Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 243
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the UniversePage 10 of 19    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/what-is-galilean-relativity

Named for its originator, the 17th-century Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei, Galilean relativity dictates that any two observers moving at constant speed and direction will obtain the same results for all mechanical experiments. Another way of stating the theory is simply that the laws of physics remain constant for all inertial frames.
 musicfellow38
Joined: 2/17/2011
Msg: 244
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/13/2012 5:27:45 PM

The formula should read F=MGI or Force equals mass times gravitational intensity .

as the 5 and 10 pound weights are attracted by the earth's gravity
on a equal, pound for pound basis and thus inertia is overcome equally,
it does not have to be calculated again and double-charged
when the gravitational attractions of the 5 and ten pound weights are calculated.
thus because the distance is the same
but the gravitational intensity of the ten pound weight greater
and gravitational attraction is responsible for acceleration.
the acceleration of the ten pound weight will be greater than the five pound weight


Interestingly, I just came off another thread trying to explain WHY people use the scientific method and used the Galileo's first high profile scientific experiment as an example, which happens to be the one where he demonstrates that objects fall at the same rate on earth regardless of Mass. My point? try it out. Drop 2 things like a bowling ball and a marble. See if it takes longer for the marble to drop and then record yor times and have someone else verify them and make up a new formula... which, by the way, is NOT the one you came up with.

You say that F=MGI or Force equals mass times gravitational intensity. Well, you took acceleration OUT of that equation all together and then concluded that based on YOUR new formula proves that Acceleration increases with mass. Look at your formula. F=MGI. Even if this were true, which it kind of IS if you realize that rate of acceleration is one round about way of comparing one gravitational force to another, a greater force does not increase acceleration. The bowling ball will hit with a much greater force than the marble but not greater acceleration. Because gravity does not pull on "pound per pounds" as you suggest. It has the same affect on all atoms individually regardless of how many atoms are stuck together.

If you meant that if the force doubles, or at least increases with the force, when the object is heavier, then here's an experiment that you can try or even just imagine trying.

Drop 2 identical bowling balls at the same time. Record the rate of acceleration.

Now, glue both bowling balls together, creating ONE object of twice the mass. If your calculation is correct, the new "double ball" object should drop twice as fast... or at least faster... again, you didn't really give a formula for acceleration, just a new one for force.

When 2 skydivers join hands in the middle of a free fall, do they all of a sudden start to accelerate faster than before because of their new combined mass?

Anyway... thats the way I used to wrap my head around it all those years ago.
 musicfellow38
Joined: 2/17/2011
Msg: 245
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/13/2012 5:37:34 PM

If you meant that if the force doubles, or at least increases with the force, when the object is heavier, then here's an experiment that you can try or even just imagine trying.


oops. meant to say "if you are implying that rate of acceleration would double if the mass of a free falling object was doubled,..."

my bad. I hope some of what I said made sense. Trying to form thoughts in between calls at work.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 246
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/13/2012 8:28:30 PM

Science and the irrational religions simply aren't on the same level of discernment of truth no matter how many times that old saw is reworded, or those religions stomp their feet to be taken seriously.


Ah, unless you are the God of rationality, they sure as hell are! The only difference being that those who adhere to the notion of God or a god as creator have no reason to continue to seek; some may even say they are fulfilled. Why should we take more seriously the one who refuses to find satisfaction, solace or an answer than the one who chooses to find contentment, fulfillment, etc. Unless you yourself are God, who are you to judge the "level of discernment of truth"? To define "truth" at all? The only "self evident truths I am aware of, as far as consistency, are those mentioned in the US Declaration of Independence, which, btw, alludes (loosely used term here) to "the Creator". I have no need to argue religion at all (I was raised with that old adage, admittedly, and I like it!!!) , but rationality is subjective. Thanks for proving that. Enjoy your journey.
 Sissyq
Joined: 3/8/2012
Msg: 247
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/13/2012 10:21:00 PM
I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die and find out there isn't. Than to live my life as if there is no God, and die and find out there is.
 Samhein
Joined: 7/20/2010
Msg: 248
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/13/2012 11:55:12 PM

. Why should we take more seriously the one who refuses to find satisfaction, solace or an answer than the one who chooses to find contentment, fulfillment, etc. Unless you yourself are God, who are you to judge the "level of discernment of truth"? To define "truth" at all? The only "self evident truths I am aware of, as far as consistency, are those mentioned in the US Declaration of Independence, which, btw, alludes (loosely used term here) to "the Creator". I have no need to argue religion at all (I was raised with that old adage, admittedly, and I like it!!!) , but rationality is subjective. Thanks for proving that.

