But that something would have to be an eternal something, or a cycle.
Do they have a purpose?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
But that something would have to be an eternal something, or a cycle.I do not think any modern cosmologies are true something-from-nothing paradigms. They all posit some radically different something which gave rise to space and time via vacuum fluctuation or what have you.
Do they have a purpose?I don't think so. I believe such events are considered causeless and entirely random.
Or, maybe it's an eternal cycle.But that something would have to be an eternal something, or a cycle.
Does everything have to have a purpose? What is the purpose of a tornado, a gamma burst or a black hole?Do they have a purpose?
Well, there appeared to be confusion as to what I meant by "caused" and why there must be an uncaused cause.That may be an excellent answer - but to which question?
Plus: How do you determine what has this possibility and what hasn´t?
An eternal cycle doesn't make sense to me, as I said before.Or, maybe it's an eternal cycle.
Atmospheric conditions are a result of existence. So whats existence's purpose?Does everything have to have a purpose? What is the purpose of a tornado, a gamma burst or a black hole?
Because it does. While individual atoms may very well be impossible to destroy, if the universe is infinitely old, these atoms would have started out order and gradually tend toward disorder. They would have reached, by now, maximum disorder, and the universe would be a jumble of atoms in space. Unless you would say we are near the beginning of infinity.What makes you think that matter has the possibility of not being?
Perfection is a trait of being perfect.And you're still not making any sense. As far as i can tell, your basic argument is that God created us so God must be perfect.
This would be a non-sequitur, except you define perfection as God.
Since you define perfection as "God", you can keep going, until you hit the point "Intelligence is a perfection" which is an equivocation fallacy, because you already defined perfection as "God" not "Intelligence".
Because it does. While individual atoms may very well be impossible to destroy, if the universe is infinitely old, these atoms would have started out order and gradually tend toward disorder. They would have reached, by now, maximum disorder, and the universe would be a jumble of atoms in space. Unless you would say we are near the beginning of infinity.
Oh sure, now you start limiting what God is capable of.
Nope. I am saying He could not do anything if He didn't exist..
But there is also the theory that the universe, being infinitely vast, is also ever-expanding. So according to this theory, not only would the energy be evenly dispersed, it would be getting thinner. Besides, there is still plenty of energy floating around. Enough for me and the rest of the planet to do work.Ah, now, this is interesting.
I read an article a while back - I'll see if I can find it - which suggested that this is precisely what's happened. The universe has achieved heat death; all of the energy in the universe is evenly dispersed and therefore nothing like the events we're used to seeing around us will ever happen again. After all, this is the most likely possibility, since the universe will go on forever, but the amount of time prior to heat death is finite.
Interesting, but what you does not explain is how thought and culture can come from quantum weirdness. The nature of the human intellect is to separate things from the matter; I do not see how matter randomly reacting could create such a strange effect.In such a place, there would still be random quantum events. With infinite time, even the enormously improbable can occur, and so these random quantum events would occasionally result in briefly conscious entities. Therefore it is most likely that what I think is my conscious experience - and all my memories of the past - are actually a brief moment of quantum weirdness, floating in the void.
Yes, but I believe the nature of the human to be greater than a random cosmic quirk. Also, given the intellect abstracts thing, how could random chemical reactions in the brain cause this thinking? My random chemical reaction tells me the intellect is separate from the matter.Interesting, no?
What consequences?
I don't see anything prima facie wrong with that. We are, after all, somewhat limited to certain categories of conceivable beginnings of all things.But that something would have to be an eternal something, or a cycle.
Far too loaded a question.Do they have a purpose?
You're trying to put me in some kind of catch- 22, but the simple fact is if God didn't exist, nothing would, so nothing would happen. By virtue of Him doing anything, He has to exist.Well sure, maybe to our limited human perspective, but wouldn't a God who could achieve his goals thru just a belief in Him be more full in his "perfectedness" than one that had to go to all the bother of existing.
*
Well, I would have to contend nothing in this universe last forever, in it nature. Everything is caused.I don't see anything prima facie wrong with that. We are, after all, somewhat limited to certain categories of conceivable beginnings of all things.
Agreed.I'll only say that "result of" is quite different than "purpose".
It's interesting to see Jews used as an apologetic tool by people who are nevertheless unashamedly antisemitic.
I suppose they are liked and supported as long as they are useful.
Oh, and also, how would the cycle start, given every part of it is indifferent ot its own, and the thing after it's existence?I don't see anything prima facie wrong with that. We are, after all, somewhat limited to certain categories of conceivable beginnings of all things.
Why?
Why?
And lastly, ... why?
Um, even I got to point out, that's shifting the burden of proof.Please explain why not, why not and lastly, ... why not?
How did you determine this?Everything in this universe has the possibility of being and not being.
Because not every system is infinitely old?You can bring up energy, but energy is not, of itself, a concrete force. It is the ability to do things, and even systems with a lot of energy tend toward maximum entropy.
If the universe is infinitely old, why is every system not a t maximum entropy yet?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?