(May 12, 2012 at 6:46 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: This is like the oldest argument against the existence of God. It's mostly a futile argument I'm afraid because theists think God existed eternally outside of time where cause and effect are meaningless.

If time is meaningless then why did he suddenly create the universe?

---

(May 18, 2012 at 9:14 pm)Polaris Wrote: Same argument over the existence of the universe. What created the Big Bang and what if anything existed in the time prior?

There is no grounds to say what existed before the big bang because well tested laws of physics at the moment can not yet be satisfactorily applied to the conditions immediately surrounding the big bang.

---

(May 19, 2012 at 2:37 am)genkaus Wrote:

(May 18, 2012 at 9:14 pm)Polaris Wrote: Same argument over the existence of the universe. What created the Big Bang and what if anything existed in the time prior?

What makes you think there was a "time prior"?

What makes you think there isn't?

---

(May 19, 2012 at 7:23 am)Ace Otana Wrote:

(May 18, 2012 at 9:14 pm)Polaris Wrote: Same argument over the existence of the universe. What created the Big Bang and what if anything existed in the time prior?

There was no 'before' the big bang. Time did not exist. Also what created the big bang? Perhaps quantum mechanics (another law of nature) is what allows the universe to simply pop into existence. Photons pop in and out of existence all the time, and the universe was once smaller than a photon.

I think physics only has a empirical understanding of time, and does not yet have a fundamental understanding of time. Coupled with the fact that just about everything else in current physics's understanding can not actually be extrapolated all the way to T=0 and still produce convincing answers, I think it's very bold to say whether time, or something analogous to time, existed before the big bang.

Unlike god, if a eternal universe does exist according to the string theory models, we will eventually be able to say a whole lot about what the fuck it was doing before it created the universe we are now familiar with.

---

(May 19, 2012 at 10:37 am)Paul the Human Wrote:

(May 19, 2012 at 10:29 am)WhatIfGodWasJustAMyth Wrote: Well to play devil's advocate, while I am an atheist, the same argument can be used against any proposal to how the universe started. You can keep going back to the beginning over and over and asking “Well how did that get there then, huh?”

It's a meaningless question. There is no... there cannot be.... before existence. By definition, nonexistence cannot exist. There was never any need for "creation".

I think this is argument by definition and does not really address the issue.

---

(May 19, 2012 at 10:54 am)liam Wrote: Does it not seem incredibly convenient to everyone present that God just happens to exist OUTSIDE of that which we know exists, such as time and the universe?

Yeah, it's a cheat. Define something without testable attributes so it can't be proven false, then shout "it exists" and don't look at the odds.

---

(May 23, 2012 at 1:58 am)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: It's awesome that the reason we exist is because things can exist for no reason. I just love that. I really wish I knew why it worked like that. But I'd probably explode if I could comprehend it.

The whole point of physics is not only do things exist for reasons, but we can understand these reasons so well we can predict what else it will do.

The fact that things exist for a reason, however, is the the same as things existing by intent.

---

(May 19, 2012 at 12:02 pm)Paul the Human Wrote: I never said the universe is static. The universe is all things, including time. There can not be a reality without existence and the universe is existence. There cannot be a 'before existence'.

That's argument by definition, which defines away the problem rather than address or solve the problem.

(May 24, 2012 at 7:07 pm)Chuck Wrote: The whole point of physics is not only do things exist for reasons, but we can understand these reasons so well we can predict what else it will do.

The fact that things exist for a reason, however, is the the same as things existing by intent.

Something had to exist first, or always exist. The whole reason it existed is pretty much because things can exist for no reason. And if there is another reason, where did that reason come from?

We are defining reason differently. I am defining reason as comprehensible, describable agency whose behavior can be modeled with predictive power. It doesn't matter if there is an infinite regression. If each step has an agency, then nothing exist without reason.

The chain of reasons does not need to, indeed I do not see how or why it should, ever terminate at some point. The fact that there is no initial reason doesn't mean there is no reason, simply no reason that can be encapsulated as having started it all.

(May 25, 2012 at 1:51 am)Chuck Wrote: We are defining reason differently. I am defining reason as comprehensible, describable agency whose behavior can be modeled with predictive power. It doesn't matter if there is an infinite regression. If each step has an agency, then nothing exist without reason.

The chain of reasons does not need to, indeed I do not see how or why it should, ever terminate at some point. The fact that there is no initial reason doesn't mean there is no reason, simply no reason that can be encapsulated as having started it all.

Either way, It's amazing things work the way they do. That was what I was getting at.

(May 24, 2012 at 7:07 pm)Chuck Wrote: What makes you think there isn't?

---

The theory that time cannot exist without space which exists as a part of the universe.

(May 25, 2012 at 4:12 am)genkaus Wrote:

(May 24, 2012 at 7:07 pm)Chuck Wrote: What makes you think there isn't?

---

The theory that time cannot exist without space which exists as a part of the universe.

I think no theory really says specifically that space as defined by our three dimensions necessarily did not exist at T=online or had no precurssor because near T=0 these 3 dimensions were too small to describe or predict with laws of physics in their current state.

Also I think there is no theory that says time is inextricably bound up with our three dimensions, and not other spacial dimensions.

Also I think most favors of string theory argues there are many other spatial dimensions besides our three, and those did not have to have a small size at near our T=0, or at any time at all. They are undetected not because they are small, but because the messenger particles to which physics currently have access, such as electromagnetic, weak force, strong force, can not propagate in those dimensions.

Basically, our ability to describe time and space with well tested laws of physics break down near T=0. This is not overwhelming evidence literally everything begun at our T=0.

God was invented/introduced by King Arkenatum of Egypt because he realised that the sun and moon him and his people worshipped, were doing bugger all for the earthlings. His idea that there must therefore be an invisible God up there controlling everything, would then be taken to Israel and hey bingo, religion was born. There is no God