by EndofMysteries 23 Replies latest watchtower bible
Here are some scientific terms " Mother Nature" "Nature"
If God is pure electrical energy, then (s)he cannot be omniscient and omnipotent. by ViV
Really Viv ? And exactly how does that work ? Cannot be ? Because..... ?
Here we go again ... the pseudo scientists, with master degrees in Google
and IQ s' several points above a rock.
I would look into the brain if you're looking to see where deity's originate and what they are made off. Also evolutionary sociological reasons.
A god made of pure energy would succumb to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and burn out in the end. That's probably what happened, and why no-one's seen god for a while, lol.
seraphim I dont know about wether the creator [if any] IS infinity.
I just lined up observations thes authors madeand 2 selected bible texts that I consider lucky shots [for the time of writing]
the ideas merely make iy somewhat plausible that a pre-big bang condition woud allow for a creative process, a creator even.
If you can discern the conditions you could possibly have the constraints on the characteristic of such an entity.
Science CAN ONLY work with the observable, so science has nothing to say about your god.
Please take some of the advice you have been repeatedly given in the last week and go buy a book on science.
Don't be so lazy.
S&R, My god,-- creator rather--, remains undefined. I am more interested in the CONDITIONS that these books, KRAUSS, PENROSE-- that I have ALL read,-- talk about.
of course we do not get direct signals, data from the time before inflation, the planck-size universe, but when talking about 'nothing' these authors are reaching into that realm. and
I am not the only one that comes away with the impression that all of them even when kicking the ball further down the road, -- seem to indicate there never was-- really nothing, or if there was 'no thing' there never was absolute emptiness.
I may be old and crazy, but dont call me lazy.
show me where I am wrong, wanting.
Wasn't talking to you prologos...
But if you are keen to catch the ball, the reference to being lazy is attached to the most basic concepts of science and energy. A trip to the library or 5mins on the amazon book section would result in resources that would allow you to see why these comments are unscientific and inaccurate.
Lazy because we have spoken about these things for years now and yet the same people clearly haven't even read the first chapters of a basic science book. To me, for someone that wants to take their spiritual beliefs into the science realm, the very least to do is read a science book....
Disagree?
Without doing so, how do you even use the words 'science' or 'energy'? It is first important to realise what these words mean.
I am tired of seeing the same peolple argue science and complex physics without the most basic understanding of these highly complex areas. I know my limitations in these area and I know I know nothing.
As for the definition of 'nothing', they are following the evidence, not intuition, not what feels right to us, not what is logical etc etc. Our understanding of the word nothing has no connection whatsoever to do with the reality of what nothing may represent, if we are calling the pre-big bang conditions 'nothing'.
Let's be honest, we can't even define 'nothing'. We can't even give an example of nothing. It is an arbitrary concept ast best, as we in our ignorance think of it, but....it may be totally irrational as a concept in the first place.
How is it possible for nothingness to exist? It is just as unintuitive as assuming there is no such thing as nothing. So rather than use gut feelings, let's wait for the data and evidnece. Krauss does it for a day job, we don't.
I don't want to talk god with you prologos, but for me, simply saying god came from nothing, is infinite and had no beginning.... is neither helpful, evidence based or interesting. I am not assuming you assume this, but from your past comments it may be the case. Anyway, I see no reason why your god is attached to the concept of nothingness, cosmology or the big bang. There is certainly no evidence for a god so far.
Krauss is working with math and evidence, for me, that is where my interest lies.
S&R I feel chastised, but at least we share the same interests. and
I keep reading because I like to have my world picture adjusted, put in better focus.
The explanation of god(s) is firmly in the realm of the mind, nothing external is required.
My personal definition of 'God' is: The totality of Everything. And I do mean Everything.
