If you believe in God, refute this! - Page 98

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

going by the assumption that the singularity is finite (even if tiny), the inference would be that it is spatial. Why dont the normal laws of physics work there? If it cant work there, can there be situations where it might not otherwise work, or times? If that's sounding absurd, then perhaps we dont have the right laws of physics yet because we can think of situations such as the singularity space where it does not work. Or, again, perhaps there is nothing like space? :)

The Math breaks down at singularity because there are a bunch of places where they encounter a division by 0. The Physics breaks down because of the restrictions imposed by the speed of light on us. Both the problems, related to Math and related to Physics are not solvable as of today.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

The Math breaks down at singularity because there are a bunch of places where they encounter a division by 0. The Physics breaks down because of the restrictions imposed by the speed of light on us. Both the problems, related to Math and related to Physics are not solvable as of today.

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

^ something about physicists reminds me of some neurosurgeons/ cardiac surgeons. Brilliant people in their fields. So brilliant that they eventually begin to believe they are smart enough to dabble in investments. Remember- they've made millions in their professions so have money to invest. Sometime later they file for bankruptcy.

moral of the story? just because someone is brilliant at something does not mean they are not very dumb when it comes to other things. Of course, their brilliance at something makes some other people believe they can never be dumb at anything, which is when they too go for a toss (oops, loss)😆

:)

Well, you usually let professionals handle the job. That much, everyone knows, you would think.

That said, I handle my own 401k through a self directed brokerage system. Oh, the roller-coaster rides I go through everyday...

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

:)

Well, you usually let professionals handle the job. That much, everyone knows, you would think.

That said, I handle my own 401k through a self directed brokerage system. Oh, the roller-coaster rides I go through everyday...

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

actually even a statement like something tending to 0 in the limit would imply there is no finite space. Think infinite regress, or limits. If the solution is non-zero, then it should be large enough for physics to hold. Which it seemingly doesn't.

If you consider limits in Math, in the case of 1/x, as x approaches 0 from the right side (as in, all values of x are positive) the quotient of 1/x gets larger and larger. For example, 1/0.1 = 10, 1/0.01 = 100, 1/0.001 = 1000 and so on. So, even before x approaches 0 the quotient approaches infinity. There is no single number that 1/x would evaluate to as x approaches 0.

In Physics, we have the luxury of ignoring the real number line and go with a hard limit such as the speed of light. But even here, when the length of space is approaching 0 (in reality, it hits the Planck length which is about 0.000000000000000000000000000000000016 cm?) the temperature and density are approaching infinity. Those temperatures and pressures need special laws.

So we need different math and different laws for problems dealing with singularity. So far, the math operation of division by 0 and the physical singularity are undefined.

The surprising thing is not why these disciplines are breaking down. The surprising thing is, even on paper, we can't come up with a possible solution. That should tell you something. It's as though all avenues are (deliberately) closed.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

[

Although isn't it a bit silly and frivolous trying to smack down a belief. It is obvious that a belief is not "truth". After all it is "belief" in God, not a "knowledge" of God. There is a huge difference between "I believe in God" and "I know there is a God". A "belief" is a an unfounded supposition of a premise to be true. It is based on inner conviction and faith rather than knowledge. Whether one believes or does not believe in God, it is obvious that God cannot be proven. You either believe, or you don't. Trying to prove that something so glaringly and obviously not a truth, as not a truth just appears to be a petty endeavor to me.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Once we start going down the "elimination" path, it won't be long before we end up under the Bodhi tree. I am all for that. Reductionism at its best.

Come to think of it, to get to nothing, we have to give up everything.

But in "reality" it seems giving up "everything" is not possible and we will be left with something however infinitesimal it is. This is what we call singularity. There is no way we could get rid of that infinitesimal thingy. In other words, there can't be nothing. Any attempts to go to nothing will fail at singularity.

Singularity could be the place where things get crazy (read chaotic) because you are still not at nothing, only awfully close. So, you do the opposite and expand like there's no tomorrow, expand towards infinity.

In reality. you will never hit infinity because there's no upper limit to infinity.

So, you go back to singularity again. And then expand again.

Big crunch, big bang. Ad nauseam.

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

^ something about physicists reminds me of some neurosurgeons/ cardiac surgeons. Brilliant people in their fields. So brilliant that they eventually begin to believe they are smart enough to dabble in investments. Remember- they've made millions in their professions so have money to invest. Sometime later they file for bankruptcy.

moral of the story? just because someone is brilliant at something does not mean they are not very dumb when it comes to other things. Of course, their brilliance at something makes some other people believe they can never be dumb at anything, which is when they too go for a toss (oops, loss)😆

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Although isn't it a bit silly and frivolous trying to smack down a belief. It is obvious that a belief is not "truth". After all it is "belief" in God, not a "knowledge" of God. There is a huge difference between "I believe in God" and "I know there is a God". A "belief" is a an unfounded supposition of a premise to be true. It is based on inner conviction and faith rather than knowledge. Whether one believes or does not believe in God, it is obvious that God cannot be proven. You either believe, or you don't. Trying to prove that something so glaringly and obviously not a truth, as not a truth just appears to be a petty endeavor to me.

But I do like the Epicurean Paradox and similar paradoxes and inconsistencies in the belief of God. Philosophically any premise we hold to be true, should be at least consistent with other things we hold to be true or know to be true. If we do have a notion of God, it should be consistent with how we perceive the reality of the world. If our definition of God conflicts with other things we hold true then we are being illogical and irrational. However, if our definition of God is consistent with everything else we hold true, then even though it may not be true it is still a logical and rational belief.

Actually, this thread was created by me to ask why people believe in God. I just wanted to know why they believed in him even when nothing directly pointed out his existence. That's why I started discussion in informal way, not with science or math. Just some inconsistencies I found withing the idea of god. The discussion veered in this direction when people started confusing belief with truth. Some started to claim that just because it is their belief does not mean that it is not true. And then when they tried to explain in scientific terms and asked me to "quantify" things, which was not possible since the idea itself is not precise, that this discussion went into proofs and science. People may say they believe there might be a God. But they have to agree that we cannot say currently that he does exist.

I won't go into the belief being danger as belief in God is different from religion. And even if there is a God, unless he came and said those things, just doing bad things in his name won't necessarily make him the culprit. If people are mislead by people that is their fault. Unless God intervenes and specifically asks, you can't attribute all those orders to him. But blind belief can be dangerous. But if you have reached the personal verdict that there might be a powerful being by rationalizing, good for you. 😊