Florida license plates

[Amianthus]

Perhaps it might be helpful to explain how this differs from randomness.

The anthropic principle is a complex idea, but it boils down to "the universe works pretty much the way it does because if it didn't we wouldn't be around to observe it."

In other words, changing just slightly some of the universal constants (like the nature of chemical bonding that leads to self-assembling organic molecules) would render a universe that is devoid of life as we know it.

[Plane]

Perhaps it might be helpful to explain how this differs from randomness.

The anthropic principle is a complex idea, but it boils down to "the universe works pretty much the way it does because if it didn't we wouldn't be around to observe it."

In other words, changing just slightly some of the universal constants (like the nature of chemical bonding that leads to self-assembling organic molecules) would render a universe that is devoid of life as we know it.

Neatly sidestepping the idea that the requirements of life are rigorous and many factors have to be just exctly right for us to be as we are through random developments. Makeing our accidental development unlikely.

Whether an accident or not, there is no asking these questions untill we show up.

Does this mean that there is no potential for finding evidence of Gods action ? No matter how unlikely some portion of development might be , we know at this point that it went right.

[Amianthus]

Neatly sidestepping the idea that the requirements of life are rigorous and many factors have to be just exctly right for us to be as we are through random developments. Makeing our accidental development unlikely.

Of course, we don't know how many billions of other universes were created in which the conditions are NOT right for life as we know it.

[Rich]

>>When a sun begins to run low on nuclear fuel for fusion, gravity causes a collapse at the core, which heats up the sun. This causes the sun to cook the heavier elements, and eventually to explode. Stellar processes are all run by gravity.<<

Okay, where did this sun come from? Or, where did the nuclear fuel come from?

[Amianthus]

Okay, where did this sun come from? Or, where did the nuclear fuel come from?

Hydrogen and helium compressed to the point fusion begins via gravity.

[Rich]

Okay, were do hydrogen and helium come from?

[Amianthus]

Okay, were do hydrogen and helium come from?

The big bang.

[Lanya]

This is really interesting.  I didn't know half this stuff.

My 2 cents is this: Why do some people feel it's important to prove the existence of a creator or God?
Not saying we shouldn't contemplate it or try to figure things out. But really, belief depends on faith.  Otherwise it wouldn't be belief. 

Can one see an electron?  I'm asking. I don't know.
There are lots of things we use in everyday life that we can't see. Radio waves are not visable.  The effects are discernable but the waves are not something you can point to in the sky.  (Unless I'm really behind.)

[Amianthus]

Can one see an electron?  I'm asking. I don't know.

No. See this article.

[Plane]

This is really interesting.  I didn't know half this stuff.

My 2 cents is this: Why do some people feel it's important to prove the existence of a creator or God?
Not saying we shouldn't contemplate it or try to figure things out. But really, belief depends on faith.  Otherwise it wouldn't be belief. 

Can one see an electron?  I'm asking. I don't know.
There are lots of things we use in everyday life that we can't see. Radio waves are not visable.  The effects are discernable but the waves are not something you can point to in the sky.  (Unless I'm really behind.)

You can see a billion electrons , scuff yur feet across the carpet and hold your knuckle near the doorknob you might get to see a flow of electrons . The motion of just one electron won't cause enough fuss for you to take note of it without a sensitive instrument.

The images, which were published online on April 28, 2007, in the Journal of Low Temperature Physics, show scattered points of light moving down the screen ? some in straight lines, some following a snakelike path. The Matrix it?s not. Still, the fact that they can be seen at all is astounding. ?We were astonished when we first saw an electron moving across the screen,? said Humphrey Maris, a professor of physics at Brown University. ?Once we had the idea, setting it up was surprisingly easy.?

Maris and Wei Guo, a doctoral student, took advantage of the bubbles that form around electrons in supercold liquid helium. Using sound waves to expand the bubbles and a coordinated strobe light to illuminate them, Guo was able to catch their movements on a home video camera.

http://www.physorg.com/news100354343.html

[Stray Pooch]

For each and every one of the philosophical proof for the existence of God, there is a logical refutation of how this turns out not to be a conclusive proof after all. The Holy Mother Church spent centuries on this subject.

