Back to Home

God & Science 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 | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Time And Life Is/is Not Coincidence

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by phil.o.sofir on October 7, 1999 02:31:18 UTC

: Tenacious: : Again, since my understanding of physics is rather limited, I must use examples of Biology. You insist that nature has created no : error. But through the course of evolution, certainly there's error. A major point in the theory of evolution is Variation. That is, : the more varied a species is, the more likely it is to survive. Thus, nature has surely experimented with thousands of possibilities : and has produced many screw ups, before humans popped up. The errors, simply vanished into oblivion because they were not successful enough to pass on their genes. Much error exists in nature. The way I perceive the world, randomness produces order and error alike.

: Greg: : As I explained before, the error in Evolution provides for the improvement of species, and the fact that only successful variations survive demonstates that it is not really error at all, but simply Nature's Way of exploring all the possibilities, so as to provide the most viable life form for the myriad variety of environmental conditions found here on earth, and throughout the Universe.

: Tenacious: : Futhermore, it is logically impossible that God could have produced All things. I say this because at least 2 things could not be created, the way I understand them. Now, an event proceedes it's cause IN time. The creation of time would be an event. But isn't time necessary for any event to occur (since an cause precedes its event in time). The creation of time would have to be an event outside of time, which doesn't make logical sense. I think, that it's a possibility that time has always existed. : Second, the laws of causality also could not be created. This law is simply the cause and effect relationship we observe in the physical world. Some things directly cause others to occur. God could not create this kind of order because such an event would be a cause in its self.

: Greg: : Time, as we understand it today, as a dimension in and of itself, came into existence with the Big-Bang. Its measure is dependant upon the proximity to an object of mass or upon acceleration in relation to the Speed of Light. The idea of Before the Big-Bang is a subjective view that logically must exist, but is not verifiable in objective reality, and I do believe you are the one who thought to approve of everything in accord with objective reality. : : As to cause and effect, everything in the Universe evolved upon the foundation provided by the creation of the first four laws of physics in the first second of the Big-Bang. So outside of the initiation of the Big-Bang itself, God only had to Create four laws of physics during one second of time, in order for all the universe to have evolved just the way it has. I do not see this as an effect which is a cause unto itself. Also, since the Law of Gravity was the first of the Laws of Physics to be Created, it is indicative of Intelligent design in that since it is the weakest of all the Laws of Physics, but the one which will ultimately contain the expansion of the Big-Bang. This allows for the utmost possible expansion to occur before it is contained, allowing for the utmost possibility for the Creation of New Life. That's an awfully convienient coincidence to occur by random chance in the first second of Creation!

***Time, the essence of measurment by man, is in fact meaningless except as a convenient tool for squeezing logic out of our surrondings, just like mathematics. Its a good thing for us, but should be seen as a useful idea and not reality. We live our lives today within the fastpace of time, when in actuallity, it is nothing more than getting as many things done (many unnecissary) over the prediction of the next reality (present). We can "see" the effects of the past, but not the past itself, we can "predict" many events in the future, but cannot "see" the future itself, thus it is my proposition that there is no time, but rather only a changing present (reality) which by being able to "see" effects gives us the illusion of "time passing". Reality is an ever changing present The equation which is supposed to "prove" time is another misunderstanding The light speed in a rocket ship anology is in actuallity only a distancing from the effect of change in the present, thus seeming to create differing speeds of time. And it is all based on our aging process which is directly rooted in "concepts" of time. As far as life is concerned, it seems as if there is a conception that life IS THE main purpose of the universe, and only then do you apply that it is expanding as long as possible "for Life". This coincidence is a bias of this belief that life is the "goal" or purpose of the universe, thus supposing that it is intelligently designed, and thus supposing that such a designer could only have been a god............... We are here, it is present, awareness is neat...

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 1994-2019 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