Creating Universes: Danger, Rant Ahead

[busterdog]

At Lancaster University, they’re unraveling the secrets of how to build a universe. In fact, they have already formed one, or something very much like it. This scientific breakthrough lies in the bottom of a chamber no larger than your pinky finger, filled with helium and cooled to 0.0003 degrees Fahrenheit above absolute zero.

http://www.theweirdpost.com/wordpress/2008/05/physicists-create-universe-smaller-than-a-marble/\

Is it just me or is this an extremely poor choice of words, if not blasphemy?

(I try to avoid getting picky about choice or words in questions of philosophy. So, let this be considered an extremely efficient rant.)

 

[Mallon]

It's a popular press account. Of course it's worded poorly. Why else do you think the average American knows so little about science?

 

[gluadys]

Given that it is posted on a web-site called The Weird Post, whose menu includes such categories as "weird" "bizarre" and "dumb", I am not surprised by the tongue-in-cheek tone. What does that have to do with the work of Lancaster University?

 

[shernren]

Even popsci's account is much better than your blog link (which is broken, btw) :

http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-05/littlest-big-bang

And why would a bad choice of words affect the reality of the physical situation involved?

 

[busterdog]

Even popsci's account is much better than your blog link (which is broken, btw) :

http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-05/littlest-big-bang

And why would a bad choice of words affect the reality of the physical situation involved?

The notion of "baby universes" is one of Hawkings. I dont know whether he ever spoke of "creating" one.

THere are bigger quibbles in life than this one. But anyone who speaks of creating another universe needs a reality check.

There is even that guy Smolin who talks about "natural selection" among these incipient universe events.

 

[shernren]

I personally recall this one guy who tried to compare Darwinism to Nazism and Stalinism, despite the fact that both Hitler and Stalin rejected evolution. He got a whole lot of publicity for trying to make a movie about that recently. I can't remember his name; it probably wasn't worth remembering.

Who's worse off?

(Is tu quoque logically valid? Of course not. But it has incredible rhetorical power. )

 

[busterdog]

Well, every time someone says G-d D--n it on television, it is wrong.

What I quoted is just as wrong, and quite comparable.

A hypothetical second wrong would not make it right.

THats a quick rant.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Is it just me or is this an extremely poor choice of words, if not blasphemy?

(I try to avoid getting picky about choice or words in questions of philosophy. So, let this be considered an extremely efficient rant.)

Ok, I'm confused... how is creating a universe blasphemy?

 

[busterdog]

Ok, I'm confused... how is creating a universe blasphemy?

One should not compare oneself to God the Creator as such. There a lot of things one could call those extra-dimensional things. "Universe" is not a good choice.

By the way, the question was whether it was very bad choice of words or blasphemy. Clearly the former is in evidence.

It would involve some speculation, but I think there are (educated) folks who really are imagining that someone is creating something just like us or our galaxy, solar system or the functional equivalent.

 

[Assyrian]

Well, every time someone says G-d D--n it on television, it is wrong.

What I quoted is just as wrong, and quite comparable.

A hypothetical second wrong would not make it right.

THats a quick rant.

I had to read that a few times before I realised you didn't mean:

Well, every time someone says God Dun it on television, it is wrong.
​

 

[Assyrian]

One should not compare oneself to God the Creator as such. There a lot of things one could call those extra-dimensional things. "Universe" is not a good choice.

By the way, the question was whether it was very bad choice of words or blasphemy. Clearly the former is in evidence.

It would involve some speculation, but I think there are (educated) folks who really are imagining that someone is creating something just like us or our galaxy, solar system or the functional equivalent.

Didn't God make us in his own image? What is wrong when the people he made turn out to be 'creative'? Does the bible place limits on what we can create without being blasphemous? And where does the limit begin? Are we allowed create beautiful art and poetry? What about beautiful landscaped gardens? Is this blasphemous because the bible describes God making a garden when he created the world? What about making more humans, no we are commanded to do that. Producing new breed of domesticated animals? No the bible seems ok with sheep cows and horses. What about creating life in a petri dish? Does the bible say the human race God created in his image cannot make new organisms? Clearly we need to be responsible with the organisms we create, but I am not aware of anything in the bible that says we cannot, or that God will strike Craig Venter down for blasphemy for creating artificial cells. Is there anything anywhere in scripture that says making a new universe is out of bounds if science is ever able to produce one?

 

[busterdog]

Didn't God make us in his own image? What is wrong when the people he made turn out to be 'creative'? Does the bible place limits on what we can create without being blasphemous? And where does the limit begin? Are we allowed create beautiful art and poetry? What about beautiful landscaped gardens? Is this blasphemous because the bible describes God making a garden when he created the world? What about making more humans, no we are commanded to do that. Producing new breed of domesticated animals? No the bible seems ok with sheep cows and horses. What about creating life in a petri dish? Does the bible say the human race God created in his image cannot make new organisms? Clearly we need to be responsible with the organisms we create, but I am not aware of anything in the bible that says we cannot, or that God will strike Craig Venter down for blasphemy for creating artificial cells. Is there anything anywhere in scripture that says making a new universe is out of bounds if science is ever able to produce one?

