If you believe in God, refute this! - Page 96

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

I have termed speculations as speculations, and the person who posted that agreed with me. This thread was supposed to deal with the fact that we can't prove God's existence with current knowledge. That's it, nothing less, nothing more.

lol we could have told you right off on page 1 that there's no scientific proof. Did you really need to run this thing on so long?

It is peculation too, and I have admitted it. Of course we don't know whether it is possible, currently. And we have been discussing that. You call discussing, ignoring?

yeah sure, we started discussing it after the same question was asked multiple times. 😆

There is no evading. Things mean the same. 1 meter on the ct axis represents the time light takes to travel in 1m. It is still measuring time with the help of conversion factor. Like someone saying I am just a 15 minutes ride from your home. You are telling distance in time's units and the conversion is implied for a fixed factor e.g. 60km/h.

so we randomly decide to normalize the vector to a magnitude of speed of light. And you think that's a physically existent reality?😆

The question itself does not make sense, does not necessarily mean that it is a fault with the math. For example, asking what is the color of number 2 doesn't make sense, it does not mean that we don't understand what color or number 2 are. Again, velocity is the change in displacement with respect to time. There is no displacement while moving through space so velocity doesn't make sense. But still, for spacetime four-velocity has been coined. And as I said, we are travelling in time in future. Otherwise we won't be moving in future.

^^ A reply for a reply only ends up making the whole thread loopy - Mahatma K!

Originally posted by: Vintage.Wine

By Blank I meant ..Space / The Separating Gap between this universe and another one ....A Separation that doesn't relate to both the universes ...And the terminologies peculiar to universe's characteristics don't apply to that... Hence the term Blank space ... 😉

The head honchos had this covered too, Vintu. In "brane" cosmology the 4D universe is restricted to a brane inside a higher-dimensional space called the "bulk".

Like I said, no need to coin our own terms. Let's borrow from the mob. They wouldn't mind.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

The head honchos had this covered too, Vintu. In "brane" cosmology the 4D universe is restricted to a brane inside a higher-dimensional space called the "bulk".

Like I said, no need to coin our own terms. Let's borrow from the mob. They wouldn't mind.

Awww ...Hehehehe 😆 ...Funny that ...I won't be surprised a bit if some Mind Honchos follow the Head Ones after a couple of decades ..and talk about multiples bulks in a greater dimensional media..

This now seems like a deliberate assumptive attempt to create more enigma for the readers and Evil pleasure for the Authors ..😆 ..We must make sure the head honchos don't own shares in some Tequila Producing Company ...😆 ..Tequila ..The GOD's own drink as the Mexicans allude to that ... 😆

Take for instance ekpyrotic hypothesis ..Two branes colliding to cause a big bang ..Then the Bulk must be some curved medium to cause the parallel branes to clash ...😆

Someone please call Einstein's soul to the Ouija board and tell him, the Cosmological constant was not an error ! ..Yehahahaha 😆


Vintu ...😛

Originally posted by: Vintage.Wine

Free 😛

Hahaha . ...Awww ... The END is when ...One starts walking from point A on the earth's surface .. ...along the equator ...and ENDS up reaching point A again ... So that doesn't suggest infinity .. Unless you keep walking forever and never reach point A again ... 😆

We don't know if that can happen in space .. ...We might need to keep waking forever to know that ...😆

...And if we reach point A even there ..That ll mean the Universe ain't infinite ...But again we would wonder what exists beyond that ...Which means either blank space ..or another full fledged UNIVERSE...with celestial bodies ..So in either case ..it becomes infinite ..😛

What cranky stuff we are on about in the quest of finding the God ..😆 When we can't find many things that he created ..Infinite things to say the least ..

Originally posted by: Vintage.Wine

True that ... 😛 The context here though was ..Freethinker thought exactly the opposite ..Since the earth's surface is spherical he wailed that we would keep going round and round that meaning it's infinite ...which is untrue as the starting point would be re visited once a circle is complete ..

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

did you really need to open this thread to show that there is no scientific proof for existence of God? 😆 really what were you hoping to accomplish? Find out whether anyone had succeeded in finding scientific proof while the rest of the world was taking a nap?😆

now since we are all agreed there's no such proof, and since i think it might be worthwhile to explore even speculative ideas, could we suggest you either have this thread closed (in which case someone else can open a thread with fewer constraints), or you stop repeating the same "blind speculation" and "no scientific proof" mantras?.😆

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

lol we could have told you right off on page 1 that there's no scientific proof. Did you really need to run this thing on so long?

Originally posted by: Vintage.Wine

Awww ...Hehehehe 😆 ...Funny that ...I won't be surprised a bit if some Mind Honchos follow the Head Ones after a couple of decades ..and talk about multiples bulks in a greater dimensional media..

This now seems like a deliberate assumptive attempt to create more enigma for the readers and Evil pleasure for the Authors ..😆 ..We must make sure the head honchos don't own shares in some Tequila Producing Company ...😆 ..Tequila ..The GOD's own drink as the Mexicans allude to that ... 😆

Take for instance ekpyrotic hypothesis ..Two branes colliding to cause a big bang ..Then the Bulk must be some curved medium to cause the parallel branes to clash ...😆

Someone please call Einstein's soul to the Ouija board and tell him, the Cosmological constant was not an error ! ..Yehahahaha 😆


Vintu ...😛

There was a program on Science channel once where there were these scientists talking about brane theory and parallel universes and claiming to have solved the long standing problem of the first cause for big bang when they were riding together in a train and "brainstorming". I immediately switched the channel.

Birdie should have brought in brane cosmology instead of time travel to paint the ridiculousness of speculations of some scientists.

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Actually, it was to oppose the way people say for sure that God exists. I just wanted to say that they can't say that for sure because our current knowledge does not allow us to assume such speculations are true. Therefore, they should be aware that what they are spreading as truth is just a hypothesis.

I agree. That's what I thought you were saying too.