Proof to support creationism?

[2scoops0406]

OK, I'll first start out by saying I don't believe in "God" however that will become more complicated as we go on.

How did the universe come about, the big bang.... no sorry I can't get my head around that one, sorry of course I may well be thick but it doesn't add up.

How big is it ? It can't be infinite, otherwise that throws up a paradox. Why isn't the sky white ??

Ok, maybe that's not true, it's accelerating, for how long ?? What's beyond that ?? If It accelerates forever, then will it become infinte (surely mathematically impossible)

Certain thing bemuse me, why bother with life at all? As a chemist, all systems return to their lowest thermodynamic state (i.e. iron rusts) life is thermodynamically unstable, why produce these molecules, what is the reason !!

Is there a guiding hand, a purpose, Hmmm. that's a difficult one, and not easily dismissed.

No I do not believe it is some white bearded old gent waving some old s**t around, but to dismiss religion entirely is misguided.

I am up to now a devout atheist...... or am I?

 

[petewood]

Is there a guiding hand, a purpose, Hmmm. that's a difficult one, and not easily dismissed.

No I do not believe it is some white bearded old gent waving some old s**t around, but to dismiss religion entirely is misguided.

I am up to now a devout atheist

If you cannot easily dismiss the 'guiding hand' idea, then surely you are agnostic rather than athiest?

 

[2scoops0406]

That is a reasonable point!! Maybe I was taking the Atheist point of view a bit too literally. I think what I was trying to say is I don't believe in God, but I'm not sure if I believe in nothing.

 

[AdamW]

How big is it ? It can't be infinite, otherwise that throws up a paradox. Why isn't the sky white ??

Amazingly enough, I was thinking about that one only a few days ago (spooky!). A teacher threw that one at me at school, and I didn't really ponder it.

The logic is "if the universe is infinite, then travelling in any one direction you will eventually meet a star. Therefore the sky should be white".

However, it fails to take into account one very simple principle:

1) The "inverse square law", by which the intensity of the light reaching the observer diminishes over relatively short distances (short, compared to infinity at least )

Sure, you would get interference patterns from all the light sources overlapping, but these would be so faint your eyes would be unlikely to register them

Jim, I would be interested to hear why you don't agree with the Big Bang theory: are you more a follower of "steady state", or is there some other camp to which you subscribe? True, they are all merely theories, but the Big Bang is so convenient from the quantum level up!

Although, one could postulate the Big Bang theory is so popular because it isn't too far from our ancestors' beliefs in genesis!

 

[2scoops0406]

How big is it ? It can't be infinite, otherwise that throws up a paradox. Why isn't the sky white ??

Amazingly enough, I was thinking about that one only a few days ago (spooky!). A teacher threw that one at me at school, and I didn't really ponder it.

The logic is "if the universe is infinite, then travelling in any one direction you will eventually meet a star. Therefore the sky should be white".

However, it fails to take into account one very simple principle:

1) The "inverse square law", by which the intensity of the light reaching the observer diminishes over relatively short distances (short, compared to infinity at least )

Sure, you would get interference patterns from all the light sources overlapping, but these would be so faint your eyes would be unlikely to register them
Jim, I would be interested to hear why you don't agree with the Big Bang theory: are you more a follower of "steady state", or is there some other camp to which you subscribe? True, they are all merely theories, but the Big Bang is so convenient from the quantum level up!

Although, one could postulate the Big Bang theory is so popular because it isn't too far from our ancestors' beliefs in genesis!

No but there would be infinite amounts of these, i.e bright white (I am always staggered by people who fail to understand infinity)

Such as 1/3 has a determinite root, PI is completely expressible, If There is a GOD. Hopefully we will never know. The Japanese have a good saying..


"If perfection were achieveable, it wouldn't be worth it.."

 

[AdamW]

Aha, but you are assuming I didn't think this one through.

Just as there would be infinite light sources, the light reaching you from each one would be infinitessimal.

Therefore, the nearer stars would contrast against the background.

Due to the limited dynamic range of the eye, the background (which would be comprised of "infinity" x "infinitessimal" photons per second), would seem rather dull.

And then of course, you have the fact that quantum physicists have defined the star only gives off so many packets of light per second... at a certain distance you will only get (on average) 1 photon hitting 1 retina per second.

At a further distance, you will get to the stage where it is unlikely that a single photon from that star will be incident on your eye (let's assume you're a cyclops) in your whole life. That distance is less than infinity!

 

[TexMex]

What you have to ask yourself is, who invented this theory of GOD. Imagine a situation where absolutely no one had ever concieved of god or religion in any form whatsoever.

Now looking at your own education, devoid of this history, would you, independantly develop a theory, "Ah, I've just realised, that everything that exists, has ever existed, or ever will, was created by some superhuman with unimaginable powers". I doubt it.

Now considering how long ago the concept was first concieved. Why on earth would you want to accept some hair brain idea, postulated by a being that probably had a smaller brain, and less education than the average four year old of the current day.

Just to add more oil to the fire, I've just come up with a completely new theory. Since we have no proof that time, itself will ever end, and nothing remains unchanged indefinately. This therefore requires that everything will change in due course. Furthermore, if everything changes within a finite amount of time, given infinate time, it will change infinately. This therefore means that everything will become everything else, at some point. Therefore at some point, one of Adams satisfying movements, will eventually become the entire universe. Or perhaps it has already been so.

 

[AdamW]

I always knew my poo was special, but every time I try to show someone they get really agitated.

 

[johnny_t]

You need to post it on www.ratemypoo.com

Who say's the internet is a wasted resource ??

 

[petewood]

(short, compared to infinity at least :

I don't think you can compare short with infinity. I think that short has the same relationship with infinity as does very very very long.

 

[petewood]

You need to post it on www.ratemypoo.com

Who say's the internet is a wasted resource ??

I knew I would regret clicking on that link and I was right.

 

[petewood]

What you have to ask yourself is, who invented this theory of GOD. Imagine a situation where absolutely no one had ever concieved of god or religion in any form whatsoever.

Now looking at your own education, devoid of this history, would you, independantly develop a theory, "Ah, I've just realised, that everything that exists, has ever existed, or ever will, was created by some superhuman with unimaginable powers". I doubt it.:

I completely agree with this, I expect that it began as sun-worship or similar and as the intellect grew, so did the need to believe in something bigger.

 

[AdamW]

(short, compared to infinity at least :

I don't think you can compare short with infinity. I think that short has the same relationship with infinity as does very very very long.

Here's a melon-scratcher for you:

what is 'x', where:

x = infinity ÷ infinity

(damn unicodes didn't work, so I can't write the symbol )

 

[2scoops0406]

(short, compared to infinity at least :

I don't think you can compare short with infinity. I think that short has the same relationship with infinity as does very very very long.

Here's a melon-scratcher for you:

what is 'x', where:

x = infinity ÷ infinity

(damn unicodes didn't work, so I can't write the symbol )

A non sequetia . Any number between 0 and infinity

An infinitessimal number x infinity = infinity.

 

[petewood]

(short, compared to infinity at least :

I don't think you can compare short with infinity. I think that short has the same relationship with infinity as does very very very long.

Here's a melon-scratcher for you:

what is 'x', where:

x = infinity ÷ infinity

(damn unicodes didn't work, so I can't write the symbol )

A non sequetia . Any number between 0 and infinity

An infinitessimal number x infinity = infinity.

An infinitessimal number x infinity = infinity

infinity = infinity
1/2 infinity = infinity
1/4 infinity = infinity
1/8 infinity = infinity


Is there no end to this?