No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

Posted by $ AJAshinoff 10 years, 2 months ago to Technology
270 comments | Share | Flag

It appear that science is never settled. I have to wonder though - perhaps its my human limitation - how something could always be without ever beginning? Interesting position, it kind of makes you wonder about God.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 5.
  • Posted by $ Mimi 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I’m going to point you up for that. AJ because that was actually the point Ayn Rand made in a televised interview. Spirituality has its place value in summing up mankind. I’m good with that.

    Robbie on the other hand is getting on my last nerve.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No, but I've wondered if I should. Recommendation?

    I tend to wait until after a season or two and see if it holds up, then "binge watch" on Netflix or on DVD so that I don't have to wait week to week.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Rarely are things "proven" true. There are just "proofs" that demonstrate that some refutations are not valid.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Omg!!! Your a goodly sum wrong. "More evil than most gods". What gods have you had real dealings with?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Some science is settled - that which is reproducible. Since the origin of the universe is unlikely to ever be such, it will never be "settled science."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, that is a good perspective, and for many sufficient. But for many more, if they were told that the consequence of their actions were only to exist to their corporeal life, what would their actions entail? I think that we're seeing much of the answer today. It seems to be that the Objectivist perspective is that one should respect others because that is the only way to ensure respect for themselves. And the only way to live a life to natural death is to have the respect of others not to take my life prematurely. Unfortunately, there are a goodly portion of society that doesn't give a rip about living a life to natural death. And if they can live a better but shorter life by depriving others of their liberties, so be it. From my observation of my fellow man and study of history, this is the default perspective of the majority of mankind. That and the hierarchy of self, family, clan, nation for acceptance of rights.

    There are failings of atheism/Objectivism when it comes to answering fundamental questions about the origin of the universe, how life initiated from inorganic matter, and how sentience came into existence. For many those questions are answered and in a way that respects the individual rights of our fellow human beings. Perhaps someday there will be a different answer, but in the meantime, I prefer this answer vs. none - which inevitably leads to not only chaos, but tyranny. For in a world where there is no supreme being, man will assume the role. I prefer God instead of some man, since most man-made supreme beings have been much more evil than most gods.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And cannot take any criticism of their "beliefs" as demonstrated by the continual down votes to any of those with a different perspective.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mdant 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ok, I thought the logic was self evident but apparently not so I will explain it.

    First for the example of the illogical. Suppose I were to say that God existed and you said he did not. I then say prove he does not exist. Of course you could not and then I say "see you can't prove he does not exist so therefore he must exist".

    That I think we can all agree is a common error of logic. Your failure to prove God does not exist in now way gives any proof that he does. However, what I am saying is exactly that...your failure to prove God exists and the other persons failure to prove God does exist is simply an exercise in futility. In the end he has been given absolutely no proof of God. But also, you have been given absolutely no proof of the absence of God.

    The error in logic that I think I hear being made by some is that they seem to think that since you can not prove a negative (that a possibly mythical person exists), that this in some way, shape, or fashion, provides comfort in saying God does not exist. Which of course it would be illogical to do so since the whole exercise was futile and proved nothing.

    That said, it does not mean that you can not analyze what we do know and come to the conclusion that you believe God does not exists and carry yourself appropriately. However, that is an entirely different thing from having proof and being able to tell people that you know God does not exist. All you have is an educated guess that you are acting on because it is the best information you have. I personally believe there is some "force" but do not believe it is likely to be anything like we think of as God (basically because I think all religions have been made up to help people deal with life and death).

    There you go and I hope you understand now. As to whether or not this is in line with Objectivism teachings or not I could not care less. I examine things and apply logic and "know what I see" as to quote one of the hero's of Atlas Shrugged.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 10 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    plusaf, I enjoyed your website tremendously, especially the story about the '65 Impala SS. I cried with him. I miss my '57 Hardtop 2-Door Bel Air, and my '56 T-Bird with porthole top, rag top, and yo-yo kit.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo