An infinite series of finite causes.

[seer]

Just be very clear, I (nor I believe shuny) is supporting any such thing. My sole argument is that the scientific concept of an infinite universe or multiverse remains an open question in science at this stage. Unlike you and your bid to shoehorn science to fit your religious presuppositions, I am not arguing for one thing or the other. I'm awaiting the scientific consensus based upon the evidence. It will come in due course just as it has for many other scientific achievements.

And I'm saying there is zero evidence for eternal matter or energy - what we do have evidence for is our finite universe.

[element771]

Just listen to yourself. A touch of "pot calling kettle black" I fear!

I think you missed my point.

Shuny doesn't have the very thing he criticizes everyone else for not having when it comes to discussing the science.

[element771]

You take digs at theists in the majority of your posts.

It is cutting edge in that, unlike established scientific theories such as the near universal scientific consensus regarding say, Evolution, there is no such scientific consensus re the multiverse...as I said previously.

This is where you are out of your depth. Every area of research has a "cutting edge". Multiverse isn't an area of science all on its own...it is a branch of astrophysics. Most of its larger branch has a scientific consensus just like every other area of science.

I deny this snide accusation.

And you are wrong. There is

...all research is cutting edge Tass, that it my point. Otherwise it would have been done already.

There's no "hypocritical behaviour" on my part. This is merely an unwarranted snide opinion on your part.

When you accuse me of making snide remarks towards you, yet you yourself make these types of remarks to theist in a significant number of your posts...that is hypocritical behavior.


Do you not understand the definition of hypocrite?

No, I do not. See above.

I think that is the one thing people accuse you of the most.

Shuny doesn't have a degree in a related field, yet pretends he understands it better than anyone.

Shuny also says that Seer's view is not valid because he lacks the necessary degree to interpret the science.

If we listened to Shuny's criteria for not listening to someone on a topic, none of us should listen to Shuny on this topic.

How do you get that I am doing the same thing as Shuny?

[JimL]

I'm speaking of this universe Shuny, which is finite, there is no actual evidence for anything else. And let's not forget your religious agenda - your faith requires eternal matter or energy.

I don't believe that heat death is the same thing as the end of energy seer, I also doubt very much that the energy/matter making up our universe comes from, or is created out of nothing. That being said, I think it's up to you to show that energy is finite, not up to us to prove it is past eternal.

[seer]

That being said, I think it's up to you to show that energy is finite, not up to us to prove it is past eternal.

No it is not, if you think there is something other than this universe then it is on you to show it.

[JimL]

No it is not, if you think there is something other than this universe then it is on you to show it.

I have. Energy is neither created nor destroyed, heat death is not the disappearance of energy, not the end of the universe, the universe that we know can expand on into infinity but it's energy, though useless will continue to exist, because not only can something not come from nothing, but neither can something become nothing. Now I can't show you that nothing can come from nothing, anymore than you can show me that it can, but the only actual evidence that we have is that it doesn't. No existing thing comes from nothing, and no existing thing becomes nothing.

[seer]

I have. Energy is neither created nor destroyed, heat death is not the disappearance of energy, not the end of the universe, the universe that we know can expand on into infinity but it's energy, though useless will continue to exist, because not only can something not come from nothing, but neither can something become nothing. Now I can't show you that nothing can come from nothing, anymore than you can show me that it can, but the only actual evidence that we have is that it doesn't. No existing thing comes from nothing, and no existing thing becomes nothing.

Jim, the point is this universe is finite, it has not been expanding forever into the past, so it had a beginning point. If you are saying one day it will be a dead universe, sure but so what? And as we have discussed in the past there are physicists who are getting very close to saying that something came from nothing. As a matter of fact Hawking says just that, that the only thing required is the law of gravity. And remember Jim, God is not nothing.

[shunyadragon]

I'm speaking of this universe Shuny, which is finite, there is no actual evidence for anything else. And let's not forget your religious agenda - your faith requires eternal matter or energy.

Speaking of the universe, yes our universe, by the current view of physicists and cosmologists it is possibly eternal and/or infinite, and possibly cyclic, and possibly a part of a multiverse.

[JimL]

Jim, the point is this universe is finite, it has not been expanding forever into the past, so it had a beginning point. If you are saying one day it will be a dead universe, sure but so what? And as we have discussed in the past there are physicists who are getting very close to saying that something came from nothing. As a matter of fact Hawking says just that, that the only thing required is the law of gravity. And remember Jim, God is not nothing.

A tree is finite, its born of the universe that it exists within, and since, analogous to a tree, we can't see beyond the root of our universe, then saying that this universe is finite means very little. We can't see that! If this universe, our universe, is born of a greater eternal and infinite cosmos, which we have no observable access to, then the only thing that is finite about this universe, like a tree, is its form. And just a point in fact. If god created the universe out of nothing, then it was created out of nothing.

[element771]

Speaking of the universe, yes our universe, by the current view of physicists and cosmologists it is possibly eternal and/or infinite, and possibly cyclic, and possibly a part of a multiverse.

Don't forget a computer simulation, hologram, dream of a super being, a universe that is entirely created by one self (solipsism), brains in the vats, the matrix, the matrix within the matrix, the matrix within the matrix within the matrix, spirits in a material world...did I miss anything?

[Tassman]

And I'm saying there is zero evidence for eternal matter or energy - what we do have evidence for is our finite universe.

You are too eager to circumvent scientific enquiry. Whilst it's true that there is no evidence, which has been sufficiently well documented and verified beyond reasonable doubt at this stage, there are compelling reasons for theoretical physicists to posit a possibly infinite universe which is possibly part of a multiverse. The research is ongoing.

[Tassman]

You take digs at theists in the majority of your posts.

This is where you are out of your depth.

I have no reason to accept your self-declared superiority in scientific matters.

Every area of research has a "cutting edge". Multiverse isn't an area of science all on its own...it is a branch of astrophysics. Most of its larger branch has a scientific consensus just like every other area of science.

.all research is cutting edge Tass, that it my point. Otherwise it would have been done already.

No it's not. See above.

When you accuse me of making snide remarks towards you, yet you yourself make these types of remarks to theist in a significant number of your posts...that is hypocritical behavior. Do you not understand the definition of hypocrite?

I think that is the one thing people accuse you of the most.

No doubt you can get a gaggle of fellow theists to agree with you

Shuny doesn't have a degree in a related field, yet pretends he understands it better than anyone.

Shuny also says that Seer's view is not valid because he lacks the necessary degree to interpret the science.

If we listened to Shuny's criteria for not listening to someone on a topic, none of us should listen to Shuny on this topic.

How do you get that I am doing the same thing as Shuny?

I did not say that. I said you are doing the same thing that you ...get the difference? Regardless, it is not fitting to talk about other members behind their back...so to speak.

[seer]

Speaking of the universe, yes our universe, by the current view of physicists and cosmologists it is possibly eternal and/or infinite, and possibly cyclic, and possibly a part of a multiverse.

What physicists and cosmologists? Again Shuny, there is no evidence for either, but you have a religious agenda - your faith requires eternal matter and energy. Never mind the fact that if a cyclical universe or multi-verse are were true how do you then demonstrate that they actually were past eternal with out a beginning point? You couldn't.

[seer]

You are too eager to circumvent scientific enquiry. Whilst it's true that there is no evidence, which has been sufficiently well documented and verified beyond reasonable doubt at this stage, there are compelling reasons for theoretical physicists to posit a possibly infinite universe which is possibly part of a multiverse. The research is ongoing.

You just don't get it Tass, even if there was a multi-verse how do you demonstrate that it was past eternal? Even if all the math lined up, that still would not tell us that it never have a beginning. We could never go back in time...

[element771]

I shouldn't stoop down to your level....point taken.

I have no reason to accept your self-declared superiority in scientific matters.

Are you an academic scientist?


String theory has been around for 40 years.


I didn't taunt you, I insinuated that you were being a hypocrite.


No, I don't really care if there is a multiverse but I don't like to play fast and loose with the science. It seems that you two desperately want there to be an eternal universe so you will grab onto anything that suggests it. And no, Shuny does not exhibit knowledge and understanding on the subject. He block quotes websites that agree with a couple of key words that he likes. His last quote was from a slide from a talk given.

I did not say that. I said you are doing the same thing that you ...get the difference? Regardless, it is not fitting to talk about other members behind their back...so to speak.

1. This is, by your definition, a childish taunt.

2. I wrote what I was accusing Shuny of doing and I am not doing that in the least. So there is no difference.