where does all the matter come from?

[Wiccan_Child]

"Who says it had to come from anywhere?"

So space itself has no beginning or no end?

Unlikely, but possible. We just don't know either which way.

Or it is the beginning and the end? The Alpha and the Omega? It was just here?

Where have I heard that before?

Revelation 21:6 and 22:13, most likely. But we're talking about the origin of the universe, not the God of the Bible.

 

[Gawron]

You're a good man, WC.

 

[plindboe]

Where did "space itself" come from?

Perhaps it always existed, perhaps it arose at some point. No one knows. Alot of people convince themselves they know though.

Peter

 

[True_Blue]

Who says it had to come from anywhere?

If you want to answer a philosophical question, Immanuel Kant is an excellent person to consult:

"In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant described space as an a priori intuition that (together with another a priori intuition, time) allows us to comprehend sensual experience. Kant referred to such intuitions as noumena and as things in themselves. In Kant's view, neither space nor time are conceived of as substances, but rather both are elements of a systematic framework we use to structure our experience."

In other words, space, like time, is an EFFECT that arises from the larger systemmatic framework of the spacetime continuum in which we live. Space is something that human beings use to describe the gap between two objects. So the same force that created objects created space. If no objects existed, space would not exist either. Our spacetime continuum, including regions of space, has elasticity--it can be shaped, molded, and manipulated by a being with sufficient power. Space is not the pure absence of existence.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

If you want to answer a philosophical question, Immanuel Kant is an excellent person to consult:

"In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant described space as an a priori intuition that (together with another a priori intuition, time) allows us to comprehend sensual experience. Kant referred to such intuitions as noumena and as things in themselves. In Kant's view, neither space nor time are conceived of as substances, but rather both are elements of a systematic framework we use to structure our experience."

Modern science begs to differ: mass itself can warp spacetime, so something must be effecting something, the latter of which is space and time.

In other words, space, like time, is an EFFECT that arises from the larger systemmatic framework of the spacetime continuum in which we live. Space is something that human beings use to describe the gap between two objects.

Colloquially, but not technically. Space may be defined as a 'real' coordinate system, but physics still applies. Spontaneous generation of matter still occurs in a vacuum, no matter how you define space.

So the same force that created objects created space. If no objects existed, space would not exist either.

Why? Because Kant says so?

Our spacetime continuum, including regions of space, has elasticity--it can be shaped, molded, and manipulated by a being with sufficient power. Space is not the pure absence of existence.

Indeed: it exists in and of itself. Moreover particles spawn in/on it. Aristotle was right when he said there's no such thing as a vacuum, but not for the reasons he gave.

 

[True_Blue]

Modern science begs to differ: mass itself can warp spacetime, so something must be effecting something, the latter of which is space and time.

Colloquially, but not technically. Space may be defined as a 'real' coordinate system, but physics still applies. Spontaneous generation of matter still occurs in a vacuum, no matter how you define space.

Why? Because Kant says so?

Indeed: it exists in and of itself. Moreover particles spawn in/on it. Aristotle was right when he said there's no such thing as a vacuum, but not for the reasons he gave.

Because Kant is much, much smarter than you are, Wiccan. He's even smarter than me.

I was referring to the RATE at which spacetime is warped. Matter is a dumb object with respect to spacetime.

 

[The Madcap]

Very late, but I will reply.

i would like to know how atheistic evolution explains how and where all the matter in the universe came from, big bang theory states that the universe exploded out from an infintismal point into what it is today, is that the best they have got,?

You don't have to be an atheist to believe that. It can be truthfully said that vacuum fluctuations are the appearance of matter at random and without cause. Where did the matter come from? Some believe it to be a vacuum fluctuation. Usually, this spawn's pairs of particles, one matter, and one anti-matter, and they eliminate each other, so no gain of matter has been achieved...usually. However, vacuum fluctuations are a random event, and the location of a particle can never fully be known (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle), so it's possible a particle can escape annihilation. This is what's theorized to be the birth of matter, and this is where some other theories might come up, like the multiverse and M Theory, etc. Why did this matter expand? We don't know. But it is obvious that the universe is expanding like our current theory of the Big Bang states.

i mean i know that living things grow,but what about all the rock/minerals/water and everything else, it seems to me that people rule out the idea of god too soon ,because they dont have the answers

Well, nobody says the elements that make up what you said are here "just 'cus". Atoms themselves weren't formed until many years after the Big Bang, from quarks and leptons, etc. I'm sure if enough research were done, you could find many credible theories or even facts as to why things are the way they are.

big bang theory states that everything just exploded out of some infinitismal point,whatever that is, that sounds to me to be just a supernatural a belief as believing in god , am i wrong?

The Big Bang is not an explosion, rather than an expansion of matter. And there's nothing supernatural about it. I believe in God, but I don't like to talk about him during scientific conversations.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

By the naughty powers invested in me by the Hethen, Atheist, Democrat, & Evolutionist Suzerainty (HADES), I hereby declare this thread zombified!

Because Kant is much, much smarter than you are, Wiccan. He's even smarter than me.

Perhaps, but that does not mean he is automatically correct. St. Augustus was a very smart mine, but that doesn't mean his Five Ways are correct: as clever as they are, they are still fundamentally flawed. At the end of the day, he is wrong about the nature of spacetime.

I was referring to the RATE at which spacetime is warped. Matter is a dumb object with respect to spacetime.

How so? You were talking about the nature of spacetime, and how it is ultimately a human construct (a view you attribute to Kant).

 

[DJ_Ghost]

Because Kant is much, much smarter than you are, Wiccan. He's even smarter than me.

Evidently so, I'm sure he would recognise an appeal to authority as a fallacy, and hence worthless in serious debate.



Ghost

 

[Vene]

Why, oh why can't this thread just rest in peace?

 

[DJ_Ghost]

I'm sorry, ihadn't noticedit was an old thread, it appeared near the top on the forum, and I'm still acustomed to how much trafic the forum used to get, which meant everything on teh first 2 pages was pretty much current.

Ghost

 

[ACuriousMind]

I don't know where all the matter came from, but if this is evidence of God, then I propose a rebuttal.

Where did God come from?

If God can be timeless, why can't matter?

Occam's razor states "the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory."

Following Occam's razor, it's irrational to say that matter can't be timeless, so we have to create a timeless being to create matter... Just makes it more complicated. XD