[QUOTE=Capitalist Dog;33136899]Science can be easily compared to religion.
It is composed of theories and facts. One could say the Christian bible is also composed of theories and facts, or any other "holy" book.[/QUOTE]
Er, no. Theories are tested under a lot of circumstances, but due to the fact we can't test them under [b]all[/b] circumstances, they become a theory.
Are you trying to say the theory of gravity is just a guess?
People can base their views on speculation but that doesn't make them any less unlikely.
All the theories we have about death are made using observed & known evidence to calculate a verifiable and observable statement on what happens and why.
Views that are not done this way are not very credible.
Yes, as I said just because our own views are "our speculation" doesn't mean it'll be everyone else.
Then again, the things I'm saying aren't really a debateable subject. Sorry about that. :v:
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;33134891]The big bang is long-gone history. No need to go prove it, since we can't go back to a place where any big bang would occur.[/QUOTE]As someone already said, you can actually see light from the Big Bang (or at-least the result of the universe cooling off enough shortly after it) via cosmic background radiation.
Oh and we wouldn't have to go to a specific place to see the Big Bang occur, it occurred in every point of space, it happened everywhere, not a specific place. Everything got further away from everything.
[QUOTE=Man Without Hat;33148977]Er, no. Theories are tested under a lot of circumstances, but due to the fact we can't test them under [b]all[/b] circumstances, they become a theory.
Are you trying to say the theory of gravity is just a guess?[/QUOTE]
The usage of physical evidence is a methodology specific to science, yes. Things are observed repeatedly (that is the methodology), scientists think about these observations and utilize that information to devise an approximation of the world which is considered true or factual. Religion uses divine intervention such as hearing voices or whatever, theologists think about these interventions and utilize and interpret that information to create a view of the world which is considered factual.
Certain conceptions of science can be described as dogmatic and esoteric in a similar fashion to religion. Both involve unprovable axioms, though religion uses quite a few more as a result of 'proof' usually being used in a scientific/observable sense. In science, this usually comes into play with fields that directly involves humans, as opposed to purely physical systems like nuclear physics.
Until recently, science and religion were rather linked. The usage of the term 'laws' is quite deliberate - early scientists set out to discover the particular 'legislation' that an intelligent creator had instituted. Newton, for example, believed that the mechanism of the solar system demanded "counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."
Obviously that's not to say that merely because Newton, in a heavily religious society hundreds of years ago, believed in intelligent design, so should we.
I feel that because we live in the natural world, and never directly experience anything outside of it, we should constrain our inquires to those of the natural world.
There are multiple theories on the creation of the Universe. Until one is proven 99%, I will just go with the most popular one, but they're all interesting theories.
If I were to be a bit more specific to the actual title, I'm pretty sure there is a more proven theory on how the planet was created and how it evolved.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33148729]Ah, so when your life ends. All "happenings" end and so your few years in a part of an eternal life was pointless.[/quote] Thats like saying its pointless to eat because eventually you will be done with what your eating.
[quote]You've got to judge things more broadly than just "it all stops". Because that's common sense, and I'm bored.[/QUOTE] If I did that and based everything on speculation I would believe dragons take your soul when you die and eat it or that there are fairies underneath every rock I don't turn over.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;33152581]If I did that and based everything on speculation I would believe dragons take your soul when you die and eat it or that there are fairies underneath every rock I don't turn over.[/QUOTE]
Better than a talking snake causing you to lose your immortality and your deity condemning the rest of your race to suffering.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;33152581]
If I did that and based everything on speculation I would believe dragons take your soul when you die and eat it or that there are fairies underneath every rock I don't turn over.[/QUOTE]
Getting there, but not quite psychedelic enough.
[QUOTE=Rct33;33137236]If mankind said 'I don't care' to anything it didn't know about, you wouldn't be typing that message on a computer. There is scientific proof for the big bang, hnng all my rage.[/QUOTE]
If there was proof, if would not be a theory.
Hnng! All my rage!
I'm no expert on this matter, but supposedly if M-theory is correct, then there are around 10^500 (that's 10 with 500 zeroes) different types of universes all with different fundamental laws. This would account for everything apparently seeming "fine-tuned" for us- it would be because we happen to live in a universe whose laws were suitable for life to exist.
It's not solid, proven fact at this point (or might never be proven), but it's still something to keep in mind.
[quote]M-theory is not yet complete, but the underlying structure of the mathematics has been established and is in agreement with not only all the string theories, but with all of our scientific observations of the universe. Furthermore, it has passed many tests of internal mathematical consistency that many other attempts to combine quantum mechanics and gravity had failed.[/quote]
[url]https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Introduction_to_M-theory#Status[/url]
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33156523]If there was proof, if would not be a theory.
Hnng! All my rage![/QUOTE]
There is nothing higher than a theory in science. A theory does not become a law and a law does not become a theory. They are two different things.
[url]http://www.notjustatheory.com/[/url]
[QUOTE=AK'z;33148729]You've got to judge things more broadly than just "it all stops". Because that's common sense, and I'm bored.[/quote]
Reality doesn't bend to your will just because you're bored.