That's right, but it was not my point.  Atheists have no such theories because there is no way to even attempt to prove the theory that there is no God.

It boils down to belief. Either you believe, or you don't, or at least do not accept the belief structure given by some specific religion to be sufficiently convincing. But no one KNOWS for sure. Those who claim to know have simply succeeded in deluding themselves.

Or, they are correct and you refuse to believe it.  You can't make a blanket claim that no one knows for sure, because it is entirely possible you are wrong.  If Saul actually had the experience Luke relates in Acts, then he certainly knew for sure.  If Joseph Smith did in fact talk to God, he knew as well.  I have had  undeniable personal revelation, and I know there is a God.  You may say I'm deluded, and you may even be right.  But at best, you can only call THAT an opinion.  I may or may not know there is a God.  You certainly do not know whether or not I know.

[Rich]

And the stuff of the big bang came from ....??

[Plane]

And the stuff of the big bang came from ....??

Issac Asimov wrote a good explanation once , it is unproveable but interesting.

http://www.alibris.com/search/books/qwork/5933084/used/Science,%20numbers,%20and%20I.

http://wayneholland.org/fourleafclover.htm

The chapter titled "Four Leaf Clover " is about the speculation that matter and energy can spontainiously come into being in pairs or fours with each bit produced haveing an opposite bit such that all of the produced matter is produced along with anti-matter net charge of the whole set is zero.

In this speculation at the moment of the big bang , at least four Universes were produced , they were massive and equal but two were positive in time two others were negative in time , two were of them were positive matter and two were negative matter , we are in the positive time positive matter universe , but the denisens of the other three would think the same as their universes ran off in the three other opposite directions.

He was not so strong on why this event would have ever occured tho.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I have had  undeniable personal revelation, and I know there is a God.  You may say I'm deluded, and you may even be right.  But at best, you can only call THAT an opinion.  I may or may not know there is a God.  You certainly do not know whether or not I know.

==================================================================
How about Indians who have seen Lord Krishna, Ganesh or some other Hindu deity? People get visions all the time. Protestants see Jesus, Catholics see the Blessed Virgin, Buddhists, Hindus, Farsees and pagans see apparitions with surprising regularity. People claim to have been abducted by Grey aliens, probed, and returned. Everyone has to decide based on faith alone, what to make of such events, don't they. I can only admit that you have experienced something that YOU think is real and YOU think you 'know'.

If I see you stop fopr a stop sign, and you say you know you stpopped for it, then I can safely say that I agree that you 'know' this. Any other affirmations about what you 'know' are conjecture and you claiming to know what happened is valid for you to say, but not for me to affirm.


 

[Xavier_Onassis]

And the stuff of the big bang came from ....??

=========================================
Let us suppose you come into breakfast one morning and a large blob of something stick and green is on your kitchen table.

You naturally wonder how it came to be there.
 (1) someone you know who had access to your house put it there.
 (2) it was beamed down from the Kilingon Birg of Prey GaKSHewfala.
 (3) it was created only minutes ago by the Supreme Being.

Which is the best hypothesis? All are possible (assuming that there are Klingons and they have a ship with that name). But what is the most likely?


In the case of material that exploded and went BANG!, after you say, "What the Hell was THAT!" you also have choices.
   (1) It was of such a tiny size it was previously undetectable, but it was always in existence.
   (2) It came from some other part of the Galaxy in some way we don't understand.
   (3) It was created by the Supreme Being, again, for reasons we don't understand.

Occam's Razor is a principle that states that when various hypotheses are given, the least complicated is usually the best.

I would say that (1) is the best hypothesis. You can't prove this, but if it was created by a Supreme Being, then we have to account for a Supreme Bing that was either created or has always existed. It would be simpler for a small dense amount of matter had always existed than it would for a complex being to have always existed.

If the Supreme Being is one of your smarter entities, he would be aware that we would come to this conclusion, and would not be annoyed for being logical.

 I cannot help  but think that any God would admire us for applying Occam's Razor.