Quote (Matao @ Aug 8 2011 08:16am)

thats the basic point , isnt it
that when we say " you cant create energy " , what we really mean is  , " we cant add to the average energy "
we can have as much " energy " as we want , as long as half of it is opposite to the other half

we live in a zero energy universe
the net energy of our universe = zero
and as long as the net remains at zero , we can have as much of everything as we want ....

Quote (Toothfariy @ Jul 26 2011 09:53pm)

its perfectly scientific and way more accurate to state that we have no idea. Asserting a higher power is nothing more than speculation. Without a substantial amount of evidence to support this, all we have is the anthropic principal.

We do not know, we have no idea. Big bang is an theory, however it does have observable evidence. We do not know the exact origins of the universe. Is it not feisable that maybe there is no origin to the universe? Why does there have to be a need for a creator at all? Perhaps it has always existed. We do not know, but we can pretty much dismiss any modern religous belief on the subject on the basis of significant contradictary evidence. Now in a general theological standpoint, we are all in the same ballpark; no one knows for sure.

Quote (Tummy @ Aug 1 2011 02:50am)

not all, you forget at the farthest depths of the ocean there are creatures who havent come within hundreds of feet of sunlight.

Quote (chickenblood @ Aug 8 2011 09:14am)

You're wrong. Current modern religion and science falls hand in hand. The big bang theory was a way to connect them. "just started" " god created in 7 days" Science and Religion were made to contradict and contrast each other so neither can be proven to be the correct one.

Quote (chickenblood @ Aug 8 2011 09:15am)

Yes but they have felt the millions and millions of neutrinos that pass straight through the earth from the sun.

Quote (bentherdonethat @ Aug 8 2011 07:27am)

Like you just said, neutrinos can pass through incredibly dense matter for great distances without hitting a single atom. Those organisms didn't "feel" the neutrinos because it'd pass right through them too.

Quote (chickenblood @ Aug 8 2011 09:30am)

But they're still combined at one time and they might leave traces of energy.

Quote (Matao @ Aug 8 2011 05:54am)

didnt read the thread , so not sure if someone has posted this already  , but ...

#1 ) not all organisms obtain their energy from the sun
#2 ) the whole " conservation of energy " thing is highly misleading , " energy " is created all the time ( the 2 examples that stand out the most are zero point energy and hawking radiation ( ok , so hawking radiation comes from zero point energy ) )

Quote (darkfire @ Aug 10 2011 01:25am)

You're going to need some citations for #2. Conservation of energy follows from the time invariance of the Lagrangians that describe the laws of physics as we understand them by Noether's theorem. In order for energy to not be conserved, either every major physical equation is wrong (in that physical laws depend on time or that they cannot be formulated as Lagrangians) or physics does not follow mathematics. While the former is possible, I am unaware of any evidence for it. I'm not really willing to accept the latter.

e: Nevermind just read your discussion with bentheredonethat that followed.

Quote (Matao @ Aug 9 2011 09:46am)

i havnt studied physics in over 15 years , so your probably gonna have to look for this stuff yourself
i can tell you that a guy called lawernce krauss says that  , in the last decade , we have been able to measure a large enough triangle , to establish that our universe is flat ( using the cosmic microwave background radiation )
and a flat universe , is the only one able to start from zero energy ( this is the amount of energy we have in our universe , zero )

once you can grasp the very simple idea , that +1 plus -1 equals zero ( the idea that , even tho i have 2 things , i really have nothing )
then you can start to see that everything has an " opposite " that " cancels it out "  , and that i can " create " as much of anything i want , as long as i create its " opposite " at the same time  ( ok , you will also need a physical mechinism as well  :P  )

so when i say its misleading , what i mean is , even in whats often termed " empty space " ( a vacuum ) , we find that paired opposite particles flash into being , before disappearing again
and that doesnt violate " conservation of energy " , because this law is actually a law of averages , and as long as the average energy stays at zero  , we have satisfied the law
it most certainly does not prohibit the creation of what we would call " energy " , as the singularity came from nothing ( in other words , our entire universe sprang from nothing ) , and did not violate the conservation of energy in any way at all

Quote (darkfire @ Aug 10 2011 02:58am)

There is no evidence that the singularity came from nothing, by the way. The strongest conclusion you can make is that the hypothesis that the singularity came from nothing does not violate any known laws of physics.