http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6811FN20100902
God did not create the universe and the "Big Bang" was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book

Hi iPondR!

Yes, I'm b-a-a-a-a-a-a-ack.

Been thinking about your question, Event vs. Process.

Here's my take on it...

1 .
A one-off Creation event, as preferred by the Theists, usually has the 2nd law of thermodynamics somewhere in the mix. (I aim to cover some of AO's points about cosmic heat death in this message.) The 2nd can be seen in action everywhere we look, from the decay of atomic particles, up to the decay of stars and galaxies. So, it looks as if things are running down. But is this the real picture?

2 .
To get a handle on the 'real picture' we need to examine how and where the 2nd applies. See here.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_system
Please look at the three headings (Isolated, Closed and Open) in the Overview section and compare them to the diagram to their left. In an Isolated system, nothing can cross the boundary between the system and it's surroundings. In a Closed system, only energy can cross the boundary and in an Open system, both matter and energy can cross the boundary. As far as I can see, the Open option doesn't really apply to the diagram, because if matter and energy (therefore, also information) can cross the boundary, what's the point of a boundary? There's no real difference between the System and the Surroundings, because they are continuously interacting. The whole of the diagram might as well be colored grey.

3 .
Now skip down to 'Systems in Equilibrium' and read that too. Ok, now for the big question. Which kind of system is our universe - Isolated, Closed or Open?
This is important, because, only an Isolated system can experience thermodynamic equilibrium, a.k.a. heat death. Neither a Closed or Open system can experience heat-death, because in each case something is crossing the boundary - either energy (Closed system) or Matter and Energy (Open system). As I said above, our universe seems to have the appearance of an Isolated system that's winding down to it's heat death. "Seems to..." That's the catch! Now I'll list the lines of evidence that (to my mind) indicate that our universe is not an Isolated system.

4 .
Where is the Boundary?
If we live in an Isolated thermodynamic system, there must be a boundary that prevents the inflow of energy and/or matter from whatever 'surrounds' our universe. The edge of the Observable universe does not qualify as this boundary. That's all it is, a limit to how far we can see - nothing more. It isn't a wall or defining boundary of any kind.
Please go to this Wiki page... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology) The salient points we need to grasp are these;
* In the first paragraph the universe's expansion is said to have increased exponentially in size by a factor of 10 78 within 10 36 to 10 32 seconds. Put simply, for the universe to get so BIG in such a small time, it must have done so at superluminal speed. Yes! Super-luminal, as in faster than the speed of light.
* The first sentence of the 'Overview' section confirms this by using the word, "in". Special Relativity only applies to objects in the universe, not to the actual fabric of the space-time continuum itself. Space-time can expand at any speed it likes.
* The 'Observational Status' section agrees with what AO has said, the Big Bang theory is the best-supported cosmological model.
However, if we accept this model, we also have to accept that Inflation requires us NOT to take the edge of the Observable universe as any kind of Boundary. Super-luminal inflation implies that there is much, much more of our universe beyond the Observational horizon, than within it. So what we see is not all that there is. Therefore, if AO accepts the standard Big Bang model, he should also accept Inflation and he should also accept that we have not discovered any definite physical boundary that would make our universe an Isolated Thermodynamic System.
Conclusion: To hold to the standard Big Bang model is to hold to a universe that is either a Closed or Open Thermodynamic System, not an Isolated one.

5 .
There is another line of evidence that implies that our universe is not an Isolated system - Dark Flow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow In this case, gravitational energy from regions beyond our observable universe, appear to be affecting large areas of ours. If the edge of the Observable Universe were a real boundary, this would not be possible. Nothing, not even gravity, could cross the boundary, to make it's effects felt within our universe.

6 .
So iPondR, the jury is most definitely out, when it comes to claim that our universe is an Isolated system. Isolation runs counter to Inflation and, taken together with Dark Flow, the implication is that we appear to be in either a Closed or Open system. Please note that I say, 'implication'. The jury cannot yet come to a firm conclusion, one way or another. They have no definitive knowledge to do so.

