The thing about applying our tests to a universe governed by laws, laws are not a product of confusion, chaos, unguided principles, or undirected focus. Absolutes are required for any testing for causal results; if absolutes are not present, nothing could be predictable, and nothing could be known. All certainty would be lost; there could be no science done. Science can only be done with tested, repeatable results, impossible in a universe where there are no absolutes; no test would yield the same results in any lab.
In a universe without absolutes, could our minds grasp anything at all? Even coming up with a single right answer would be impossible, no matter how limited the scope of the queries are, even 1+1=2 could not be counted on, pardon the pun. To know any truth requires there to be truth, a mind that can recognize it and set it apart from error. This is not the product of chaos but intelligence, God creating a universe that reflects His nature.
@the-grifter removed their quoted postHow do you propose anything is proven, given most things in our universe are such that this is true, but it's true because, and that because is only true, because of another because. So it’s a declaration given for a reason, and that reason requires a declaration that requires a reason, and this all stops where? Every truth statement we proclaim is due to some cause, and where this gets settled is only in one place, the reason that just is, requiring no cause. I point you to Jesus Christ, who said, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, all things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made, making God the causeless cause, the prime reality. Outside of Him, it’s an eternal regression. So if we are ever to make a truth statement and the only reason for it is that we believe it, then, unlike God, we are the new source for our truth, but we are not responsible for it all! We are just one voice, caught up in our own thoughts, creating our own little personal narratives that describe the universe as we see it, not necessarily as it truly is.
@the-grifter removed their quoted postIn other what, a universe? Can you give me a cause or reason to assume there are more than one?
@KellyJay saidThere is some evidence of other universes, like galaxies seemingly older than the universe which could say thinking of our universe as a bubble, another bubble universe bangs into ours and we exchange mass, we give that uni some galaxies and we get some in return.
In other what, a universe? Can you give me a cause or reason to assume there are more than one?
Don't worry, not claiming that as fact I said it was EVIDENCE and there is some evidence in the CMB also and of course you are free to poo poo all that since that so far is all we have s far as evidence of other universes.
@sonhouse saidEvidence, really, what evidence do you think we have that there is something other than our own and that they are older? Just share what you think we have.
There is some evidence of other universes, like galaxies seemingly older than the universe which could say thinking of our universe as a bubble, another bubble universe bangs into ours and we exchange mass, we give that uni some galaxies and we get some in return.
Don't worry, not claiming that as fact I said it was EVIDENCE and there is some evidence in the CMB also and ...[text shortened]... are free to poo poo all that since that so far is all we have s far as evidence of other universes.
@KellyJay saidEr, I DID just share with you evidence seen by such telescopes as the James Webb and the CMB probes refining the CMB readings year by year.
Evidence, really, what evidence do you think we have that there is something other than our own and that they are older? Just share what you think we have.
Tell me, is their ANY science you approve of?
1 edit
@KellyJay saidJust proves how closed YOUR mind is. Other universes? Please? So you know SO much about the universe you can 100% rule them out.
Another universe, please.
So tell me your rationale for Please?
https://phys.org/news/2026-04-bennu-sample-reveals-newly-asteroid.html
Do you think water flowed in this asteroid Bennu?
@sonhouse saidI am asking for your evidence you claimed to have nothing more.
Just proves how closed YOUR mind is. Other universes? Please? So you know SO much about the universe you can 100% rule them out.
So tell me your rationale for Please?
https://phys.org/news/2026-04-bennu-sample-reveals-newly-asteroid.html
Do you think water flowed in this asteroid Bennu?
1 edit
@KellyJay saidYeah I know, the entire scientific community is on MY shoulders, I am SO ashamed I have not made an interstellar propulsion drive or solved the riddle of life origins.
I am asking for your evidence you claimed to have nothing more.
But you think since you just arbitrarily assign hate as the reason for my protestation, you CLEARLY could give a rats ass about MILLIONS of AMERICANS blown off insurance ONE HUNDRED PERCENT DUE TO THE EVIL OF TRUMP.
There is an organization called RAM, Remote Area Medical where people who lost insurance and have nowhere to go to get teeth fixed, eyeglasses and such, they are sleeping in their cars for several days waiting in line with hundreds of people seeking medical health.
CAUSED BY TRUMP.
And now he says on TV, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THESE PEOPLE, CHILD CARE and such, so he puts in a budget for the military of 1.5 TRILLION, 600 BILLION more than last year, and the money for that to be done by even more cuts to medicaid and such, he could care less how many people are going to die because of his ABUSE OF POWER TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
And YOU just sit their saying NOT A FKING WORD abut how Trump is LITERALLY running the USA into the ground, our international reputation in the FKING TOILET, wants to kill NATO, and the high speed rail in California, DEAD because TRUMP doesn't like BLUE STATES and Gavin Newsom in particular, and you see how he ACCEPTS total loyalty, you saw that in Kristy Noem, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, Steve Miller who is another EVIL person but if Trump decides you are out, he has ZERO friends and does loyalty EXACTLY like a diode, Loyalty goes ONE WAY, TO Trump, NEVER the other way. Take a look at Rudolph Giuliani, look how well Trump treated HIM.
