Is there evidence of something beyond nature?

[PsychoSarah]

What to you mean physically close? Again this is what it meant God covered His Glory with his hands.

Please, address the fact that people do not have to be physically close to something to see it directly.

 

[Smidlee]

Please, address the fact that people do not have to be physically close to something to see it directly.

If you want to see someone's face you need to be close.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If you want to see someone's face you need to be close.

I don't need to be on top of them. And the sun produces light, and is huge, so I do not have to be close to it at all to see it.

 

[Smidlee]

I don't need to be on top of them. And the sun produces light, and is huge, so I do not have to be close to it at all to see it.

LOL. What you are "seeing" is the electromagnetic waves coming off the sun.

 

[PsychoSarah]

LOL. What you are "seeing" is the electromagnetic waves coming off the sun.

That is what all sight is. It isn't as if seeing anything else involves our eyes directly absorbing that material.

 

[Loudmouth]

LOL. What you are "seeing" is the electromagnetic waves coming off the sun.

When you see a tree 100 ft. away you are seeing electromagnetic waves from the sun bouncing off of the tree.

In fact, all of our other senses involve electromagnetism since all of them are based on the interaction of electrons through electromagnetism.

 

[justlookinla]

Electromagnetism is just a force which 'just happened'. How lucky we are.

 

[Smidlee]

When you see a tree 100 ft. away you are seeing electromagnetic waves from the sun bouncing off of the tree.

In fact, all of our other senses involve electromagnetism since all of them are based on the interaction of electrons through electromagnetism.

The stars are giving off electromagnetic waves during the daytime yet you can't see them because of the suns waves. In the same way you can't see the sun either. The same way you can't see the person at night shining a bright flashlight in your face.

 

[DerelictJunction]

Electromagnetism is just a force which 'just happened'. How lucky we are.

It's almost like you have Tourette's or you're that guy who walks around talking to himself using some of the words that he hears others saying.

 

[DerelictJunction]

The stars are giving off electromagnetic waves during the daytime yet you can't see them because of the suns waves. In the same way you can't see the sun either. The same way you can't see the person at night shining a bright flashlight in your face.

This is like reading The Sound and the Fury except more disjointed. You know there is a point to the narrative but it is obscured by the incredible divergence from reality. At this point I am still reading these entries out of sheer morbid fascination.

Sorry for the interruption...sally forth!

 

[Oncedeceived]

How do you know they did know this?

Its in Scripture?

Complex life as we understand it might be rare. Simple life might be not uncommon. Indeed, there are a couple of locations in our own solar system that might have life potentially.

Our solar system is in our universe. Even simple life needs the life permitting fine tuning we fine in our universe.

What is that number and where did you get it from?

I have the link earlier for this number.

Life is already here on Earth, so the chances are 1 in 1 as they are for all events that have already happened.

We know life does exist and that it is a 100% chance that it happened. However, the requirements of that take on many many forms within the life permitting areas of our universe.

 

[Loudmouth]

The stars are giving off electromagnetic waves during the daytime yet you can't see them because of the suns waves.

That is only because your eyes lack the level of contrast needed to see the stars. The light from those stars is still hitting your retina.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Also, Once, if you want to be picky about the words being used - what about the 'foundation of the earth'?

That implies that the earth is attached to these foundations and fixed in one place, like the foundations of a house, which it clearly isn't.

foun·da·tion

noun \fau̇n-ˈdā-shən\ : a usually stone or concrete structure that supports a building from underneath
: something (such as an idea, a principle, or a fact) that provides support for something
: an organization that is created and supported with money that people give in order to do something that helps society





Full Definition of FOUNDATION

1
: the act of founding

2
: a basis (as a tenet, principle, or axiom) upon which something stands or is supported <the foundations of geometry> <the rumor is without foundation in fact>

3
a : funds given for the permanent support of an institution : endowment
b : an organization or institution established by endowment with provision for future maintenance

4
: an underlying base or support; especially : the whole masonry substructure of a building

5
a : a body or ground upon which something is built up or overlaid
b : a woman's supporting undergarment : corset
c : a cosmetic usually used as a base for makeup

 

[Loudmouth]

Oncedeceived,

This will be the third time I have posted this at your request.