No, I don't have to be God. Your spurious requirement isn't valid.

I am one to judge because I have seen both sides, have a rational mind, and understand what is truth, and what isn't. I don't need to be right 100% of the time to be right about something.

The creator mentioned in the Declaration probably isn't the one you follow, so who cares? that is also non sequitur. And I have not proven whatever weak point you were attempting; I did prove my own, though/.

the faith you are likely defending, simply cannot stand next to science; deal with it.
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 249
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 1:25:59 AM

I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die and find out there isn't. Than to live my life as if there is no God, and die and find out there is.

Best hope that 'god' can't tell the difference between a 'true believer' and someone who is just hedging their bets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager




The only difference being that those who adhere to the notion of God or a god as creator have no reason to continue to seek; some may even say they are fulfilled. Why should we take more seriously the one who refuses to find satisfaction, solace or an answer than the one who chooses to find contentment, fulfillment, etc.

This ^^^ is meaningless. You are just begging the question and arriving unhindered by logic at a prejudiced conclusion.



Unless you yourself are God, who are you to judge the "level of discernment of truth"? To define "truth" at all? The only "self evident truths I am aware of, as far as consistency, are those mentioned in the US Declaration of Independence, which, btw, alludes (loosely used term here) to "the Creator".

Appeals to ignorance are a logical fallacy. It's perfectly obvious that many many many 'truths' are self evident. Most of them are mundane, such as 'water is wet' and so on.
It's equally obvious that the statement 'god exists' is not a self evident truth since there's no logic or evidence to support it.

The fact that your Declaration of Independence refers to anything has no meaning in terms of cosmology or science generally.


I have no need to argue religion at all (I was raised with that old adage, admittedly, and I like it!!!) , but rationality is subjective. Thanks for proving that. Enjoy your journey.

What are you talking about? Irrationality certainly is (subjective), the diversity of psychotic delusions encountered by therapists, many of which contain religious overtones interestingly, scarily demonstrate how subjective interpretations can lead people astray.
But in what way is rationality also 'subjective'?

Do you mean... like the 'subjective rationality' in these kinds of statements? -
The only "self evident truths I am aware of, as far as consistency, are those mentioned in the US Declaration of Independence, which, btw, alludes (loosely used term here) to "the Creator".
Because... that's ^^^ not 'subjective rationality', it's subjective irrationality, since there is no rational basis for such a statement.
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 250
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 8:50:58 AM
@ musicfellow
because the earth pulls with equal force on all the atoms individually ( the meaning of pound per pound.) inertia is over come and their is an equal acceleration.
but this is only half the equation, you have only done one side.

but the phenomena of falling is no just one object attracting another. it is two objects gravitationally attracting each other at the same time
and the combined rates of acceleration must be combined to find the true speed.

because the earth has already over come inertia.
the larger weight -of the same size but a different density and at a equal distance pulls on the Earth with greater force and a stronger gravitational pull than the small one as the gravitation fields are acting on an object the same size and inertia for them both-the earth- it leads to a greater acceleration which builds absolutely over time.

the expectation that object twice the mass should fall twice as fast has fooled a lot of people. but objects fall in a relationship of there size relative to that of the earth. i believe
or on some other curve. you need to do the experiment with a laser finish to catch the difference not with the naked eye and dropping things off a tower .
the hand is quicker than the eye.

galileo might be right if all materials had the same density or all masses were equal per volume but this is not true
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 251
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 9:19:57 AM
and galileo knew he lied

he could test for it, like i said with cannons and cannonballs
i figured out what i did wrong, if i did any thing,

if the 5 pound and ten pound cannon ball were fired at the same height above the ground with equal energy.

they would both travel the same amount of distance.
because the earths gravity pulls on each atom in the weight is individual and thus equal.
it does not pull with greater force on each atom
although it expends greater energy moving the greater weight.

if the earth really accelerated things towards it at the same rate no matter what the mass

the velocity would not matter because it is vertical and the gravitational pull of the earth is vertical.
so he knew he was lying
 Balsamica
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 252
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 8:18:46 PM
Does all this hinge on the definition of God?

