What created God?

Originally posted by googlefudge
I wasn't claiming it possible to travel through time (at least not in the Hollywood, backwards in time,
it is certainly possible to travel forwards in time) Simply describing aspects of the hypothetical thought
experiment universe.

As for the rest of your post.... I am not sure you know what you mean, and I certainly don't.
Could you try to expand on what you are saying because I have no clue what your trying to say?

It is certainly possible to travel forwards in time? How do you know this? Do you know exactly how time works? I thought time didn't exist that it was now called "spacetime?"

The real question is that you can't see or even prove time but you can believe in it as easy as you can breathe?

You claim that you don't believe in God but you don't know if God exists either yet you constantly try to prove God doesn't exist.

Would you be willing to try to take a step on the other side to expand your own understanding?

Would you be willing to open your mind and instead try to prove that God does exist?

If you can't prove God you will still have gained understanding because science can't prove any of its theories yet as a collective has gained understanding from it.

In other words, it would be a win win for you.

Eternity is too long to be wrong so if you aren't sure, which is what you yourself claim, then you should be trying as hard as possible to understand both sides of the coin instead of trying to prove that tails doesn't exist simply because the coin is currently on heads.

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]This is true in a finite existence but if existence is infinite then the point of creation can be before and after creation.
Your argument with "circular" time or whatever still does not allow a basic problem to go away. Stop at any point on that temporal construct of yours where creation occurs and ask

Does a god capable of creating something exist question I expect we live in a granular universe and that actual infinities don't exist.[/b]

Yes, since before and afterwards there was a God capable of creation because at any point on that "temporal construct" creation is happening; creation already happend; and creation will happen.

You can't escape language. You can't escape the thought proccess that percieves time as an arrow.

Originally posted by tomtom232
It is certainly possible to travel forwards in time? How do you know this? Do you know exactly how time works? I thought time didn't exist that it was now called "spacetime?"

The real question is that you can't see or even prove time but you can believe in it as easy as you can breathe? You claim that you don't believe in God but you don't know if God ...[text shortened]... ying to prove that tails doesn't exist simply because the coin is currently on heads.

Picking one thread out of the dizzying blur .... spacing and paragraphs are your friend.

"It is certainly possible to travel forwards in time?
How do you know this?
Do you know exactly how time works?
I thought time didn't exist that it was now called "spacetime?" "

Every second, we move one second further forwards in time.
This may seem trivial, but we do travel in time.... Forwards.

The rate at which this happens can be altered, using both special and general relativity
using effects demonstrated and measured.

The question as to whether time exists, and what time precisely is is extremely complex
and unknown.

However this doesn't mean we can't know anything about it.

In GR space consists of 3 dimensions and Time 1, which combine to make 4 dimensional spacetime.
So in GR time very much exists.



As for the rest of your post.

It reads like you are speed talking, without pausing for breath.

I would be happy to answer your questions, as many as you like, but please can you ask them slower,
in more detail with space between them so it doesn't just look like one big block of text.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Picking one thread out of the dizzying blur .... spacing and paragraphs are your friend.

[b]"It is certainly possible to travel forwards in time?
How do you know this?
Do you know exactly how time works?
I thought time didn't exist that it was now called "spacetime?" "

Every second, we move one second further forwards in time.
This may s more detail with space between them so it doesn't just look like one big block of text.[/b]

What if time is like a like a cube but each side and edge is infinite and every event is just a point or line somewhere inside this cube.

How would one travel forward then?

How would one even define a direction then?

If you can move "forward" in time then the only other direction is "backward" assuming there even is another direction correct?

If there isn't another direction then how do you define the current direction we are moving at forward?

Edit: I also edited my above post to include line breaks like this one.

Originally posted by tomtom232
I am not arguing that every "thing" is sentient, this is what you assume, I am aruguing that the entity everything is sentient but not everything in it is sentient. You are sentient but your hands and feet are not. God(everything) is sentient but the rocks on the ground are not. You are part of the sentience of God. I am also not using this as "the" argume ...[text shortened]... as the argument and if you believe infinity then this is the same thing as believing in God.

I appreciate what you are arguing. And I disagree.

The fact that some things in everything are sentient, does not mean that 'everything in it's entirety' is sentient.

The universe has no collective intellect made up from instances of disparate intellect found in it.

Infinity is a concept, the real number line is infinite, it goes for ever in either direction and you can keep travelling
up or down it for ever without ever reaching an end (or infinity).

This makes it infinite, but doesn't mean that infinity is a number, it just means it goes on forever.

If you define god as infinity, then god no longer means anything.

The concept behind the word god is rather vague, but generally refers to a super powerful being, who may or may
not be singular in existence, and may or may not be infinite in size or time.

However if you randomly redefine the word god to be a different concept then we are no longer talking about the same thing.


You could define god to mean the 'smell you get after rain' and I would agree with you that that exists,
or you could define it as the universe, so 'everything' is god, and I would agree that with that definition that god would exist.

But that is not what anyone else means when they talk about god.

God as an intelligent super being of whatever description is what I am talking about when I use the term, and what pretty
much everyone else is when they use it.

And under such a definition god is not infinity, and 'believing in infinity', whatever that means, is not the same as believing in god.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let
them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and
over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps
on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God
He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:26-26 NKJV)

What? Where does it say that God can die?

Originally posted by tomtom232
What if time is like a like a cube but each side and edge is infinite and every event is just a point or line somewhere inside this cube.

How would one travel forward then?

How would one even define a direction then?

If you can move "forward" in time then the only other direction is "backward" assuming there even is another direction correct?
...[text shortened]... ving at forward?

Edit: I also edited my above post to include line breaks like this one.

Why would I have any reason to suppose time is how you describe it?

What evidence do you have for this?


There is a principle in science called the law of causality.

It is a rather cherished principle and has never ever been seen to be violated.

It says that if event A causes event B then event A MUST precede event B.

I.e. cause never follows effect.


We like this idea in science because without it everything goes haywire.

Fortunately nothing has ever been seen that even hints that it is possible.

And this is a question that has been, and continues to be, tested really really thoroughly.

So, until such time, if ever, that the law of causality is shown not to be true.

Any theory you present must meet the law of causality.

Cause can't precede effect, and time can't travel backwards (or people/things can't travel back in time)


We have made an enormous number of incredibly precise measurements of the universe and any hypothesis
you make needs to meet all of them.

This is why while it is quite possible (and even probable) that our theories are not right, where they match
current observations any new theory that replaces them must also produce the same answers where we
have already made observations.

Originally posted by tomtom232
It is certainly possible to travel forwards in time? How do you know this? Do you know exactly how time works? I thought time didn't exist that it was now called "spacetime?"

The real question is that you can't see or even prove time but you can believe in it as easy as you can breathe?

You claim that you don't believe in God but you don't know if ...[text shortened]... ying to prove that tails doesn't exist simply because the coin is currently on heads.

"The real question is that you can't see or even prove time but you can believe in it as easy as you can breathe?"

Well now that really depends on what you are talking about.
Certainly for all practical purposes time appears to exist/pass whatever.

I remember a past, I experience a present, and plan for a future.

However there are hypotheses that postulate 2 dimensions of time, and some that remove time altogether 'because it
makes the math nicer'. I don't know which, if any are true.
However some of them [the hypotheses] make predictions that are useful and accurate so it can be beneficial to use them,
while still trying to determine what in reality is actually true.

However till such a time, if ever, when we know, the jury remains out.

"You claim that you don't believe in God but you don't know if God exists either yet you constantly try to prove God doesn't exist."

I don't believe in god, I state this as fact as it is something I can know absolutely, although I appreciate I can't really prove it to anyone
else (barring someone developing a brain scan that can detect belief in god)

I don't claim to 'know whether god does or does not exist' but I do claim it to be unlikely that god exists and I believe god doesn't exist.

I would love to prove the non-existence of god, but I don't think it's possible.

I don't believe in god because there is no evidence he exists.

I believe god doesn't exist because I find the idea of god as described as absurd. And there doesn't exist the evidence I would expect if he did,
and there is a bunch of evidence pointing to god being made up by people.

I don't know god doesn't exist because I can't prove it, and don't think anyone can.

"Would you be willing to try to take a step on the other side to expand your own understanding?"

I am willing to hear any argument you have for god's existence and am more than willing to challenge my own convictions.


"Would you be willing to open your mind and instead try to prove that God does exist?"

I have an open mind, if you demonstrated god's existence (or more properly if god decided to demonstrate his existence, I don't expect
you to have god on tap) I would change my mind.
However having an open mind doesn't mean believing any idea that wanders through it.

To actively believe in an idea I need evidence or rational justification for it, suitable to justify the idea in question.

"If you can't prove God you will still have gained understanding because science can't prove any of its theories yet as a collective has gained understanding from it."

" In other words, it would be a win win for you."

"Eternity is too long to be wrong so if you aren't sure, which is what you yourself claim, then you should be trying as hard as possible to understand both sides of the coin instead of trying to prove that tails doesn't exist simply because the coin is currently on heads."

I am not sure what you mean by this and so will hold of until you explain further what you are getting at.



Thank you for the spacing.

Originally posted by galveston75
What? Where does it say that God can die?

I would think that God can do some things He hasn't told us He can do. Are you suggesting God is incapable of irreversibly terminating His own existence?

Originally posted by JS357
I would think that God can do some things He hasn't told us He can do. Are you suggesting God is incapable of irreversibly terminating His own existence?

Hmmm, interesting.


If god has always been, and thus has existed for an infinite amount of time
(ie you could go back any arbitrary vast distance in time and god would still
have existed for infinitely longer).

Then the probability of god choosing to end himself in any given point in time
must be zero, otherwise he would have done it by now.

So if god has always been then he can't kill/end himself.



If god is finite, then he has a beginning, and thus could have an end.

But then you have to ask what created god?

Which means god was either created by something/someone else.
Or
God created himself which is logically impossible.


So if you believe god to be the ultimate being, and eternal, he can't end himself.

If god isn't eternal he can't be the ultimate being and can end himself.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Hmmm, interesting.


If god has always been, and thus has existed for an infinite amount of time
(ie you could go back any arbitrary vast distance in time and god would still
have existed for infinitely longer).

Then the probability of god choosing to end himself in any given point in time
must be zero, otherwise he would have done it by now. ...[text shortened]... n't end himself.

If god isn't eternal he can't be the ultimate being and can end himself.

If god has always been, and thus has existed for an infinite amount of time
(ie you could go back any arbitrary vast distance in time and god would still
have existed for infinitely longer).

Then the probability of god choosing to end himself in any given point in time
must be zero, otherwise he would have done it by now.

So if god has always been then he can't kill/end himself.

Then how can God do anything he hasn't done by now?

Originally posted by JS357
If god has always been, and thus has existed for an infinite amount of time
(ie you could go back any arbitrary vast distance in time and god would still
have existed for infinitely longer).

Then the probability of god choosing to end himself in any given point in time
must be zero, otherwise he would have done it by now.

So if god has always been then he can't kill/end himself.

Then how can God do anything he hasn't done by now?

If god has existed for an infinite amount of time he will have done everything
he can do an infinite number of times.

So anything he hasn't already done he can't do.


EDIT: This of course means that a god that has existed (and will exist) for ever will have not
only have created an infinite number of other universes, but he will have created an infinite
number of universes identical to this one.
Which rather takes the shine off of the "we're gods special chosen people" line.


This is an inescapable conclusion if god has existed forever.

Originally posted by googlefudge
If god has existed for an infinite amount of time he will have done everything
he can do an infinite number of times.

So anything he hasn't already done he can't do.

At least you are making it up as you go along, instead of reading from a book.🙂

Originally posted by googlefudge
I wasn't appealing to zeno's paradox, rather comparing the problem to it.

However...
No, making time granular doesn't solve the problem as an infinite line of integers
has exactly the same issue as the real number line.

Namely how do you get from -infinity to any number on the number line, because add any
number to -infinity and you still get -i , or be at.
Any object in the universe would be a finite distance from any other object.

I don't disagree that infinity is not a number (unless we are talking about certain branches of mathematics, such as hyperbolic geometry, that append "the point at infinity" to the reals for convenience/utility)

However if we suppose time started at the big bang (I'm not a physicist btw but that seems to be the standard way of thinking - correct me if I'm wrong) coupled with granular time then for any time t_0 there would exist only a finite number of steps between that point and any point prior. In such case infinities don't occur.

Originally posted by JS357
At least you are making it up as you go along, instead of reading from a book.🙂

Just following the laws of logic.


If god has the ability to do something then he has a non zero probability of doing it at any
given moment in time.

If he has existed forever then he logically must have done everything it is possible for him to
have done, and done it an infinite number of times.

Anything he has not done by now it is because he can't do it.


Similarly if the universe has existed in one form or another for eternity then everything that it
is possible to happen will have happened an infinite number of times.