Alan Guth, have you heard of him? He's kind of a big deal.

"In inflationary theories the universe evolves from a very tiny initial patch. While this patch was very small, there was plenty of time for it to become uniform by the same mechanism by which a slice of pizza sitting on the table cools to room temperature: things tend to come to a uniform temperature. Once this uniformity is established on the scale of the very tiny patch, inflation can take over and magnify the patch to become large enough to encompass everything that we observe. Thus, inflation provides a very natural explanation for the uniformity of the universe."--Alan Guth, Cosmic Questions - Guth: Evidence for Inflation

He is saying exactly what I am, that there was a period of interaction of energy prior to the Big Bang, prior to inflation.

 

[justlookinla]

He is saying exactly what I am, that there was a period of interaction of energy prior to the Big Bang, prior to inflation.

"Interaction of energy prior to the Big Bang"? Where is the singularity in all this? And does this mean that the "interaction of energy", which preceded the Big Bang, followed natural laws of today which existed before the Big Bang?

 

[PsychoSarah]

The stars are giving off electromagnetic waves during the daytime yet you can't see them because of the suns waves. In the same way you can't see the sun either. The same way you can't see the person at night shining a bright flashlight in your face.

Still not sure how you reason that looking at the sun directly would result in death

 

[Oncedeceived]

Oncedeceived,

This will be the third time I have posted this at your request.

Alan Guth, have you heard of him? He's kind of a big deal.

"In inflationary theories the universe evolves from a very tiny initial patch. While this patch was very small, there was plenty of time for it to become uniform by the same mechanism by which a slice of pizza sitting on the table cools to room temperature: things tend to come to a uniform temperature. Once this uniformity is established on the scale of the very tiny patch, inflation can take over and magnify the patch to become large enough to encompass everything that we observe. Thus, inflation provides a very natural explanation for the uniformity of the universe."--Alan Guth, Cosmic Questions - Guth: Evidence for Inflation

He is saying exactly what I am, that there was a period of interaction of energy prior to the Big Bang, prior to inflation.

There is no evidence for this hypothetical interaction prior to the Big Bang. This patch might be seen as the singularity, but I am not sure if that is what Guth is referring to here or not. Regardless, the evidence that everyone is saying SUPPORTS inflation theory is after the Big Bang.

On Monday (March 17), scientists announced new findings that mark the first-ever direct evidence of primordial gravitational waves — ripples in space-time created just after the universe began. If the results are confirmed, they would provide smoking-gun evidence that space-time expanded at many times the speed of light just after the Big Bang 13.8 billion years ago.

Universe May Exist in a Multiverse, Cosmic Inflation Suggests

 

[Oncedeceived]

"Interaction of energy prior to the Big Bang"? Where is the singularity in all this? And does this mean that the "interaction of energy", which preceded the Big Bang, followed natural laws of today which existed before the Big Bang?

He is just incorrect about the timing of this interaction and the inflation that occurred after the Big Bang. There is no evidence of any something being nothing and most other Scientists are rather annoyed by Krauss and his ideas that ignore that the Laws of Physics and how they arise after the Big Bang.

 

[justlookinla]

He is just incorrect about the timing of this interaction and the inflation that occurred after the Big Bang. There is no evidence of any something being nothing and most other Scientists are rather annoyed by Krauss and his ideas that ignore that the Laws of Physics and how they arise after the Big Bang.

I think he made yet another statement without thinking it through. And yes, Krauss has made a fool of himself within the scientific community. You'll not see them promoting his 'nothing is something' (or is it 'something is nothing') wild guesses and suppositions concerning his creation guesses and suppositions.

I suspect we'll see Krauss referenced less and less on the forum.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Often the morals we claim animals have are our interpretation of an animal's behavior. (This would included rape., murder, etc.)

Interesting.Do you think this differs from the statement: "Often the morals Christians claim God has are based on their interpretation of the bible"?