ForumGarden

Pahu;1474928 wrote: How does conservation of energy work in general relativity, and how does this apply to cosmology? What is the total mass-energy of the universe? Conservation of energy doesn't apply to cosmology.


So what you are saying is that because of where it is the Laws of Thermodynamics don't apply any more? Right. Therefore, the laws apply on earth, but not to the Universe. Right. Isn't earth part of the Universe then?

You argue that the concept of Mas / Energy has not been demonstrated. What did you eat for dinner, or did you simply plug in to the wall & recharge? Whichever way you look at it Mass has Energy & Vice Versa. That is Equilibrium. Whether a kilogram weight is kept in a cupboard or in the middle of a field it still weighs 1kg. The beginning of the Unverse is the Cupboard. The current state of the Universe is the Field. The Mass of the Universe is the Kilogram weight. The mass (which can be in the form of Matter, Energy or Both) doesn't change, regardless of the size of the Universe. Why is it that you can't grasp a concept that is so simple? Why is it that you have to invent a new dimension (the dimension of Supernaturality) whenever you can't understand anything so that you can attribute your ignorance to that?

Originally Posted by Pahu:

How does conservation of energy work in general relativity, and how does this apply to cosmology? What is the total mass-energy of the universe? Conservation of energy doesn't apply to cosmology.

FourPart;1474963 wrote: So what you are saying is that because of where it is the Laws of Thermodynamics don't apply any more? Right. Therefore, the laws apply on earth, but not to the Universe. Right. Isn't earth part of the Universe then?


The Laws of Thermodynamics appear to be working throughout the universe, including Earth. The statement you are responding to is referring to conservation of energy in general relativity. I am not clear what that means.

You argue that the concept of Mas / Energy has not been demonstrated. Whichever way you look at it Mass has Energy & Vice Versa. That is Equilibrium. Whether a kilogram weight is kept in a cupboard or in the middle of a field it still weighs 1kg. The beginning of the Unverse is the Cupboard. The current state of the Universe is the Field. The Mass of the Universe is the Kilogram weight. The mass (which can be in the form of Matter, Energy or Both) doesn't change, regardless of the size of the Universe. Why is it that you can't grasp a concept that is so simple? Why is it that you have to invent a new dimension (the dimension of Supernaturality) whenever you can't understand anything so that you can attribute your ignorance to that?


It may be true that mass (which can be in the form of Matter, Energy or Both) doesn't change, regardless of the size of the Universe, but before the universe existed mass and energy did not exist either. There was nothing! From that nothing the universe with its mass and energy appeared. Since the universe cannot come from nothing by any natural cause, the cause of the universe must be supernatural.

Do you have a better explanation for the existence of the universe from nothing?

Pahu: "Do you have a better explanation for the existence of the universe from nothing?"

Not pretending to be up on this topic, although my son graduated MIT with a degree in physics, & he explains things to me all the time, but I came across the following:

Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning

"If a new theory turns out to be true, the universe may not have started with a bang.

In the new formulation, the universe was never a singularity, or an infinitely small and infinitely dense point of matter. In fact, the universe may have no beginning at all.

"Our theory suggests that the age of the universe could be infinite," said study co-author Saurya Das"

Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning

Pahu;1475061 wrote: It may be true that mass (which can be in the form of Matter, Energy or Both) doesn't change, regardless of the size of the Universe, but before the universe existed mass and energy did not exist either. There was nothing! From that nothing the universe with its mass and energy appeared. Since the universe cannot come from nothing by any natural cause, the cause of the universe must be supernatural.

Do you have a better explanation for the existence of the universe from nothing?


You are presuming that the Universe came from nothing & because this assumption does not make sense, rather than accept that the presumption is false you simply invent an explanation inasmach as it is "Supernatural" - your answer to anything you can't explain.

AnneBoleyn;1475067 wrote: Pahu: "Do you have a better explanation for the existence of the universe from nothing?"

Not pretending to be up on this topic, although my son graduated MIT with a degree in physics, & he explains things to me all the time, but I came across the following:

Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning

"If a new theory turns out to be true, the universe may not have started with a bang.

