In the beginning

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

[quote] 'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'

Now, having closely examined that sonship, and reading that I have discounted 'any' creation event, do you stand by your statement that I actually believe the universe created itself out of nothing? If not, kindly retract your false assessment of what I believe. [/quote ...[text shortened]... ent[/b] FORM from the past FORM a creation event of the present FORM caused by the past FORM?

"The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that. "


True to form an immediate misquote showing you haven't got it. Not only did you misread 'one' for 'some' you even put 'SOME' in capital letters.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Nudge for Kelly.

Either identify one person who has ever expressed such a view, or like sonship resign such silly statements to the bin. I know it is a handy put down for non-subscribers to your 'God did it' belief, but it really is disingenuous when no one has claimed the universe created itself out of nothing.

Theory of Self-Creation. The discussion is reached to the point when the Indian scientist considers that the things created themselves. By implication, it also means that this earth and universe created themselves and that there is no sign for the existence of one unique God.

Look it up yourself if you want to go after it.
I simply said some do, it wasn't simply laying down some ground work for the question. Outside of God what could make this universe? Now you are in my opinion the only one I have seen attempt to answer this. I don't agree or find your reasoning solid, but it is your reasoning and I admire you for stating it.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
"The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that. "


True to form an immediate misquote showing you haven't got it. Not only did you misread 'one' for 'some' you even put 'SOME' in capital letters.

This pure faith on your part or is there some evidence we can look at and judge?

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

sonship:

"The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that. "

You say I misrepresent you above. What you literally wrote was -

'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'

There is no misrepresentation of what you wrote.

One form or another - YOU.
in SOME form - ME.

There is no sneaky misrepresentation of my understanding of what you mean.

Let's say the universe in FORM A is a different form then the universe in FORM B which is a different form from the universe FORM C.

The set of FORM A, FORM B, and FORM C. From the slither of an infinite situation, FORM B, for example is "SOME form".

Any form in the set, even if an infinite set, is SOME form.
So I represent your thought exactly that you are saying that ---

"The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that. "

True to form an immediate misquote showing you haven't got it. Not only did you misread 'one' for 'some' you even put 'SOME' in capital letters.

Capital letters is simply for emphasis.
It seems you are trying to rig the exchange so that expressing my interpretation of your concept is not allowed if it is not a verbatim quotation.

The real issue is should I apologize for saying you believe the universe was created when you clearly say it ALWAYS existed. Again, the capital letters on "ALWAYS" is simply my emphasis.

While I acknowledge that you say, if I understand you there was no creation of the universe, I am not sure you really mean no creation of the universe.

If we take a subsection of your infinite process of the universe in some form, let's say FORM N and understand it was did not exist when the universe was in FORM N-1, then was the universe in FORM N created?

H2O can be in the form of vapor, the form of liquid, the form of ice.

If the temperature is high, H2O is in the form of vapor while that same H2O in the form of liquid has not been created yet. When the temperature is right for the transformation that H2O in the FORM of liquid is created. If the temperature is dropped further, the H2O in the FORM of ice is created.

That H2O in SOME form, in one form or the other is created.

So the universe in its present form, was it created ?
Was the cause of the universe in its present form brought about by the existence of the universe in its previous form?

Now, having closely examined that sonship, and reading that I have discounted 'any' creation event, do you stand by your statement that I actually believe the universe created itself out of nothing? If not, kindly retract your false assessment of what I believe.

Having closely examined your concept it is hard to say that you are really saying there is no creation event (of any universe).

If the universe in form N-1 existed and the universe in form N did not, and then the universe in N came out of the universe in form N-1, the universe created itself in a new form.

And for back to infinite, you are holding that infinitely the universe creates itself in form after form, in SOME form.

For infinity your universe creates over and over again itself. It is hard for me to imagine that something does not exist then, but exists after then, but creation was not involved.

I would say only God as a Life for which a greater cannot exist, is uncreated.

Now, since each universe in its various forms is created OUT of the previous form, I couldn't say you're saying the various forms of the universe were created out of NOTHING. That I might have to retract if I charged you with that.

But you have IMO a contradiction - the universe. - ever existing and self creating.

An iterative, infinitely iterative cycle of self creation is occurring in your explanation.

@sonship said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

[quote] 'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'

Now, having closely examined that sonship, and reading that I have discounted 'any' creation event, do you stand by your statement that I actually believe the universe created itself out of nothing? If not, kindly retract your false assessment of what I believe. [/quote ...[text shortened]... ent[/b] FORM from the past FORM a creation event of the present FORM caused by the past FORM?

My post: 'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'

Your reply: 'The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that.'


I didn't 'say that'. You didn't 'get it'.

@kellyjay said
This pure faith on your part or is there some evidence we can look at and judge?

A finite mind can never comprehend the infinite. You know that Kelly. All we can do is apply logic.

I have done that.

@kellyjay said
Theory of Self-Creation. The discussion is reached to the point when the Indian scientist considers that the things created themselves. By implication, it also means that this earth and universe created themselves and that there is no sign for the existence of one unique God.

Look it up yourself if you want to go after it.
I simply said some do, it wasn't simply laying d ...[text shortened]... don't agree or find your reasoning solid, but it is your reasoning and I admire you for stating it.

You are aware what science says about this, are you not?

@whodey said
Let their be light = Big Bang

Let the water bring forth life = Cambrian Explosion.

There is nothing gradual about evolution/creation. That is the big myth.

14 billion years isn't gradual enough for you?

@kellyjay said
This pure faith on your part or is there some evidence we can look at and judge?

This is worth a read Kelly, if you genuinely would like to consider some evidence for an eternal universe:

'The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once... In cosmological terms, the scientists explain that the quantum corrections can be thought of as a cosmological constant term (without the need for dark energy) and a radiation term. These terms keep the universe at a finite size, and therefore give it an infinite age. The terms also make predictions that agree closely with current observations of the cosmological constant and density of the universe...'


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

@kellyjay said
Genesis 1 English Standard Version (ESV)
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

I've asked this before.
Some believe in a steady state universe.
Some believe the universe created itself out of nothing.
Some believe in this that or the other things.

With cause (defend your belief) can anyone come up with a reason for everything?

I do not know.

@whodey said
Let their be light = Big Bang

Let the water bring forth life = Cambrian Explosion.

There is nothing gradual about evolution/creation. That is the big myth.

I've already shown you are full of $h1te regarding Cambrian explosion!!!

@wolfgang59 said
I do not know.

An admirable 'human' answer, and a good starting point to search for genuine explanations.

@suzianne said
You are aware what science says about this, are you not?

Actually people say things not science. What do you think science says about this?

@wolfgang59 said
I do not know.

Honest answer!

@ghost-of-a-duke said
This is worth a read Kelly, if you genuinely would like to consider some evidence for an eternal universe:

'The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once... In ...[text shortened]... he universe...'


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

The universe is not at a finite size or static, it is expanding. Even Einstein saw this when he looked through Hubble’s telescope, when he then acknowledged the error you are trying to justify.