You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #51: Not all singularities are created equally [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
Spinzonner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #19
51. Not all singularities are created equally

You seem to be confused about some proposed singularities associated with Black Holes and the singularity (the Mother of All SIngularities ?) from which the Universe derives under the Big Bang theory. Your quaint notions of mass and space are simply meaningless preceeding the emergence of the Universe. It didn't come FROM anything or anywhere. Your attempts to apply the notion of causality in the absense of time - which doesn't exist either unntil the existence of the Universe - is similarly misguided.

The question is not begged at all. You simply don't understand the real implications - and inapplicability - of your question. You are attmepting to frame things within the confines of your personal perpective about the nature of existence - and so-called laws of nature - which is only menaingful in an existing Universe - that which doesn't apply prior to that existence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -1. Existence (or: The Origin of the Universe) Strong Atheist  Nov-29-05 06:30 AM   #0 
  - Sounds like you scored some GOOD weed tonight.  Freedomfried   Nov-29-05 06:35 AM   #1 
  - No, I am this way all of  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 08:46 AM   #22 
  - solution B comes out of a singularity  tocqueville   Nov-29-05 06:44 AM   #2 
  - bingo  xchrom   Nov-29-05 06:49 AM   #4 
  - So where did the singularity,  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 07:00 AM   #5 
     - A singularity is a singularity  Spinzonner   Nov-29-05 07:04 AM   #8 
        - Either a singularity is SOMETHING , or  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 07:09 AM   #9 
           - Tell me what 'something' and 'nothing' are  Spinzonner   Nov-29-05 07:10 AM   #10 
           - Those are intuitively obvious, like what  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 07:20 AM   #13 
              - I think that your thinking is tainted by your existence as a four-  Spinzonner   Nov-29-05 07:26 AM   #14 
                 - Ok. I will  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 08:24 AM   #19 
                    - Where did a 14 billion year old event come from?  papau   Nov-29-05 12:01 PM   #44 
                    - Not all singularities are created equally  Spinzonner   Nov-29-05 02:17 PM   #51 
                       - The universe came from a couple of oscillating brane that touch sometimes.  Silverhair   Nov-29-05 09:47 PM   #73 
                       - Mathematically, of course  Spinzonner   Nov-30-05 05:09 AM   #78 
                          - In theory, one could make a universe in the laboratory.  ozone_man   Nov-30-05 08:48 PM   #100 
                             - No, you can't have a Universe unless you promise to take care of it ...  Spinzonner   Dec-01-05 10:08 AM   #105 
                       - From my perspective, this  Strong Atheist   Nov-30-05 06:09 AM   #80 
           - OK since Wikipedia explains it better than I do  tocqueville   Nov-29-05 07:47 AM   #15 
  - The Bottom Line  Midwest_Doc   Nov-29-05 06:47 AM   #3 
  - Not clear that the idea 'popped into existence' make any sense  Spinzonner   Nov-29-05 07:00 AM   #6 
  - from a different standpoint  ayeshahaqqiqa   Nov-29-05 07:04 AM   #7 
  - This is why I do not  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 07:16 AM   #11 
     - that's fine  ayeshahaqqiqa   Nov-29-05 07:49 AM   #16 
        - Thank you! nt.  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 08:38 AM   #20 
  - "challenged atheists to explain how the universe came about" - and the  papau   Nov-29-05 07:18 AM   #12 
  - I am glad that you posted this.  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 08:43 AM   #21 
  - God is an existing thing is the first "error" - God is - at least in the  papau   Nov-29-05 09:17 AM   #25 
     - I am saying for you  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 09:24 AM   #27 
        - was, is, and always shall be - "existing" is not the word I would choose  papau   Nov-29-05 09:33 AM   #30 
           - There are only two  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 11:09 AM   #34 
              - Consistent ? God must not only be in the image of man, but must use  papau   Nov-29-05 11:55 AM   #41 
  - I have thought that I  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 02:10 PM   #49 
     - You claim the answer in your question- that God did not exist and then did  papau   Nov-29-05 02:53 PM   #56 
        - So God exists.  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 02:57 PM   #58 
           - It is the nature of God to be, was, and always will be. The "how did  papau   Nov-29-05 03:02 PM   #60 
              - Ah. Not logical to the theist. And here is  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 03:09 PM   #62 
              - Have a great evening - I agree we can rename God as "things" that  papau   Nov-29-05 03:28 PM   #65 
                 - I am sorry that I was not clear in my  Strong Atheist   Nov-30-05 06:12 AM   #81 
              - Exactly.  Zebedeo   Dec-16-05 06:23 PM   #106 
  - Well, the first thing to realize is that "God did it" isn't an answer.  trotsky   Nov-29-05 07:51 AM   #17 
  - you can say that "God dit it" as an answer  tocqueville   Nov-29-05 08:01 AM   #18 
  - "theists say you cannot understand it, so "God did it" is not what this  papau   Nov-29-05 09:28 AM   #29 
     - very strange definition of logic  tocqueville   Nov-29-05 06:32 PM   #69 
        - I fall back on our friends the Greeks and the discussion of what we can be  papau   Nov-29-05 10:15 PM   #75 
           - Intelligent design ?  tocqueville   Nov-30-05 07:46 AM   #86 
              - Aquinas's 5th "proof" is indeed "Intelligent design" - but I was using it  papau   Nov-30-05 12:01 PM   #96 
                 - cheers  tocqueville   Nov-30-05 06:55 PM   #98 
  - "God did it" begs the question,  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 09:02 AM   #23 
  - "Where did the singularity come from?" is a meaningless question.  trotsky   Nov-29-05 09:11 AM   #24 
  - No, it is not a meaningless question;  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 09:26 AM   #28 
     - It is a meaningless question  Spinzonner   Nov-30-05 09:18 AM   #90 
  - Singularity is 14 billion years old today- per science! - God is forever.  papau   Nov-29-05 11:56 AM   #42 
  - To reject the question of creation is indeed one of Hawking's responses.  papau   Nov-29-05 09:20 AM   #26 
     - Well yeah, because "God" isn't an answer.  trotsky   Nov-29-05 09:36 AM   #31 
        - Human experience defines logic - and God is the logical answer -  papau   Nov-29-05 09:45 AM   #32 
           - "God" adds  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 11:11 AM   #35 
           - True only if you see them as two separate issues!  papau   Nov-29-05 11:48 AM   #39 
           - Clarification  trotsky   Nov-29-05 12:52 PM   #46 
              - nope - the concept of God - the one that produces more questions, is  papau   Nov-29-05 02:57 PM   #57 
                 - Alright, maybe *you* don't have more questions,  trotsky   Nov-29-05 03:12 PM   #64 
                 - Science says the Universe started 14 billion years ago - and who am I to  papau   Nov-29-05 03:30 PM   #66 
                    - Science is strong BECAUSE of disagreement.  trotsky   Nov-29-05 03:36 PM   #67 
                       - I need more emotion icons in my message - we of course agree on  papau   Nov-29-05 08:38 PM   #70 
                          - And that's why "God" isn't an explanation.  trotsky   Nov-30-05 07:27 AM   #84 
                             - :-) :-) :-) May we both be happy in our belief system! :-) :-) :-)  papau   Nov-30-05 08:50 AM   #88 
                                - And may you derive the pleasure you so desire  trotsky   Nov-30-05 09:34 AM   #91 
                                   - Not meant to be insulting in any way-But Belief system is in my vocabulary  papau   Nov-30-05 09:52 AM   #92 
                                      - It is the correct word in your belief system.  trotsky   Nov-30-05 10:08 AM   #93 
                                         - true n/t  papau   Nov-30-05 10:37 AM   #94 
