Reply With Quote
I'm fine with something always having been around. The issue here in this thread is intelligent design.
gotcha. I would be interested to know your thoughts on what was there before?
I'm fine with something always having been around. The issue here in this thread is intelligent design.
Maybe time isn't linear and there is no "before" as we understand it.
I can definitely get behind that. And that goes to my statement that we just may not be capable of comprehending the real facts.
I'm not unfine with it. But I can't understand it. Which means, I can't really say with any certainty what's going on. You can't either.
And are we really much different from robots and AI? We think we have some kind of free will but I fully believe it's just all brain chemistry combined with life experiences. If we had perfect data, I think we could predict the future.
Bolded: I am pretty sure this is the case. Just look at how we evolved. imo We were not meant to solve every problem in the universe. We dont look closely enough at the stuff WE make up in order to understand the universe imo.
As to the rest of your queries this is how science would answer them imo. It may not be satisfying to you personally, but this is how it is reconciled imo.
1. Time
Time is really a very human way of assessing a series of events. If no events ever occur, time does not make any sense at all as an idea. Its not useful. So from a human perspective, thus a science perspective, time began when events occurred. If nothing ever happens, if no physical (or energy) events occur, then the idea of time does not work. So looking at what time really means... I think most people dont use the definition I have given because its not how we run our lives everyday.
2. What if nothing exists. No physical objects, no energy. What does the universe then mean? So BEFORE the big bang is not a question science can handle because two central ideas, time and space, make no sense. We use words (even math) and examples to define these two ideas. What we have found so far is there is one constant in nature. The speed of light in a vacuum. This is the human scientific take at the moment. Time and Space are not constants. The speed of light, and our relative position to it, change our measurements of space AND time. And then it becomes mathy, but there are experiments to prove both. And they are extraordinarily odd to us because we dont physically or really mentally experience them in our lives. Time on clocks change and objects change size
Section 2 requires a lot more explanation but this is as simply as I can put it as a person that does not really understand the math involved in the General Theory of Relativity, or quantum mechanics. I really can only put a "thumbprint" on the special theory of relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
(which is limited in what it explains. I can do geometric math to get the time dilation equation but it still is very odd to me)
And honestly the people who do understand the math of the above (general and quantum) will tell you if you dont get the math, you cant set up a mental platform to really deeply understand number 2. And then many admit its sort of a fleeting understanding.
preliminarily, its perfectly acceptable for the answer to be "we dont know." its possible that we will never know. its possible that we one day will. but if an answer right now is "i dont know, but we're trying to find out"... thats fine. by the scientific method, the one thing you dont do is assume an answer. you instead adopt the "null hypothesis"
but as to your question, it might not even be one that makes sense. as far as we understand, the big bang is what set time, space, and matter into motion. einstein is the one who came up with the "space-time" model. so if there was no space/matter, there also could not be time. so within the closed system that is our universe, there wouldn't really be a "before". its like going to page 1 of a book and asking whats on the page before (and no, not accepting snarky answer like the publisher page or book cover). or what was your life like before you were born (or conceived, whatever). or what was your marriage like before you were married. etc.
beyond that we dont really know much. is it possible that our universe, which appears to be a closed system, is just a pocket or bubble of a greater cosmos/multiverse. we dno.
And I dont mean to sound all smart about this I am just determined, I dont give up on trying. (Acutally I have given up on General and quantum, I cant do the math. Its too difficult)
I was watching a chess rerun of a tournament in which the winner gets to play Magnus, the current champion.
I know chess just beyond a beginner and I just laid there in bed watching the announcers (who are all very good at chess) explaining the moves and then going into what it would mean further into the play and I was just completely lost. I just laid there knowing I could not possibly keep up with their "well if he did this, then this, then this, oh but this... lets try out this one" I was completely dumfounded. I will never get it. And thats fine for me. But I can appreciate people who can concentrate long enough to see all this in their head. And these people practice constantly, its their life.
I appreciate the post. You're right...it doesn't satisfy me. But I do agree with your Time comments. It makes some kind of abstract sense. As to 2, I don't know if science can show me how something comes out of nothing. And maybe that's a limitation on my brain. I certainly don't have enough education in physics or quantum mechanics. But I also don't think any human can understand (much less explain to me) how something came out of nothing. I'm certainly not advocating for a "God". Just pointing out that we might not be capable of "getting it"...whatever "it" is. None of this changes me having to go to work everyday to make sure I can buy food and an Iphone. Again, I'll compare humans to very advanced robots and AI. Once we get to the point of creating robots with AI, will they have these same questions? IMO, humans really are just very well built, self sustaining machines. Personally, I don't think we really have free will. It's all just based on past events and each person's brain chemistry. Is that really any different than a programmed robot?