[quote]I don't have a problem with you not following my train of thought. I create my own, and so do you.[/quote]
No my problem is that you're just saying what you [i]think[/i] without any kind of backing or reason for it. That's not debate.
[quote]You know what a symbol is?[/QUOTE]
In this context? Not really, please explain.
[editline]6th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;33148871]Yes.
Individuality is key.[/QUOTE]
Are you seriously implying that you can discard logic and evidence so long as you can still be a special snowflake?
[QUOTE=AK'z;33148871]Yes.
Individuality is key.[/QUOTE]
You're mentally ill. I mean really, Everything you have posted so far has shown no sign of rational or complex thought process at all, the sheer fact that a human being can even lack that kind of rationality chills me to the bone, i applaud you for showing lack of reason far beyond the norm of human cognitive processing, you are truly individual, you lunatic.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33156523]If there was proof, if would not be a theory.
Hnng! All my rage![/QUOTE]
if you could read, you wouldn't make dumb posts
[editline]6th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Noble;33156630]There is nothing higher than a theory in science. A theory does not become a law and a law does not become a theory. They are two different things.
[url]http://www.notjustatheory.com/[/url][/QUOTE]
Richard Dawkins advocates using the word "theorum" to distinguish scientific theories from the common use of the word to mean a guesstimate.
Seems like a good idea to me.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33156523]If there was proof, if would not be a theory.[/QUOTE] No its called a theory because it has proof. Unless your being sarcastic look up the definition of a scientific theory.
The key is that for something to be created from nothing, it has to be nothing itself. That is how I view the worlds creation...
This may be a bit off topic, but I've always wondered. What would happen if we were to be outside the universe. I know we'll probably never be able to accomplish that ever because the universe is still rapidly expanding, but yeah.
[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;33161498]This may be a bit off topic, but I've always wondered. What would happen if we were to be outside the universe. I know we'll probably never be able to accomplish that ever because the universe is still rapidly expanding, but yeah.[/QUOTE]
I just imagine it as pushing out the edge of a balloon or something. If you manage to overtake the expansion of the universe, you just start to expand to universe yourself.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;33156831]That's not debate.
[/QUOTE]
I know, I mentioned this previously.
[editline]7th November 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;33156856]You're mentally ill. I mean really, Everything you have posted so far has shown no sign of rational or complex thought process at all, the sheer fact that a human being can even lack that kind of rationality chills me to the bone, i applaud you for showing lack of reason far beyond the norm of human cognitive processing, you are truly individual, you lunatic.[/QUOTE]
Stop moaning. You jump to many conclusions without even knowing me.
I thought we were talking about jerking off.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;33133298]big bang theory, look it up
tl;dr for it, dense as fuck singularity expands forming planets and stars on the way[/QUOTE]
No. It occurred everywhere, not at just a single point.
[QUOTE=Master X;33164471]No. It occurred everywhere, not at just a single point.[/QUOTE]
You'd have to define "everywhere" for your point to make sense.
"Everywhere" in the context of a universe isn't quite as clear of a term as you'd expect.
[QUOTE=Anonim;33164703]You'd have to define "everywhere" for your point to make sense.
"Everywhere" in the context of a universe isn't quite as clear of a term as you'd expect.[/QUOTE]
On the contrary, asking me to define everywhere in the context of something that doesn't or didn't exist yet makes no sense. We're not talking in context of the universe because the big bang created the universe. It preceded the universe and created it all, thus it was everywhere.
[quote]Big Bang Misconception 2-
There is a center of the universe where the big bang occurred.
The big bang did not occur at the center of the universe, in fact, there really is no center
of the universe. The big bang occurred everywhere at once more like a “big splat.” The
big bang did not occur in one place and spread out through space. The big bang created
space and time. Space and time did not exist before the big bang. The big bang is still
creating space as we speak. This is the reason that there is a constant Cosmic Microwave
Background Radiation in the universe. You can see some of this background radiation if
you tune your television to a non-existent channel. A percentage of the static that you see
on the screen is from CMBR hitting the antenna. When you are tuned to a strong station,
the signal overpowers the CMBR and you don’t see the static anymore. So certainly,
there is a geometric center of the universe, but there is nothing special there. There is a
very high probability that it is just empty space. . . empty expanding space.[/quote]
[url]http://scienceinquirer.wikispaces.com/file/view/BigBang.pdf[/url]
[QUOTE=RichyZ;33133298]big bang theory, look it up
tl;dr for it, dense as fuck singularity expands forming planets and stars on the way[/QUOTE]
The big bang also didn't make planets or stars. Not directly at least. Stars came later, planets even later than that.
[quote]
Misconception 7-
All of the elements that make up our universe were created in the big bang.
Most of the material generated by the big bang were light elements like hydrogen and
helium. Heavier elements were created in the fusion reactions in the center of stars.
Stars are only hot enough to create elements as heavy as iron. Anything heavier than iron
is created in Supernovas. Supernovas are the result of very large stars running out of
light elements to fuse together. Without the large amount of heat at the center of the star,
it collapses and then explodes in the most energetic events known to cosmologists. This
violent explosions fuse heavy elements together making copper, gold, uranium, platinum,
and silver as well as other elements heavier than iron. [/quote]
[QUOTE=Jookia;33133386]The universe wasn't created. It's always existed in some form, and it exploded.[/QUOTE]
If you're talking about the big bang then you're wrong. Refer to misconception 2.
[QUOTE=FPChris;33134915]The universe expands and gets eaten by black holes etc.
New big bang etc.[/QUOTE]
If the universe is expanding, then how does it get eaten by black holes? If everything is eaten by black holes, then how does a big bang occur? Black holes (as far as we know), don't create space and time. Perhaps within the warped time and space of a black hole there's some type of new universe, but that's kind of pushing it in my opinion. Black holes do disipate (according to Hawking), so either way eventually everything would just spread out infinetly.
[QUOTE=No_0ne;33136573]Nothing even a fraction as old as the universe exists without a cycle of renewal.
I believe that the universe has always existed, but undergoes a cycle of collapsing on itself and exploding to form a new universe.[/QUOTE]
The universe is expanding at a very rapid pace, it's not going to collapse in on itself so far as we can tell.
[quote]Big Bang Misconception 4-
The universe’s expansion is slowing down and eventually gravity will make it collapse.
This was one hypothesis for many years, but scientific observations have shown it not to
be true. In fact, the universe’s expansion is accelerating! This is also explained by the
expansion of space itself. Some have hypothesized that Dark Energy is the source of
energy powering this expansion, but this has not been verified and nobody yet knows
what Dark Energy really is.[/quote]
[QUOTE=J-Dude;33137390]Assuming the Universe isn't itself a massive Mobius Strip where spacetime wraps around so reaching the "edge" just brings you to the other side of the "map" like in "Asteroids".
Chances are, in spacetime terms, we EXIST on the "edge" of the Universe, and the only way out, is through. Punching wormholes and stuff like that.
[/QUOTE]
Besides this, I agree with you. We do not live on the "edge" of the universe, that's an idea formed upon the misconception that the universe is expanding from a central point (see misconception 2). In fact we cannot even see the edge of the universe.
[quote]Misconception 5-
We can see to the edge of the universe.
Remember that the space between us and all other objects is expanding. The more space
there is between us and the other objects, the faster they are moving away from us. There
are objects that are so far away from us and are moving so quickly away from us that
their light will never reach us. Because the expansion of the universe is accelerating, the
number of objects that we will never see is increasing as the objects right on the edge of
that limit get farther away from us and separate from us even faster. Recall that the
universe is[/quote]
[QUOTE=Wadsworth;33138512]I saw this really interesting documentary called Into the Universe with Steven Hawking, and he said that because the universe is always expanding if you look at it in reverse that means it would get closer and closer together until it compacted into a very small space, and that is where the universe began.[/QUOTE]
No, that's not where the universe began, that's where a piece of our visible universe would have began (begun?). Refer to misconception 2.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33164018]I know, I mentioned this previously.
[editline]7th November 2011[/editline]
Stop moaning. You jump to many conclusions without even knowing me.[/QUOTE]
I've watched your posts in multiple sections for a long time, How you act is mental in the face.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;33156523]If there was proof, if would not be a theory.
Hnng! All my rage![/QUOTE]
Theories have proof, just not tested under every circumstance..
[quote]Theories are abstract and conceptual, and to this end they are never considered true. Instead, they are supported or challenged by observations in the world.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;33166060]I've watched your posts in multiple sections for a long time, How you act is mental in the face.[/QUOTE]
You've watched me. Never talked to me.
Actually AK'z usually people would express their true feelings when anonymous I think.
But anyway, isn't it obvious how the world was created? Just shit piling up in space due to gravitation and other cool laws of physics, which are relative and.. well, there's just a lot of objects of different masses, in space.
How it all started? I wouldn't know. We counted it back 14 billion years, but maybe that's just retarded thinking. But I gotta say scientists have done some incredible findings about space and planets. And a lot of it makes sense out of what is senseless.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;33166199]Actually AK'z usually people would express their true feelings when anonymous I think.
[B]But anyway, isn't it obvious how the world was created? [/B]Just shit piling up in space due to gravitation and other cool laws of physics, which are relative and.. well, there's just a lot of objects of different masses, in space.
How it all started? I wouldn't know. We counted it back 14 billion years, but maybe that's just retarded thinking. But I gotta say scientists have done some incredible findings about space and planets. And a lot of it makes sense out of what is senseless.[/QUOTE]
No, it isn't.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33166088]You've watched me. Never talked to me.[/QUOTE]
I've talked to you. And not only are you fucking crazy, you commonly make up new definitions for words and stop using proper grammar making your posts nigh unreadable.
Honestly I have no idea why anybody bothers responding to you at this point.
We don't know. Nothing at all. And probably never will. But at least we can admit that fact and live with it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.