|
|
Post by chris on Oct 19, 2005 14:35:34 GMT
This thread maybe seen as slightly different to the rest. I was hoping a few people could give me a hand with some homework. I have to get a varitey of opinions from friends and family, and this forum popped straight onto my head!
Anway, this is the question: Is there such thing as nothingness, and is nothingness infinate?
The general context is the creation of the universe, and these questions come from the Oscillating Universe theory. (The one with the bangs and crunches)
Thanks alot for your help - much appreciated!
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 19, 2005 17:18:01 GMT
The universe is like a ball or wheel. Finite infinity. Take ball and draw a dot on it and then go in any direction you want and you'll come back to the dot. Time is the same. Nothing, but nothing is infinite really. You will always come back to your starting point.
Life itself is cyclic. Although a person is born, lives, and dies the life force can never been extinguished. Physically the person is no more but the spirit or 'soul' if you like remains. There is no conciousness 'per se' with it. That only comes with physical existence but it is still an entity in it's own right that is ongoing for all time.
Phil will no doubt have something to say and be better qualified than me to comment on the physical side of it all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2005 18:14:50 GMT
Does nothingness exist if there is no tangible thing that could exist to demonstrate that the nothingness is present?
If there is no tangible thing that exists to demonstrate the nothingness, then how do you know that the nothingness is truly nothingness with nothing to occupy it?
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 19, 2005 18:20:51 GMT
Does nothingness exist if there is no tangible thing that could exist to demonstrate that the nothingness is present?
If there is no tangible thing that exists to demonstrate the nothingness, then how do you know that the nothingness is truly nothingness with nothing to occupy it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOK, I always thought you were Chinese and that confirms it. What an inscrutabbable thought!! Sounds like the theories of 'Wun Gon Wong'
Either that or the thoughts of Paddy O'Sozzled
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2005 18:26:21 GMT
D TOK, I always thought you were Chinese and that confirms it. What an inscrutabbable thought!! Sounds like the theories of 'Wun Gon Wong' Either that or the thoughts of Paddy O'Sozzled Not quite. I'm just trying to answer the question posed in the OP... |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 19, 2005 18:26:59 GMT
The nothingness i'm thinking of in this case is outside the universe. Once matter has ended, what is after that? Take the Big Bang as an example. A massive explosion happened around 15 billion years ago. This has caused matter to be created and fly out, logically in a huge circle with the cetre of the explosion as the theoretical centre of the locus. The matter is going further and further away. As it does, the universe expands. But what is just past the edge of the universe? As no matter has reached it, it is full of nothingness. But is this nothingness infinite, or does it even exist at all?
(Sorry if i'm over complicating myself - a lot of the stuff is way over my head!)
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 19, 2005 18:27:29 GMT
Not quite. I'm just trying to answer the question posed in the OP...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know that yer silly devil. I was takin' the pi$$.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 19, 2005 18:36:30 GMT
AIUI nothingness is the absence of anything, so it starts where the matter in the universe ends at present (accepting we understand it is still expanding), and goes on from there.... to......? (infinity if you accept what's gone before)
BTW is this Physics, Philosophy or Psychology homework? Pretty advanced for a 16 yr old!
|
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 19, 2005 18:37:31 GMT
I tried to explain it with the ball example. Everything inside the ball is what exists. Everything outside the ball also exists but in a different plane. (I'm not talking airbus either)
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 19, 2005 18:39:30 GMT
BTW is this Physics, Philosophy or Psychology homework? Pretty advanced for a 16 yr old! Religious Studies. (The topic is about creation of the universe) |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Oct 19, 2005 19:06:00 GMT
imho the nothingness outside the universe does not exist. The universe is infinite and all there is, and as the universe is expanding therefore so is infinity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2005 19:17:50 GMT
in my opinion i dont really know and if we were made to find that out, we would of know thousands of years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 19, 2005 19:56:54 GMT
Logocally, i belive this: The universe is finite, with the potential to be infinte. Outside the uniserve, there is (probably) nothingness but we'll never know for when the hand of man has reched into nothingness, matter has entered. It is no longer nothingness, it is the universe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2005 20:21:59 GMT
Not quite. I'm just trying to answer the question posed in the OP... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I know that yer silly devil. I was takin' the pi$$. Oh, I see. I must confess that this thread is certainly different - it's not the sort of thing you'd expect to see. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Oct 20, 2005 2:03:41 GMT
BTW is this Physics, Philosophy or Psychology homework? Pretty advanced for a 16 yr old! Religious Studies. (The topic is about creation of the universe) What the heck has the universe (a science thing) got to do with religion (made up stuff in old books)? They were two very different subjects when I was at school. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 20, 2005 6:55:58 GMT
TOK - Yes it is a bit different. (I hope nobody objects, i won't make it a frequent discussoin point)
Colin - i think the general idea is looking at the one (or two) creation stories in the Bible and seeing if they tie in with any of the scientific creation storeis. Also it's looking at whether science and religion are compatable.
|
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 20, 2005 14:58:25 GMT
The universe created life and the humans created God.
Not vice versa, please note.
Russ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2005 15:22:51 GMT
The universe created life and the humans created God. Not vice versa, please note. Russ Ah, but you can't say that for certain though! That's the argument which has been raging for all time! |
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Oct 20, 2005 15:47:42 GMT
Ah, but you can't say that for certain though! That's the argument which has been raging for all time! Is there any evidence that man had gods before recorded history? There's plenty of archaeological evidence that they gave thanks to the earth, water, sun etc but I've seen nothing to show that there was a single god. |
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 20, 2005 15:58:38 GMT
Ah, but you can't say that for certain though! Just my personal view, Alan. I disagree. To our knowledge, it is an argument created by the humans, and the humans have not existed for all time. It is the humans who define and create our knowledge. Russ (who is not without spiritual dimension, but it is one of my own creation) |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Oct 20, 2005 19:53:15 GMT
Sorry for taking this thread off the original question - but then perhaps what i'm about to say will help with the 'connection' thing. My original point about the Two subjects being different is based on this view:
When I was at school we were told that Joe Bloggs witnessed certain events or John Doe did something - and all this stuff was put into books known as the bible (or another religion's equivalent). These books (the basis of religions) are full of hearsay, gossip and rumours. Is any of it true? Who knows.
Now science is a different matter - it can be proven. It's that simple. The big bang (creation of the universe as we know it) happened, Dinosaurs existed, Monkeys evolved into humans - it's all true, because science can prove it.
So are religion and science connected?
NO! they couldn't be further apart, which is why I don't get what religious studies has got to do with the universe. I'm starting to see now why the papers are full of stories about how education is failing kids today - especially with stuff like this!!
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 20, 2005 20:32:28 GMT
The big bang (creation of the universe as we know it) happened, So are religion and science connected? NO! they couldn't be further apart, I'm going to have to argue with you on those two points: 1) The Big Bang is a theory, and is not proven. It is logical, yes, but not neccassarily right. There are other theories, the Big Bang has most in it's favour. 2) Science and religion do agree with alot of things, but argue about others. The Catholic Church issued a document a few days ago, stating that the Bilbe is not 100% correct and should not be taken litterally. Other parts of it are fact. (If you want to believe, that is) One story not to be taken literally is the creation story. In fact, the Bible give two different stories. I have issues with the creation story like why was the sun created a few days after light was. |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 20, 2005 21:54:11 GMT
Even most Christians accept that the bible cannot be taken as a scientific textbook. However there is little in the Bible that can actually be DISPROVED by science: if , for example, a 'day' in Genesis is say a few million years then the bible is not that far wrong.
However, on the original post, I cannot see how the concept of nothingness comes into RS! It is science, even though not all the facts are known yet.
Mind you, when I was at school, it was "obvious to all" (scientists' words) that the universe was in a steady state and "all this talk about expansion was rubbish"
So the scientists only know what they know (and don't know what they don't know - yet). Profound yet obvious!
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 20, 2005 21:56:09 GMT
The universe created life and the humans created God. Wow - how can you be so sure? Do you have a hotline to the Almighty? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2005 1:22:31 GMT
No wonder they say never talk about religion or politics with your friends!! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 21, 2005 1:49:09 GMT
Wow - how can you be so sure? It's what I believe. Not that I put any great importance on absolute certainty in such matters, but I would like to think I am rational, and one of the qualities of consciousness (which seems to me to be one of the prime purposes of the allegory of the Adam and Eve tale) is an capability for abstraction, and hence the process of deification. In any case, I think the notion of man inventing God (or a little g god) is far more interesting and plausible than 'God inventing man', and also has the benefit of a more adult allocation of responsibility for human action. I've never felt the need for one, especially to someone else's almighty, but I get the impression you would regard me as presumptuous if I said I did? Russ |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Oct 21, 2005 2:34:52 GMT
I'm going to have to argue with you on those two points: No wonder they say never talk about religion or politics with your friends!! ;D I think i'll go back on the fence with Alan - I can see this going on forever otherwise !! ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 21, 2005 3:04:05 GMT
All it boils down to is fact, fable and fiction. Ancient man worshipped the Sun, Moon etc because they existed and were tangible.FACT.
Man adheres to the teachings of Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, et al because he wants something to believe in. FABLE.
The stories of walking on water and suchlike are probably the product of fertile minds and are therefore FICTION.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 21, 2005 9:29:16 GMT
OK I'll throw this out for consideration because it happened. Analyse it how you like but (using my old teacher's clause) I present it without any revelation of my own views in the matter.
The Rev David Sheppard (the one who captained the England cricket team for many years ) was having a long argument with a confirmed atheist. Finally he came up with this.
"OK ,let's say it's a 50/50 chance whether God exists. I can't prove he does and you can't prove he doesn't. Where does this leave us?
During life you win because I have restrictions on your life and you don't.
After life it's all different. If you're right then we both end up in nothingness (i.e. cease to exist) and are both in the same boat.
But if I'm right, then I end up in heaven and you have a real problem....."
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 21, 2005 14:44:19 GMT
People. At this point i'd like to thank you for your posts which have helped me immensly and that (as i suspected) we'll have to agree to disagree
|
|
