PDA

View Full Version : The illogical solution to an illogical problem.



dgkisler
02-10-2004, 02:17 PM
Ok, joking a side, I would like to run a little theory of mine by you guys.
These are some generally agreed upon theories. 1. Matter and mass are constant. Matter, mass, and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Therfore the existance of matter, mass, and energy is infinite.
Of course something cannot be created out of nothing, therefore the existance of anything is illogical.
We have no information or facts about the "creation" or "non creation" of the universe. So the only logical answer to an illogical problem is an illogical solution, God. We have no proof of either. The huge majority of the humans on earth do believe in the existance of the universe, they just have no rational answer to its creation or non creation (if you believe it has always been a constant). But god on the other hand is a solution believed by billions of people too, Einstein included. So has the illogical faith based God become a catch all problem solver for all the illogical questions of the universe. Will we one day become smart enough to understand the universe and stop relying on the crutch of God?
Interested to hear what your opinions are, and feel free to use any of your opinions, I am always ready to talk about this incorigable proposition.

Cueless Joey
02-10-2004, 02:54 PM
St Thomas Aquinas ( sp?) theories.
He offered 5 proofs why God must exist.
Most notably the transformation from potentiality to actuality and the law of generation.
Anything in actuality now was previously in potentiality.
God had to be the beginning since he is pure actuality and everything else transformed from potentiality to actuality.
The law of generation dictates that everything that exists today was generated. Generation's beginning cannot go infinitely therefore something had to exist by itself and was not generated, that being God.
I am not qualified to disallow St Thomas Aquinas' arguments. My philosphy teacher said, he is exploiting man's limited comprehension of time ( we cannot comprehend infinity) or so.
SO, when did time begin? Really, does it have to begin or it was always there?

Sidepocket
02-10-2004, 03:49 PM
I am pretty sure there is a prolbem with your first assumption. First, if you have assumed that mass and matter are constant, then they certainly cannot be infinite. Second, we do have the ability to create matter, mass, and even anti-matter. This process involves the collision of atoms at great speeds, etc. (grab a science book if you want further info or go spend some time at Argonne or Fermi). One example that I can think of would be the atom bomb, the nuclear bomb, or pretty much any bomb that you can think of. So the premise of your argument is not plausible, as well as illogical.

Also, just as in the billiards....there is always an equal and opposite reaction to any action.

cheesemouse
02-10-2004, 04:11 PM
The only thing I'm sure of is that the pondering of these questions is what caused the first human to put his palms up and srugg his shoulders.... /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

nAz
02-10-2004, 06:36 PM
Must be a supreme being I can not believe all the beauty in the universe was an random accident, it must have been created...unless of course Fast Larry did it /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

pooltchr
02-11-2004, 06:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sidepocket:</font><hr> Second, we do have the ability to create matter, mass, and even anti-matter. This process involves the collision of atoms at great speeds, etc.<hr /></blockquote>

Do we have the ability to actually CREATE these things, or are we just changing the form of something that is already in existance? Do atomic collisions create energy, or just take energy that already exists and release it? I think we only have the ability to take things that already exist and change their form. I can't think of any instance where man created something out of absolutely nothing.

Wally_in_Cincy
02-11-2004, 07:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> Do we have the ability to actually CREATE these things, or are we just changing the form of something that is already in existance? Do atomic collisions create energy, or just take energy that already exists and release it? I think we only have the ability to take things that already exist and change their form. I can't think of any instance where man created something out of absolutely nothing. <hr /></blockquote>

I believe you are correct

Wally_in_Cincy
02-11-2004, 07:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote nAz:</font><hr> Must be a supreme being I can not believe all the beauty in the universe was an random accident, it must have been created...unless of course Fast Larry did it /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

<hr /></blockquote>

I don't believe something as complex as the human body could have just "happened" by accident.

There are things we as simple humans cannot even begin to comprehend. Like George Burns said in that movie "Oh God"...

"if I appeared to you as I actually exist you could not comprehend it"

Rich R.
02-11-2004, 08:50 AM
Just what the world needs, another Philosophy major. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

dgkisler
02-11-2004, 09:05 AM
I may be wrong, but isn't the atom bomb just a release of the potential energy in atoms. And if we could create more energy from the potential energy than we would be looking at an unlimited source of energy.

dgkisler
02-11-2004, 09:12 AM
Clueless Joey, you hit on something interesting, yoy used the word Law. one of your "proofs" could also be that the Laws of the universe had to be MADE by something. There is also the intricate design of species, if something (ie human biology) appears to be designed, who designed it. Me personally think my ancestors were poo throwing monkeys. And I think philosophy is a good major if you want to be broke the rest of your life, I am going for psychology myself.