OK ........

 

[The Lady Kate]

One should not compare oneself to God the Creator as such. There a lot of things one could call those extra-dimensional things. "Universe" is not a good choice.

If the shoe fits...

By the way, the question was whether it was very bad choice of words or blasphemy. Clearly the former is in evidence.

And the latter is not.

It would involve some speculation, but I think there are (educated) folks who really are imagining that someone is creating something just like us or our galaxy, solar system or the functional equivalent.

Then they should read the article and become educated further...

 

[busterdog]

If the shoe fits...



And the latter is not.



Then they should read the article and become educated further...

Except that we all know that SOME scientists do compare themselves to God in creating life, intelligence and now universes. Whether it happens to be these particular guys is quite beside the point.

It is similar to the pretention and confusion represented in the following:

"If I told you what it takes to reach the highest high,
You'd laugh and say 'Nothing's that simple!'
But you've been told many times before,
Messiahs pointed to the door,
And no one had the guts to leave the temple!"
-- The Who

When you use the word Mosiach, you best be careful, which they weren't. There was only ever one Messiah.

You insensitivity to blasphemy is noted. There are worse insensitivities than this. But, it is apparent.

Now we are ranting in earnest!

 

[Assyrian]

It is similar to the pretention and confusion represented in the following:

"If I told you what it takes to reach the highest high,
You'd laugh and say 'Nothing's that simple!'
But you've been told many times before,
Messiahs pointed to the door,
And no one had the guts to leave the temple!"
-- The Who

When you use the word Mosiach, you best be careful, which they weren't. There was only ever one Messiah.

Matt 24:5 For many will come in my name,saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will lead many astray. Matt 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. Even the Messiah talked of other messiahs.

 

[busterdog]

Matt 24:5 For many will come in my name,saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will lead many astray. Matt 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. Even the Messiah talked of other messiahs.

Yeah. I am sure that is what Pete Townsend meant. All those false messiahs as distinct from Jesus.

So, you really think the Ammonites in the Bible were shellfish then?

 

[Assyrian]

Yeah. I am sure that is what Pete Townsend meant. All those false messiahs as distinct from Jesus.

He doesn't say either way, but bear in mind Paul happily quoted from Pagan poets without vetting their entire theology. You were criticising Townsend and The Lady Kate's quotation of Townsend, for his use of the plural of Messiah when he was using it the same way Jesus did and giving the same warning Jesus did about these Messiahs. I suppose Paul shouldn't have quoted Cleanthes saying "For we are also his offspring" because Cleanthes wasn't talking about Yahweh, it was a hymn to Zeus.

So, you really think the Ammonites in the Bible were shellfish then?

Well they were kind of mean to the Israelites Deut 23:3 No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the LORD. Even to the tenth generation, none of them may enter the assembly of the LORD forever, 4 because they did not meet you with bread and with water on the way, when you came out of Egypt.

 

[Cabal]

Has anyone actually read the link in the OP, the one that's actually from Lancaster university? It's a lot less tongue in cheek, and by the sounds of this, all they're doing is simulating a 2D brane interface. It's a big deal because it's the first possible experimental test of string theory. Hardly blasphemous at all.

Reminds me of when a month or so ago one of my professors announced they were simulating black holes and everyone went snooker-loopy and assumed they were going to destroy the world. Whereas EVERY SINGLE REPORT pointed out that it was a simulation of an event horizon created using pulses of light.

 

[shernren]

What about creating life in a petri dish? Does the bible say the human race God created in his image cannot make new organisms? Clearly we need to be responsible with the organisms we create, but I am not aware of anything in the bible that says we cannot, or that God will strike Craig Venter down for blasphemy for creating artificial cells.

Depends on who you ask.

 

[shernren]

It is similar to the pretention and confusion represented in the following:

"If I told you what it takes to reach the highest high,
You'd laugh and say 'Nothing's that simple!'
But you've been told many times before,
Messiahs pointed to the door,
And no one had the guts to leave the temple!"
-- The Who

When you use the word Mosiach, you best be careful, which they weren't. There was only ever one Messiah.

You insensitivity to blasphemy is noted. There are worse insensitivities than this. But, it is apparent.

"This is what the LORD says to his anointed (lit. maschiach - Messiah),
to Cyrus, whose right hand I take hold of
to subdue nations before him
and to strip kings of their armor,
to open doors before him
so that gates will not be shut:
(Isaiah 45:1 NIV)

I always knew the righteous prophet Isaiah couldn't have written the second half of the book! His impostor is obviously an insensitive blasphemer.