The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-06-2016, 07:43 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(28-06-2016 04:41 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 04:29 PM)Doddia Wrote:  How about nobody knows for sure how it all happened and science is only guessing.

To claim that science is only guessing is to fundamentally misunderstand what science is and how it operates.

Quote:Science changes it's mind all the time.

Scientific theories are constantly refined as new and better evidence is brought to light. It provides the best available understanding given what evidence is available at any given time. That's much more useful than an unchanging view based on ancient literature written by people with little understanding of the world.

Quote: I'm not ruling out science but I think that there are places it hasn't been yet.

That is not in question. Scientists, unlike theologians, do not pretend to have all the answers.

I think that fundamental Christians think they have all the answers because they read the Bible as though every word of it is true, but academic theologians are open minded and will freely admit that they don't have all of the answers?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 07:48 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 07:43 AM)Doddia Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 04:41 PM)unfogged Wrote:  To claim that science is only guessing is to fundamentally misunderstand what science is and how it operates.


Scientific theories are constantly refined as new and better evidence is brought to light. It provides the best available understanding given what evidence is available at any given time. That's much more useful than an unchanging view based on ancient literature written by people with little understanding of the world.


That is not in question. Scientists, unlike theologians, do not pretend to have all the answers.

I think that fundamental Christians think they have all the answers because they read the Bible as though every word of it is true, but academic theologians are open minded and will freely admit that they don't have all of the answers?

You think that academic theologians don't think that they know that a god is behind anything that they don't understand? They may admit that they don't have all the details in some cases but they are certain of the ultimate answer.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 08:07 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(28-06-2016 10:06 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 08:02 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The gravitational effects of Dark Energy and Dark Matter have been observed. There is "something" more we don't see. It's affects are observed. We don't know at this point what we will be able to see and study. Who knows ? maybe in the future we will watch baby universes form and grow. Never say never. THAT's one of the lessons of history.

We don't know that. The equations do not balance. So it either the theory is incomplete and needs revision, or there must be more matter in the universe so that the equations balance.
If there is more matter it could be that some part of our universe accelerated away before our portion did. Maybe there have been other Bangs before the one we call the Big Bang. So it is possible that Dark Energy/Matter is really just normal matter, but is too far away and moved faster than the speed of light at the initial formation, so we will never ever be able to detect radiation from it. That is certainly possible.
I tend to think the theory is incomplete and needs revision since we do not really understand gravity. At this point it is pure speculation.

NO. What is wrong is saying "The only data we will ever have is "radiation" that resulted from the Big Bang." We have observable affects. Apparently you know very little about Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/dr-mar...atter.html

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 09:33 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 08:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  NO. What is wrong is saying "The only data we will ever have is "radiation" that resulted from the Big Bang." We have observable affects. Apparently you know very little about Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/dr-mar...atter.html
The radiation is an observable affect. Indirect data only allows inference. We will never have direct data from anything leading up to the Big Bang. We will only be able to infer things, and won't be able to ever prove it unequivocally.

Nobody knows anything about Dark Matter and Dark Energy. They see affects that can't be explained by general relativity. The only way to explain it without altering the theory is to assume there is much more matter in the universe than can be observed, so they cook up the idea of Dark Matter/Energy so that the theory is correct. However, there are other explanations. Given that we don't really understand gravity, I suspect the theory needs revision. Time will tell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 09:40 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 07:48 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 07:43 AM)Doddia Wrote:  I think that fundamental Christians think they have all the answers because they read the Bible as though every word of it is true, but academic theologians are open minded and will freely admit that they don't have all of the answers?

You think that academic theologians don't think that they know that a god is behind anything that they don't understand? They may admit that they don't have all the details in some cases but they are certain of the ultimate answer.

Not the ones I've met while studying Theology. And the ones in many of the books I've read. The good ones acknowledge that they might not be right and address the assumptions of people who don't believe in God. It's an open debate and anyone can have a say, and we should all listen to each other.

One of my Theology tutors didn't believe in God so I asked him why he's a scholar of Theology and he said 'You can be interested in Marxism but that doesn't make you a Marxist'.

I love it when authors attempt to cohere science and the metaphysical! Some authors do it very well, such as Greg Braeden and Michael Talbot. They're pretty hard to argue with. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 10:34 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 09:33 AM)u196533 Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 08:07 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  NO. What is wrong is saying "The only data we will ever have is "radiation" that resulted from the Big Bang." We have observable affects. Apparently you know very little about Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/dr-mar...atter.html

The radiation is an observable affect. Indirect data only allows inference. We will never have direct data from anything leading up to the Big Bang. We will only be able to infer things, and won't be able to ever prove it unequivocally.

