Could the Universe have Created Itself?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linusthe2nd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
This is not fair because atheists have been working on developing a rationale for values and meaning in life while at the same time coming to terms with their atheist views.
Click to expand...
Why should atheists have to come to terms with their atheistic views? If it is, as they claim, the natural, logical state of being, then why would they have to try to ‘come to terms’ with it?

And why, if we are all merely the result of chance events involving chemicals should atheists be developing any rationale for values of meaning in life? Surely if we are all simply the result of chemical reactions then there is no meaning to life, and values are then nothing more than artificially created codes of conduct to be broken whenever deemed necessary?
 
Peter_Plato said:
If by “universe” you mean “space-time, matter and energy,” then it seems pretty clear THAT “universe” had a beginning and didn’t “always exist.”
Click to expand...
It is not clear to Penrose who has been lecturing and writing on the theory of a cyclical universe.
 
Tomdstone said:
The point is that modeling a series of data points by curve fitting may appear to show design where there really is none.
Click to expand...
By saying “may” you also leave open the possibility of “may not.” So the appearance of design “may” indicate the reality of design.

You see, once again you have used philosophy, rather than science, to stretch your view. :rolleyes:
 
Tomdstone said:
It is not clear to Penrose who has been lecturing and writing on the theory of a cyclical universe.
Click to expand...
I’ll admit that I haven’t read these theories in detail, but seeing that we are dealing with an infinite time span. it seems quite possible that the universe has been re-created several times.
 
Brendan_64 said:
Why should atheists have to come to terms with their atheistic views? If it is, as they claim, the natural, logical state of being, then why would they have to try to ‘come to terms’ with it?

And why, if we are all merely the result of chance events involving chemicals should atheists be developing any rationale for values of meaning in life? Surely if we are all simply the result of chemical reactions then there is no meaning to life, and values are then nothing more than artificially created codes of conduct to be broken whenever deemed necessary?
Click to expand...
Deists too. What I am about to say is truly just an observation, but I think that religious people fear disorder and must have “artificially created codes of conduct.” Some of these codes are almost universally accepted (Prohibition against murder), while other have far less support.
Left to itself, the universe would have no such codes because they would serve no purpose… It is only man and whatever intelligent life may be out there that needs some order beyond the natural.
 
oldcelt said:
I’ll admit that I haven’t read these theories in detail, but seeing that we are dealing with an infinite time span. it seems quite possible that the universe has been re-created several times.
Click to expand...
Let’s suppose that the cyclical view of this universe is false and that the BB was the beginning of the universe. Catholics, while still believing in God, recognize a whole lot of events as natural events not due to divine intervention, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, tornados, etc. I suppose that the BB could be described as a completely natural event, not necessitating direct divine intervention, if, for example, you assume a multiverse or a large possibly infinite number of parallel universes. This is so, because you could have a situation where a chaotic quantum fluctuation in a parallel universe could give birth to a BB and thus a new universe and this event would be due to some naturally occurring instability in a localised area of that other parallel universe.
Why would it be impossible for a multiverse or system of parallel universes to have existed eternally backward in time? Causality does apply to many areas in our solar system, but not to all, such as for example, the description of some quantum effects. What allows us to assume that causality is a universal principle that would apply to the multiverse as a whole, if in fact it is not appropriate to use causality to explain some earthly effects?
There still remains the question of consciousness and how it arose as part of the universe. I don’t see a convincing and detailed explanation of this on purely materialistic, physical grounds. Biologists often cite evolution as the answer, which, of course, does apply in a whole lot of instances. But what is the mechanism, either physical or biological which is responsible for consciousness?
 
Tomdstone said:
It is not clear to Penrose who has been lecturing and writing on the theory of a cyclical universe.
Click to expand...
You seem to be offering what Penrose says as a fact, whereas it is pure speculation. It is a fact that the Big Bang happened. It is not a fact that the Big Bang followed a previous Big Crunch.