If God were, say, Intelligence........let's use that or plug in another word ....could we say Intelligence created the universe?

Or, if God were the Laws of Physics, could we use that?

Or, if God were Atomic Energy.......or........whatever.

Is the problem really the bearded white man in a throne up on a cloud?
 Samhein
Joined: 7/20/2010
Msg: 253
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 11:08:27 PM
if the 5 pound and ten pound cannon ball were fired at the same height above the ground with equal energy. they would both travel the same amount of distance.

Aside all the other errors in your statements, this is patently not true. As a fan of the Age of Sail, firing these objects from a cannon would bollocks up whatever your argument about gravity is.
Please, give it a rest.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 254
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 11:30:52 PM
Uggg Samhein....

Ok, Got the message about inflation and how it all happened within the first few seconds and that the inflation had matter distributed evenly and then matter started clumping together to form blah blah blah...

WTF man... This absolutely must discount any sense of infinity right. You can't inflate infinity in an instant. It must be a constrained inflation. What is currently baking my brain is dark matter... If it is absolutely everywhere and even in the spaces between atoms then this would be what the universe was inflated with. Basically a balloon inflated with dark energy/matter which is the medium that interacts with particles to give them mass...

Now I will say that I wanted the dark matter / energy to be absolutely everywhere but now that is kind of breaking down because of the 3d map of dark matter. It now doesn't seem to be absolutely everywhere and is instead more like very large oil like droplets contained in yet another …thing…
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMZ6GSVYVE_index_1.html#subhead1

Why does it seem that it would be just as likely that we are an experiment in some super universes laboratory particle collider that just discovered how to recreate the big bang... We have about 1/1000000 of a second left until we annihilate.

The lead scientists name is Joe Hova and he thought it would be a great laugh to see what would happen if he slipped in some of his own genetic material (wink wink) into the the center of the collision.
 Samhein
Joined: 7/20/2010
Msg: 255
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/14/2012 11:44:05 PM

WTF man... This absolutely must discount any sense of infinity right. You can't inflate infinity in an instant. It must be a constrained inflation. What is currently baking my brain is dark matter... If it is absolutely everywhere and even in the spaces between atoms then this would be what the universe was inflated with. Basically a balloon inflated with dark energy/matter which is the medium that interacts with particles to give them mass...

Infinity.. I don't know what you mean. I mean, from what you say, right, Space did not inflate to where it is now at that first instant. I have no idea if they've calculated some kind of rate of expansion to the point where they could offer a measurement of volume, per se, right after the beginning. I can't answer that Q without a lot of Googling and such.... But Space is in a sense, finite but boundless. You will never locate an edge. Now about Dark matter, I mean just skimming what it is is mind boggling to me. Basically it's all the galactic corn syrup mixed in with the tiny amount of real fruit juice. In my mind it must be bound up in interstellar objects and stellar furnaces... and probably black holes. It isn't immediately evident here around us personally so it must instead be located in more active phenomena where we could not have evolved or survived. Either that or it somehow permeates everything on a particle level and we just haven't grasped how to liberate it yet...



Now I will say that I wanted the dark matter / energy to be absolutely everywhere but now that is kind of breaking down because of the 3d map of dark matter. It now doesn't seem to be absolutely everywhere and is instead more like very large oil like droplets contained in yet another …thing…
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMZ6GSVYVE_index_1.html#subhead1

Yeah...


Why does it seem that it would be just as likely that we are an experiment in some super universes laboratory particle collider that just discovered how to recreate the big bang... We have about 1/1000000 of a second left until we annihilate.

