Back to Home

Blackholes2 Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes II | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: CREATION

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Joe/">Joe on January 12, 1998 16:53:50 UTC

You are ignoring what I said about the universe not needing a supernatural force to get it started--it is self-generating-- meaning it can happen on its own. Just because something is amazing doesn't mean that it is not a physical process. The reason that our universe has the properties to allow life which is known to us can be described by the Anthropic Principle. Since a near infinite number of other iniverses may also have been created with ours, it is possible that at least one of them would posses the properties necessary to allow life as we know it to develop. It seems fitting that we would only be able to BE in a universe that supports the existance of life. Thankyou for the reassurance about the statement about Hawking, really needed it..... What I mean is that science in general has revealed to us that nature can be explained according to the cause and effect relationships which exists between every natural phenomena, and that these relationships can NOT be broken. Physics does not take "a stab" at explaining the universe, but rather we (as in scientists) are constantly uncovering the physics (as in mathematics) which exists in nature. Since this same physics was happenning in the universe before us, and will continue to occur after us, that shows that physics is inherent in nature, and not an invention of man. I don't know how you figure that singularities are not allowed by the laws of physics. If they weren't, they wouldn't exist. Please do not try to bring up the argument about infinite densities and masses, because General Relativity is a classic theory ie-it does not incoporate quantum mechanics, which by the way, describes singularities beautifully.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins