Hey Charlie, How is it going?
I’m curious by the way as to what you think about Dr. Barretts research and experiments. Did you get a chance to read the article?
Also I think that as you spend more time thinking about what we’re discussing, things will be clearer.
couple of things on your comments,
It is interesting that you say you write long messages to train your thoughts
Once again please read what I wrote carefully. I did not say I’m writing my messages to train my thoughts, I said:
Please do forgive my long posts as once I start writing, I try to maintain my train of thoughts so I don’t forget my ideas.
Train of thought = expression. Train as in: “bus, car or train”, not as in: “I’m trying to train my mind”. It's just an english expression. I'm basically sayin, I'm trying to organize my thoughts.
I feel Muslims often come with same way of talk and are not good to reply when someone comes with a new point of view
I hope this statement is based on the previous misreading of what I wrote. Also I request that you don’t share opinionated statements like this, especially when there is no supporting evidence. We actually like to see new points of view (we really do), and are very welcoming to reply to them. We do it all the time here so, try to avoid these presumptions.
I have mentioned Dawkins because he’s very known publicly to support atheism, and was just mentioning him in the context of his inability to answer the question I asked. Feel free to disagree with him and/or not take his ideas. Let’s discuss the arguments rather than people.
About the BB. You said:
This is so far just a theory and maybe impossible to ever show evidence for
I did mention the evidence that support the theory. Maybe you meant to say that the theory is not necessarily an absolute solid fact; exactly what I believe about evolution.
Due to some theories the expansion of universe will stop by the gravitation and change to contraction. One day everything will again be united in a huge cosmic egg and maybe explode again in a new BB
That’s why physics theorists insist on the existence of what they call dark matter although they have yet to prove it. But this pulsating universe theory has no evidence at all that I’m aware of. Actually like you mentioned universe is behaving to the contrary of what the theory says. Have you heard of the “theory” of God? The theory says: There is a God who created the world! I see this theory more, logical, convincing, and less of a mind-stretch with better evidence than a pulsating universe. Why are you open to the possibility of a pulsating universe, but are absolutely not open to the “theory” of God?
You talk about sun not being eternal, and universe not being eternal. No one says the sun is eternal
But that does not mean this is the start of the time. There could have been and probably has been some universe there before, although we can not prove that scientifically. Just speculate about it, just as you speculate about god.0
Charlie, after I read your comments on this one, I think I have identified a very important distinction that we have to note; and I think you will find this interesting. We might have been using the words “matter” and “universe” to mean different things. You seem to limit matter to only this universe as we know it, although I meant for it to be all matter. Let’s take the pulsating universe idea as example to clarify. You say, before the big bang, there could have been some universe before ours. That universe has matter in it. Now that universe is included in my discussion when I discuss whether matter/energy is eternal or not. There might have been some confusion using the word with interchangeable meanings. Think about applying the reasons of why we favor God to matter as the eternal first cause again. Matter changes its attributes all the time as far as we know. Whether in this universe as we know it, or in the previous one (assuming pulsating universe), or the one before…etc. I explained to you why we view change in attributes as a contradiction to eternal matter.
Logically we have two options:
Either the universe/time/matter all started at the Big Bang;
Or something existed even before the Big Bang.
Option1 makes us naturally ask, what started the BB? Our minds completely refuse an absolute-nothing-before-it idea (per statement1). Check out the following dialogue (hope it will clarify things a bit):
The question becomes, what existed before BB?
You say: ok more matter we don’t really know what it is, just as in a pulsating theory example.
We say: God.
If we say: but what was before the previous universe in your pulsating universe example.
you say: I can turn the question on you and ask: but what was before God.
If we say: Nothing was before God because God is eternal, he existed all the time to infinity in the past.
you say: Ok well I can say the same thing then. Nothing is before matter because matter is eternal, just like your God is eternal; it existed all the time to infinity in the past as well!!!!
We stopped here at some point in time. But I wanted to clarify to you why we choose God over matter to be the eternal “first cause”; and that was in one of my last posts.
So let me know what you don’t see logical if any so far. I’ll address the rules/law discussion in a different post.
Best of luck
Stranger
Bookmarks