frank317:


What has law of cause and effect got ro do with a causless cause that u have never tested no can u answer other detailed questions on?

The law of cause and effect nullifies infinite regress and that is why we have an uncaused cause as the first cause.

Butterflyleo:


Now you have crossed into the realm of science fiction. My OP does not deal with science fiction but is strictly on pure verifiable science.

You are now assuming!

Science clearly says that our universe began from a singularity which was impacted by an extraodinary amount of energy which is unknown and never seen before or after it. FULL STOP.

No randomness involved in this singularity and the energy which impacted it.

You are now desperately shooting blanks.

what I saw is that the universe began from a singularity which started expanding.

where did you get the information of extraordinary amount of energy acting on it?

vaxx:
it is not an assumption, it is from the position of knowledge. so the knowledge being true or false is base on human subjectivity. i face a similar question like this with a moniker named zahra, go thru the thread and post your question here... https://www.nairaland.com/4115579/why-there-something-rather-than

I really will not be patiemt enough to go through the thread as it os a long one... for now pls based om ir knpwledge that the universe was creates by an uncaused cause... can u confirm with prove that it is a singular uncaused cause? Further clarify where this uncaused cause lives and how it/he/they look like.

The level of stupidity we resort to when we have nothing intelligent to say is just sad, and if there weren't a devil intending to derail any seeds of progress by our discussions we sure create one ourselves in the attempt to hold on to illogical positions.

Ops thread set up a basis for intelligent discussion, except that he was rather ill prepared to defend his position once questioned and resorted to his usual underhandedness once accosted.

Below is [url=httpbutter.iep.utm.edu/hume/]David Hume[/url] in his An Understanding of Human Knowledge, dealing with the same issues this thread posed, though, since we seem to lack the ability to comprehend our simple use of words, Hume's is likely to fly over the heads of some.

In a word, if we proceed not upon some fact present to the memory or senses, our reasonings would be merely hypothetical; and however the particular links might be connected with each other the whole chain of inferences would have nothing to support it, nor could we ever, by its means arrive at the knowledge of any real existence. If I ask you why you believe a particular matter of fact which you relate, you must tell me some reason; and this reason will be some other fact connected with it. But as you cannot proceed after this manner in infinitum, you must at last terminate with some fact which is present to your memory or senses or must allow that your belief is entirely without foundation. (Hume 1955 [1748], pp. 59–60)

It can be seen that butter has decided to opt for the latter, 'terminate with some fact present to his own senses', rather than admit his belief is entirely without foundation.

frank317:


I really will not be patiemt enough to go through the thread as it os a long one... for now pls based om ir knpwledge that the universe was creates by an uncaused cause... can u confirm with prove that it is a singular uncaused cause? Further clarify where this uncaused cause lives and how it/he/they look like.

The fist four page of that thread will have put paid to you question.

vaxx:
it is not an assumption, it is from the position of knowledge. so the knowledge being true or false is base on human subjectivity. i face a similar question like this with a moniker named zahra, go thru the thread and post your question here... https://www.nairaland.com/4115579/why-there-something-rather-than

You keep making this erroneous claim, with no evidence to support it. Personally, I wish it were true. I could subjectively tell the Ferrari salesman I have a million pounds in my bank account, write a cheque and drive out of the showroom with a brand spanking new red Ferrari.

The fact is that things we know, and call 'knowledge' - if you mean, "facts that are valid", in that they are statements that "correspond to reality" - are not dependant on an observer. If they, any statement made by anyone would be true if they claimed it was.

budaatum:

You keep making this erroneous claim, with no evidence to support it. Personally, I wish it were true. I could subjectively tell the Ferrari salesman I have a million pounds in my bank account, write a cheque and drive out of the showroom with a brand spanking new red Ferrari.

The fact is that things we know, and call 'knowledge' - if you mean, "facts that are valid", in that they are statements that "correspond to reality" - are not dependant on an observer. If they, any statement made by anyone would be true if they claimed it was.

My claim can only become erroneous if your rebuttal is in anyway accurate,my evidence are tautology at best not necessarily the absolute truth, it is subjective,There is no absolute truth anywhere. Everybody validate or makes claims all the time, because each word that are used in their claims comes from just one source, you, or some other individual.Even if you have a solid scientific truth, like gravity, there is total and constant change across the entire Universe, so the parameters are never fixed. To what degree can we access the absolute truth is the question we can only tackle and not the absolute truth itself. The best way we have of doing that is through the methods of science. It does not give us direct access to absolute truths, but give us provisional truths which are better and better approximations to reality as time goes by. what we can do as of now is to depend on some tautology for is survival. and this will be consider subjective truth.

