Real Science Friday: The Energy Order of the Universe

[Lighthouse]

Is it normal for a creationist, when responding to a question about evolution, to not even pretend to address the question and instead make a comment about a completely different subject?

What question? I didn't see a question in the section to which that was my response. Do you need glasses? Must be entropy.

 

[ThePhy]

What question? I didn't see a question in the section to which that was my response. Do you need glasses? Must be entropy.

So your refuge is that Alate did not phrase it in the form of a question? You choose to pretend not to understand the intent of what I said, and prefer instead to dodge the substance by hiding behind semantics.

 

[Alate_One]

I'm not the one that looks out at the universe and thinks it was an accident.

I don't think that. And you demonstrate GROSS ignorance yet again by saying that.

So what caused the big bang?

We don't know and we may never know.

No. "Nuclear fusion," would have been an answer.

So "ever hear of nuclear fusion" wasn't good enough for you? And *I'm* the idiot in this conversation? Get a clue. Like Jukia, I was surprised to see you even asking the question so I didn't immediately launch into an explanation.

Then I was lied to.

I dunno who told you that but they aren't correct. Now Hawking worked on singularities, which are, essentially looking at the very beginning of the big bang. But even he didn't like the idea of the universe having a beginning so he was/is? trying to figure out ways around it.

 

[Lighthouse]

So your refuge is that Alate did not phrase it in the form of a question? You choose to pretend not to understand the intent of what I said, and prefer instead to dodge the substance by hiding behind semantics.

No, you twit!

First off he did phrase it in the form of a question, so check your brain it's not working properly.

Secondly, the fact that he phrased it as a question is not the sole issue. Even if he had merely stated, "Nuclear fusion," it still would not have been a full answer. I was looking for an explanation, such as what Jukia gave.

I don't think that. And you demonstrate GROSS ignorance yet again by saying that.

Then what do you believe?

We don't know and we may never know.

So you don't believe God had a hand in it?


And you can't think of how an explosion can happen without any gases?

So "ever hear of nuclear fusion" wasn't good enough for you? And *I'm* the idiot in this conversation? Get a clue. Like Jukia, I was surprised to see you even asking the question so I didn't immediately launch into an explanation.

At least Jukia explained nuclear fusion, whereas you mentioned it and nothing more. You assume too much.

I dunno who told you that but they aren't correct. Now Hawking worked on singularities, which are, essentially looking at the very beginning of the big bang. But even he didn't like the idea of the universe having a beginning so he was/is? trying to figure out ways around it.

Then where did it come from? Do they even have a theory?

 

[Alate_One]

Then what do you believe?

God has sustained and ordained the unfolding of the universe from the Big bang through stellar evolution, planetary evolution and biological evolution up until the present day. With God nothing is "an accident".

However, even an atheistic view of evolution is not just "an accident". The processes of natural selection are not random. For the origin of the universe, from an atheist's perspective, you might be able to say "accident" if you take certain views of it. Even so the processes after the big bang are in many ways orderly.

So you don't believe God had a hand in it?

I didn't say that. However science does not currently (and may never) know what was before the Big Bang. I'm not going to play "god of the gaps" and say because we don't know currently what caused the Big bang that God supernaturally caused it. Maybe He did. But certainly God is involved in creating and preserving the created order, up until the present day, so God was and is involved in creation, period.

And you can't think of how an explosion can happen without any gases?

It happened before there was matter- its what created matter and separated the forces of the universe. This isn't like a gasoline explosion on earth. You know what protons neutrons and electrons are right?

At least Jukia explained nuclear fusion, whereas you mentioned it and nothing more. You assume too much.

You could have also taken two seconds and looked it up for yourself online too. You doth protest too much.

Then where did it come from? Do they even have a theory?

Where did what come from? the singularity? Some people think the universe oscillates back and forth and there may have been lots of collapses followed by Big Bangs rather than one. Or that there are multiple universes and we just happen to be in the one that supports life. So far as we know these are not currently scientifically testable so they are not much more than speculation.

 

[Lighthouse]

However, even an atheistic view of evolution is not just "an accident". The processes of natural selection are not random. For the origin of the universe, from an atheist's perspective, you might be able to say "accident" if you take certain views of it. Even so the processes after the big bang are in many ways orderly.

Where does the order come from if there is no intelligence to guide it?

I didn't say that. However science does not currently (and may never) know what was before the Big Bang. I'm not going to play "god of the gaps" and say because we don't know currently what caused the Big bang that God supernaturally caused it. Maybe He did. But certainly God is involved in creating and preserving the created order, up until the present day, so God was and is involved in creation, period.

I didn't ask what science thought. I asked what you believe.

It happened before there was matter- its what created matter and separated the forces of the universe. This isn't like a gasoline explosion on earth. You know what protons neutrons and electrons are right?

Gasoline doesn't explode. The fumes [gases] do.

You could have also taken two seconds and looked it up for yourself online too. You doth protest too much.

I've got other stuff going on. And, beside, Jukia was able to answer quite succinctly and still explain fully. If she could do it why not you?

Where did what come from? the singularity? Some people think the universe oscillates back and forth and there may have been lots of collapses followed by Big Bangs rather than one. Or that there are multiple universes and we just happen to be in the one that supports life. So far as we know these are not currently scientifically testable so they are not much more than speculation.

No, I meant the universe. If they don't like the idea that it began then where did it come from?

 

[Alate_One]

Where does the order come from if there is no intelligence to guide it?

Things are ordered based on the universal laws and constants. Now why our constants are set in such a way that life will develop is an open question - that's where the multiverse hypothesis comes in.

I didn't ask what science thought. I asked what you believe.

I believe God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them. Exactly how God began creation I don't know. Maybe it was the Big Bang itself, maybe something before that.

