₦airaland Forum

Spy360:
Ok. I respect your opinion.

For my theory of creation to make any meaning then God has to be a person that is a defined entity. Something we cannot do.

God has a person is a very limited entity. A person, male or female?

A female God is more rational than a male God because mothers create and nurture.

Anyway, I've read many philosophies on God, but the approach of Otem and his people is still the deepest and most rational I've come across though it's extremely complex.

Still, I only accept what is true what has been proven to be true. In the absence of such proof, I remain an agnostic.

Spy360:
I am a creationist and so have my own beliefs apart from whatever Otem or anyone suggests.

God created the universe from nothing. I have just proved that 'nothing' is not nothing using the particulate theory of matter. If an electron collides with a positron they are annihilated (disappear) and produce energy.

If that is possible then God can create matter from nothing by simply splitting 'nothing' via energy fission.

You are a physicist and should understand my point which is empirically proven.

I understand your view, but I don't agree with it.

Some people say God is Nothing or Nothing is God or God is Existence as Otem says. I don't agree with them too as an agnostic because God is an ambiguous word with hundreds of meaning.

monerozi5590:
Yeah. No Absolute truth in science. Even when we were studying temperature, they will tell you, you can't have absolute zero degree but that doesn't mean there's no Zero degree or Zero degree is not true.

Absolute zero is an ideal condition, which is purely theoretical. Physicists aim to achieve ideal conditions as much as possible in designing models and building devices.

The closer you can get to ideal conditions, the better. But ideal conditions only exist theoretically and mathematically in what's called "Platonic world of forms", which are mathematical objects named after Plato, who made key contributions in idealism in natural science and philosophy.

They don't exist in reality.

Bombblacks:
Cc monerozi5590.

Maybe the wording I used here is confusing you and that's why we are going in circles.

**

What i was trying to tell you is that everything in natural science comes with a level of uncertainty, so nothing is ever scientifically proven "true" beyond a shadow of doubt. I used the word fact in my post. There's always room for improvement and it can even be thrown away when more accurate discoveries are made.

Those two statements you made are clearly different as there millions of facts established about our planet, solar system, and universe in natural science.

There's nothing like absolute truth in science.

Take your time to learn the basics of science before embarrassing yourself in public.

Google can't teach you what scientists learnt within the four walls of a classroom and labs for years.

Still waiting for you to show that matter existed before the cosmic inflation phase of the Big Bang.

monerozi5590:
How is something not fact under certain conditions? E.g

A body will remain in its state of rest until a force is applied. Is that statement not true?

Why are you doing this?

You're wasting your time with that guy. He lacks basic knowledge about science.

Fools like him think once you read a couple of links on science on Google and watch some YouTube videos, you know better than experts in the field who took courses in science and philosophy for years and have written many papers in the field.

Even a high school kid will reel out many facts established about the planet and our solar system in natural science.

Na low IQ dey disturb this one. There are no confirmed facts in natural science, but the fool knows what's called fact.

He must have supernatural powers. Lols.

Stupidity is an understatement.

monerozi5590:
I understand your points. Ok then. Let's wait for the research to be completed.

I'm almost certainly sure the limitations of the Big Bang theory will be improved in our lifetime.

Nevertheless, it's not something to believe in. You don't have to believe in gravity. It's there, whether you believe it or not.

Nothing in science is a confirmed fact. He wasted several pages to prove that matter existed before the cosmic inflation of the Big Bang and couldn't.

He didn't even know what's called the Big Bang before this discussion and had to google it to read it briefly to have a faint idea.

Lols. Clown of the century.

You shouldn't be talking about science at all. Deep ignorance, lols

Binned. No time to read rubbish.

Nothing in science is a confirmed fact. Lols. Na dis one I dey engage. Lols. Nairaland is such a funny place.

You can't prove anything to be true in natural science, but you know what's called fact and what's called truth. Interesting.

A thief wey no sabi a course in elementary physics sef dey discuss the Big Bang theory. Interesting.

That clown wants to show matter existed before the cosmic inflation of the Big Bang. I'd be interested in how he does that.

monerozi5590:
.....Just like the name implies is still a theory and not a confirmed fact.. Not all scientists sef accept the theory.

You can't find any scientist that knows his onions that would tell you the Big Bang is bogus. It's the most established model explaining the origin of the Universe.

It has still its limitations which are active areas of research.

Physicists have written articles and books on a universe from nothing, but they're all lying but a clown that doesn't know jack about Physics is the only one saying the truth.

Lols.

Bombblacks:
* Stop lying and repeating this mumbo jumbo.

*The big bang is an attempt to explain how the universe developed from a very tiny, dense state into what it is today. It doesn't attempt to explain what initiated the creation of the universe, or what came before the big bang or even what lies outside the universe.

* We have already established it was nothing or void like you are claiming.

What existed before the Universe then? Educate me.

Bombblacks:
Scientist don't read books about unicorns or minotaur to find any truths. Scientist don't read and find truths in fairytales. Scientist don't read the bible or Quran to find truth in anything. How can a physicist say scientist read fairytales to find truths? Wait you are reading and following Otem to find truth. What school did you attend again?

Still talking foolishly. Many scientists are also philosophers because they read a lot of books on philosophy, include the philosophies of religions.

About Otem, I read Otem's book just like I read other books from diverse philosophies.

Don't open your mouth in public and say you're a graduate. I didn't even know the education system in Nigeria is this poor.

Bombblacks:
Can you show me where I said the above sentence? You keep reading without understanding.

That's why I said your IQ is too low. You don't understand the subject you're arguing about.

Based on the Big Bang model, many physicists assert the Universe came from nothing, an initial state devoid of matter.

They use the term nothing because time, space, and matter didn't exist in that initial state, and the state isn't visible to the naked eye.

Facts in Physics generally don't align with your parochial views and emotions, and it's possible for something to come from nothing empirically speaking.

Bombblacks:
*What did you school teach you about metaphysics?

Type it on Google. Maybe it can cure your stupidity.

Bombblacks:
* We have already established it didn't come from nothing like you claimed.


* Whenever you make a statement, try to define what you mean in terms of sense-experience. If you find that you can't, you are talking gibberish. This is called "positivism", and in positivism, one does not admit questions like yours as meaningful. Physicists are positivists.

*The big bang is an attempt to explain how the universe developed from a very tiny, dense state into what it is today. It doesn't attempt to explain what initiated the creation of the universe, or what came before the big bang or even what lies outside the universe.

I don't have time to read your nonsense. Before the Big Bang, matter didn't exist, according to the theory.

That's a vacuum or what's called Nothing. That's a summary of the Big Bang.

If you feel otherwise, you can keep basking in your delusion.

monerozi5590:
Alright. Your second paragraph.

Many people like me will not agree with your second paragraph. Let's just respect each others views and move on.

I didn't make my posts for you to agree or disagree with me.

I just shared a quote from one of the old books on Nothing I've read written by a Buddhist atheist.

If you respect other people, you'd also be respected.

Almost all scientists in the world belong or belonged to one religion or the other.

Your IQ is too low to know philosophy lies at the heart of all principles and concepts in science.

Na wa o. See the graduate the Nigerian education system is churning out.

Bombblacks:
* Scientist don't read books about unicorns or minotaur to find any truths. Scientist don't read and find truths in fairytales. Scientist don't read the bible or Quran to find truth in anything.


*Make me understand. You ridicule religious people and their beliefs but find truths In their books? You ridicule religious people but believe in the words of Otem or is it atum.


*Mystical philosophy is mumbo jumbo. Nobody takes them seriously.

*

The Big Bang is metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. A disgrace that calls himself a graduate. Lols

monerozi5590:
Is perspective and belief system. Like me, I don't believe in Big Bang. I am a Christian so I don't believe in that.

You are an Atheist right? You believe in Big Bang. That's still ok.

I don't believe in the Big Bang. It's a model. Not what to believe in.

Based on a number of solid evidence, I know the Universe came into existence via the Big Bang.

I also know the limitations of the Big Bang model and the fact it would still be developed further in the future.

Bombblacks:
*How can a so called physicist not know the meaning of metaphysics. Let me help you with the definition.

"Metaphysics is the branchof philosophy that studies the fundamental nature of reality; the first principles of being, identity and change, space and time, cause and effect, necessity and possibility"


* There's no way you can convince me that your are physicist.

I did philosophy in school and passed it in flying colors. That's why I know metaphysics, one of the aspects of philosophy, is different from physics.

Only fools confuse one with the other.

Bombblacks:
Can you please stop embarrassing yourself. The Big Bang Theory tells you the Universe emerged from "something" - a quantum singularity not nothing or void that you are describing. This is getting laughable.

And you can see that quantum singularity? Your IQ is so low. You can see quantum particles? Without the physicists you disparage, would you know there are anything like quantum particles — sub-atomic particles which are too small to be seen with the naked eye?

You're obviously more knowledgeable that the scientists that designed the model who believe the universe expanded from nothing, a state the human eye can't see.

It's called a vacuum or void because it is devoid of matter. Learn the basics of Physics before discussing the subject.

You're just a clown.

If the Big Bang is metaphysics, the Standard Model, Einstein theories of relativity, which are some of the most successful theories in Physics, are too.

That makes Physics the same as metaphysics. This one na disgrace to graduates.

monerozi5590:
Bombblacks and A001 both of you are right. Your perspectives on the issue are different. Is like seeing 6 and 9.

It's not. He doesn't understand the subject under discussion.

You must know the Big Bang model and have some basic knowledge of Physics to understand the subject.

Big Bang is metaphysics. This one na big clown. Lols

Bombblacks:
*You tap wisdom from mystical philosophy which are nonsense. This explains why you keep reasoning the way you do.


* Who the hell is Otem?


*Taoism is a religion. Negro stop being ignorant. You condemn religious folks but believe in mystical philosophy. Can you even hear yourself?

If you're not foolish, you'd know philosophy is the mother of science.

That's why scientists read books on various philosophies, including those of Atum, Taoism, Buddhism, Daoism, Hermetica, Abrahamic religions, and many others.

There are some truths in all of them.

As a researcher, I've different books on many philosophies and religions because they're crucial to the field I'm engaged in.

About Otem, if you don't know Tem, the god of ancient Egyptians, you're more ignorant than I thought.

Bombblacks:
* Can you show me where is said anything about the Big bang being mumbo jumbo?

* I don't know the basics of physics lol. Personal attacks are not doing you any favours.

* How can you call yourself a Physicists yet doesn't know the meaning of metaphysics? You are begining to sound weird and a liar. Big bang is a metaphysical hypothesis in precise sense.

You obviously don't understand anything you've been saying.

The scientists that postulated the Big Bang model believe the Universe expanded from nothing, and many physicists around the world hold that view.

The Big Bang postulates the Universe expanded from an initial state of singularity. If you were to witness that state, you'd call it nothing because you can't see the subatomic particles in the state.

Your posts show you don't even have an idea of what's called the Big Bang.

You're just a clown.

reccy:
I have to commend your level of knowledge of science but you can do better without insults nah.

Insults are to be met with insults sometimes. Sometimes, I can ignore fools like him.

Bombblacks:
* The only thing you have talked about since yesterday is false equivalence. You have talked about Otem(who the hell is that), Taoism (a Chinese religion centered on metaphysics) and a flawed book. What exactly have you contributed?

You've not read Krauss' book, Otem's book, or even the books of Lao Tzu, who created Daoism.

I tap from the wisdom of these great minds, not a nonentity on Nairaland that calls the Big Bang, one of the most successful theories in Physics, metaphysical mumbo-jumbo.

You're just babbling. This one na graduate?
Lols, Nigeria's education system is a joke.

Bombblacks:
Learn to read and understand. You don't know how to read.

* The krauss you have been shouting about his book is flawed. Next time you better not believe each and every mumbo jumbo you read.

His book is flawed to you that don't know the basics of Physics? This one na clown.

I don't need to waste my first time with someone that considers the Big Bang metaphysical mumbo-jumbo.

Lols, joke of the century.