And you TOTALLY ignore the FACT Trump IS A FELON, if those felonies were committed by ANY democrat you would be screaming to the top of your lungs HANG THE SOB, but NOT Trump, NEVER blame Trump for ANYTHING since he is the ONLY HOPE OF AMERICA.
Right now, he is fking the entire PLANET and all you can mewl and puke out is how since you say I hate him you somehow think that negates ANY argument I have over the ABSOLUTE corruption and pure ego driven EVIL, ALL THAT OUT THE WINDOW with you because YOU think OUR hatred of Trump gives Trump a BYE.
IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT, that is why we have COURTS to handle corruption at the highest levels and out in the open.
I can only assume YOU think there is NOTHING WRONG with BILLIONS in corruption, boys will be boys.
THE ENTIRE PLANET is in trouble, Trump threatening WAR CRIMES, attacking power plants, hospitals in Iran, JUST LIKE PUTIN in Ukraine.
I didn't even see you bitch about PUTIN so I guess you figure if you are a dictator, you get anything you want, is that about it?
5 edits
@KellyJay saidTo talk about natural laws "governing" anything is to employ a metaphor.
The thing about applying our tests to a universe governed by laws, laws are not a product of confusion, chaos, unguided principles, or undirected focus. Absolutes are required for any testing for causal results; if absolutes are not present, nothing could be predictable, and nothing could be known. All certainty would be lost; there could be no science done. Science can only ...[text shortened]... This is not the product of chaos but intelligence, God creating a universe that reflects His nature.
Thermodynamic laws, such as the law of entropy and the law of the conservation of energy, are descriptive laws, not normative laws. That is, they describe regularities we observe in nature, they do not compel anything to happen. These laws do not regulate events in nature; they regulate how any human explanation of events in nature are to be formulated.
And yes, these laws are indicative of intelligence, but you're pointing your finger in the wrong direction. The intelligence which laws of physics reveals is human intelligence: it is in every case the intelligence of people such as Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg which summarized these observed regularities as laws. They are not absolute, in the sense they could and probably would be reformulated, in light of new evidence.
Laws of physics are like principles of chess strategy. "Rooks belong behind passed pawns" etc. This principle of strategy does not make rooks move behind passed pawns--it only suggests that you do so, if you happen to have a rook and a passed pawn.
Similarly, the law of the conservation of energy does not make energy conserve itself. It only says that, in any chemical reaction, gasoline exploding inside a cylinder for example, the motion we can detect in moving the piston down plus the heat generated by the explosion, will add up to the same total even if there were no piston being pushed down but only heat generated.
Similarly, the law of gravity does not attach to a metaphysical force which makes things fall down. It simply codifies, in very general terms, the observation we have made, over thousands of years, that avalanches always end up at the bottom of the ravine, never at the top.
@moonbus saidPeople often focus on what confirms their existing beliefs rather than stepping back to seek what is true. If they see something true that they dislike, they have two choices. Alter their beliefs to fit reality, or make up something that can dismiss it, over the illusions they create to explain it.
To talk about natural laws "governing" anything is to employ a metaphor.
Thermodynamic laws, such as the law of entropy and the law of the conservation of energy, are descriptive laws, not normative laws. That is, they describe regularities we observe in nature, they do not compel anything to happen. These laws do not regulate events in nature; they regulate how any ...[text shortened]... ver thousands of years, that avalanches always end up at the bottom of the ravine, never at the top.
Of course, we use metaphorical names to describe what we see, but we do so after identifying structures that our explanation in our naming laws of nature can explain. Semiotics, for example, is something we understand because we both read and write; when we see words we recognize, we infer that another intelligence wrote them. Written (or spoken) language has mathematical features.
Even if we do not understand the language, we can often tell it is not chaos, unlike a random string of unrelated symbols thrown together without a pattern. I’ve said this before; it doesn’t change.
One way to see the difference is to scan a letter or other document and count the number of distinct words it contains; with gibberish, you would be lucky to find any consistent pattern. It takes intelligence to recognize intelligence, and that recognition is all around us. Likewise, the universe is describable because it is mathematically discernible—and that is not a fluke.
Abert Enstine’s quote fits; the most incomprehensible feature of the universe is that it is comprehensible. You are acknowledging only part of the universe, what we see, not what it is we are looking at.
@sonhouse saidNo, the only thing I am asking of you is to produce something you alone said you had.
Yeah I know, the entire scientific community is on MY shoulders, I am SO ashamed I have not made an interstellar propulsion drive or solved the riddle of life origins.
But you think since you just arbitrarily assign hate as the reason for my protestation, you CLEARLY could give a rats ass about MILLIONS of AMERICANS blown off insurance ONE HUNDRED PERCENT DUE TO THE EVIL ...[text shortened]... bout PUTIN so I guess you figure if you are a dictator, you get anything you want, is that about it?