Gasoline doesn't explode. The fumes [gases] do.

Now you're playing semantic games because I wasn't specific enough in my analogy. Solids can explode. What we are talking about in the big bang isn't even matter and it expanded faster than the speed of light.

I've got other stuff going on. And, beside, Jukia was able to answer quite succinctly and still explain fully. If she could do it why not you?

I certainly could. I chose not to. What's not to understand? And why are you still complaining about it. Its not like you paid for a lesson.

No, I meant the universe. If they don't like the idea that it began then where did it come from?

The oldest idea was that the universe was eternal but the Big Bang upended that. Like I said some people have tried to say the Big Band is only part of a larger, perhaps eternal cycle, but there's no evidence for it.

 

[Lighthouse]

Things are ordered based on the universal laws and constants. Now why our constants are set in such a way that life will develop is an open question - that's where the multiverse hypothesis comes in.

But no theories as to how it all began [everything] from those who refuse and deny all forms of intelligent design?

I believe God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them. Exactly how God began creation I don't know. Maybe it was the Big Bang itself, maybe something before that.

So what do you do with Genesis?

Now you're playing semantic games because I wasn't specific enough in my analogy. Solids can explode. What we are talking about in the big bang isn't even matter and it expanded faster than the speed of light.

But how do solids explode?

I certainly could. I chose not to. What's not to understand? And why are you still complaining about it. Its not like you paid for a lesson.

I was done with it until you and The Phy kept bringing it up.

The oldest idea was that the universe was eternal but the Big Bang upended that. Like I said some people have tried to say the Big Band is only part of a larger, perhaps eternal cycle, but there's no evidence for it.

So the idea was that it just existed? And they don't think that sounds stupid?

 

[Alate_One]

But no theories as to how it all began [everything] from those who refuse and deny all forms of intelligent design?

Essentially you have two options either there's an actually infinite series of causes or there's a beginning caused by something that doesn't have a cause - assuming any of that makes sense. I think the latter makes more sense than the former but plenty of intelligent people disagree. But really anything before the Big bang is speculation.

So what do you do with Genesis?

Genesis 1 is not meant to be a literal representation of HOW God created the universe. Its a stylistic semi-poetic account that is specifically directed against other myths of the ancient near east.

But how do solids explode?

I don't know but I know they do, most explosives are solids. And the Big bang didn't involve matter so . . . .

So the idea was that it just existed? And they don't think that sounds stupid?

That was the prevailing idea before the Big Bang. I dunno about it "sounding stupid" but it doesn't really make sense to me.

 

[Lighthouse]

Genesis 1 is not meant to be a literal representation of HOW God created the universe. Its a stylistic semi-poetic account that is specifically directed against other myths of the ancient near east.

Can you back that up?

I don't know but I know they do, most explosives are solids. And the Big bang didn't involve matter so . . . .

But is it really the solids that explode or the gases within?

That was the prevailing idea before the Big Bang. I dunno about it "sounding stupid" but it doesn't really make sense to me.

It doesn't make sense to anyone. If they say it does they're lying to save face.

 

[Alate_One]

Can you back that up?

Getting a little far off topic for this thread but if you'd like to start another, or go to this slightly old one I wouldn't be opposed.

But is it really the solids that explode or the gases within?

Expanding gases are what make up any normal explosion (not the big bang obviously) but they could start off in any phase.

It doesn't make sense to anyone. If they say it does they're lying to save face.

I dunno strange things can make sense to smart people . . . that's an everyday occurrence around here.

 

[Lighthouse]

Getting a little far off topic for this thread but if you'd like to start another, or go to this slightly old one I wouldn't be opposed.

Expanding gases are what make up any normal explosion (not the big bang obviously) but they could start off in any phase.

I dunno strange things can make sense to smart people . . . that's an everyday occurrence around here.

:loser:

 

[Alate_One]

:loser:

So you admit defeat . . . very good. :up: :chuckle:

 

[Lighthouse]

So you admit defeat . . . very good. :up: :chuckle:

You can't be defeated when your opponent refuses to fight, coward.

 

[Jukia]

You can't be defeated when your opponent refuses to fight, coward.

Fight about what? Science in general? Astronomy? Physics? Biology?
With whom? You?
Sorry, but the fight would be unfair. You have shown that you have no weapons, intellectual or otherwise.

 

[Lighthouse]

Fight about what? Science in general? Astronomy? Physics? Biology?
With whom? You?
Sorry, but the fight would be unfair. You have shown that you have no weapons, intellectual or otherwise.

I have my concealed carry permit.

 

[Alate_One]

You can't be defeated when your opponent refuses to fight, coward.

I have to agree . . .where are your posts in the thread I linked? Where's the new thread you started?

I have my concealed carry permit.

It seems you don't have the guts to brandish whatever "weapons" you might have.

 

[Jukia]

I have my concealed carry permit.

Ah yes. Whoever has the biggest gun wins? You know there are often deep seated psychological issues that go along with the need to carry a gun. Often Mommy issues. But lets not go there.

What you really need is something that does not need a permit---intellectual curiosity.

 

[Memento Mori]

What you really need is something that does not need a permit---intellectual curiosity.

And library cards are free!

 

[Lighthouse]

I have to agree . . .where are your posts in the thread I linked? Where's the new thread you started?


It seems you don't have the guts to brandish whatever "weapons" you might have.

The fact that you are unaware of the weapon I am using proves that I wield it with perfection.

Ah yes. Whoever has the biggest gun wins? You know there are often deep seated psychological issues that go along with the need to carry a gun. Often Mommy issues. But lets not go there.

What you really need is something that does not need a permit---intellectual curiosity.

Did you see that airplane?