Well, it could be as likely. We are inside the box so we can never know. In my personal view, things that philosophically complex which I also cannot ever know, are irrelevant to me. If we annihilate , I won't know it. If we are about to, I don't know it. So i don't care. Just keep feeding me and give me some ass now and then and i'll run in the wheel all day.

And note: thusfar on that last bit PoF is totally useless ;) Someone change the experiment paradigm please
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 256
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/15/2012 12:11:36 AM

Infinity.. I don't know what you mean. I mean, from what you say, right, Space did not inflate to where it is now at that first instant. I have no idea if they've calculated some kind of rate of expansion to the point where they could offer a measurement of volume, per se, right after the beginning.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)

In physical cosmology, cosmic inflation, cosmological inflation or just inflation is the theorized extremely rapid exponential expansion of the early universe by a factor of at least 1078 in volume, driven by a negative-pressure vacuum energy density.[1] The inflationary epoch comprises the first part of the electroweak epoch following the grand unification epoch. It lasted from 10-36 seconds after the Big Bang to sometime between 10-33 and 10-32 seconds. Following the inflationary period, the universe continued to expand, but at a slower rate.


Yeah... within seconds. FML not only is that one big ass ballon but one hell of a compressor. hahaha. I like how they say "at a slower rate." Well ya think?
 Samhein
Joined: 7/20/2010
Msg: 257
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/15/2012 12:48:19 AM
It's all relative







-ity ;)
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 258
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/16/2012 1:34:06 PM
because of the density of the basic particle of the universe and their momentum's,
their collisions and the waythey angle off each other
in consistent and regular patterns
bundling up further and further
into more and more complex structures
which form the force and particles,
waves are really masses of smaller particles
-waves of particles
and as Feynman said,
it is just: particles, particles, particles, particles.
and as there can be no action at a distance.
all interaction
consists of one particle hitting another.
No matter what.
It is always a particle at the base.
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 259
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/16/2012 8:37:20 PM
Dark matter and dark energy are on average, not believed to be all that "mysterious" or "special". There is evidence [ie, side-effects such as too much or too little gravity in some places] that there is more energy or matter in some parts of the universe than we can detect at present. Because there is evidence these things exist, we identify them as matter and energy. Because we can't see what they are, we label them as "dark". Much of the "dark matter" is thought to simply be gaseous hydrogen which is diffuse enough to not block the telescopic view, but when it surrounds an entire galaxy and spills out into the void, it could be a LOT of mass added to the gravity of measurable things like stars and nebulae.
 aremeself
Joined: 12/31/2008
Msg: 260
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/16/2012 11:15:31 PM
so how would feeble science find god in the universe, catch him tinkering some where?

he's not IN this universe, if he exists.

general motors isn't in you car either.

no watch maker in you watch.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 261
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/17/2012 12:22:40 AM
he's not IN this universe, if he exists.


Sorry to say that statement also says that he is not here. Out of everything that I have learned through this thread and reading what I have read. You can't box god up. For some reason Religion boxes him up and moves him around and around and as each new discovery comes out the opinion is 'god doesn't live here' so he gets moved again.

This is partly because they want to prove he exists but can't. So... godditit is the easy catch phrase and it gets associated to the random thing of the day that can't be explained. Illness - Goddidit Recovery-Goddidit The sun-Goddidit, etc All that does is move him to the next unexplained thing (god of the gaps).

If we turned religion upside down and removed the "believe or ye shall die' aspect of it and not only promoted discovery and intelligence but encouraged the leaning of the unknown guess where god would be.

In everything and everywhere because we would be discovering new things all the time. Even universes of universes it would just keep expanding.

Go figure....
 lyingcheat
Joined: 9/13/2009
Msg: 262
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/17/2012 1:33:22 AM

he's not IN this universe, if he exists.

How do you know where he/she/it is? Assuming, as you say, that he/she/it exists at all.
Which is why it's so funny that people talk about all these qualities and motivations they attribute to he/she/it but no one can actually even say where he/she/it might be, what he/she/it looks like, what capabilities he/she/it might have... etc etc. Yet believers see nothing ludicrous about espousing 'belief' in he/she/it?

general motors isn't in you car either.