In the new formulation, the universe was never a singularity, or an infinitely small and infinitely dense point of matter. In fact, the universe may have no beginning at all.

"Our theory suggests that the age of the universe could be infinite," said study co-author Saurya Das"

Big Bang, Deflated? Universe May Have Had No Beginning


The universe cannot be infinitely old or all useable energy would have been lost already (entropy). This has not occurred. Therefore, the universe is not infinitely old. Therefore, the universe had a beginning and before that beginning there was nothing. Something cannot come from nothing by any natural cause but since evolutionism is a philosophy of materialism, it has to claim the universe came from nothing by some natural cause, which contradicts the facts of science.

Something cannot bring itself into existence. Therefore, something brought it into existence. What brought the universe into existence? It would have to be greater than the universe and be a sufficient cause to it.

All things that came into existence were caused to exist. Therefore, logically, there must be a single uncaused cause that has always existed. That uncaused cause is God.

FourPart;1475077 wrote: You are presuming that the Universe came from nothing & because this assumption does not make sense, rather than accept that the presumption is false you simply invent an explanation inasmach as it is "Supernatural" - your answer to anything you can't explain.


Since the universe had a beginning, there was nothing before that beginning. The universe could not come from nothing by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural. All of your squirming will not change that fact. Explain why that fact does not make sense.

Pahu;1475087 wrote: Since the universe had a beginning, there was nothing before that beginning. The universe could not come from nothing by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural. All of your squirming will not change that fact. Explain why that fact does not make sense.


There is no evidence to support such a conclusion.

Pahu;1475087 wrote: Since the universe had a beginning, there was nothing before that beginning. The universe could not come from nothing by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural. All of your squirming will not change that fact. Explain why that fact does not make sense.The universe is our reference of time; the beginning of the universe is the beginning of time for us. What was before the universe is unknown, and for our purposes of time and existence, is irrelevant.

For you to advance ridiculous stories reveals your immaturity. Not knowing something is not a justification for believing in supernatural events or the existence of any God. We more mature people admit we just don't know. There are theories out there regarding what existed before our universe or is outside our universe, but no evidence to support any of them as far as I know.

Pahu;1475086 wrote: The universe cannot be infinitely old or all useable energy would have been lost already (entropy). This has not occurred. Therefore, the universe is not infinitely old. Therefore, the universe had a beginning and before that beginning there was nothing. Something cannot come from nothing by any natural cause but since evolutionism is a philosophy of materialism, it has to claim the universe came from nothing by some natural cause, which contradicts the facts of science.


Once again you try to deny the laws of physics by the misuse of the word "Entropy",

If something has a cause that cause is natural.

If the cause is supernatural, then there is a cause.

Therefore anything that's seen as supernatural has to be natural.

Therefore there is no such thing as supernatural.

Supernatural, by definition is something that exists in the mind only, used by the ignorant in a desperate attempt to explain the unacceptable, as opposed to the unexplainable.

Something cannot bring itself into existence. Therefore, something brought it into existence. What brought the universe into existence? It would have to be greater than the universe and be a sufficient cause to it.


Yet you find it perfectly acceptable that a God brought himself into existence from nothing, and when this contradicts all your other bizarre claims you try to quantify it as "Supernatural".

All things that came into existence were caused to exist. Therefore, logically, there must be a single uncaused cause that has always existed. That uncaused cause is God.


Now you're gettnig a bit closer. A single cause that has always existed. That cause is matter / energy. The 'beginning' of the Universe, as we know it, was just that moment at which everything exploded, like a tiny grain of popcorn bursting outward.

FourPart: "Therefore anything that's seen as supernatural has to be natural.

Therefore there is no such thing as supernatural."

Agree wholeheartedly! If it exists, it's natural.

Originally Posted by Pahu:

Since the universe had a beginning, there was nothing before that beginning. The universe could not come from nothing by any natural cause. Therefor the cause of the universe was supernatural. All of your squirming will not change that fact. Explain why that fact does not make sense.

LarsMac;1475096 wrote: There is no evidence to support such a conclusion.


What other conclusion is possible?

Ahso!;1475101 wrote: The universe is our reference of time; the beginning of the universe is the beginning of time for us. What was before the universe is unknown, and for our purposes of time and existence, is irrelevant.

For you to advance ridiculous stories reveals your immaturity. Not knowing something is not a justification for believing in supernatural events or the existence of any God. We more mature people admit we just don't know. There are theories out there regarding what existed before our universe or is outside our universe, but no evidence to support any of them as far as I know.


Before the existence of the universe it did not exist. Therefor there was nothing. That is self-evident! The universe came from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause. Therefor the cause was supernatural. We who are mature realize that is the only conclusion. The immature refuse to accept the facts and the logic based on those facts because they refuse to accept the reality of God.

Pahu;1475159 wrote: Before the existence of the universe it did not exist. Therefor there was nothing. That is self-evident! The universe came from nothing.We don't know that. And a bunch of sheep herders from 2000 years ago knew even less. They thought the world was flat too.

FourPart;1475104 wrote: Once again you try to deny the laws of physics by the misuse of the word "Entropy"


False! Entropy is:

1 Physics: a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

2 lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder.

That definition, which I am using, does not deny the laws of physics!

If something has a cause that cause is natural.


Evidence free speculation.

If the cause is supernatural, then there is a cause.

Therefore anything that's seen as supernatural has to be natural.

Therefore there is no such thing as supernatural.


What mixed up "logic" is that? If I understand that assertion correctly, if the cause of something is supernatural it has to be natural and therefor there is no such thing as supernatural. Does that make sense in your mind? Lets see:

Natural means existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.

Supernatural means some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

Supernatural, by definition is something that exists in the mind only, used by the ignorant in a desperate attempt to explain the unacceptable, as opposed to the unexplainable.


Wrong! Supernatural, by definition is some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. In reference to the universe, before it existed there was nothing, from which is appeared, which is impossible by any natural cause, therefor the cause was supernatural. That is a fact, not mental imagination, which you are unable to refute.

Yet you find it perfectly acceptable that a God brought himself into existence from nothing, and when this contradicts all your other bizarre claims you try to quantify it as "Supernatural".


I have corrected your erroneous assertion several times, which you have ignored. God did not bring himself into existence from nothing. That would be impossible, even for God. Nothing can bring itself into existence from nothing. He has revealed that He has always existed.

All things that came into existence were caused to exist. Therefore, logically, there must be a single uncaused cause that has always existed. That uncaused cause is God.



Now you're gettnig a bit closer. A single cause that has always existed. That cause is matter / energy. The 'beginning' of the Universe, as we know it, was just that moment at which everything exploded, like a tiny grain of popcorn bursting outward.


Sigh, how many times must your erroneous assertions be corrected? Before the universe existed there was nothing, including matter and energy. From nothing the universe appeared with its matter and energy, which is impossible by any natural cause. Therefor the cause was supernatural. The only reason you continue to resist that fact and logic is your unwillingness to accept the fact that God exists. You are unable to explain how the universe could come from nothing by some natural cause, but you are unwilling to admit the cause has to be supernatural because you choose to deny the existence of God. Pathetic!

Ahso!;1475120 wrote:


The Bible is accurate:



1. Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/the_rocks_cry_out.html

http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a008.html

http://www.campuslight.org/wvu/Evidence ... pter5.html http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html

2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scienti ... bible.html

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Science_Confirms_the_Bible

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Sci ... -Bible.php

http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

http://www.100prophecies.com/

http://www.raptureforums.com/BibleProph ... stdays.cfm

http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/

http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/bible ... filled.htm

http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophe ... lity-bible

http://www.allabouttruth.org/Bible-Prophecy.htm

No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.

Pahu;1475159 wrote: Before the existence of the universe it did not exist. Therefor there was nothing. That is self-evident!
It is not self evident as it is an assumption by you that there was a time before the Universe.



The universe came from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause.


Once again, the same assumption.

Therefor the cause was supernatural.


Once again your same old get out clause when you can't accept the alternatives.