eg8r
02-11-2004, 09:13 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I may be wrong, but isn't the atom bomb just a release of the potential energy in atoms. And if we could create more energy from the potential energy than we would be looking at an unlimited source of energy. <hr /></blockquote> I am not sure, but I bet the leftists would be completely against the use of it commercially. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

eg8r
02-11-2004, 09:15 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Me personally think my ancestors were poo throwing monkeys. And I think philosophy is a good major if you want to be broke the rest of your life, I am going for psychology myself. <hr /></blockquote> LOL, apparently some are not completely evolved as others. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Cueless Joey
02-11-2004, 10:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dgkisler:</font><hr> Clueless Joey, you hit on something interesting, yoy used the word Law. one of your "proofs" could also be that the Laws of the universe had to be MADE by something. There is also the intricate design of species, if something (ie human biology) appears to be designed, who designed it. Me personally think my ancestors were poo throwing monkeys. And I think philosophy is a good major if you want to be broke the rest of your life, I am going for psychology myself. <hr /></blockquote>
I went to a Catholic university so I had to take Philisophy/Theology.
Those weren't my proofs. Those were St Thomas.
Btw, I'm Cueless not Clueless. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

dgkisler
02-11-2004, 01:08 PM
Sorry about the misunderstanding. If I was to choose a christian religion it would definatly be a catholic church. The whole confesional think is pretty cool, my confesional would probably go something like "Dear father, I have sinned, since the last time I have been mostly drunk, masturbating at least twice a day, gambling constantly and using your name in vain at least every other time I speak. I have also coveted the nieghbors wife, usually right after he leaves for work. How many hail marys and our fathers would that get me?

Cueless Joey
02-11-2004, 01:27 PM
DG, since you are a bonehead and probably a zit faced punk, this thread is closed as far as I'm concerned.

dgkisler
02-11-2004, 01:39 PM
Holy crap, easy.....eeeeeeeasy.....easy there fella, now that wasn't very christian of you there. And what do you have against people with skin conditions. As far as I am concerned you seem to be a pretty nice guy, but I DO NOT JUDGE PEOPLE. IT IS NOT MY PLACE TO JUDGE PEOPLE.

Eric.
02-11-2004, 05:40 PM
The two prevailing origins are either scientific or religeous, depending on your views. The dominant scientific view is that the universe was created in a catastophic explosion of enormous proportions which created a burning/life giving mass of perpetual energy to sustain life.

The other prevailing theory is that the origins of the universe was by Divine intervention; a superior being that orchestrated everything in a controlled, gradual, deliberated process, which...
.
.
.
.
.
would probably explain how someone would have 5 Aces in a game of Texas Hold Em.


Eric &gt; /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Fred Agnir
02-12-2004, 08:26 AM
If you're intent is to create a controversial thread based on a religious belief, then you're terribly unoriginal.

If you're attempting to "promote intelligent conversation," then you're terribly arrogant.

Personally, I think you're a troll and can't understand why anyone would simply come into an existing forum and trollbait from day one.

Fred

Cueless Joey
02-12-2004, 09:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fred Agnir:</font><hr> If you're intent is to create a controversial thread based on a religious belief, then you're terribly unoriginal.

If you're attempting to "promote intelligent conversation," then you're terribly arrogant.

Personally, I think you're a troll and can't understand why anyone would simply come into an existing forum and trollbait from day one.

Fred <hr /></blockquote>
This is obviously a kid trying for attention. Why he picked this board, I have no idea. He should find other boards.

dgkisler
02-12-2004, 11:21 AM
I thank you for calling me a kid, I am actually about 10 at heart, and refuse to feel any older. I start these threads to amuse my self between classes, and to get a rise out of you rubes. The five aces arguement has been viewed by a few of my friends and they couldn't understand why anyone would waste their time to even comment or reply to my obvious ruse. And yes, I do have friends. And know I do not mess with you rubes for attention, just sheer amusement.

Wally_in_Cincy
02-12-2004, 12:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dgkisler:</font><hr>...And know I do not mess with you rubes for attention, just sheer amusement. <hr /></blockquote>

So you're like the little alien girl in the Twilight Zone that had humans for pets. We are glad we can provide some color to your dreary day /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Cueless Joey
02-12-2004, 12:29 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dgkisler:</font><hr>...And know I do not mess with you rubes for attention, just sheer amusement. <hr /></blockquote>

So you're like the little alien girl in the Twilight Zone that had humans for pets. We are glad we can provide some color to your dreary day /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif <hr /></blockquote>
Classic, classic, classic!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Cueless Joey
02-12-2004, 12:33 PM
Rubes?
Lol, you are a zit-faced punk.
Now leave and do your homework.
Clean your room while you're at it.

dgkisler
02-15-2004, 09:38 PM
Will you people ever learn?

cheesemouse
02-16-2004, 05:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dgkisler:</font><hr> Will you people ever learn? <hr /></blockquote>


LIKE...Certainly not from you...LIKE...see ya.