The analogue is fallacious. The physical manifestations of General Motors exist (cars, amongst other things) and are directly traceable to an edifice that clearly exists. No such proof or traceable line of evidence exists for deities. Not one. Ever.

no watch maker in you watch.

There are no pixies in your watch either. But if you don't understand that an absence of pixies doesn't imply that pixies who live in alternate universe must have created your watch, just see above.
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 263
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/17/2012 5:29:32 AM
@ balsamica the Laws of physics exist.
Now if they had brought the universe into existance
they would be bringing it into existance now.
and there would be more and more of it
and space would be filling up
and for those that point to those virtual particle's that"just " appear
they also "just" disappear
so that means the universe could just disappear at anytime
and if it can just dis appear
than logically it could just appear
so it is logical to say that it wasn't always here.
and you can't prove by science that it always was, so that's out.
and if it was a one time thing the appearance of the universe
than it can't be demonstrated by experiment
and public demonstration and its not science.
what Science really has to do
to prove the creation of the universe was natural
is to create a universe publicly ,
in an experiment.
with a machine or something.
and i don't think they can.
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 264
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/17/2012 1:11:02 PM

Now if they had brought the universe into existance
they would be bringing it into existance now.
and there would be more and more of it
and space would be filling up

Non sequitur. For an 'if-then' statement to be valid, your conclusion much actually be dependant on your assumption. In this case it absolutely isn't. What you have is juice powder and water - when you mix them, you have juice. You don't get any more though because what you needed to make it was used up in the process.


and for those that point to those virtual particle's that"just " appear
they also "just" disappear
so that means the universe could just disappear at anytime
and if it can just dis appear
than logically it could just appear

Another non sequitur. Virtual particles and matter aren't the same game. Note that the former are "virtual".


and if it was a one time thing the appearance of the universe
than it can't be demonstrated by experiment
and public demonstration and its not science

False. Many valid scientific proofs can be obtained indirectly, by demonstrating that all the parts necessary to create the whole, work in a suitable way. So "for A to be true, B through Z must all be true. Since B through Z ARE all true, A is a reasonable conclusion."


what Science really has to do
to prove the creation of the universe was natural
is to create a universe publicly ,
in an experiment

No. Such an experiment would only demonstrate a possible way of originating a universe. There would still be no 100% because one could still not observe the origin of our universe. While your experiment would add one more layer of security to the theory, the fact is that there are already many experiments which support the theory. The conclusions are the same and it's only a percentage point or two difference in confidence. Besides which, science doesn't prove ANYthing to be natural. Natural causes are an required assumption of all science. No unnatural causes have ever been demonstrated, and there's no reason to ever consider them a priori.
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 265
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/17/2012 1:45:15 PM
do virtual particle exist or not?

and if you say it was a one time thing,
that the particle were used up
that means you cant repeat it
and you have to be able to repeat things for it to be Science

and science is the definition of a process or method
involving a human witness and machine recording,
not an outcome.

the process does not assume , you do. a priori

and the fact that matter exists may be proof that a God does. indirectly
and scientificly be cause of its order.

and while creation of a universe through experiment and public demonstration might only demonstrate one way to do it.
you have not demonstrated any
through experiment and public demonstration
just made excuses

what you are claiming is that your contention is logical.
not scientific and proven

and you can prove water freezes
so don't talk about proofs only appearing in math. it ain't true
 Samhein
Joined: 7/20/2010
Msg: 266
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/19/2012 2:42:31 AM

he's not IN this universe, if he exists.


But if he's affected this universe, then he is. If he is, or was, he will leave traces. If we can detect and measure these traces, his existence can be shown, potentially proven.

So far there is not one single shred of such evidence, and given the supposed properties, there won't be, so it isn't intelligent to posit him. We already have sufficient answers and sufficient evidence to dismiss the necessity; nature takes care of it all, without conscious outside direction.
 mccullough64
Joined: 11/11/2006
Msg: 267
view profile
History
Stephen Hawking: God Did Not Create the Universe
Posted: 3/28/2012 12:04:19 PM
The Great Fly in the Sky and his Giant Turd's, Our Creator's Particles, may be too small to detect with our insturements in Roman time they used to say nothing smaller than what they could see existed and die from them all the time
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >