Author Topic: Hello  (Read 421 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Hello
« on: June 29, 2014, 04:56:19 PM »
Hello, so I've been reading on this forum for quite some time and decided to sign up. I come from a strict evangelical background. I left my faith 5 years ago. The main reason for that was that the more I learned to objectively grow in my work (math/physics), the less I could convince myself to believe in the God as depicted in the bible.

It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.

I eventually left my religion when something happened to me in my personal life. That was the wake up call for me.

Also I didn't want my son to be brought up with the same suppression of reality I faced.

The reason why I signed up is that I often see religious people trying to build their case by using science and its misrepresentation. I used to be like this and recognized it as I was constantly looking for ways to align my faith with my work. I hope to be able to talk to you and know your experience. As well as clear some of the many misunderstandings as regards scientific claims made.


 

 

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11193
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Hello
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2014, 05:02:41 PM »
Welcome to the forum. I myself am studying physics and have great respect for math - I consider it to be the most perfect abstract thing we've ever discovered/invented[1].
 1. I'm not sure what to call it, but it's somewhere between those two terms.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1265
  • Darwins +132/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: Hello
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2014, 06:25:33 PM »
Welcome, Wow.  I hope you find this an interesting place to explore ideas & sometimes chatter.   :D
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Online Defiance

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 792
  • Darwins +28/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Can't be mad at something that doesn't exist.
Re: Hello
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2014, 02:35:30 PM »
Wlcome to the forum in which no theist can prove the existence of god. Wow, that's a good name.
"God is just and fair"
*God kills 2.5 million of people he KNEW would turn out like this in the flood*
*Humanity turns bad again, when God knew it would*
We should feel guilty for this.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11193
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Hello
« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2014, 02:38:29 PM »
Wlcome to the forum in which no theist can prove the existence of god. Wow, that's a good name.

We usually call that place "reality" for short. ;)
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #5 on: June 30, 2014, 03:57:32 PM »
Haha thanks everyone!

@ One above all: good luck with your studies. What year are you currently in and may I ask what your religious background was? I noticed that the more I studied mathematics and physics, the less I could convince myself to believe. It was a very confronting and frightening experience for me, but I am glad I pushed through.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11193
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Hello
« Reply #6 on: June 30, 2014, 04:31:41 PM »
good luck with your studies.

Thanks.

What year are you currently in

I will finish the final exam of the first year in the third of July. So far I've passed 7 out of 10 classes in two semesters.

and may I ask what your religious background was?

I was raised catholic, according to my mom, though I really don't give a crap. I'm a gnostic atheist now, and that's how I'll remain until the day I die.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Online Defiance

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 792
  • Darwins +28/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Can't be mad at something that doesn't exist.
Re: Hello
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2014, 04:42:31 PM »
good luck with your studies.

Thanks.

What year are you currently in

I will finish the final exam of the first year in the third of July. So far I've passed 7 out of 10 classes in two semesters.

and may I ask what your religious background was?

I was raised catholic, according to my mom, though I really don't give a crap. I'm a gnostic atheist now, and that's how I'll remain until the day I die.
Aren't you going to finally accept god like Darwin did on his deathbed?

Jokes, jokes.
"God is just and fair"
*God kills 2.5 million of people he KNEW would turn out like this in the flood*
*Humanity turns bad again, when God knew it would*
We should feel guilty for this.

Online wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1996
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Hello
« Reply #8 on: July 01, 2014, 01:12:57 PM »
Welcome, wow. Good luck in correcting sincere believers' misconceptions about science. It's a worthy goal, but from what I've seen, many of them are too committed to their religious beliefs to be reasoned away from them.

skeptic54768, for example, remains impervious to having his fallacies and ignorance pointed out to him and corrected by other forum members. A textbook example of someone so invested in their views that they won't consider evidence those views might be wrong. Or admit to it, anyway.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline YRM_DM

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • Darwins +92/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2014, 01:35:56 PM »
Hello, so I've been reading on this forum for quite some time and decided to sign up. I come from a strict evangelical background. I left my faith 5 years ago. The main reason for that was that the more I learned to objectively grow in my work (math/physics), the less I could convince myself to believe in the God as depicted in the bible.

It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.

I eventually left my religion when something happened to me in my personal life. That was the wake up call for me.

Also I didn't want my son to be brought up with the same suppression of reality I faced.

