Why Athiesim is a self defeating belief

Status
Not open for further replies.
oh wait im sorry the law of conservation of energy ill use the equation energy equals stars ready!??!?! m equals starting matter which is supposedly 0 al righty kids now the number of stars is 100000000000000000000000000000000*10^100000000000000000 or more
.5E= Mi Ni (thats the conservation of energy's equation) right so that equals this the equation of spidergoats "perfectly naturually happening law" which would equal eachother
oh and the imput of energy since there was nothing was zip so we got this

.5( 100000000000000000000000000000000*10^100000000000000000 )= 0^o N^o

huh that doesnt equal each other looks like your wrong spider goat
 
Monkey Mak33 said:
im waiting u to prove there is no god lol you can prove everything thats false mathimatically can i see an equation please?
like everything usually multiplies and combines like 100000 dna= 1 tissue can i get your equation then? how bout your theory of not disobeying natural law ok guys lets do it 0*?=1000000000000000000000*10^10000000000000000 stars can anyone get that one?
Click to expand...

There are an infinite number of premises that cannot be disproven. So, being unable to disprove something is not evidence of it's existence. The most famous example of this is Russell's Teapot. Can anyone disprove that there is a small teapot somewhere in orbit around our sun? ...one small enough to evade a search by our most powerful telescopes? The burden of proof is on you to show the existence of God, not on me to disprove it.
 
okay now your contridicting youself

spidergoat said:
No one who wrote this thread 4 years ago is around to respond to your statement. Allow me. There is no concept in physics of a "cosmic egg" from which everything emerged. It actually emerged from nothing. This was possible because it took no energy. The matter/antimatter premise is not that far from the truth. The positive energy is balanced by negative, so no net energy was required. The Big Band was an uncaused event. Uncaused events don't happen on the scale of things in which we live, but they do as subatomic scales, as described by Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle. No existing natural laws were broken when this happened, so there is no need for Gol


Remarkably, the sum of the measured sums of the rest and kinetic energies of the bodies in the universe seems to be exactly cancelled by the negative potential energy that results from their mutual gravitational interactions. Within small measurement errors and quantum uncertainties, the mean energy density of the universe is exactly what it should be for a universe that appeared from an initial state of zero energy, within a small quantum uncertainty.​
Click to expand...



see this u were agreeing with me then say that your theory is right i proved that wrong mathimatically speaking 1 quintillion or more doesnt equal zero which you said it did according to the rule of conservation of energy so according to your rule... ,0007 still doesnt equal zero so you just contridicted your own speaking, athiest or non athiest u proved that there was a god was wrong with science and i proved that the theory that led you to prove god was wrong was wrong with mathematics, whats your point...
 
if u cant disprove it then looks like i was right -.- ur just making excuses. now saying that your equation was wrong ok and no that was a mis enterpretation of my math here ill break it down since you seem to need it

conservation of energy- .5Exerted energy= Mass^ input Neutrons ^ imput you had said that your universe theory exerted from nothing right and there are a whole lotta stars out there so the equation of your theory turns out to be

.5(infinite)= 0^0 (0^0)

(infinite) does not equal zero so you said that it was not a contridiction of the natural of the conservation of energy which would have been a good point, if ud have actually been correct the cosmic egg theory still stands because

(infinite)= (infinite) ^1 burst of energy(input) (0) neutrons because the matter and antimatter equal each other out ^1 so basically (infinite)=(infinite) which is a correct and valid statement therefore yours is false and my is vaild and loical that the cosmic egg with infininite mass of an infintesibly small equation of an equal number of antimatter and matter which have opposite newtrons and 1-1 =o so the neutrons were nulled so mine stands logical that the infintesibly small force known as the cosmic egg would have to be created and in that lies somthing that had to create it so your wrong and there is a possibility that god had created if not you name what did there happy i proved you wrong
 
i guess i win this one then again i dont take honor in that lol arguing on the internet is like the special olympics after all oh and russels teapot is another example of athiests concentrating on the significance of man because a teapot is man made god was not made, he was eternal always there and always shall be yet russell has mad a manmade object resemble god, ever notice that? anyway there couldnt be a teapot because we would have to reach the sun with it.. and we would have to make it since there are no other planets near us that have life god is not man made therefore russells opposition on the matter wouldnt be true the teapot would be improbible and impossible but god not being man made could have always been there and we havent even reached the sun yet... just incase you didnt know. God in a sense of fact is like the universe but he was there before. its not manmade but its there? can you see the end of the universe sir? no? oh i guess the universe doesnt exist because you cant see the end of it even with your most powerful microscopes and everything has an end so basically russell is saying the universe doesnt excist but we know this to be a false fact so why would you think its right about one thing if its wrong about the other?
 