                 - You seem to dance right over the problem of time 6000 years versus  heidler1   Dec-20-05 01:21 AM   #109 
  - my 2 cents  unpossibles   Nov-29-05 10:18 AM   #33 
  - I like your post. We agree a lot.  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 11:12 AM   #36 
     - thanks!  unpossibles   Nov-29-05 11:46 AM   #38 
  - Existence Is  Beetwasher   Nov-29-05 11:33 AM   #37 
  - Ok. I will try to get around  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 02:49 PM   #54 
  - well, i will continue - or interject  wtbymark   Nov-29-05 11:51 AM   #40 
  - "Logical is a cohearent, repeatable system" - and we are back to science?  papau   Nov-29-05 11:59 AM   #43 
  - "There can be no logic that does not follow the scientific method?"  wtbymark   Nov-29-05 12:06 PM   #45 
     - but is logic limited to the rules in science? Science must follow logic -  papau   Nov-29-05 01:00 PM   #47 
        - Logic has established rules of it's own  wtbymark   Nov-29-05 01:45 PM   #48 
           - The mathematical rules of logic, and the verbal versions of the rules  papau   Nov-29-05 02:35 PM   #52 
           - I forgot to say I agree with your time is a biproduct of realty comment  papau   Nov-29-05 03:07 PM   #61 
  - Much as I hate to interrupt you and papau,  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 02:53 PM   #55 
     - :-) - that works for me as a definition of atheist - indeed the talking  papau   Nov-29-05 03:00 PM   #59 
        - Agreed!  Strong Atheist   Nov-29-05 03:10 PM   #63 
  - There was no "begining"  Odin2005   Nov-29-05 02:12 PM   #50 
  - last years attempts to find "brane" evidence all failed - but I like the  papau   Nov-29-05 02:40 PM   #53 
     - I'm jumping back in  wtbymark   Nov-29-05 04:41 PM   #68 
     - My friend at the U of MD tried to do QM using Whitehead - and  papau   Nov-29-05 08:51 PM   #71 
        - Amazing, isn't it?  Zebedeo   Dec-16-05 07:45 PM   #107 
     - I read that in last month's Scientific American.  Silverhair   Nov-30-05 07:23 AM   #83 
  - A few thoughts.  Darranar   Nov-29-05 09:29 PM   #72 
  - While I may not agree with everything  Strong Atheist   Nov-30-05 06:17 AM   #82 
     - With all due respect  Spinzonner   Nov-30-05 07:37 AM   #85 
        - See post # 80 nt.  Strong Atheist   Nov-30-05 08:26 AM   #87 
           - Saw it  Spinzonner   Nov-30-05 08:55 AM   #89 
  - Many of these responses are making an error regarding "before".  Silverhair   Nov-29-05 10:00 PM   #74 
  - Indeed - that God has no time dimension is a given. :-)  papau   Nov-29-05 10:16 PM   #76 
  - Just because time is part of our physical universe  Darranar   Nov-29-05 10:21 PM   #77 
     - You appear to be playing word games  Spinzonner   Nov-30-05 05:15 AM   #79 
        - No, I am not.  Darranar   Nov-30-05 01:52 PM   #97 
  - Read post #60 and #90.  Strong Atheist   Nov-30-05 11:14 AM   #95 
     - Yes - you are the "only one" missing the logic of the singularity (but I  papau   Nov-30-05 08:45 PM   #99 
     - Peace, papau.  Strong Atheist   Dec-01-05 06:09 AM   #102 
     - The singularity argument and the God one are essentially different.  Darranar   Nov-30-05 09:51 PM   #101 
        - Now THIS  Strong Atheist   Dec-01-05 06:11 AM   #103 
        - Well said :-) But again "God came originated ex nihilo" is not the  papau   Dec-01-05 07:32 AM   #104 
        - May I respectfully suggest  Zebedeo   Dec-16-05 08:01 PM   #108 
           - Careful, now.  trotsky   Dec-20-05 07:40 AM   #110 
           - You can't  Brentos   Dec-20-05 12:13 PM   #111 
              - I'm not asking you to prove that he did,  trotsky   Dec-20-05 12:40 PM   #112 
                 - True  Brentos   Dec-20-05 12:47 PM   #113 
                    - Your view of the subject is rational to me. In spite of the fact that I  heidler1   Dec-20-05 01:57 PM   #114 
                       - Ohhh, bloody heck, no!  Brentos   Dec-20-05 02:17 PM   #115 
           - Stuff pops in and out of existence all of the time.  hunter   Dec-20-05 02:19 PM   #116 
              - My brain hurts! :-)  Brentos   Dec-20-05 02:25 PM   #117 
                 - Long ago I read that atomic particles are possibly whole new worlds and  heidler1   Dec-20-05 05:12 PM   #118 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC