we see in the universe. To answer the "where did all this come from" you have to go into even more esoteric parts of physics and for this you need very advanced math that you (nor I) are familiar with, its in essence very technical and not something the layman can say "SHOW ME" and there will be a demonstration of the creation of the Universe (besides the theories are very much in flux)

From the wikipedia article:

A little while later, the first transmutation reactions (such as[12] the Cockcroft-Walton experiment: 7Li + p → 2 4He) verified Einstein's formula to an accuracy of ±0.5%. In 2005, Rainville et al. published a direct test of the energy-equivalence of mass lost in the binding-energy of a neutron to atoms of particular isotopes of silicon and sulfur, by comparing the mass-lost to the energy of the emitted gamma ray associated with the neutron capture. The binding mass-loss agreed with the gamma ray energy to a precision of ±0.00004 %, the most accurate test of E=mc2 to date.[3] The mass–energy equivalence formula was used in the development of the atomic bomb. By measuring the mass of different atomic nuclei and subtracting from that number the total mass of the protons and neutrons as they would weigh separately, one gets the exact binding energy available in an atomic nucleus. This is used to calculate the energy released in any nuclear reaction, as the difference in the total mass of the nuclei that enter and exit the reaction.

 

[wolfie_cr]

And also, seperate question.

How can a "bunch of energy" (as you say) be created without something or someone creating it?

See I already suspected where you were heading, these things are so predictible

Ok so someone created god.....and this someone who created it was created by another one and so , ad infinitum. How can SOMETHING exist without something ELSE creating it (you cant play it both sides, you cant say 'everything needs a creator EXCEPT for THE creator, he/she/it has always been around ...he was not created..he just "IS" '

 

[wolfie_cr]

The matter of any human's body (i assume this is what you are referring to) from a nuclear explosion does not jus "disappear" into energy. The matter just changes form. Unless my high school science teacher lied to me....

No, I am talking about the mass before/after the explosion of the reactants involved in the nuclear reaction.

 

[DesertDevil]

perhaps you just didnt learn the lesson well



Einstein came up with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-energy_equivalence , it shows that you can convert matter into energy and viceversa, this has been experimentally confirmed specifically in nuclear reactions.

You can look at this part from the link I posted, if you have further doubts pay a visit to the physics department of the closest university. Or give them a call, I am sure they will be happy to give a short explanation.

But all of this is ACADEMIC because what follows next is that you say "ok fine you may destroy matter into energy" but you cant create things that were not there before (be that matter or energy)....so SOMEONE "surely" put the energy and mass that we see in the universe. To answer the "where did all this come from" you have to go into even more esoteric parts of physics and for this you need very advanced math that you (nor I) are familiar with, its in essence very technical and not something the layman can say "SHOW ME" and there will be a demonstration of the creation of the Universe (besides the theories are very much in flux)

From the wikipedia article:

A little while later, the first transmutation reactions (such as[12] the Cockcroft-Walton experiment: 7Li + p → 2 4He) verified Einstein's formula to an accuracy of ±0.5%. In 2005, Rainville et al. published a direct test of the energy-equivalence of mass lost in the binding-energy of a neutron to atoms of particular isotopes of silicon and sulfur, by comparing the mass-lost to the energy of the emitted gamma ray associated with the neutron capture. The binding mass-loss agreed with the gamma ray energy to a precision of ±0.00004 %, the most accurate test of E=mc2 to date.[3] The mass–energy equivalence formula was used in the development of the atomic bomb. By measuring the mass of different atomic nuclei and subtracting from that number the total mass of the protons and neutrons as they would weigh separately, one gets the exact binding energy available in an atomic nucleus. This is used to calculate the energy released in any nuclear reaction, as the difference in the total mass of the nuclei that enter and exit the reaction.

Hmmm... Sorry man. I dont think this answers my question. Maybe you are on such a different intellectual plain than me, so I thats why Im missing something.

This explains how matter can be turned into energy. But does it prove that the matter no longer exists? Or did it just change form?

And also, I dont see how any of what you just posted proves how you can make something out of nothing. Excuse my ignorance...

 

[DesertDevil]

See I already suspected where you were heading, these things are so predictible

Ok so someone created god.....and this someone who created it was created by another one and so , ad infinitum. How can SOMETHING exist without something ELSE creating it

Im not talking about God here. Where did this come from? I asked a question. I asked how can a "bunch of energy" be created without someone or someone creating it? So you are saying there is no answer???

 

[wolfie_cr]

Im not talking about God here. Where did this come from? I asked a question. I asked how can a "bunch of energy" be created without someone or someone creating it? So you are saying there is no answer???

There are theories that are very much in flux, are you calling already the nearest physics department so that you get it from the experts? Because I am simply an amateur anyway

Among the theories I have seen are , the universe has always existed wit infinite big bang /crunch , you can read more in here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Speculative_physics_beyond_Big_Bang_theory

So its perfectly possible the Universe has always existed, just because our minds WANT the Universe to conform to what we are used to ("first was this" , "then this then follows this", with a beginning and an end etc) it does NOT have to be that way, in the same fashion that VERY STRANGE THINGS have already been confirmed experimentally (see relativity theory, google it or google "experimental verification of relativity" , same deal with quantum mechanics)

(does it make sense that if you travel very very fast time actually GOES slower for us than for people that are not moving at high speed? NO , it doesnt make any sense because what makes sense is that if I measure 1 second , you will measure the same amount of time, but here comes Einstein with his fancy formulas and later on they verify it experimentally so things that dont make sense to us , mere mortals make perfect sense and become the "new" normal when you talk about conditions totally different than the ones we live in )

Simply put, there is NO GOOD REASON why the universe had to be "created" versus a "it has always existed , fluctuating between these states"

Reality is stranger than fiction.

 

[wolfie_cr]

Bunches of books in amazon about this subject, this era has this advantage, information (both bad and good quality ) is abundant

For example this one

http://www.amazon.com/Time-Loops-Sp...33/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1335982230&sr=8-10

I simply picked that one because of the irony in the title and the reviews, there are many LOW quality books out there that are used to popularize science. I dont endorse the book or reject the book, but it would seem it could have some answer to your questions.

 

[DesertDevil]

Bunches of books in amazon about this subject, this era has this advantage, information (both bad and good quality ) is abundant

For example this one

http://www.amazon.com/Time-Loops-Sp...33/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1335982230&sr=8-10

I simply picked that one because of the irony in the title and the reviews, there are many LOW quality books out there that are used to popularize science. I dont endorse the book or reject the book, but it would seem it could have some answer to your questions.

Well thank you for taking the time to reply to my posts and questions.

And please dont take offense, but Im afraid you did not directly answer any of my questions. And/or disprove anything I have said.

1. I originally made the claim that matter cannot be simply created out of nothing. Matter can change forms, but science has never been able to explain or prove that "something can be made out of nothing". I dont see anything you have posted as evidence to discredit or disprove my claim.

2. You have provided some nice theories. But they are nothing more than theories. And prove nothing.

3. You have failed to answer or prove how energy can be created without something or someone creating it.

 

[DesertDevil]

And my overall point here is that science will NEVER answer every question in this universe.

For anyone to make the claim that Evolution and/or Creationism is 100% fact based on the science of this world is idiotic. Science will never prove or disprove either theory.

So until the day you die, you will never 100% know whether God exists or not. (That is of course unless you believe that a God will someday reveal himself on Earth. But that is besides the point.)

I have a feeling we will all find out when our time is up. (And no. I cant "prove it". Just a hunch) ;-)

 

[festeringZit]

Classic Kalam cosmological argument:

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence; Therefore:
3. The universe has a cause of its existence.

 

[Bjizzle06]

There are theories that are very much in flux, are you calling already the nearest physics department so that you get it from the experts? Because I am simply an amateur anyway

Among the theories I have seen are , the universe has always existed wit infinite big bang /crunch , you can read more in here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Speculative_physics_beyond_Big_Bang_theory

So its perfectly possible the Universe has always existed, just because our minds WANT the Universe to conform to what we are used to ("first was this" , "then this then follows this", with a beginning and an end etc) it does NOT have to be that way, in the same fashion that VERY STRANGE THINGS have already been confirmed experimentally (see relativity theory, google it or google "experimental verification of relativity" , same deal with quantum mechanics)

It's not enough to just list speculative theories and models that postulate infinite regression and say "well see the universe could have been eternal". That proves nothing. There are no mathematically consistent models of the universe that go back to past infinity. If you disagree, I'd love for you to show me one and show me where a consensus of cosmologists endorse it.

Alexander Vilenkin, one of the leading cosmologists in the world (and NOT a theist) said at a conference at Cambridge earlier this year that ALL of the evidence supports the universe having a beginning. His theorem, co-authored by Borde and Guth, shows that any universe that is, on average, at a state of cosmic expansion had to have an absolute beginning.

Are you trying to avoid an absolute beginning of the universe because you don't want to deal with the metaphysical consequences of it?

 

[Mr_Mark]

Most people are not in jail or murder people. Of course there is a % of people who cant control their impulses.

About wars, its precisely groups banding together to improve access to resources , normally under a piece of cloth or a religion.

This was exactly the point I was making. As creatures who evolved, survival of the fittest is our instinct. Then why do so many go against our instinct without any effort?

 

[Mr_Mark]

dont take offense to these questions wolfie, just nice to discuss things of this nature. Usually these types of conversations are pointless because both sides are so convinced, not only that they are 100% right but also that the other person is a complete idiot an 100% wrong, not just about their beliefs but about everything.
Fact is science has many holes in its theories and requires a level of assumption and trust, a trust that what researchers consider facts are facts and there were no mistakes made along the way or interpreting evidence. Believing in a god or many gods requires a level faith as well. Answers dont mean you know everything, questions do not mean you know nothing

 

[HacheMan]

And my overall point here is that science will NEVER answer every question in this universe.

Agreed.. Dead On.... But you won't convince anyone in the field of that... They believe they know it all

 

[festeringZit]

And my overall point here is that science will NEVER answer every question in this universe.

And I'll venture to say that it will NEVER even come close.