Thread: Extended Discussion 2009 Religious Affiliation Census

Nope, that is complete nonsense. The universe is determined, not random. Probability is the 5th dimension to us and it can be said to be 0 dimensions. I.e. a point, or fixed. Unchanging.

The theory of the multi verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

I am yet to be convinced that there is a God. So I am an Atheist. (Y)

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

Nope, that is complete nonsense. The universe is determined, not random. Probability is the 5th dimension to us and it can be said to be 0 dimensions. I.e. a point, or fixed. Unchanging.

I don't understand that.

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

The theory of the multi verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

I agree that there is no proof for it, but it is the best way to have determinism in light of quantum phenomena. That's something that a lot of the new age crew doesn't understand. The whole reason to postulate the multiverse is to recover determinism.

And I too am curious about scientists trying to get to light speed. Of all people, they understand why it's not possible.

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

Nope, that is complete nonsense. The universe is determined, not random. Probability is the 5th dimension to us and it can be said to be 0 dimensions. I.e. a point, or fixed. Unchanging.

You seem pro-deterministic to untenable levels. You can't just ignore quantum theory.

The theory of the multi verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

Firstly, why is it completely ridiculous? If the creation of a large number of universes is infinitely ridiculous, it follows that the creation of a single universe is infinitely ridiculous, yet such an event has occurred, reductio ad absurdium.

Secondly, how do you explain the fine tuning of the universe for life?

I'm hearing that scientists have or are trying to get to light speed..

From the voices in your head I presume?

I thought I read that somewhere, but i was mistaken, they were talking about photons I believe.

I believe..Once you reach the speed of light you BECOME light...pure energy. Outside of time and space. Interesting stuff really.

Originally Posted by Xei

You seem pro-deterministic to untenable levels. You can't just ignore quantum theory.

Saying that every probable event creates a new universe is an unfounded idea. Where does all the matter and energy necessary for the new universe come from?

Firstly, why is it completely ridiculous? If the creation of a large number of universes is infinitely ridiculous, it follows that the creation of a single universe is infinitely ridiculous, yet such an event has occurred, reductio ad absurdium.

Creation?

Secondly, how do you explain the fine tuning of the universe for life?

How do you explain the fine tuning of the universe for silicon-based computing devices?

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

The theory of the multi verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

The theory of the uni-verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

The theory of there being no god has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Hercuflea

The theory of the uni-verse has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

You have never observed the universe before?

I am not going to comment on the second one since it makes you sound like a complete idiot

Yeah, and your multiverse comment made you sound like a complete idiot. Thats what I was doing there...

You've observed a universe being created? You do realize of course that that is like the find of the millennium?

Saying that every probable event creates a new universe is an unfounded idea. Where does all the matter and energy necessary for the new universe come from?

I'm not talking about the quantum theory interpretation, I'm talking about the idea that there may be more than one universe, with different fundemantal constants.

Obviously the energy point makes no sense because, again, the idea that there could be several other universes containing energy is no more bizarre than the existence of this one.

Creation?

Uh yes, it means something wasn't there previously and then it was.

How do you explain the fine tuning of the universe for silicon-based computing devices?

If the EMF constant differed by around 1 part in 10^40, molecules would not form; particles would just be floating around in a big soup.

Either the universe for some reason wants matter to form (i.e. argument for theism) or there are lots of universes, in a tiny proportion of which matter forms. Which do you think is more reasonable..?

There are many other examples of tiny variations in constants destroying any possibility of complex phenomena.

It's worth just considering the fact that there is no reason that these constants are what they are. It's completely arbitrary.

No, but based on your conclusion, I'm guessing you've observed the infinite reaches of the "uni" verse?

The theory of there being no god has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

The theory of there being no teapot orbiting the sun has no proof and is quite frankly completely ridiculous.

For God's sake just THINK before you post this dumb crap.

The point of that was: that none of these theories can be proven, God, no god, universe, multiverse, etc etc

To each his own.

There's a different between the lack of proof for an affirmative and the lack of proof for a negative.

Consider: should I believe that there is a teapot orbiting the sun?

No, because it's ridiculous, and there's no empirical or logical proof.

Same applies to God.

It does not apply to the multiverse because, although empirical proof is inherently impossible, there are clear logical arguments.

Originally Posted by Xei

I'm not talking about the quantum theory interpretation, I'm talking about the idea that there may be more than one universe, with different fundemantal constants.

Obviously the energy point makes no sense because, again, the idea that there could be several other universes containing energy is no more bizarre than the existence of this one.

Hard Wired specifically said that at every moment in time a new universe is created. Where from?

I didn't say it wasn't possible, I said it was unfounded, which it is.

Uh yes, it means something wasn't there previously and then it was.

Why do you think that there was once no universe?

If the EMF constant differed by around 1 part in 10^40, molecules would not form; particles would just be floating around in a big soup.

Either the universe for some reason wants matter to form (i.e. argument for theism) or there are lots of universes, in a tiny proportion of which matter forms. Which do you think is more reasonable..?

Obviously multiple universes, since a universe is an observed phenomenon, but that isn't proof that at every moment in time new universes form into other universes with the 'other possibility' of what just occurred in this universe. That is unfounded.

There are many other examples of tiny variations in constants destroying any possibility of complex phenomena.

It's worth just considering the fact that there is no reason that these constants are what they are. It's completely arbitrary.

Okay.

Sorry it looks like we just misunderstood each other, I don't particularly believe in multiverses in the sense of the quantum interpretation.

In fact I don't have any particular views about that, because I haven't studied any quantum physics yet. I think it's one of those things that laymen are just completely unqualified to talk about.

Yeah it seems so.

Just a general question but why do a lot of people insist that time is 'cyclic'? And 'non-linear'? Doesn't make much sense to me seeing as I seem to experience the universe in at a consistent rate in chronological order according to my memories.

Way to get off topic guys.

Originally Posted by Xei

.

Secondly, how do you explain the fine tuning of the universe for life?

That is a good observation and question.

I have a question for you. You have read my recent posts haven't you?

Try to answer the question with the assumption that this reality is digital, virtual, simulated and computed. I look forward to your answer.

(Btw, I feel we are spreading the discussion over way too many different threads, can we continue in http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...t=83470&page=4 ? )

What's the question?

Im Catholic.

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

Saying that every probable event creates a new universe is an unfounded idea. Where does all the matter and energy necessary for the new universe come from?

Conservation of energy: Conservation of energy is grossly violated if every instant infinite amounts of new matter are generated.

MWI response: Conservation of energy is not violated since the energy of each branch has to be weighted by its probability, according to the standard formula for the conservation of energy in quantum theory. This results in the total energy of the multiverse being conserved.[36]

From the wiki article on MWI.

But he said a new universe that is basically a copy of the last except one quantum particle is different. How does this happen? Just because?