Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God


Recommended Posts

Udedenkz

...in monotheism like Christianity, there's no reincarnation and no second chance...

They did teach it though in the old days.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vincent

I don't believe the big bang was proven to be anything other than a stab in the dark.

This statement of your's is a stab in the dark, mother nature, including observational and measurable evidence says otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
argonite

Time (spacetime) began when the universe began. Time depends on spatial reference frames, so if there is absolute nothing then there is no time.

Thus the universe has "always existed" for as long as the word "always" has had meaning.

You cannot go before the moment of inception, since negative time doesn't exist.

FAQ:

Was the universe created? No, creation is an event that implies a state of before and after, and there is simply no "before."

Was it always there then? Yes, if you define "always" as 13.7 billion years.

What about before that point? Unanswerable, there was no such thing as the concept of "before", 13.7 billion years ago.

So there was nothing? I'd be more inclined to say everything was "undefined," but don't hold me to that.

Why do you avoid the question? This is not avoiding the question. Questions about creation simply don't make sense logically.

HAH! So logic is a human construct that cannot define God-like behaviour! That's not a question. Next please.

Logically, the matter is settled. Anything before the Big Bang is veering into philosophy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
vincent

Time (spacetime) began when the universe began. Time depends on spatial reference frames, so if there is absolute nothing then there is no time.

Thus the universe has "always existed" for as long as the word "always" has had meaning.

You cannot go before the moment of inception, since negative time doesn't exist.

FAQ:

Was the universe created? No, creation is an event that implies a state of before and after, and there is simply no "before."

Was it always there then? Yes, if you define "always" as 13.7 billion years.

What about before that point? Unanswerable, there was no such thing as the concept of "before", 13.7 billion years ago.

So there was nothing? I'd be more inclined to say everything was "undefined," but don't hold me to that.

Why do you avoid the question? This is not avoiding the question. Questions about creation simply don't make sense logically.

HAH! So logic is a human construct that cannot define God-like behaviour! That's not a question. Next please.

Logically, the matter is settled. Anything before the Big Bang is veering into philosophy.

Cosmology FAQ

Link to post
Share on other sites
morphen
... The argument goes like this:

`I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'

`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'

`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly disappears in a puff of logic.....

http://www.whysanity.net/monos/hikers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Eric

Please keep theological discussions in the Official Religion Thread.

I realize this does touch on it, but let's keep the discussion related to the news article. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
jakem1

That's the kind of attitude that promotes extremism when you think about it. I could tell you that being an atheist is barbaric, see what I did there?

over debating only hurts it never helps, so why not be tolerant and respectful of what others believe in.

This is the most astonishingly stupid comment I have ever seen and yet you've summed up religion in a few poorly chosen words. Stay stupid and believe in god. Why think or question in case you discover the truth. Ignorance is bliss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solid Knight

This statement of your's is a stab in the dark, mother nature, including observational and measurable evidence says otherwise.

Yeah because they were able to measure the conditions prior to the Big Bang. But here's some food for thought: we are currently limited in our ability to observe and measure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mudslag

Yeah because they were able to measure the conditions prior to the Big Bang. But here's some food for thought: we are currently limited in our ability to observe and measure.

currently being the key word. More food for though is if the idea that black holes creates new universes, the there are new ones popping up all the time. So then it wouldnt be creating something from nothing. Just a thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BoredBozirini

You people need to realize the fact that Stephen Hawkings is the closest thing to what you call a "god". Whatever he says is true. The sooner you accept it, the faster you enjoy life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solid Knight

currently being the key word. More food for though is if the idea that black holes creates new universes, the there are new ones popping up all the time. So then it wouldnt be creating something from nothing. Just a thought.

There's a variety of possibilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustGeorge

I can see/understand how some people think the universe happened without devine intervention and also the side of those that do believe in intelligent design. My opinion is that this universe coming into existence without a creator is about as likely as finding a car parked on the polar ice cap on Mars. Everything that makes up an automobile has a purpose, put there by its creator. The radiator cools the engine, the brakes stop the vehicle, the engine makes the vehicle go....etc. If you found a car on another planet, you would immediately come to the conclusion that someone created it because of how its made. When I look at the universe and everything in it, including us, I apply the same logic. Everything seems to have a specific purpose or role to play. Not having proof of God's existence does not disprove his existence, again in my opinion.

On the other side, one could argue that at some point, something had to come from nothing and if God just is because he is, then why could'nt everything else just have come into existence the same way? It really boggles my mind trying to wrap my head around the concept of something just coming to be which is where faith comes into play. I simply do not have the mental capacity or the information required to process such an event. We're all pretty young as far as universe goes and I don't expect any of us will be alive when this is all figured out.

Bottom line: Believe what you wish, but don't bash someone else for having a belief thats different than yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

Bottom line: Believe what you wish, but don't bash someone else for having a belief thats different than yours.

Yeah, if everyone would just do this one thing the world would be a much calmer place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
guru

In this context it would be the absence of something.

in than case.. you have virtual particles and energy being morphing into each other all the time

Vacuum energy is an underlying background energy that exists in space even when devoid of matter (known as free space). The vacuum energy is deduced from the concept of virtual particles, which are themselves derived from the energy-time uncertainty principle. Its effects can be observed in various phenomena (such as spontaneous emission, the Casimir effect, the van der Waals bonds, or the Lamb shift), and it is thought to have consequences for the behavior of the Universe on cosmological scales. The energy of a cubic centimeter of empty space has been calculated to be one trillionth of an erg [1], based on the upper limit of the cosmological constant. However, in both Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) and Stochastic Electrodynamics (SED), consistency with the requirement of Lorentz invariance and with the magnitude of the Planck Constant leads to the much larger figure of 10107 Joules per cubic centimeter or 10113 Joules per cubic meter.[3][4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy

if you had said, <anything - not even space and time> then i wouldn't know. but then you also hit a limitation with language, you cant "create" if there is no space or time for it to be created :/

speaking of language limitations, since Math dies with whenever inifinity / /0 encountered could it mean Physics will never be able to explain few things

I don't believe the big bang was proven to be anything other than a stab in the dark.

There's more evidence for Big Bang than "God created it" theory. I'd say God is a stab in the dark and placeholder for whatever science cant explain in getdate().

Link to post
Share on other sites
wellofsouls

My opinion is that this universe coming into existence without a creator is about as likely as finding a car parked on the polar ice cap on Mars. Everything that makes up an automobile has a purpose, put there by its creator. The radiator cools the engine, the brakes stop the vehicle, the engine makes the vehicle go....etc. If you found a car on another planet, you would immediately come to the conclusion that someone created it because of how its made. When I look at the universe and everything in it, including us, I apply the same logic. Everything seems to have a specific purpose or role to play. Not having proof of God's existence does not disprove his existence, again in my opinion.

the polar ice cap on Mars is quite a small place compared to the universe. given enough infinite large space and enough infinite long time, there is a chance that even pure random particle movements can spontaneously form a car at SOME time in SOME place, you just need gazillions upon gazillions of years of time with gazillions upon gazillions of lightyears of space for that chance to become more than negligible.

But then with the current size and age of our universe, the likelihood of SOME form of life spontaneously forms in SOME place in our universe by pure random chance is actually quite high. We just happen to evolve from one such simple lifeform (a carbon-based one at that) and planet Earth happens to be one such place.

On another note, on Mars, there's a region called Cydonia where there's a hill formation that looks like a human face, and that's formed out of pure randomness, now the chance of that happening is also infinitely small, but it happened (unless you think the Cydonia Face was carved by some ancient human astronauts, or God, intentionally).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kirkburn

Bottom line: Believe what you wish, but don't bash someone else for having a belief thats different than yours.

A noble sentiment, but not one that really always makes sense. Especially after that belief is announced on a public forum.

If I have a friend that believes unicorns created calculators, and that leaving calculators in people's beds will save them from an eternity of gorilla hell ... I think that's a belief that deserves to be bashed. I think you justifiably could go as far as to call the friend a fool, though it would be kinder to try and reason with him and point out what a silly set of beliefs that is.

Not all beliefs are created equally. Unfortunately, most silly religious beliefs (though not all) have become culturally taboo to question. If there was a whole religion of Calculator Unicorn people, it would suddenly become rude and inappropriate to question that belief. You'd get accused of being mean or insensitive for pointing out to individual members that they're silly to believe that, since they're part of a greater system. Personal accountability suddenly gets thrown out the window for religion.

So: sure don't randomly insult people and religions, but its not exactly an insult if you back it up with justification. ("You're a fool" vs "You're a fool for believing something so obviously false, because...")

Link to post
Share on other sites
guru

Yeah, if everyone would just do this one thing the world would be a much calmer place.

Respect for each others opinions depends on the views being expressed. I'm sure you wouldn't respect Commies,Nazi's.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustGeorge

the polar ice cap on Mars is quite a small place compared to the universe. given enough infinite large space and enough infinite long time, there is a chance that even pure random particle movements can spontaneously form a car at SOME time in SOME place, you just need gazillions upon gazillions of years of time with gazillions upon gazillions of lightyears of space for that chance to become more than negligible.

But then with the current size and age of our universe, the likelihood of SOME form of life spontaneously forms in SOME place in our universe by pure random chance is actually quite high. We just happen to evolve from one such simple lifeform (a carbon-based one at that) and planet Earth happens to be one such place.

On another note, on Mars, there's a region called Cydonia where there's a hill formation that looks like a human face, and that's formed out of pure randomness, now the chance of that happening is also infinitely small, but it happened (unless you think the Cydonia Face was carved by some ancient human astronauts, or God, intentionally).

No way a car is going to form radomly no matter how many gazillion years and particles you have in the mix. Your're basically saying that everything we've invented over the course of our existence would've been made anyway due to the forces of the universe.

A noble sentiment, but not one that really always makes sense. Especially after that belief is announced on a public forum.

If I have a friend that believes unicorns created calculators, and that leaving calculators in people's beds will save them from an eternity of gorilla hell ... I think that's a belief that deserves to be bashed. I think you justifiably could go as far as to call the friend a fool, though it would be kinder to try and reason with him and point out what a silly set of beliefs that is.

Not all beliefs are created equally. Unfortunately, most silly religious beliefs (though not all) have become culturally taboo to question. If there was a whole religion of Calculator Unicorn people, it would suddenly become rude and inappropriate to question that belief. You'd get accused of being mean or insensitive for pointing out to individual members that they're silly to believe that, since they're part of a greater system. Personal accountability suddenly gets thrown out the window for religion.

So: sure don't randomly insult people and religions, but its not exactly an insult if you back it up with justification. ("You're a fool" vs "You're a fool for believing something so obviously false, because...")

You have every right to question someone's beliefs if you're approached and asked to join them in that belief. Afterall, you're being asked to alter your way of thinking and ultimately your lifestyle. Something that important demands scrutiny. You however do not have the right to insult, bash, provoke, attack, etc. someone for believing in something you don not. If its idiocy, walk away from it, period.

Respect for each others opinions depends on the views being expressed. I'm sure you wouldn't respect Commies,Nazi's.....

I'm pretty sure that not respecting the views of commies, Nazis is plain common sense....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solid Knight

There's more evidence for Big Bang than "God created it" theory. I'd say God is a stab in the dark and placeholder for whatever science cant explain in getdate().

I had no intentions of implying that "God did it".

Link to post
Share on other sites
guru

I had no intentions of implying that "God did it".

my apologies then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LoveThePenguin

To all those that argue that god created the universe: which god? Gaia and uranus according to the greeks? Juppiter for the romans? Christ for the christians? Allah for the muslims? Shiva for the indians? Thor for the scandinavians? All are equally preposterous, and are born out of ignorance. What makes the christian god any more valid than say pallas athene? Just because we don't understand the origin of matter, energy, life, gravity etc, it doesn't mean there is some kind of supernatural explanation, for history has proven there is always a rational explanation for everything, and it's only a matter (excuse the pun) of time before we discover it.

That being said, I disagree with a lot of hawking's and modern physics' theories and conclusions, most of which are based on a house of cards. For instance, the observable force gravity has yet to be defined. What is it? where does it come from? does it not break our law of thermodynamics that states energy can not be created or destroyed, but merely transferred? Neither hawking nor physics understand it. They merely manipulate equations with arbitrary constants which still fail to describe the quantum.

I firmly believe einstein's mathematics and most of those in use today are completely wrong. We simply don't have a language with the necessary complexity to describe it. Ours are far too simplistic, and that is the problem with mathematics, it encourages simplification where neither the problem nor the solution is simple. A good example of this is drake's equation, which calculates the probability of other intelligent life existing in the universe. It's far to simplistic and fails to account for many known and probably vastly more unknown variables. I believe that the conditions and the probabilities for the creation of life are so incredibly rare that we are just a freak occurrence, and that a billion billion universes could have been created without such a mathematical anomaly. Perhaps I'm alone in this, but I hear few others who are willing to admit such a possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
guru

That being said, I disagree with a lot of hawking's and modern physics' theories and conclusions, most of which are based on a house of cards. For instance, the observable force gravity has yet to be defined. What is it? where does it come from? does it not break our law of thermodynamics that states energy can not be created or destroyed, but merely transferred? Neither hawking nor physics understand it. They merely manipulate equations with arbitrary constants which still fail to describe the quantum.

I firmly believe einstein's mathematics and most of those in use today are completely wrong. We simply don't have a language with the necessary complexity to describe it. Ours are far too simplistic, and that is the problem with mathematics, it encourages simplification where neither the problem nor the solution is simple. A good example of this is drake's equation, which calculates the probability of other intelligent life existing in the universe. It's far to simplistic and fails to account for many known and probably vastly more unknown variables. I believe that the conditions and the probabilities for the creation of life are so incredibly rare that we are just a freak occurrence, and that a billion billion universes could have been created without such a mathematical anomaly. Perhaps I'm alone in this, but I hear few others who are willing to admit such a possibility.

The current equations do describe and predict observable phenomenon. It isn't unified Theory yet. but that doesn't mean current set of theories are incorrect in the context they are applied in. Just like Newton's equations are perfectly valid for most applications on earth. sure they'll fail if you take them to quantum levels (chips or planetary scale) but still valid for many cases. The example and you give - drakes equation isn't really valid as they delve into inexact part of "life". if you were to remove those parts and limit it to earth like planets , it might well be right or atleast very good starting point for refine the number.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wellofsouls

No way a car is going to form radomly no matter how many gazillion years and particles you have in the mix. Your're basically saying that everything we've invented over the course of our existence would've been made anyway due to the forces of the universe.

no, you are quite wrong here, our universe is not that old, and NOT infinite. As far as we currently understand, it's at most only around a dozen billion years old, and similarly around a dozen billion light years large. Far far FAR less than gazillions upon gazillions of years and gazillions upon gazillions of lightyears of space needed to make a spontaneously formed car a possibility. You obviously lack any knowledge regarding the age and size of our universe, and basic statistics. For example, the chance of all molecules in a cubic meter space, in their completely random movements, all spontaneously move in a certain way, to form a certain object, is around 1/10^50, and yes that's a practically negligible chance, but mathematically speaking, it is NOT zero, and given enough time and enough space, you may well find it happening at some time, some place.

On the other hand, if you make the requirement less strict, then you'll find the chance going higher considerably. For example, you may not be able to find a spontaneously formed car due to the relatively young age and small size of our universe, if you just want an appearance of a car, you may very well find some rocks on our Earth to have been carved into the likeness of a car by the random natural forces of our planet. Sure that's far from a full functional, working car, but heck the chance of random winds and storms carving rocks into the likeness of a car is still quite small, yet the age and size of our (cosmically speaking very young and very tiny) planet Earth is obviously enough for that to actually happen already.

Saying "No way a car is going to form radomly" just shows you don't know the meaning of the word "random", nor basic maths. Everything has a chance, but usually we just count chances as small as 1/10^50 as practically zero.

And semantically speaking, we humans are part of the forces of the universe, so yes everything we humans made ARE due to the forces of the universe. I just don't understand the sentiments that suggest we humans as not part of the universe, we are a part of the universe, we are a part of nature, we are a part of the lifeforms on Earth, and we are a species belonging to the Animal Kingdom.

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Class: Mammalia

Order: Primates

Family: Hominidae

Subfamily: Homininae

Tribe: Hominini

Genus: Homo

Species: H. sapiens

No we are not anything that special or separate from the universe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.