The reason why I signed up is that I often see religious people trying to build their case by using science and its misrepresentation. I used to be like this and recognized it as I was constantly looking for ways to align my faith with my work. I hope to be able to talk to you and know your experience. As well as clear some of the many misunderstandings as regards scientific claims made.

Yeah when something happens to you in your personal life, and twenty different well meaning, praying, personal relationship with Jesus, Christians come up to you, moved by the Holy Spirit...

...and all tell you fairly different things, based on where they came at the issue from in the first place.   The advice is exactly the same as it'd be if they never prayed or heard anything from god at all.

It makes you realize that none of them are communicating with god, and you never were either.

When you're just "in it" like that, you can really see from a central point just how "all over the place" religion is.


Welcome.

You can't spell BELIEVE without LIE...  and a few other letters.  B and E and V and I think E.

Online Jag

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1906
  • Darwins +198/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
Re: Hello
« Reply #10 on: July 03, 2014, 12:57:38 PM »
It's endlessly amazing to me how different reality looks now, and I haven't been an active participant in any faith in a couple of decades. It's only been since I began looking at reality with a genuine desire to see it accurately that my recognition of the overwhelming reinforcement of christianity actually happened.

Education is viewed with a certain amount of suspicion in this country. It's really a mixed message - on the one hand, there's a lot of talk about how important it is to educate our children (without delving too deeply into the many roadblocks imposed by the same people), but there's also an attitude of disdain toward professional academics and/or degrees beyond a bachelor's (preferably in business, accounting, or marketing).

With that backdrop, it's really no wonder that general science illiteracy is pretty common. Frustrating, but true. The social sciences (sociology and economics in particular come to mind) can help explain a lot of what's going on, but if anything, those are even more misunderstood by the general public.

"Theory" might be the most misapplied word in English. If they can't remember even that much from their 7th grade science class, expecting them understand what the ToE actually says is perhaps unreasonable on our part.
"It's hard to, but I'm starting to believe some of you actually believe these things.  That is completely beyond my ability to understand if that is really the case, but things never cease to amaze me."

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2014, 07:40:46 AM »
Welcome, wow. Good luck in correcting sincere believers' misconceptions about science. It's a worthy goal, but from what I've seen, many of them are too committed to their religious beliefs to be reasoned away from them.

skeptic54768, for example, remains impervious to having his fallacies and ignorance pointed out to him and corrected by other forum members. A textbook example of someone so invested in their views that they won't consider evidence those views might be wrong. Or admit to it, anyway.

Thanks, Wright. I think what bothers me most is how I see religious people misuse science, its purpose and mostly its results. The way they use to argue their case without even paying respect to the way science works at all. For example being critical in conducting research. The blunt copy pasting of 'scientific facts' that support their view, without paying further attention to it, and how the statistical analysis if done, for example to reach those conclusions and what data underlies it, is really what concerns me. The reason I say concern, is because I feel that the more they seek for reconciliation of faith and science, the less likely it is for science to be called objective (from the perspective of a biased-researcher). And there is nothing much you can say about research, if you don't dig into the research itself.

I have read some of his posts. Some post baffle me. For example, he posted a link which provides 'evidence' that the creationists have concluded 'using science' that the radiometric dating system was not accurate and thus the earth could be 6000 years old. When I looked up the paper, I saw quite som flaws in the research set up. When I posted this to him, I got nothing more than a circular reference, and indeed at that point you kinda wonder, what's the point in arguing? But, at the same time, I can understand where he comes from, because I recognize his way of dealing with evidence presented.
It is hard for me to admit, but I also used to be someone who would argue my way around things in order to not face the consequences of what was right there in front of me. I was perhaps, even more diluded and hypocritical, because not only was I arguing with my colleagues and students around things, I was also practically working in a field which requires objectivity. And I was not able to take that stand at all for quite some time.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 07:51:13 AM by wow »

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2014, 07:49:55 AM »
It's endlessly amazing to me how different reality looks now, and I haven't been an active participant in any faith in a couple of decades. It's only been since I began looking at reality with a genuine desire to see it accurately that my recognition of the overwhelming reinforcement of christianity actually happened.