Not only are his speculations controversial, by no means has he enlisted the widespread support of the cosmological community.

physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/nov/19/penrose-claims-to-have-glimpsed-universe-before-big-bang
 
oldcelt said:
Deists too. What I am about to say is truly just an observation, but I think that religious people fear disorder and must have “artificially created codes of conduct.” Some of these codes are almost universally accepted (Prohibition against murder), while other have far less support.
Left to itself, the universe would have no such codes because they would serve no purpose… It is only man and whatever intelligent life may be out there that needs some order beyond the natural.
Click to expand...
Only irreligious people fear there might be an ordered universe that serves some kind of divine purpose. That is why atheists (many of them) so angrily oppose religion. Religion frustrates the sense of purposelessness that they prefer, and the freedom they think they gain to design their own universe. Irreligious people fear “artificially created codes of conduct,” not because they are artificial, but because they might be true. In point of fact, the only artificially created codes of conduct are those created arbitrarily and capriciously by those who believe there is no absolute system of morality to which they must conform.
 
Tomdstone said:
Let’s suppose that the cyclical view of this universe is false and that the BB was the beginning of the universe. Catholics, while still believing in God, recognize a whole lot of events as natural events not due to divine intervention, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, tornados, etc. I suppose that the BB could be described as a completely natural event, not necessitating direct divine intervention, if, for example, you assume a multiverse or a large possibly infinite number of parallel universes. This is so, because you could have a situation where a chaotic quantum fluctuation in a parallel universe could give birth to a BB and thus a new universe and this event would be due to some naturally occurring instability in a localised area of that other parallel universe.
Why would it be impossible for a multiverse or system of parallel universes to have existed eternally backward in time? Causality does apply to many areas in our solar system, but not to all, such as for example, the description of some quantum effects. What allows us to assume that causality is a universal principle that would apply to the multiverse as a whole, if in fact it is not appropriate to use causality to explain some earthly effects?
There still remains the question of consciousness and how it arose as part of the universe. I don’t see a convincing and detailed explanation of this on purely materialistic, physical grounds. Biologists often cite evolution as the answer, which, of course, does apply in a whole lot of instances. But what is the mechanism, either physical or biological which is responsible for consciousness?
Click to expand...
I think personal identity is another inexplicable question, unless you mean by “consciousness” the loci of identity from which “consciousness of” seems to arise. Why would “I” as the subject of experience exist in this body at this time and place? Why not 500 years ago in Northern Africa or 200 years ago in Peru?

The perspective from which the natural order is observed needs to be explained just as much as the natural order that is there to be observed. The falsifiability criterion certainly doesn’t apply to “subjectivity” proper since I need to subjectively experience anything before I can begin to assess its meaning and importance. The things that currently exist in my field of consciousness are not falsifiable and neither is my consciousness proper. Both just ARE and undeniably so.

The important question is, “What does it all mean or signify?” NOT whether it is falsifiable or quantifiable. I would only ask about the latter if and when I have a mind to control or use what I am conscious of, but certainly that doesn’t give me the whole story about reality and what might be the reason “I” exist within it. Some might ignore that question completely, but that may turn out to be a gross error on their part.

Neither does the fact that it just always existed (cyclical model or not) answer the question of why or what the significance of it all actually is. Such an answer just seems to rationalize ignoring the question completely rather than honestly dealing with it.
 
Tomdstone said:
What will we do in heaven? Will we be able to work out and discover something new, or will everything be known to us and then what?
Click to expand...
First of all we will be absolutely happy and content at all times and all times we will be aware of God’s consoling presence and communication. And we will have an entire eternity to explore the universe, to get to know all the chiors of Angels and our fellow Saints. And every bit of knowledge available to the human intellect will be available to us. And there will be no sadness, no pain, no disappointments.

All the knowledge we do not have now will be new to us.

Linus2nd
 
First, this was the most amazing thread I’ve ever read anywhere in my somewhat short life so much respect to everyone who threw in their opinions so far.

Second, Peter Plato is a genius and I want him to teach me all he knows 🙂

My point, which kinda connects to oreoracle and the comments about heaven. You said before that some people are in such a place to take their own lives. So here’s an opinion coming from 1 of them. Skipping to the point without getting into the background, I suffered from anxiety attacks, clinical depression, and was suicidal to the point I was taken outta work for my issues. No way am I sayin I was worse off than anyone else but safe to say I was in a dark place. What saved me was my 3 yr old son who i couldnt think of any name for but Christian (no link to me being a christian, but later this struck me as odd coincidence) the love of family and friends and my refound belief and faith in Jesus. When all these came together and I allowed it to, it was a feeling running through my entire body and soul as I’ve never felt before. It’s a feeling of being loved that I’ll never experience from anyone on earth.

Prior to all this I didn’t set foot in a church for 16/17 years, gave up on faith and pretty much didn’t care about it in the least. Now you can say there’s no proof cuz you’ve never experienced it or see no “scientific” evidence. The evidence is inside me, and inside majority of the people posting on these boards, it’s also knocking on your chest, all you have to do is invite him in again.

I’d imagine heaven as feeling love in it’s most intense and purest form radiating through your body, understanding all you can ever ask and watching over the loved ones left behind until you greet them at the gates.

That’s just my tale, take it for what its worth but great thread again…love and respect you all
 
AntB said:
First, this was the most amazing thread I’ve ever read anywhere in my somewhat short life so much respect to everyone who threw in their opinions so far.

Second, Peter Plato is a genius and I want him to teach me all he knows 🙂

My point, which kinda connects to oreoracle and the comments about heaven. You said before that some people are in such a place to take their own lives. So here’s an opinion coming from 1 of them. Skipping to the point without getting into the background, I suffered from anxiety attacks, clinical depression, and was suicidal to the point I was taken outta work for my issues. No way am I sayin I was worse off than anyone else but safe to say I was in a dark place. What saved me was my 3 yr old son who i couldnt think of any name for but Christian (no link to me being a christian, but later this struck me as odd coincidence) the love of family and friends and my refound belief and faith in Jesus. When all these came together and I allowed it to, it was a feeling running through my entire body and soul as I’ve never felt before. It’s a feeling of being loved that I’ll never experience from anyone on earth.

Prior to all this I didn’t set foot in a church for 16/17 years, gave up on faith and pretty much didn’t care about it in the least. Now you can say there’s no proof cuz you’ve never experienced it or see no “scientific” evidence. The evidence is inside me, and inside majority of the people posting on these boards, it’s also knocking on your chest, all you have to do is invite him in again.

I’d imagine heaven as feeling love in it’s most intense and purest form radiating through your body, understanding all you can ever ask and watching over the loved ones left behind until you greet them at the gates.

That’s just my tale, take it for what its worth but great thread again…love and respect you all
Click to expand...
👋 Beautiful story!
 
oldcelt said:
I’ll admit that I haven’t read these theories in detail, but seeing that we are dealing with an infinite time span. it seems quite possible that the universe has been re-created several times.
Click to expand...
From your point of view, wouldn’t it be more probable that the universe has been created an infinite number of times? :confused:
 
Oreoracle said:
And there it is, the last resort: “You just don’t believe in God because you’re closeminded!”

If you don’t have any rebuttal then just say so. Respectfully tip your hat and exit the discussion. Don’t try to get the last word by pretending that you’re concerned for my soul. I don’t need anyone’s charity or pity.
Click to expand...
Here, we wish the best for everyone and pray for everyone. I have given you plenty of rebuttle, but you are not listening - you won’t even take the trouble to watch a harmless movie. :tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:

Linus2nd
 
Linusthe2nd said:
Here, we wish the best for everyone and pray for everyone. I have given you plenty of rebuttle, but you are not listening - you won’t even take the trouble to watch a harmless movie. :tiphat::tiphat::tiphat:

Linus2nd
Click to expand...
I watched it Linus…absolutely incredible! So your work want done for nothing ha
 
Tomdstone said:
Here’s an alternative explanation according to which closed timelike curves in the past give rise to various scenarios such as for example an inflating metastable vacuum producing an infinite number of bubble universes. Please see the paper: Can the universe Create itself?
xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/astro-ph/9712344v1.pdf
Click to expand...
Theory and proof are two different things. We have proof of the Big Bang. We do not have proof of “an infinite number of bubble universes.”

So for you science ends there and atheistic philosophy begins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top