Atheist Nexus Logo

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

Information

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4167
Latest Activity: 1 hour ago

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

2.8 million year old jaw

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Patricia 23 hours ago. 22 Replies

Ice Age Floods - Columbia River Basalt Group

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Gerald Payne yesterday. 3 Replies

Pill Makes People More Compassionate

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Idaho Spud on Monday. 3 Replies

Mystery of strange mammals

Started by Patricia Mar 19. 0 Replies

Global warming is not man made

Started by Donald L. Engel. Last reply by Gerald Payne Mar 17. 13 Replies

Too Much Vitamin D Bad for Heart

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Patricia Mar 12. 3 Replies

Scientists Say Mars had an Ocean of Water

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Mar 6. 3 Replies

Hawking on Aggression, Empathy and Space Travel

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Idaho Spud Feb 26. 23 Replies

Neanderthal Division of Labor by Sexes

Started by Daniel W. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Feb 21. 33 Replies

Quantum Entanglement.

Started by Paul Daniels. Last reply by Paul Daniels Feb 19. 9 Replies

6000 Year Old Valentines Found in Greek Cave

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Feb 16. 14 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Marc Draco on January 20, 2009 at 3:02pm
Seriously Alex, why did you infer I was ever upset? Perhaps you have been debating too much with conservatives too much of late?

I've written a whole chapter in my current book about Big Bang, in fact! Looking back, I guess I chose the wording poorly saying "given". Our physical laws came into being at Big Bang (or shortly afterwards). This does not imply a creator just a creation event: which is an entirely different thing.

What we don't know - and so far cannot accurately infer - is what came before Big Bang (assuming anything did!). I have never seen a convincing argument for a creator and rather doubt I ever will. I was demanding to know who created the creator before I hit my teens.

In the same way, we could all be brains in jars - or I might be brain in a jar and all this is provided for my amusement.

I can't find Dr. Meaden's article discussing how we might project back before Big Bang - there might not have even been a before; and even there was, I see no reason to assume that the physical laws existing before the BB event were in any way like our own.
Comment by Marc Draco on January 20, 2009 at 11:47am
Calm down? Whatever made you imagine I wasn't calm? ;-)

How is big bang creating our laws an argument for a designer?

I am aware of the anthropic principal (and the arguments both for and against).
Comment by Marc Draco on January 20, 2009 at 9:47am
But before the Big Bang, there were no laws of physics as we understand them; or at least, we can't be sure of any. Space-time as we understand only came into existence at Big Bang.
Comment by John on January 20, 2009 at 9:25am
Marco, the "laws of physics" simply are. I wouldn't say they were given to us as much as they are an inevitable result or an inherent function of the universe.

That is a very good argument against a persistent god though. The universe exists now in a state that can be measured and studied to a staggering precision. A god in the current universe is simply not necessary. I agree with you Dr. Meaden, Vic Stenger has a most interesting position on this. I read your link and it is quite interesting.
Comment by Marc Draco on January 20, 2009 at 9:11am
Didn't the Big Bang give us the laws of physics that we know now?
Comment by Dr. Terence Meaden on January 20, 2009 at 9:08am
http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/originsuniverselifehumankindanddarwin/forum/topics/2182797:Topic:110343

You can shift this discussion if you wish to another part of this group's discussion area as prompted by the Big Question, "What happened before the Big Bang?".
Although we can never know, we can try approaching possible answers through applying the known laws of physics. One possibility that I find attractive has been well discussed by Vic Stenger. I wrote a piece about this, and sent it to Vic Stenger for comment (with which he agreed). The URL is
http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/originsuniverselifehumankindanddarwin/forum/topics/2182797:Topic:110343

http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/originsuniverselifehumankindanddarwin/forum/topics/2182797:Topic:110343
Comment by Marcus Tullius Cicero on January 20, 2009 at 8:21am
Strong AP: the laws of physics are biased toward life or, as Dyson is reported to have once said, the universe was aware that we were coming.

Andrei Linde, recently. Brandon Carter, in the 70's. John Polkinghorne, recently. Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate. There are others.

When one discusses a theory or paradigm it does not necessarily mean he believes it to be true. It is a thought experiment. Relax, take off the boxing gloves, and join us in the land of cool cogitation.
(:
Comment by Tedster on January 20, 2009 at 12:25am
To yes, I agree. God didn't make me an atheist, he isn't around to do it. This gives to good conversation starters.
Comment by Marcus Tullius Cicero on January 19, 2009 at 7:35pm
A new thread to pursue in "Origins": how do we deal with the large number of theoretical physicists who have arrived at the "strong" Anthropic Principle as a result of their scientific, not theological, research? These are brilliant men, some of whom are Nobel Laureates. Others have said that if there is only one universe, not a multiverse, then a conscious fine-tuner is needed. Another has said that consciousness may be a fundamental component of the universe, that a conscious observer is necessary for it to exist.

Oh, the problems we have! Just wait until this hits the lay press!
Comment by Mario Romero on January 19, 2009 at 2:26pm
No! please, don't cry,,, last time it lasted for, like, 40 days and nights and we ended up with GOP and Billy O'Riley!
 

Members (4167)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service