We who are mature realize that is the only conclusion. The immature refuse to accept the facts and the logic based on those facts because they refuse to accept the reality of God.


Almost correct, apart from the bit about God. Change "God" to "Reality" or insert "the non-existence of" & that is an accurate statement.

Throughout your posts you begin with one of your presumptions, which you then base everything else on as being fact, even though there is nothing to found your presumption on.

False! Entropy is:

1 Physics: a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

2 lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder.

That definition, which I am using, does not deny the laws of physics!


The definition is correct. Your use of it is false. Unavailability is not the same as non-existence. Fossil fuel, such as coal has entropy, yet it still has energy. You are using entropy to describe the depletion of energy. As with coal, any state that reaches a state of entropy will have been totally converted to the condition of Potential Energy, which might even explain the Big Bang. All matter / Energy concerted to an infinitely small unit of entropy - then triggered by a chance reaction of, maybe, a couple of electrons bashing into each other, and like a coiled spring all that potential energy is released again.

Using the prospect of entropy there is another theory that the Universe is pulsating. Expanding, as it is doing now, then folding in on itself into the atomic state of entropy, then blowing up again, and so on.

My point, however is that you use 'entropy' to describe the usage & destruction of energy, which is impossible. It is this that is the fale premise.

Originally Posted by Pahu:

Before the existence of the universe it did not exist. Therefor there was nothing. That is self-evident! The universe came from nothing.

Ahso!;1475161 wrote: We don't know that. And a bunch of sheep herders from 2000 years ago knew even less. They thought the world was flat too.


Are you claiming the universe exited before it existed? How do you explain it coming from nothing?



The Bible says the earth is round (Isa. 40:22) and hangs on nothing (Job 26:7).


The Earth Hangs on Nothing. Almost 3500 years ago Job stated in chapter 26 verse 7 that the earth hangs upon nothing. However, various civilizations recorded that either the earth was situated on the back of Atlas (in Greek mythology), or that it was on the back of an elephant which was standing on the back of a turtle, which was supposed to be swimming in some kind of a cosmic sea (in the culture of India), or that the earth was flat being held up by pillars (in the Egyptian culture). However, as true science progressed, it is now proven that the earth really does hang upon nothing. Which means nothing physically holds it up.

The Earth Is Round


The Bible indicates that the earth is round. Consider Isaiah 40:22 which mentions the “circle of the earth. This description is certainly fitting—particularly when the earth is viewed from space; the earth always appears as a circle since it is round.

Another verse that indicates the spherical nature of our planet is Job 26:10. This verse teaches that God has inscribed a circle on the surface of the waters at the boundary of light and darkness. This boundary between light and darkness (day and night) is called the “terminator since the light stops or “terminates there. Someone standing on the terminator would be experiencing either a sunrise or a sunset; they are going from day to night or from night to day. The terminator is always a circle, because the earth is round.

One of the great delights of observing the moon through a small telescope is to look at its terminator, especially during the first or third quarter phases when the terminator is directly down the middle of the moon. The craters are most easily seen at this boundary since the sun is at a low angle and casts very long shadows there. The moon looks particularly three-dimensional when viewed through a telescope during these phases; it is clear that the moon is a sphere—not a flat disk (see photo below).

For the earth, the terminator occurs not on a cratered rocky surface, but primarily on water (since the earth’s surface is 70 percent water). Job 26:10 suggests a “God’s eye view of the earth. This biblical passage would be nonsense if the earth were flat, since there would be no true terminator; there is no line to “step over that separates the day from night on a flat surface. Either it is day everywhere or night everywhere on a hypothetical “flat earth. However, the earth does indeed have a boundary between light and darkness which is always a circle since the earth is round.

Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round.1 However, the biblical passages are older than this. Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C. and Job is thought to have been written around 2000 B.C. The secular astronomers before the time of Pythagoras must have thought the Bible was wrong about its teaching of a round earth, yet the Bible was exactly right. It was the secular science of the day that needed to be corrected.

The Earth Floats In Space

A very interesting verse to consider is Job 26:7 which states that God “hangs the earth on nothing. This might evoke an image of God hanging the earth like a Christmas tree ornament, but hanging it on empty space. This verse expresses (in a poetic way) the fact that the earth is unsupported by any other object—something quite unnatural for the ancient writers to imagine. Indeed, the earth does float in space. We now have pictures of the earth taken from space that show it floating in the cosmic void. The earth literally hangs on nothing, just as the Bible teaches.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... irms-bible

Originally Posted by Pahu:

Before the existence of the universe it did not exist. Therefor there was nothing. That is self-evident!

FourPart;1475177 wrote: It is not self evident as it is an assumption by you that there was a time before the Universe.


Before the universe existed there was no time, only eternity. Time came into existence along with the universe, which came from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause, therefor the cause of the universe is supernatural.

Once again, the same assumption.


Based on logic based on facts.

Once again your same old get out clause when you can't accept the alternatives.


What alternatives? Several times I have challenged you to name an alternative. All you can come up with is silence.

We who are mature realize that is the only conclusion. The immature refuse to accept the facts and the logic based on those facts because they refuse to accept the reality of God.

Almost correct, apart from the bit about God. Change "God" to "Reality" or insert "the non-existence of" & that is an accurate statement.


You are correct equating God with reality. The rest of your sentence is due to your denial of reality based on the facts of science.

Throughout your posts you begin with one of your presumptions, which you then base everything else on as being fact, even though there is nothing to found your presumption on.


Except logic based on the facts of science.

Entropy is:

1 Physics: a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

2 lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder.

That definition, which I am using, does not deny the laws of physics!

The definition is correct. Your use of it is false. Unavailability is not the same as non-existence.


True while the universe exists, which came from nothing. Before the universe existed entropy and everything else did not exist.

Fossil fuel, such as coal has entropy, yet it still has energy. You are using entropy to describe the depletion of energy. As with coal, any state that reaches a state of entropy will have been totally converted to the condition of Potential Energy, which might even explain the Big Bang. All matter / Energy concerted to an infinitely small unit of entropy - then triggered by a chance reaction of, maybe, a couple of electrons bashing into each other, and like a coiled spring all that potential energy is released again.


Entropy describes the running down of the universe and everything in it until it reaches a state of equilibrium when there is no movement and temperature is stable. Since that is not the state of the universe, it had a beginning.

Your notions about the Big Bang are evidence free speculation.

Using the prospect of entropy there is another theory that the Universe is pulsating. Expanding, as it is doing now, then folding in on itself into the atomic state of entropy, then blowing up again, and so on.


Evidence free speculation.

My point, however is that you use 'entropy' to describe the usage & destruction of energy, which is impossible. It is this that is the fale premise.


No I don't. I use entropy as I have described above.

1 Samuel 2:8

He raises up the poor from the dust; he lifts the needy from the ash heap, to make them sit with princes and inherit a seat of honor. For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and on them he has set the world.

Job 38:4-6

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements -- surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone?

Job 28:24

For he looks to the ends of the earth, and sees everything under the heavens.

Daniel 4:10-11

The visions of my head as I lay in bed were these: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth; and its height was great. The tree grew and became strong, and its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth.

Isaiah 44:24

Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb; "I am the Lord, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth -- Who was with me? --

Job 38:13

that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it?

Ahso!;1475188 wrote:


Bible Accuracy

1. Archaeology confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible:

The Rocks Cry Out

In what ways have the discoveries of archaeology verified the reliability of the Bible? • ChristianAnswers.Net

Archaeology and the Bible Archaeology and the Bible • ChristianAnswers.Net

2. The Bible is not a science book, yet is scientifically accurate:

Scientific Facts in The Bible

Science Confirms the Bible - RationalWiki

SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF THE BIBLE

Eternal Productions - 101 Scientific Facts and Foreknowledge

Science and the Bible

3. The Bible is filled with hundreds of accurately fulfilled prophecies:

100prophecies.org

http://www.raptureforums.com/BibleProph ... stdays.cfm

About Bible Prophecy

Bible Prophecies Fulfilled

Reasons To Believe : Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible

Bible Prophecy

No other book, religious or secular, comes close to those requirements.

Good one!