In general relativity, space-time can be empty of matter or radiation and still contain energy stored in its curvature. Uncaused, random quantum fluctuations in a flat, empty, featureless space-time can produce local regions with positive or negative curvature. This is called the "space-time foam" and the regions are called "bubbles of false vacuum." Wherever the curvature is positive a bubble of false vacuum will, according to Einstein's equations, exponentially inflate. In 10^-42 seconds the bubble will expand to the size of a proton and the energy within will be sufficient to produce all the mass of the universe.

The bubbles start out with no matter, radiation, or force fields and maximum entropy. They contain energy in their curvature, and so are a "false vacuum." As they expand, the energy within increases exponentially. This does not violate energy conservation since the false vacuum has a negative pressure (believe me, this is all follows from the equations that Einstein wrote down in 1916) so the expanding bubble does work on itself.

INFLATION AND CREATION
Victor J. Stenger
 
Monkey Mak33 said:
now you can go ahead and prove why god isnt there please -.-
Click to expand...

Which God? The one that answers prayers? Scientific studies in cooperation with religious authorities have shown no "prayer effect". The one that creates life? The chemistry of DNA proves that nothing but matter is required for a runaway process of evolution to lead to intelligent beings. The one that tells prophets what the future will be like? No specific and risky predictions have come true (general ones may come true, but that isn't proof of anything)... Should I go on?
 
yes but according to your equation there was no random quantum fluxuation because quatum time contiunium relates to the universe and even that had matter before your universe was created there was no time there was nothing to create the matter therefore nothing to create the bubble and einstien also helped in the cosmic egg theory btw
 
still i have seen no mathimatical evidence or equations of what your saying your making broad statements and another thing says in the bible well you wouldnt know at least but it would be probable it wouldnt be awnswered because in the bible it says "thou shalt not test your god" and i think praying for scientifical evidence would count dont you think so he wouldnt grant your prayer because you were testing him which is against what his son had said also, emp ratios excist and there have been proven hauntings so what makes you thinks souls and gods dont excist god and angels and ghost and demons and aliens and whathave you are all supernatural no one has proven aliens dont excist no one has proven ghosts dont excist they actually have proven that ghosts do excist btw so what makes you think that they would be able to prove that god which is supernatural would not excist.
 
The early universe was in a state of maximum entropy, so where was God's hand in creating order? ...Because simple cooling and phase transition explains the emergence of the complexity we call chemistry.
 
aanyways i think ive proved you wrong on just about everything that you have said so far so im going to go to bed after all it is 1:04 am -.- night and when u die dont come cryin to me to try not to prove you wrong because you think you can have a behavior which is a cause without an effect and everything negative you do will have an effect that is common knowledge so and you hope that you can do what ever you want and have escape maintained behavior towards death because of all the bad things that you have probably committed as a person said before. im too tired to look up the name and too tired to argue with an ignorant idiot who consistently contridicts himself so good night
 
i already proved mathimatically with the equation that you gave me that the universe could not have been made out of nothing! once again listen u cant really do math can you if you think im wrong here ill give you this, your equation .5 (Exerted total energy or number of stars)=
(mass of original energy which would be zero for your theory which is nothing became something)^ (input which is 0 because of no big bang explosion or 1 because of your magical bubble that isnt made out of matter) (number of neutrons of nothing= 0) ^ input

get those two sides to equal each other genius you better recheck your facts because you are severely wrong about your fact about how the universe was made and there are huge flaws in that theory so you go on about your false facts im going to bed u ignorant athiest
 
So you bring up several new arguments. The existence of supernatural entities and phenomenon like ESP (EMP?) and ghosts, none of which have been shown to exist. The next argument is that God is the source of moral behavior, which is also false. Moral behavior exists independently of religions and is an evolutionary characteristic of human beings as social creatures.

Here is the thing you are leaving out of your "equation". The negative gravitational potential energy of the universe has the same magnitude as the positive energy contained in its contents (matter and radiation), and hence the total energy of the universe is indeed zero (or at least close to zero).
 
Last edited:
Monkey Mak33 said:
i guess i win this one then again i dont take honor in that lol arguing on the internet is like the special olympics after all oh and russels teapot is another example of athiests concentrating on the significance of man because a teapot is man made god was not made, he was eternal always there and always shall be yet russell has mad a manmade object resemble god, ever notice that? anyway there couldnt be a teapot because we would have to reach the sun with it.. and we would have to make it since there are no other planets near us that have life god is not man made therefore russells opposition on the matter wouldnt be true the teapot would be improbible and impossible but god not being man made could have always been there and we havent even reached the sun yet... just incase you didnt know. God in a sense of fact is like the universe but he was there before. its not manmade but its there? can you see the end of the universe sir? no? oh i guess the universe doesnt exist because you cant see the end of it even with your most powerful microscopes and everything has an end so basically russell is saying the universe doesnt excist but we know this to be a false fact so why would you think its right about one thing if its wrong about the other?
Click to expand...
:wtf:
 
Is it troll feeding time already? My turn!

Prove the non-existence of invisible pink unicorns. Don't respond until you've searched the entire universe for them because they could be anywhere so until you've looked you can't prove a thing.

If the universe can't come from nothing on the basis that nothing can then neither can god, after all, nothing can, right? Breaking that rule for god makes your first premise false. Simple logic.

You think you're special because this planet is the only known life in the universe? Seeing as you're so fond of math go away and work out how many billions of galaxies there would be in an infinite and constantly expanding universe(you can start with a few known ones if you like), then work out how many billions upon billions of stars each galaxy contains, then work out the billions of planets in orbit around those stars. It's almost a mathematical certainty that other life would exist somewhere, and if it doesn't then according to you god created it all for, well nothing really. That's an awful big waste of space. Sounds logical.:shrug:
Would also love to see your proof that says we haven't found life on these 'billions' of planets, we've barely left our own planet. Or do you think our telescopes would see the aliens waving at us when they can barely make out planets?
Still think you're special huh? Get over yourself.

I advise you to go away and think about things for a while. I suspect you're just a reincarnation of a former member who will ignore this advice and just continue to troll, but rest assured you'll still be entertainingly foolish.
 
The early universe was in a state of low entropy

spidergoat said:
The early universe was in a state of maximum entropy, so where was God's hand in creating order? ...Because simple cooling and phase transition explains the emergence of the complexity we call chemistry.
Click to expand...

You are wrong spidergoat, the universe at "birth" was in low entropy because entropy is seen to always increase with time (so diminush in reverse time.)

It is true that as you say that it implies that something happen (god?) to be in such state ;)
 
Monkey,

Welcome to sciforums BTW.

Ok so the big bang, i hope you know what this is, is considered an infintesemly small atomic egg made out of anti matter and matter colliding, the matter and anti matter destroying each other, there being so much of each, had made an enormous explosion, …….. making the universe, this being proven by the outward motion of the universe, from radio waves. that being said.
Click to expand...
Apparently nothing about BB theory has yet to approach anything close to a proof. At the current time the theory is broken, the math doesn’t work.

Since EVERY SINGLE LAST THING in this universe every single thing even black matter, had have to have been created, according to scientists,
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure you will not be able to find any reputable scientist that understands the issues who would make such a statement. The current understanding is that nothing is created or destroyed. If BB did occur then it would appear to be no more than a point in time where everything was denser than it is now.

ok so what makes you so sure that this atomic egg magically popped out of nowhere not being created in the least bit yet it had matter and matter cannot become without being created.
Click to expand...
Within BB theory there appears to be much debate about the nature of its beginning. Inflationary theory tends to show that there was never a nothing.

Are you sure there wasnt a god to make it and if not i want to hear your explanation because it sounds pretty dumb arguing that there isnt anything bigger than us with that being said. and another thing if i am somehow magically false using what your scientists believe, well then how Isnt there a god.
Click to expand...
Whether there was a BB and its nature is still subject to much debate within science with some groups denying it ever occurred. Others more recently have proposed the cyclic model of expansion, collapse, bang, and repeat. We seem to be very far from understanding the history of what we call the universe and we are very far from exhausting all the natural explanations.

Introducing a baseless fantasy like a god doesn’t appear to help our understanding or further our knowledge of reality. But if the reasoning for proposing a creator god is that everything must be created then that simply doesn’t move us forward since that raises the question of how god was created. If you propose that there must be a first uncaused cause then that defeats the claim that everything must be created and we are back to the universe having always existed – i.e. what we observe – nothing is ever created or destroyed.

For the moment the need for a creator cannot be established, and without any evidential support that such things could exist, we are left with no meaningful basis to propose a god exists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top