Education is viewed with a certain amount of suspicion in this country. It's really a mixed message - on the one hand, there's a lot of talk about how important it is to educate our children (without delving too deeply into the many roadblocks imposed by the same people), but there's also an attitude of disdain toward professional academics and/or degrees beyond a bachelor's (preferably in business, accounting, or marketing).

With that backdrop, it's really no wonder that general science illiteracy is pretty common. Frustrating, but true. The social sciences (sociology and economics in particular come to mind) can help explain a lot of what's going on, but if anything, those are even more misunderstood by the general public.

"Theory" might be the most misapplied word in English. If they can't remember even that much from their 7th grade science class, expecting them understand what the ToE actually says is perhaps unreasonable on our part.

Thanks Jag for your reply. I personally experienced a great sense of relief, looking at my work and physics/mathematics without the glasses of religion on me. It was a very different experience to know and accept that what we have achieved in this way, is really our sense of how the world works and our mechanism of understanding it. Before I used to consider the Platonic view. God has allowed us to understand the world through mathematics/physics, god teaches men whatever they know of this truth. Yet again, the more I studied and researched and tried to develop myself, the more I realized that this is a very misleading view. Religious people saying the bible supports the big bang and trinity can be seen in physics through the depiction of quantums, etc. etc., I've heard so many things, and in the end, imho these attempts at reconciliation are desperate ways to deal with reality moving ahead of you, and you're staying behind. Trying to point back to the only values you hold, which are in a 2000 year old book, because you can't actually understand how else everyone seems to be getting closer and closer to completing the puzzle.

I would just hope people would pay more attention to their personal development and be more critical. Even if it means stepping out of your comfort zone.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 07:52:45 AM by wow »

Online Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1686
  • Darwins +112/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Hello
« Reply #13 on: July 06, 2014, 09:11:35 AM »
Hello, so I've been reading on this forum for quite some time and decided to sign up. I come from a strict evangelical background. I left my faith 5 years ago. The main reason for that was that the more I learned to objectively grow in my work (math/physics), the less I could convince myself to believe in the God as depicted in the bible.

It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.

I eventually left my religion when something happened to me in my personal life. That was the wake up call for me.

Also I didn't want my son to be brought up with the same suppression of reality I faced.

The reason why I signed up is that I often see religious people trying to build their case by using science and its misrepresentation. I used to be like this and recognized it as I was constantly looking for ways to align my faith with my work. I hope to be able to talk to you and know your experience. As well as clear some of the many misunderstandings as regards scientific claims made.

What was it about physics that you could not reconcile with religion? The process of critical thought or specific facts?

Imagine a god living in a perfect universe which we can call heaven. This means that there is no entropy. It sounds perfect. Maybe you can think through the consequences of a universe without entropy. What would happen?
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #14 on: July 06, 2014, 03:41:50 PM »
Hello, so I've been reading on this forum for quite some time and decided to sign up. I come from a strict evangelical background. I left my faith 5 years ago. The main reason for that was that the more I learned to objectively grow in my work (math/physics), the less I could convince myself to believe in the God as depicted in the bible.

It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.

I eventually left my religion when something happened to me in my personal life. That was the wake up call for me.

Also I didn't want my son to be brought up with the same suppression of reality I faced.

The reason why I signed up is that I often see religious people trying to build their case by using science and its misrepresentation. I used to be like this and recognized it as I was constantly looking for ways to align my faith with my work. I hope to be able to talk to you and know your experience. As well as clear some of the many misunderstandings as regards scientific claims made.

What was it about physics that you could not reconcile with religion? The process of critical thought or specific facts?

Imagine a god living in a perfect universe which we can call heaven. This means that there is no entropy. It sounds perfect. Maybe you can think through the consequences of a universe without entropy. What would happen?

To answer your first question it was a mix of both.

As for the second one. I have heard this before in some different forms, mostly applied to our actual universe, and have debated on the topic quite some time.
If I look at your hypothetical universe. For this heaven to exist and zero-entropy to be there, the Laws of Thermodynamics must be applicable. You can’t utter this universe and zero-entropy in the same breath, without implicitly assuming that the underlying assumptions must apply. Even when zero-entropy is mentioned, the statement only makes sense within the framework of the Laws in which it is defined.

A perfect universe, with zero-entropy and a god living in it, commonly builds on the notion of such a universe being (in)finite and requires a cause outside of it, and this is argued by many. For example, in the finite case, the argument would be that for zero entropy to hold, this perfect universe should never reach a state where all usable energy is gone, throughout its finite existence.

Suppose we alter the hypothesis and assume it to be infinite. The argument that this perfect infinite universe would distinguish itself from our universe (which is also argued by some to be infinite), would not necessarily need to call upon zero entropy in the first place. If it still does, what do we have? An infinite, uncreated, undestroyable perfect universe, where the energy is efficiently infinitely available and can be used. Some physicists could actually argue that this is the description of the beginning of the Big Bang and thus we would drift from your perfect universe into our actual universe. Suppose this perfect universe does actually fit that description and remains to contain zero entropy infinitely. Thus the entropy change must always be zero, starting from zero and the entropy change of this universe must through reversible processes remain zero and constant. If in this universe reversible processes are actually possible and observable, we could also kick that god out and revert to the state of the perfect universe being there without him without any effects to it.

If we now go back to this perfect universe is, as you state, defined by its property of zero entropy, but now proceeding with it being finite, it couldn't have been there all the time as all energy would be dissipated and there would be no useful energy in the limit, thus violating the Second Law of TDs. Also, because it now must be finite, all events must have some cause, as every events can be finitely regressed back, to their origin. With this perfect universe then having zero-entropy, being finite and all events within this universe having a cause/origin, there must be a cause outside of this universe, which is also not subjected to and is responsible for its existence. Now we have two options. Either it was this god himself or something else.

A zero entropy state would imply that all available thermal energy in a system is efficiently available for expending and can be used. But within that same context, the First Law of TDs states that energy can’t be created nor destroyed. Thus this god can’t be the one that created this perfect universe in the first place to begin with. Let’s say he didn’t create it but is merely ‘living’ in this heaven, i.e. perfect universe, then he implicitly can’t be greater in size, dimension and duration than this perfect universe, which now is finite. Apart from these hypothetical limitations, when such arguments are applied to our universe, that’s where the trouble for me begins. Especially when such a god is claimed to be our creator. 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 04:30:24 PM by wow »

Online Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1686
  • Darwins +112/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Hello
« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2014, 06:16:45 PM »
You are still allowing a lesser god to live in this kind of universe.

Have you thought about the stability of the fabric of these universes?
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Online Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1686
  • Darwins +112/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Hello
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2014, 12:45:56 PM »
I just wondered because I find these scenarios to be nothing more than wishful thinking by people who want to imagine a viable heaven. They think they can remove part of a functioning system and expect it to remain stable and inhabitable. What we actually get is our early universe in the state of a quantum soup, totally uninhabitable and unstable.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6822
  • Darwins +551/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Hello
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2014, 12:53:59 PM »
It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.
Welcome to WWGHA[1]. You put it well. As a life-long atheist who has never believed, I found the idea that giving up a religion could be difficult hard to believe.

However, such posts as yours and those from other deconverteds here made me realise that we are all different and that I had not understood that religion is indeed "the opiate of the masses" and is just as addictive, pointless, and destructive.
 1. I am known for my lateness
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 12:55:46 PM by Graybeard »
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2014, 11:59:00 AM »
You are still allowing a lesser god to live in this kind of universe.

Have you thought about the stability of the fabric of these universes?

In my opinion, if we have a finite 'perfect universe' with zero entropy, thus obeying the Laws of TD's and a god living in it who did not create it, it absolutely limits that god and it's capacity. There goes omnipotent, omniscient, etc. etc. The fact that this god can not be the creator automatically limits his abilities, and if he lives in such a universe, he can at most be a subset of that perfect universe and not a superset. Thus, he will be finite in dimension, size, and duration, relative to that universe.

With respect to the stability of the fabric, if we need to start with zero entropy, and end with zero entropy (because it's finite), then again we need to keep it constant at zero and we need to have reversible processes, thus nothing would be for sure as anything within such a closed system could be reversed to its pre-caused state for that perfect universe. But, in physics it could also argued that the entropy of the universe as a whole quantum system could be considered to be zero, in which pieces of that universe are added up due to entanglement. Each sub quantum system could then be argued to have non-zero entropy. This is probably where it would get messy, as then subsets of that perfect universe would fail to meet the description of that 'zero-entropy' as a whole, which is the main argument for calling the place perfect in the first place.

I just wondered because I find these scenarios to be nothing more than wishful thinking by people who want to imagine a viable heaven. They think they can remove part of a functioning system and expect it to remain stable and inhabitable. What we actually get is our early universe in the state of a quantum soup, totally uninhabitable and unstable.

This is indeed an interesting view. I already mentioned some of it above, but to add some more, suppose this would be the heaven believers go to. If 'heaven' is finite in size, dimension and duration and such a lesser god would live there, there is no way believers/souls can end up there for eternity. Thus their finite time there, they will be in the presence of a lesser god. Suppose this lesser god still has the ability to observe the 'total universe' and this is what distinguishes him from the believers/souls who go there. This would imply that the believers/souls who go there could well be within such a sub quantum system where entropy is not-zero. There goes stability.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 12:06:32 PM by wow »

Offline wow

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • Darwins +36/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Hello
« Reply #19 on: July 10, 2014, 12:04:26 PM »
It was a scary experience as most of what I learned/worked with, I tried to desperately reconcile with faith, until the point where you can't deny the facts in front of you without becoming a total nutcase.
Welcome to WWGHA[1]. You put it well. As a life-long atheist who has never believed, I found the idea that giving up a religion could be difficult hard to believe.

However, such posts as yours and those from other deconverteds here made me realise that we are all different and that I had not understood that religion is indeed "the opiate of the masses" and is just as addictive, pointless, and destructive.
 1. I am known for my lateness

Thanks!

I can imagine, now, that for an atheist, such an idea can be hard to believe indeed. But the problem here is that the thought of even not-believing doesn't pop up quickly generally because of the consequences you believe you will have to face. I was like that as well, and I've lived in fear for very long. I think it is because you fear what could happen, that the final decision to deconverting is always difficult. But the more you reach that point where you start examining, rethinking and observing, the more ou know that all that fear was put in your head by the dogma's and superstitions of your church, perhaps family, perhaps friends, you realize that all this time you've been afraid of the boogieman. So you will go to hell? What is hell? Either a big barbeque or the absolute absence of god? How many believers go through life praying and praying and praying and end up feeling left by god? What would be the difference if he wasn't there in the first place?

Personally, I believe most of the times, it really takes something to shake you up. It doesn't just happen. That is why so many theist always play the 'you're mad at god card' in order to clarify for themselves why you left the most 'loving' god.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 12:09:57 PM by wow »

Online Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1686
  • Darwins +112/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Hello
« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2014, 12:50:07 PM »
You are still allowing a lesser god to live in this kind of universe.

Have you thought about the stability of the fabric of these universes?

In my opinion, if we have a finite 'perfect universe' with zero entropy, thus obeying the Laws of TD's and a god living in it who did not create it, it absolutely limits that god and it's capacity. There goes omnipotent, omniscient, etc. etc. The fact that this god can not be the creator automatically limits his abilities, and if he lives in such a universe, he can at most be a subset of that perfect universe and not a superset. Thus, he will be finite in dimension, size, and duration, relative to that universe.

With respect to the stability of the fabric, if we need to start with zero entropy, and end with zero entropy (because it's finite), then again we need to keep it constant at zero and we need to have reversible processes, thus nothing would be for sure as anything within such a closed system could be reversed to its pre-caused state for that perfect universe. But, in physics it could also argued that the entropy of the universe as a whole quantum system could be considered to be zero, in which pieces of that universe are added up due to entanglement. Each sub quantum system could then be argued to have non-zero entropy. This is probably where it would get messy, as then subsets of that perfect universe would fail to meet the description of that 'zero-entropy' as a whole, which is the main argument for calling the place perfect in the first place.

I just wondered because I find these scenarios to be nothing more than wishful thinking by people who want to imagine a viable heaven. They think they can remove part of a functioning system and expect it to remain stable and inhabitable. What we actually get is our early universe in the state of a quantum soup, totally uninhabitable and unstable.

This is indeed an interesting view. I already mentioned some of it above, but to add some more, suppose this would be the heaven believers go to. If 'heaven' is finite in size, dimension and duration and such a lesser god would live there, there is no way believers/souls can end up there for eternity. Thus their finite time there, they will be in the presence of a lesser god. Suppose this lesser god still has the ability to observe the 'total universe' and this is what distinguishes him from the believers/souls who go there. This would imply that the believers/souls who go there could well be within such a sub quantum system where entropy is not-zero. There goes stability.

Yes.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V