Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems logical/intuitive to me that there was/is some kind of creative energy (ie god) that created everything because here we are. You're saying this can't be understood by the average person who only understands macroscopic events of our world that we evolved on?
OK, here's a small question: In my simple minded understanding of lay person's physics the most mind boggling thing to me is the double slit experiment. How can it possibly be that electrons/photons behave differently when you place a detector at the slit??? What other interpretation can there be other than the electrons/photons somehow know they're being observed/measured??? And furthermore why should they care? It implies they have some kind of consciousness. I think this is what fuels the new age "you create your own reality" gurus.
Bruce Lipton seems like one of the more brilliant "alternative" thinkers.
If we're part of a brane, then one might assert that the creation of our Universe was the creation of all of the branes, as well.
But that isnt really his point -- Krauss' point is that there isnt the requirement for a God to create the Universe, it'll just happen, it isnt pre-programmed or engineered for life, out of it, it all has to come. It's all about quantum physics.
Speaking of quantum physics, that's my specialty. It's what I do every day for work. It's also the least understood field of physics. It isnt normal, it isnt rational, it isnt obvious. You can understand cosmology (the Universe on a large scale) by thinking critically and using your head. Quantum physics is in a world of its own. What you think should happen doesnt and what does happen surprises you.
Take a look at all the questions in this thread. Most all of them are about the opposite of quantum physics (the study of the small) and are about cosmology (the study of the big). I've yet to see a question about Quarks, Gluons, Pions, Spin, Uncertainty, or anything like that. People just dont understand it.
And when people just dont understand it, it makes understanding Lawrence Krauss a little bit more complex. He really does try to word things in ways that people can relate to. His movie will be out soon, The Unbelievers it is called, it premiered in a few theaters already but isnt everywhere.
Boy, I can certainly attest to the bolded section of your statement. Binary I can comprehend, if it is not on, then it must be off. That is rational, and obvious. However, in quantum physics a quantum bit can be on, or it can be off, or it can be on and off at the same time. How does one even begin to write code for that?
Bruce Lipton seems like one of the more brilliant "alternative" thinkers.
"Bruce Harold Lipton, born 21 October 1944 at Mount Kisco, New York, is an American developmental biologist best known for promoting the idea that genes and DNA can be manipulated by a person's beliefs."
....and that's about where my attention span ends for that guy. If I believe I can fly, I still cant fly.
[youtube]
On one hand there's the something out of nothing hypothesis championed by Lawrence Krauss among others, on the other you have the brane hypothesis where 2 branes collided to form the universe. You can't have both since a brane (of unknown origin or composition) is something. In our present state of ignorance how can you say one or the other hypothesis is right? There may be other possibilities too yet Krauss is so gun-ho about this nothing hypothesis. Your thoughts?
The idea of something, like the entire universe, out of nothing can indeed be a pretty difficult concept to understand. Could there be other possibiities? Maybe, but the something out of nothing concept is a viable possibility. Colliding branes might be a possibility, but probsbly not as typically envisioned. Rather more likely as energetic fluctuatons within scalar fields. Keep in mind that there are only representations to help understand the concept.
Unlike God, heh? Do you believe in a sentient creator of the universe, Beninfl? I'm not asking if science has proved one, I know it hasn't. But do you personally believe in God? I've read that some physicists along the way have said they believe, or at least that there's some evidence for it.
By the way, I'm not evangelizing or a Christian. I'm just asking a question I keep going back and forth on myself.
The question is more of a philosophical one. Here's something that might help.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,163,488 times
Reputation: 8105
Thanks for the video. It's exceedingly odd that the "can" contained everything needed for a universe of such complexity of laws, such finely tuned constants, such a range of basic building blocks, and such a powerful brain, that we chemical blobs could be here conversing about it!
Thanks for the video. It's exceedingly odd that the "can" contained everything needed for a universe of such complexity of laws, such finely tuned constants, such a range of basic building blocks, and such a powerful brain, that we chemical blobs could be here conversing about it!
Keep in mind that we've only been around for a very small period of time from the Big Bang to now. A lot can slowly happen over billions of years. We're not just chemical blobs. If you look much deeper, we're a collection of energetic particles. That said, the universe could've just as easily turned out very different. For that matter, life on the planet could've evolved very differently. But because of variations, over long periods of time, to survive and adapt and fill a niche, here we are, able to communicate with computers.
Thanks for the video. It's exceedingly odd that the "can" contained everything needed for a universe of such complexity of laws, such finely tuned constants, such a range of basic building blocks, and such a powerful brain, that we chemical blobs could be here conversing about it!
If you subscribe to the Multiverse theory, in which we are one Universe in a neverending swarm of other Universes, then our Universe *had* to happen, because given infinite "time", what can happen, must happen! Other Universes may have different laws of physics, some not form galaxies or stars, different forces, etc.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
We're not just chemical blobs. If you look much deeper, we're a collection of energetic particles.
But if energy is mass and mass is energy, arent we both?
But if energy is mass and mass is energy, arent we both?
That's true, which is why I said "We're not just chemical blobs."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I believe I can fly, I still cant fly.
