danot Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 My debate is with you, I’m telling you what I think, what do you think. I know what different theorists think but I’m not debating with them.I've already explained my position on this.. numerous times- 'I'm unable to comprehend how the universe can exist without cause'. The big bang theory (the theory that is now the widely accepted theory) is that nothing existed before the singularity sprang into existence. Your theory of the universe being infinite and having always existed, is the "steady state theory", which was discredited by theorists when the big bang theory arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I've already explained my position on this.. numerous times- 'I'm unable to comprehend how the universe can exist without cause'. The big bang theory (the theory that is now the widely accepted theory) is that nothing existed before the singularity sprang into existence. Your theory of the universe being infinite and having always existed, is the "steady state theory", which was discredited by theorists when the big bang theory arrived. The steady state theory is one in which new matter is continuously created as the universe expands, which isn't my theory. In an infinite universe all the matter would have always existed, there will be forces in the universe, gravity being one of them, which will keep the universe in a steady state of change. The problem with scientists is they will have an opinion which they will only express when they can formulate a provable theory. Then other scientist that disagrees will only express their disagreement when they can prove the theory is wrong. We however can express our opinions openly because it would make no difference if someone else thinks you are an idiots. The big bang theory fits nicely in my theory and it solves the problem of where did the singularity come from, Some scientists are now theorising and formulating evidence that the gravitational forces of a black holes will create a singularity, which in turn will explode and expel all its matter back into the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The steady state theory is one in which new matter is continuously created as the universe expands, which isn't my theory. In an infinite universe all the matter would have always existed, there will be forces in the universe, gravity being one of them, which will keep the universe in a steady state of change. The problem with scientists is they will have an opinion which they will only express when they can formulate a provable theory. Then other scientist that disagrees will only express their disagreement when they can prove the theory is wrong. We however can express our opinions openly because it would make no difference if someone else thinks you are an idiots. The big bang theory fits nicely in my theory and it solves the problem of where did the singularity come from, Some scientists are now theorising and formulating evidence that the gravitational forces of a black holes will create a singularity, which in turn will explode and expel all its matter back into the universe. The big bang theory fits nicely into the creationists theory also. It would fit nicely into any theory that doesn't require a cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The big bang theory fits nicely into the theory also. It would fit nicely into any theory that doesn't require a cause. How? ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 How? ........ If you're claiming that the universe is infinite and has always existed, shouldn't you be asking yourself how the universe could have always existed? If you don't feel it necessary to ask yourself that question, why are you asking me why some other theoretical entity that doesn't require a cause to exist could be capable of causing the big bang? It just would be, primarily because it's infinite and has always existed just like the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 If you're claiming that the universe is infinite and has always existed, shouldn't you be asking yourself how the universe could have always existed? If you don't feel it necessary to ask yourself that question, why are you asking me why some other theoretical entity that doesn't require a cause to exist could be capable of causing the big bang? It just would be, primarily because it's infinite and has always existed just like the universe. What kind of entity, would it be intelligent, why would it have existed for infinity before deciding one day to create it, why would it create a singularity and wait for the universe to unfold, why would it create a universe that could end, why would it put things into a universe that can destroy any life that may develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 What kind of entity, would it be intelligent, Of course. It would require an entity of infinite wisdom to comprehend infinity. Posted by MrSmith why would have existed for infinity before deciding one day to create it, It wouldn't have existed for eternity, how could it have when it hadn't created time yet? Posted by MrSmith why would it create a singularity and wait for the universe to unfold, How could it wait when time didn't exist? Posted byMrSmith why would it create a universe that could end, Why would a child own an ant farm? Perhaps it just decided to. Posted by MrSmith why would it put things into a unversed that can destroy any life that may develop. When you say "life", do you mean life as we know it, or do you mean everything within the comprehension of my infinitely wise entity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I'll leave you to debate the existence of a GOD with someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I'll leave you to debate the existence of a GOD with someone else. What do you mean- "God"? If you're suggesting that by using the creationists argument as a counter argument to yours I've entered into the realms stupidity, what does that say about your theory? My reason for using the creationist argument isn't religiously motivated, I not religious. My reason for raising the creationist argument was to illustrate that an infinite universe theory and the God theory is only accepted by people who prefer to believe in a causeless phenomena that created the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 What do you mean- "God"? If you're suggesting that by using the creationists argument as a counter argument to yours I've entered into the realms stupidity, what does that say about your theory? My reason for using the creationist argument isn't religiously motivated, I not religious. My reason for raising the creationist argument was to illustrate that an infinite universe theory and the God theory is only accepted by people who prefer to believe in a causeless phenomena that created the universe. That counts me out then because I don't believe the universe was created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.