Oh.
The universe is a big as we measure and then calculate it to be.
There is no beyond the universe in science. You can only measure space if objects and energy exist.
Sure. But I can occam razor my way to what it's not.
Not Zeus
Not spaghetti monster
Not Bible God.
So what else is there? I don't care tbh because I'll never know.
I do care when Christians push their into legislation because Bible says so. That's why threads like these are in the political forum.
Bolded
Science absolutely cannot explain it.
Honestly, think about the word nothing. It does not mean anything unless we experience something. And so we get these false sense that if we count objects, those are things, and if there are no objects of the type we are counting, we call this zero. Well thats not what nothing really means here. So words, imo, can be very tricky things.
When we try to explain events we often use analogies "thing of a ball rolling down a smooth inclined plane". Well what if the phenomena we are trying to explain does not fit an analogy we have experienced? Then we go to math. Then the math presents us with a physical model that is totally beyond our experience but the math helps us predict the event we dont even have a fundamental grasp of through analogy. Its a flipping mess. We dont think of how we actually think about things like you said. Incapable. But we still try. We dont give up. We just know there is only so much we can do imo.
I get the analogy. But Chess does have a beginning. Here's the board layout and pieces set in a fixed manner. It's all math at that point. We can create a program that beats most players. Not sure if Magnus has played a computer yet. As a side note, I'd recommend watching "Al o" which is a do entary about designing a program to beat the best Go players. Go is to Chess like Chess is to Checkers. Anyway, I'm OK not knowing. I realize that I'm not anywhere near the brightest minds in the world. But I think I'm smart enough to know that something out of nothing is not explainable. Much less provable.
ive been following the candidates as well. nepo coming back this strong after his humiliating defeat last year is quite the story
I dont even know the people so its hard for me.
I do know one younger guy with longish light hair was explaining to an older guy with a beard how he could have beaten him instead of drawing.
It "looked" really embarrassing. but I cannot fully appreciate the humbling because I dont get the moves.
Unlike you, I do care. Even though I'll probably never understand it, I want to try to. Like you, I have a problem with any group pushing their into legislation. I'm somewhere between an atheist and an agnostic but way closer to the atheist side. But I will say that in general, Christians are pretty good people. Of course the news portrays all of them as psycho right wing nuts. Just like the right portrays atheists as the most immoral people in the world.
Yep.
The chess illustration is just one of many things I cannot fully appreciate. I watched a do entary about Mozart and the people playing his work were explaining the subtly... and just right over my head. Zing... nothing.
I know they are super passionate about it but I cant get it and its very frustrating. Science is calming because its finite for me. We basically suck at knowing things. Yes we will understand more, but never fully get the universe. It will become more complex imo. An ape is not a good vehicle for what we try and do. But I cant get out of the vehicle so... yeah.
Talking about music, it's always been interesting to me that we know what kind of music we like but most of us are incapable of creating it ourselves.
At a base level, it's just 12 notes (for Western music) but the average person can't put together a song for themselves.
my interest in chess has been pretty come and go since my middle school days. stopped playing in late high school. really got back to it in college. off and on. after the queens gamibt netflix series ive basically been following the professional scene.
Nepo is the russain dude who won the same event last time around and was able to challenge Magnus Carlsen in the 2021 championship. after 5 very even/dull draws, nepo lost one game in dramatic fashion, and then he basically collapsed and lost other games with frankly embarrassing/elementary blunders that were simply not becoming of a professional chess player.
but now he's had a dominating start to the tournament this time around as well
i know more about the blues than anyone, i'll tell ya
Ok Sparky, talk to me about Blind Joe Finglefart. Poopshoot Magoo? I've got a Tolliver Goobus 45 stuck in my track and field mag. What do you have?
Oh I remember that!
And I also get the "not becoming of a professional chess player" as these guys are supposed to be able to shrug off what happened and get right back into the present unfazed. Part of their rating is consistency and being able to overcome screw ups. There is a Chinese guy in this tourney that got into a really difficult situation and got a draw out of it. His opponent and the analyzers said he did a fantastic job getting a draw. This was after he had a player in a very difficult position and failed to close him out. So he made an outstanding recovery AFTER playing a bad game. And was greatly admired for it. Seems the chess world really likes the Chinese guy. I am not sure why.
I think they need to change the name of this event into something like "the winner of this gets to play the world champion"
only more dramatic.
See you are really good at this imo.
I will never forget him scrounging around at garage sales for old cassette tapes and continually striking gold.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