7 .
Christianity requires God to be eternal, but his created universe to be a finite construct, with a definite beginning (Genesis) and ending (Revelation), that is - an Isolated system.
However, we cannot positively say that our universe is an Isolated system. It could be, but Inflation implies that the physical boundary that is needed to isolate us can never be found, because it lies beyond the observable universe. Another factor, that seems to indicate that we are living in a created, isolated system is the Big Bang itself. It appears to be the Genesis of the universe. So, a Theist would argue that we do observe a beginning. This is where the KCA rears it's ugly head. But, we've already covered this ground. (It's not a proof. It deals only with inferred knowledge and yields only probabilities, not certainties. It begins with a metaphysical act of a-logical intuition. Etc., etc.) It's no help here either, because we still can't say if the Big Bang was the true point of origin or not.

8 .
If looked at in theological terms, the Big Bang is neither Theistic or Atheistic, it is Agnostic. It might be the true beginning of all things, but then again, it might not. Just as an agnostic will state that it's impossible to say if there's a God or not, the Big Bang effectively says the same thing about the origin of the universe. There is A-GNOSIS ("no knowledge") of anything before or beyond the Big Bang event that can be understood by the human mind. There are theories and models and speculations and arguments and religious beliefs, but no firm knowledge. Time 0 and Space 0 permit us no knowledge of Time -1 or Space -1. Theists claim certain knowledge, but they arrive at this conclusion thru logically inadmissible means.

9 .
Points 1 thru 8, lead me (rightly or wrongly) to the following conclusions;
* It's not possible to positively state that we live in a finite, isolated-system universe.
* It's not possible to positively state that we live in a closed-system universe.
* It's not possible to positively state that we live in an eternal, open-system universe.
* It's possible that we could be living in any one of the above.
* We can express what is probable, but currently that is all.
* Since Christianity requires an isolated-system universe and since it is not possible to say if we do live in one, Christianity remains an option not the answer.

10 .
So then iPondR, I find that I cannot answer your question, Event or Process, in any kind of satisfactory way. Sorry 'bout that! If the jury's still out, then I must be too. To take any other position would be dishonest of me. However, I do have certain views and certain theories that I find appealing. I won't mention them now because i must give others the chance to reply to this post. Ok?

Thanks,

BAA.

BSoR wrote:

Perhaps you need to meditate on that.

I'm pretty sure I knew what you meant from the beginning; I was just having some fun with you

Humans may be intelligent, but they often don't act accordingly. This describes most attempts to draw attention to the obvious implications of population levels.

Humans procreate on a "personal" level. It rarely if ever occurs to them how it affects the macro level. They think, "I'm going to have a family", when they should be thinking, "I'm going to add to an already extremely large number of humans". They don't grasp the obvious unsustainable nature of this paradigm.

I'll admit to not being much of a poetry fan in general, but some of what you write really strikes a poetic nerve. Keep it up, it's cool

here is the link for the ustream cam live from Burning Man 2010 Burning Man 2010

The Titanic Beckoning, By Brian37

"I'm not a fear monger"
He decried
Two steps below
A real man's speech

"I'm pointing out the ice burg"
So we don't sink
Obama is a racist
Who hates the white man's wealth

"We need to kneel and pray"
The founders were monochromatic
Corporate owned government
Is the only way

Platitudes and placebos
Are the ice burg he creates
Selling a theocratic utopia
While he lines his pockets

No rules no rules
Let the pay gap explode
And if your mom cant pay for health care
She deserves an early grave

Oh Uncle Sam
It is the American Dream
To hand out money to banks
And stick us with the bill

Oh yes Glen
You do have a dream
That greed is good
And fuck the poor

Just blame them Glen
Even though my friends
Who live on manicured land
In the middle class

Even those who have
And work long hours too
Your jaded lip service to a god
Only makes you rich

They too Glen
Have a dream
That bills wont kill them
Or take their middle class houses

And you dare sully the name
Of someone who truly cared
By pretending to care
You don't

You use your God
And a great man
To advance your wealth
And nothing more

If I had a god
I would certainly hope
Smite
Would be your fate

Pursuit of happiness
Is what it says
Not jaded judgment
Of those with less

You invoke the founders
Leaving out half the story
That Jefferson despised
Passing around money

You fail to tell them
He valued real work
He valued small business
He valued the small guy

He educated his slaves
And wanted them free
Long before Lincoln
And would hate your speech

You are for Wal Mart
Not Main Street
Out for yourself
Nothing more

Yes Glen
There is an ice burg
It is your class war fare
Invoking god and corporate anarchy

You will not win Glen
We are not sheep
We are not fooled
By the lies you sell

E-Pluribus Unum
Is more than one class
More than one religion
That makes our nation last

You are sinking us
By raping the public
Blaming the poor
Praying on credulity to get more

There is a Beckoning
It is the mirror you face
Creating destruction
By your own greed

You are a glutton
A bloated blowhard
Using your God
To line your pockets

Bodhitharta wrote:

Islam is submission to God in peace. If you do not believe in God do you believe in submitting yourself in peace to life?

I believe I'd like to have some peace from ancient superstitions. In a world with many divisive and often aggressive god believers, peace is probably something we can't have.

How do you save a youtube video to your computer? I need to use a youtube video in a school project, but youtube is blocked at school. How do I save it as a file/to my computer?
_______________________
market samurai ~ marketsamurai ~ marketsamurai.com

Bodhitharta wrote:

HighPriestessLois wrote: Millions of Christians offered up millions of prayers for God to plug up the oil-spewing hole in the sea floor. Has he done so? No. Millions of Christians pray for their children to be healed of fatal diseases. Does God comply? No. You can see the graves of little children in every cemetery in the country. The Bible says that you will get whatever you ask for in prayer, if you believe it and you ask in Jesus' name. Millions of Christians believe, they have faith, they do their best to live how God wants them to live, yet when they pray, God ignores every single thing they ask for, no matter how unselfish. Therefore, the Bible lies and cannot be trusted. But the Oil did stop not very long after they prayed and it seems to have suddenly evaporated, go figure.

I love this! I love this so much! It truly gives my heart joy to ruminate on such questions. No really

To test the conditions for prayer to work, you could try making a double-blind study with hospital patients (done) or could try proving that there is a critical mass at which thought 'energy' accumulates (the Hundreth Monkey effect & good old Rupert Sheldrake) or you could set up a designated 'omega moment' where thousands get together to meditate on world peace (well that's been tried, how did that work out?) and so on and so on etcetera, etcetera.

You could alternatively take the position that such rationalist approaches to 'magical thinking' are bound to fail as they do not allow for the transcendent, are not wholistic and do not recognise the inner life of the individual and the collective consciousness. Consciousness is an essential quality inherrent IN reality and indeed beyond it into realms unknown and perhaps unknowable. So double blind studies are OK for testing pain killer drugs but NOT for homeopathy, acupuncture and therapeutic touch.

Some postulate that human thought has a kind of objective reality and can interfere with matter in (generally nebulous and ill defined) ways... some choose to place a 'god' mechanism as an intercedant or mediator between the 'broadcaster' and 'reality'... either way the end result is the same IMO. Either our brains are continuously hooked up into some awesome hyperdimensional matrix and we just don't know it yet... or we don't broadcast ANYTHING that will EVER be detected by any human or natural process -BUT- that our divine benefactor and overlord will etherically pick up the signals (or is indwelling etc as the case may be) ----AND YET---- still can & does employ non-detectable means in order to carry things out.

[edit; Except that the stuff that the divine intervenes in IS detectable. If we follow that line of argument to it's logical conclusion, reality LOOKS THE SAME whether there's a God (theism) or god (deism) or NOT because if there is intervention we should be able to detect it in some way, no? The only necessary problem that (at least deistic) god concepts solve (at least notionally) is that of First Cause (assuming your ontological construct requires one)... phew, that was easy! ]

So;

a. rationalist / naturalist mechanism
(the well was capped by naturally evolved human action/technology and persistence etc)

b. supernatural non-detectable method which still impacts on matter
(the well was capped by, divinely intervened, evolved human action/technology and persistence etc)

Hmmm, interesting. One seems to involve an extra step or is that a leap?

MockingGods wrote:

A least we know Mick isn't the product of someone's imagination and he certainly can put on one hell of a show. So yeah, probably.

Throw in a crucifixion and we might have a nice little religion here!