Philosophers have come up with a number of different possibilities for what is true or not. There is correspondence theory, the pragmatic theory, the coherence theory, various permutations and combinations of these and other ideas. Google it and you will find many well written sources.

superhumanist:



The energy in our universe is eternal. It will never be destroyed. An eternal universe is a fact.

You are just too dishonest to consider that the past of the universe too is endless.


Furthermore, the universe has no true beginning. What proof does anyone have that the cause of the big bang isn't part of our universe?

The cyclical universe theory points out a flaw in thinking that the universe just started with the big bang.

Funny enough, people fail to want to consider that something must have existed for it to go bang, and which might have at that very point formed the universe as we know it. And even that which existed prior to the bang we know of itself might have come about from an even previous bang of what existed prior to that point. And who's to say that what existed prior to the bang that was prior to the bang we know of itself didn't come into existence by prior bangs ad infinitum? But no, in our arrogance we exclude that possibility and insert a godthingy in the gap instead. It wouldn't really be a problem if the god people admit they are just filling in gaps of the unknown, and if they didn't ask that those bangs be worshipped!

Butterflyleo:


1.Now you have crossed into the realm of science fiction. My OP does not deal with science fiction but is strictly on pure verifiable science.

2.You are now assuming!

3.Science clearly says that our universe began from a singularity which was impacted by an extraodinary amount of energy which is unknown and never seen before or after it. FULL STOP.

4.No randomness involved in this singularity and the energy which impacted it.

5.You are now desperately shooting blanks.

1.first cause God is not based on verifiable science.

2.first cause God is only an assumption also.

3.science doesn't say anything about an extraordinary amount of energy.

4.no one knows that, you assume.

5. so is the first cause God.

Butterflyleo:


1.Now you have crossed into the realm of science fiction. My OP does not deal with science fiction but is strictly on pure verifiable science.

2.You are now assuming!

3.Science clearly says that our universe began from a singularity which was impacted by an extraodinary amount of energy which is unknown and never seen before or after it. FULL STOP.

4.No randomness involved in this singularity and the energy which impacted it.

5.You are now desperately shooting blanks.

1.first cause God is not based on verifiable science.

2.first cause God is only an assumption also.

3.science doesn't say anything about an extraordinary amount of energy.

4a. no-one knows that, you assume.

b. and even if you want to remove randomness in the creation, it does not still mean the first cause has to be intelligent. even without randomness the first cause could be inanimate.

the 'outside earth magnet' is like a programmed machine that is used to build artificial intelligence androids. it follows this in built program even without being conscious. this programmed machine although is unintelligent, creates an intelligent Android.
so also, the 'outside earth magnet' has a specific 'program' it follows to create the universe. this 'program' has been part of it for eternity. the 'program' is the property of the 'magnet', so they both have always existed without a cause since the 'magnet' is uncaused. the 'magnet' is still unconscious but it does not operate based on randomness.

so there is still an unintelligent first cause that can create intelligence.

also for 3&4, don't forget that these things are happening outside the universe where our scientific laws don't apply.


5. so is the first cause god.

Butterflyleo:



I already told you that the origin of the universe according to science came FROM A SINGULARITY and was not chaotic. Chaos only began AFTER the big bang.

why isn't the singularity/big bang the first cause then? after all, it is only the universe that had a beginning. the singularity doesn't.

why do you have to add a first cause god?

Gggg102:


what I saw is that the universe began from a singularity which started expanding.

where did you get the information of extraordinary amount of energy acting on it?

This is a diagram derived from NASA and at the very left end you see quantum fluctuations. Quantum fluctuations simply means a temporary change in the amount of ENERGY in a point in space. We are told by science that this big bang cause intense and unimaginable heat which was over 100 times the power of the sun and the universe began to expand from this singularity and began to cool down at the same time.

Can you tell me an energy source known to our universe that can be over 100 times the power of the sun?

Gggg102:



1.first cause God is not based on verifiable science.

2.first cause God is only an assumption also.

3.science doesn't say anything about an extraordinary amount of energy.

4.no one knows that, you assume.

5. so is the first cause God.

At the words in bold I already offered you the diagram to help your ignorance.

Gggg102:


why isn't the singularity/big bang the first cause then? after all, it is only the universe that had a beginning. the singularity doesn't.

why do you have to add a first cause god?

The singularity isn't the first cause because quantum fluctuations impacted the singularity. This is pretty elementary.

Butterflyleo:


This is a diagram derived from NASA and at the very left end you see quantum fluctuations. Quantum fluctuations simply means a temporary change in the amount of ENERGY in a point in space. We are told by science that this big bang cause intense and unimaginable heat which was over 100 times the power of the sun and the universe began to expand from this singularity and began to cool down at the same time.

it never said extraordinary amount of energy caused the big bang.

in quantum physics, those fluctuations come come and go randomly from nothing. so it would mean something can come from nothing.

the big bang caused a large amount of energy, no one says a large amount of energy caused it.

science tells us we know what happened from the 1*10^-36 seconds and that is the beginning of the inflation. anything from the point of the big bang is speculation at least for now. science currently does not know what happened before the big bang and there probably isn't a before since time began with the big bang.

Gggg102 I will quote genesis 1:3 to you

This was what the bible recorded happened AT THE BEGINNING AFTER THE SPIRIT OF GOD SAW EVERYWHERE WAS DARK AND FORMLESS AND VOID.

Then God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.

LIGHT IS ENERGY and according to science, at the beginning there was immense energy which we call QUANTUM FLUCTUATIONS which triggered the singularity to expand and become our universe.

This will be probably the only time I will draw a link to both science and the bible. How did early unscientific man know that energy aka light came before the big bang?

Gggg102:



it never said extraordinary amount of energy caused the big bang.

in quantum physics, those fluctuations come come and go randomly from nothing. so it would mean something can come from nothing.

the big bang caused a large amount of energy, no one says a large amount of energy caused it.

science tells us we know what happened from the 1*10^-36 seconds and that is the beginning of the inflation. anything from the point of the big bang is speculation at least for now. science currently does not know what happened before the big bang and there probably isn't a before since time began with the big bang.

The diagram speaks for itself. The quantum fluctuations came before the inflation. The inflation was caused by the singularity which was acted upon by energy. Do you deny the diagram? It is right there in front of you

Gggg102:



it never said extraordinary amount of energy caused the big bang.

in quantum physics, those fluctuations come come and go randomly from nothing. so it would mean something can come from nothing.

the big bang caused a large amount of energy, no one says a large amount of energy caused it.

science tells us we know what happened from the 1*10^-36 seconds and that is the beginning of the inflation. anything from the point of the big bang is speculation at least for now. science currently does not know what happened before the big bang and there probably isn't a before since time began with the big bang.

At the words in bold. Are you saying NASA lied?

darkchild64:
since you want it this way alright

Its alright this way, because that's how OP wants it.

I however have noticed, from reading all your comments, so far on this thread
that OP in removing the "how" complexities, so as to be intellectually undemanding
has cleverly managed to challenge you to try and think about:
Could anything actually exist in the universe, some powerful thing, becoming visible after being concealed, as science understands it,
that is, worthy of being called "God"?

darkchild64:
tell us exactly how "God" created the universe

[img]https://s1/images/HistoryUniverse.jpg[/img]
I am sorry I cant, in toto, tell you exactly how "God" created the universe.
Reiterating, conventional wisdom, plus science, as seen in above pic,
however each give a simplified understanding of everything that happened 1 second after the Big Bang

darkchild64:
I am not satisfied with your answer, tell us the method(s) he used

You not being satisfied with an answer is not an epiphany
Even astronomers, are at sea, because all the stars, planets and galaxies that can be seen today, make up just 4% of the universe,
whilst the rest 96% of the universe, is made of mysterious and invisible matter.

These mysterious substances are called dark energy and dark matter

Dark matter, which makes up 22% of the universe, is a material that has yet to be detected in the laboratory
Dark energy is a gravitationally repulsive entity. Its existence is confirmed and determined to fill 74% of the universe.

darkchild64:
stop bringing the Bill Gates comparison because the methods and steps he took in creating the software is known,
his source of knowledge is also known

Bill Gates and Microsoft products are within almost every one's reach and/or the average IT-savvy Joe Public can easily relate to it

darkchild64:
so tell us more about how "God" used this thing you call "knowledge" to create the universe

"God" is the Intelligent Designer and Programmer with aspiration(s)
like Bill Gates is an intelligent designer and programmer with aspiration(s)
so "God", just as Bill Gates, does with building Microsoft computer software, used the "knowledge" of object-oriented programming, to create the universe

darkchild64:
and the "method" he used

The "method" He used?
The "method" He used, purely supernatural, well, is out of this world

Dumbing-down, it's among other things, a combination of writing Functions and Methods.

Function or a method, as a matter of fact, is a named callable piece of code, used to accomplish a specific task
and so therefore, when called, executes instructions on data "taken in", process it, and optionally return a value or result.

Butterflyleo:


This is a diagram derived from NASA and at the very left end you see quantum fluctuations. Quantum fluctuations simply means a temporary change in the amount of ENERGY in a point in space. We are told by science that this big bang cause intense and unimaginable heat which was over 100 times the power of the sun and the universe began to expand from this singularity and began to cool down at the same time.


Can you tell me an energy source known to our universe that can be over 100 times the power of the sun?

@ your words in bold, the big bang caused the unimaginable heat more than 100 times the power of the sun. this heat is what began to expand from this singularity.

this heat is the total energy in the universe.

this energy did not cause the big bang but was caused by it.

quantum fluctuations did not imply the amount of energy. it also comes from nothing , showing something comes from nothing.

Butterflyleo:


At the words in bold I already offered you the diagram to help your ignorance.

the extraordinary amount of energy you are showing me came after the big bang.

Butterflyleo:


The singularity isn't the first cause because quantum fluctuations impacted the singularity. This is pretty elementary.

then we might as well say quantum fluctuation is the first cause.

MuttleyLaff:
Its alright this way, because that's how OP wants it.

I however have noticed from reading all your comments, so far on this thread
that OP in removing the "how" complexities, so as to be intellectually undemanding
has cleverly managed to challenge you to try and think about:
Could anything actually exist in the universe, some powerful thing, becoming visible after being concealed, as science understands it,
that is, worthy of being called "God"?

[img]https://s1/images/HistoryUniverse.jpg[/img]
Sorry I cant, in toto, tell you exactly how "God" created the universe.
Reiterating, conventional wisdom, plus science, as seen in above pic, however gives a simplified understanding of everything that happened 1 second after the Big Bang

You not being satisfied with an answer is not an epiphany
Even astronomers, are at sea, because all the stars, planets and galaxies that can be seen today, make up just 4% of the universe,
whilst the rest 96% of the universe, is made of mysterious and invisible matter.

These mysterious substances are called dark energy and dark matter

Dark matter, which makes up 22% of the universe, is a material that has yet to be detected in the laboratory
Dark energy is a gravitationally repulsive entity. Its existence is confirmed and determined to fill 74% of the universe.

Bill Gates and Microsoft products are within almost every one's reach and/or the average IT-savvy Joe Public can easily relate to it

"God" is the Intelligent Designer and Programmer with aspiration(s)
like Bill Gates is an intelligent designer and programmer with aspiration(s)
so "God", just as Bill Gates, does with building Microsoft computer software, used the "knowledge" of object-oriented programming, to create the universe

The "method" He used?
The "method" He used, purely supernatural, well, is out of this world

Dumbing-down, it's among other things, a combination of writing Functions and Methods.

Function or a method, as a matter of fact, is a named callable piece of code, used to accomplish a specific task
and so therefore, when called, executes instructions on data "taken in", process it, and optionally return a value or result.

This was a very powerful statement from national geographic.

Big bang proponents suggest that some 10 billion to 20 billion years ago, a massive blast allowed all the universe's known matter and energy—even space and time themselves—to spring from some ancient and unknown type of energy.

And this is from discover magazine

In late 1979, a Stanford physics postdoc named Alan Guth offered an explanation for the explosive force behind the Big Bang. Guth’s intellectual leap stemmed from theories in particle physics, which held that at extremely high energies — far higher than could ever be reached in a laboratory — a special state of matter would turn gravity upside down, rendering it a repulsive rather than an attractive force.

A patch of space containing a tiny bit of this unusual matter could repel itself so violently as to literally blow up. Guth suggested that a tremendous burst of this sort triggered the Big Bang, swiftly enlarging the universe so much it doubled in size at least 100 times. This exponential growth spurt — called cosmic inflation — was short-lived, however, lasting just a tiny fraction of a second because the repulsive material quickly decayed, leaving behind the more familiar forms of matter and energy that fill the universe today

Butterflyleo:
Gggg102 I will quote genesis 1:3 to you

This was what the bible recorded happened AT THE BEGINNING AFTER THE SPIRIT OF GOD SAW EVERYWHERE WAS DARK AND FORMLESS AND VOID.



LIGHT IS ENERGY and according to science, at the beginning there was immense energy which we call QUANTUM FLUCTUATIONS which triggered the singularity to expand and become our universe.

This will be probably the only time I will draw a link to both science and the bible. How did early unscientific man know that energy aka light came before the big bang?

quantum fluctuation is different from the immense energy.

quantum fluctuation was before the big bang while immense energy was after the big bang. and quantum fluctuation comes from nothing.

Butterflyleo:


The diagram speaks for itself. The quantum fluctuations came before the inflation. The inflation was caused by the singularity which was acted upon by energy. Do you deny the diagram? It is right there in front of you

quantum fluctuation caused the big bang, the immense energy is an effect of the big bang.

Gggg102:



@ your words in bold, the big bang caused the unimaginable heat more than 100 times the power of the sun. this heat is what began to expand from this singularity.

this heat is the total energy in the universe.

this energy did not cause the big bang but was caused by it.

quantum fluctuations did not imply the amount of energy. it also comes from nothing , showing something comes from nothing.

I honestly do not see how you could possibly not understand a diagram right in front of you.

How do you think the big bang model was gotten? How do you think NASA and their Hubble telescope got this diagram done?

The singularity did not trigger itself. It was triggered by an energy which is alien to this universe.

This was how theories about aliens existing outside our planet came about FYI.

Gggg102:


quantum fluctuation is different from the immense energy.

quantum fluctuation was before the big bang while immense energy was after the big bang. and quantum fluctuation comes from nothing.

Young man, quantum fluctuation IS ENERGY and for the singularity to explode and expand it needed an immense energy source, one we do not have available in our known universe for it to occur.

This is the same principle that governs particle acceleration and particle accelerators. This is elementary.

Gggg102:


quantum fluctuation caused the big bang, the immense energy is an effect of the big bang.

Do you know what a particle accelerator is?

Butterflyleo:


At the words in bold. Are you saying NASA lied?

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.space.com/31192-what-triggered-the-big-bang.html&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwippsiG9rzaAhVSbFAKHWlQB7oQFjAAegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw18iSWCCzOV_A9m67eim-Yg

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.space.com/13347-big-bang-origins-universe-birth.html&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwippsiG9rzaAhVSbFAKHWlQB7oQFjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2PsuMGz2rcZ9nnFxQ8CE7Q

scientist thick they can pick up what happened 1*10^-36 seconds after the big bang.

Gggg102:



https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.space.com/31192-what-triggered-the-big-bang.html&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwippsiG9rzaAhVSbFAKHWlQB7oQFjAAegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw18iSWCCzOV_A9m67eim-Yg

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.space.com/13347-big-bang-origins-universe-birth.html&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwippsiG9rzaAhVSbFAKHWlQB7oQFjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw2PsuMGz2rcZ9nnFxQ8CE7Q

scientist thick they can pick up what happened 1*10^-36 seconds after the big bang.

I ask again, are you saying NASA lied?

Answer this and win a Nobel prize

Butterflyleo:


I honestly do not see how you could possibly not understand a diagram right in front of you.

How do you think the big bang model was gotten? How do you think NASA and their Hubble telescope got this diagram done?

The singularity did not trigger itself. It was triggered by an energy which is alien to this universe.

This was how theories about aliens existing outside our planet came about FYI.

it was triggered by quantum fluctuations.

the immense amount of energy is a result of the big bang.

Butterflyleo:


Young man, quantum fluctuation IS ENERGY and for the singularity to explode and expand it needed an immense energy source, one we do not have available in our known universe for it to occur.

This is the same principle that governs particle acceleration and particle accelerators. This is elementary.

where does it state that the singularity needed an immense form of energy.