Your tooth fairy not mine

@moonbus said
Yup. Gunna watch The Passion. See whether it moves me.

The trick, of course, is to cancel prime the day before the free trial runs out.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Pretty much. Have you ever looked into Hinduism? (You know, before dismissing it out of hand).

Basically at least with most people I know we stop looking for something once we find it. I dabbled with various religions but Jesus Christ topped them all.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I have no idea what that means.

We are not the only ones talking about this.

@kellyjay said
Basically at least with most people I know we stop looking for something once we find it. I dabbled with various religions but Jesus Christ topped them all.

So the answer is no, you haven't looked into Hinduism and don't really know what you are comparing Christianity to, but nonetheless place your God over all other religions,....even though you haven't explored those religions, and despite the fact, had you by chance been born in India, you would no doubt be here stating that the Hindu Gods are the prime reality?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
This is what you said:

"We have so far seen your one ended universe with respect to time, the narrative that the natural universe exists because it made itself when it wasn’t here to make itself."

This is NOT the universe I presented you. This is not what 'you have so far seen.' My narrative is not that "the natural universe exists because it made itself." By re ...[text shortened]... cause it made itself, who's narrative is that? Why are you falsely attributing that narrative to me?

This moment in time Is your universe’s tip at one end, and there is an eternity before now correct? It doesn’t matter if it’s a straight uninterrupted stream or one that expands and collapses it’s unending before this point in time. What you described seems even more illogical when you look at the current state of things, expanding and collapsing would be like a bouncing ball there would always be less energy for the next bounce. An eternal length of would prohibit that anyway. As I said when the energy is spent there is nothing else that can add to it it’s over.

@kellyjay said
This moment in time Is your universe’s tip at one end, and there is an eternity before now correct? It doesn’t matter if it’s a straight uninterrupted stream or one that expands and collapses it’s unending before this point in time. What you described seems even more illogical when you look at the current state of things, expanding and collapsing would be like a bouncing bal ...[text shortened]... ohibit that. As I said when the energy is spent there is nothing else that can add to it it’s over.

I don't even know where to begin trying to explain dark energy fluctuation to you.

Start with this:

'The idea of the existence of a big bounce in the very early universe has found diverse support in works based on loop quantum gravity. In loop quantum cosmology, a branch of loop quantum gravity, the big bounce was first discovered in February 2006 for isotropic and homogeneous models by Abhay Ashtekar, Tomasz Pawlowski and Parampreet Singh at Pennsylvania State University. This result has been generalized to various other models by different groups, and includes the case of spatial curvature, cosmological constant, anisotropies and Fock quantized inhomogeneities.

Research in loop quantum cosmology purported to show that a previously existing universe collapsed, not to the point of singularity, but to a point before that where the quantum effects of gravity become so strongly repulsive that the universe rebounds back out, forming a new branch. Throughout this collapse and bounce, the evolution is unitary.

While the existence of big bounce is still to be demonstrated from loop quantum gravity, the robustness of its main features has been confirmed using exact results and several studies involving numerical simulations using high performance computing in loop quantum cosmology.

In 2010, Roger Penrose advanced a general relativity-based theory which he called the "conformal cyclic cosmology”. The theory explains that the universe will expand until all matter decays and ultimately turns to light. Since nothing in the universe would have any time or distance scale associated with it, it becomes identical with the Big Bang, resulting in a type of Big Crunch which becomes the next Big Bang, thus perpetuating the next cycle.

Our old friend Wiki

@ghost-of-a-duke said
So the answer is no, you haven't looked into Hinduism and don't really know what you are comparing Christianity to, but nonetheless place your God over all other religions,....even though you haven't explored those religions, and despite the fact, had you by chance been born in India, you would no doubt be here stating that the Hindu Gods are the prime reality?

You guys have been at it for 8 years?

How about we look at Nietzsche for finding an appropriate comparison to Christianity?

"Christianity is Platonism for the people."

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I don't even know where to begin trying to explain dark energy fluctuation to you.

Start with this:

'The idea of the existence of a big bounce in the very early universe has found diverse support in works based on loop quantum gravity. In loop quantum cosmology, a branch of loop quantum gravity, the big bounce was first discovered in February 2006 for isotropic ...[text shortened]... Big Crunch which becomes the next Big Bang, thus perpetuating the next cycle.

Our old friend Wiki

Stephen Hawking was said to be a staunch atheist, and also on record as a staunch believer in only one Big Bang, which began the universe, and nothing preceding the BB.

Roger Primrose left the possibility of a God open, and believes the Big Bang was not the start of the universe, and also believes in a multiple cycles of Big Band and Big Crunch. He also believes there is something before the Big Bang, but apparently does not know what it is. Then, putting on the robe of a cosmological prophet, Roger prophecies that this something before the Big Bang will come in our future.

If any, to which of the two cosmologists are we to give the palm?

@kellyjay said
Basically at least with most people I know we stop looking for something once we find it. I dabbled with various religions but Jesus Christ topped them all.

I am still curious and open-minded about matters such as those that get discussed on this forum.

I recognize the fact that none of us know about the origin of the universe, assuming there is one, so there is quite a bit of mystery and speculation attendant thereto.

I think the source, nature, and application of morality is an interesting topic.

But, alas, your theism has hamstrung you completely on it and you end up saying the most absurd things [..."Not believing in Jesus is the most evil thing that humans can be guilty of", for example, one of your late-2022 offerings...] and you have nothing to offer but your own certainty and made-up-mind in support of them.

@pettytalk said
Stephen Hawking was said to be a staunch atheist, and also on record as a staunch believer in only one Big Bang, which began the universe, and nothing preceding the BB.

Roger Primrose left the possibility of a God open, and believes the Big Bang was not the start of the universe, and also believes in a multiple cycles of Big Band and Big Crunch. He also believes there i ...[text shortened]... will come in our future.

If any, to which of the two cosmologists are we to give the palm?

They're safe from me because no one knows the answer. They're just advocating for the possibility they deem most likely.

@bigdogg said
They're safe from me because no one knows the answer. They're just advocating for the possibility they deem most likely.

Indeed.

@pettytalk said
You guys have been at it for 8 years?

How about we look at Nietzsche for finding an appropriate comparison to Christianity?

"Christianity is Platonism for the people."

I believe it began in the 1920's with some Russian chap, very much fixated on the role of gravity. It has come along way since then, such is science.

In regards to an eternal universe, it is hardly a new idea and is central to the beliefs of Jainism. Jains believe the universe has always existed and will always exist. (Being regulated by cosmic laws and kept going by its own energy processes. They do not believe the universe was created by any sort of God). - And seeing as you bring up the time element, isn't Jainism older than Christianity?

@kellyjay said
This moment in time Is your universe’s tip at one end, and there is an eternity before now correct? It doesn’t matter if it’s a straight uninterrupted stream or one that expands and collapses it’s unending before this point in time. What you described seems even more illogical when you look at the current state of things, expanding and collapsing would be like a bouncing bal ...[text shortened]... that anyway. As I said when the energy is spent there is nothing else that can add to it it’s over.

I'm not sure your bouncing ball analogy quite factors in loop quantum gravity or dark energy fluctuations. You will, of course, dismiss these out of hand and make no real attempt to understand them, just as you do with alternative religions.

You have all the answers and have shut up shop.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I don't even know where to begin trying to explain dark energy fluctuation to you.

Start with this:

'The idea of the existence of a big bounce in the very early universe has found diverse support in works based on loop quantum gravity. In loop quantum cosmology, a branch of loop quantum gravity, the big bounce was first discovered in February 2006 for isotropic ...[text shortened]... Big Crunch which becomes the next Big Bang, thus perpetuating the next cycle.

Our old friend Wiki

Papers please, or a link, so they discovered a perpetual motion and energy source that never ends did they, that can raise all the disintegrated matter and recharge the death of an entire universe? Dark energy fluctuation on a galactic scale, is amazing, it sounds like pixy dust, did that god you compared to the Lord of the Bible make it? Do they have taped evidence of a bounce, or did someone witness it, exactly what about all of this is a scientific certainty?

@pettytalk said
Stephen Hawking was said to be a staunch atheist, and also on record as a staunch believer in only one Big Bang, which began the universe, and nothing preceding the BB.

Roger Primrose left the possibility of a God open, and believes the Big Bang was not the start of the universe, and also believes in a multiple cycles of Big Band and Big Crunch. He also believes there i ...[text shortened]... will come in our future.

If any, to which of the two cosmologists are we to give the palm?

Scientists can say the strangest things, I've heard others quote this and this came off the web for whatever that is worth, I've never read his book. Because of a law, not because of gravity itself, so a law about something that doesn't exist yet, how strange. If he was implying to gravity, then that is something not nothing, he just redefined nothing to make be something that could to thing required, which too isn't nothing.

Stephen Hawking says in his latest book The Grand Design that,

Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.