Nobody knows anything about Dark Matter and Dark Energy. They see affects that can't be explained by general relativity. The only way to explain it without altering the theory is to assume there is much more matter in the universe than can be observed, so they cook up the idea of Dark Matter/Energy so that the theory is correct. However, there are other explanations. Given that we don't really understand gravity, I suspect the theory needs revision. Time will tell.


We may be able to see other universes "bang" or be able to detect them. You don't know what they will be able to see or not see, or even detect about this universe in the future. We DO know "something" about Dark Energy and Dark Matter. It HAS gravitation affects and they are observable. What are these "other explanations" you claim you know about, and where are they discussed ? By whom ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 10:45 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 09:40 AM)Doddia Wrote:  I love it when authors attempt to cohere science and the metaphysical! Some authors do it very well, such as Greg Braeden and Michael Talbot. They're pretty hard to argue with. Smile

They are hard to argue with only in the sense that there is no substance to their claims. Believing things because they might be true is not rationally justified unless you have supporting evidence.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
29-06-2016, 11:03 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 10:34 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  We may be able to see other universes "bang" or be able to detect them. You don't know what they will be able to see or not see, or even detect about this universe in the future. We DO know "something" about Dark Energy and Dark Matter. It HAS gravitation affects and they are observable. What are these "other explanations" you claim you know about, and where are they discussed ? By whom ?

I've already explained that. There are observable gravitation effects that the theory of relativity cannot explain. So to explain them (and get the equations to balance) physicists created the idea of Dark Matter, but it has never been detected. They reason that there must be more matter in the universe to cause the observed gravitational effect.
It is also possible that there is real matter that broke off early in the inflation of the universe immediately after the Big Bang. It could be out there but will never be detected.
A simpler explanation is that the theory needs revision. I tend to think Dark Matter is just a place holder for ignorance since we don't understand gravity. There are other less prominent theories, but I don't pay much attention.
It is all speculation and not worth paying attention to until they get real empirical data.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2016, 11:12 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 11:03 AM)u196533 Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 10:34 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  We may be able to see other universes "bang" or be able to detect them. You don't know what they will be able to see or not see, or even detect about this universe in the future. We DO know "something" about Dark Energy and Dark Matter. It HAS gravitation affects and they are observable. What are these "other explanations" you claim you know about, and where are they discussed ? By whom ?

I've already explained that. There are observable gravitation effects that the theory of relativity cannot explain. So to explain them (and get the equations to balance) physicists created the idea of Dark Matter, but it has never been detected. They reason that there must be more matter in the universe to cause the observed gravitational effect.
It is also possible that there is real matter that broke off early in the inflation of the universe immediately after the Big Bang. It could be out there but will never be detected.
A simpler explanation is that the theory needs revision. I tend to think Dark Matter is just a place holder for ignorance since we don't understand gravity. There are other less prominent theories, but I don't pay much attention.
It is all speculation and not worth paying attention to until they get real empirical data.

Yeah, I know you tried, ..... how about you tell us what the Theory of Relativity has to do with the observed gravitational affects.

Consider Consider Consider Consider

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
29-06-2016, 11:16 AM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(29-06-2016 10:34 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 09:33 AM)u196533 Wrote:  The radiation is an observable affect. Indirect data only allows inference. We will never have direct data from anything leading up to the Big Bang. We will only be able to infer things, and won't be able to ever prove it unequivocally.

Nobody knows anything about Dark Matter and Dark Energy. They see affects that can't be explained by general relativity. The only way to explain it without altering the theory is to assume there is much more matter in the universe than can be observed, so they cook up the idea of Dark Matter/Energy so that the theory is correct. However, there are other explanations. Given that we don't really understand gravity, I suspect the theory needs revision. Time will tell.


We may be able to see other universes "bang" or be able to detect them. You don't know what they will be able to see or not see, or even detect about this universe in the future. We DO know "something" about Dark Energy and Dark Matter. It HAS gravitation affects and they are observable. What are these "other explanations" you claim you know about, and where are they discussed ? By whom ?

The Holographic Universe Michael Talbot? Just thought I'd chip in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: