(February 2, 2014 at 1:42 pm)Carnavon Wrote:(February 2, 2014 at 1:23 pm)pocaracas Wrote: No.Then I cannot help you my friend. Even Richard Dawkins admits that. And by implication you also accept extremely small (Statistically very well beyond "nil") chance that it happened "by itself". Well there goes logic for you ! But what the heck!
The evidence thus far can support anything, that's what ryan told you.
We don't know how it happened.
(February 2, 2014 at 1:49 pm)Carnavon Wrote:(February 2, 2014 at 1:45 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: It is more accurate to suggest that a singularity, in this scenario, represents everything. It's a bit conceited to dismiss a theory on the basis of your understanding of that theory being precisely incorrect.Thanks. Please explain what this singularity is and where it came from? Is it "nothing" or is it "something"? Please explain in simple terms - you know what Einstein said.
A singularity is an event where known physics brakes down.
We don't know how to describe this singularity, we only know that the tools we have have been insufficient for that task.
The option you propose relies on wishful thinking. Given our current knowledge of the event, I can't say it's 100% impossible, but it does not seem likely.
