The Force: Mystical and Scientific?

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 16 hours ago #336579 by
I too have read this assertion that had the Big Bang sent forth its energy just one tiny increment faster or slower than what actually happened, either the stars wouldn't have coalesced into form (if too fast) or the universe would have collapsed due to gravit (if too slow). The implication was that since the odds of the universe's expansion happening at just the perfect speed to take form by chance are miniscule, an intelligence is behind its design. The authors who presented this to me are not scientists, so I spent a small window of time looking online to see what I could find.

Googling "Big Bang faster slower" didn't turn up anything relevant, though it did reveal a number of fascinating articles - including ones from various universities and the Smithsonian - speculating that perhaps the speed of light may not have always been constant. Apparently the measured current size of the universe is larger than the distance a photon traveling at what we know to be the speed of light could have traveled since the moment we estimate the universe began.

So, I tried searching for "Big Bank Intelligent Design". That turned up mainly religiously-oriented websites or sites commenting on religious perspectives, but I did find one interesting paper from Baylor University (at https://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/56712.pdf ) which noted that a community of some contemporary scientists is speculating that the big bang hypothesis is incorrect, and that the universe is, and always has been spatially infinite. That's again no confirmation of the initial assertion, but still is an interesting concept.

Finally, I searched for "First second of the universe". This turns up a lot of interesting information, and buried somewhere in there could be some evidence that the creation of our universe did begin in narrowly-defined conditions that were extremely unlikely to manifest by chance. However, I'm out of time - if anyone wants to continue this, I'd recommend starting here.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 16 hours ago #336580 by

TvonEisan wrote:
And yes I am. Not in a "God created heaven and the earth" kind of way. More of a " I added a 1 to the equation to make it work." Kind of way



This idea of fine tuning is just not a viable argument. The expansion rate of the universe is driven by the cosmological constant. It is a number that determines the energy density of the vacuum. It acts like a kind of pressure that, depending on its value, acts against gravity to push the universe apart or acts with gravity to pull the universe together. The cosmological constant is a tiny positive number. The very fact that the galaxy’s expansion is accelerating is proof it’s positive.

So what if this constant were changed? Well what is there to keep us from then changing the other constants in the universe and adjusting them to whatever value we want so that a universe will again form. One in which a form of life we can’t even imagine might exist, but life nonetheless.

But even if we were stricter and changed only this one cosmological constant number? Is it really the most optimal number for the universe to form? Well it turns out the answer is no. Actually this number exists on one edge of range of viable numbers. And in fact the number 0 is more conducive to the creation of the universe than the actual number the universe has. And if we take it even further it is actually with a negative cosmological constant number that the universe would be most optimally tuned to maximize the creation of the universe.

So if any sort of intelligence or designing entity were to pick a number to use for this constant it would actually not be the one we currently have in this universe. So this idea that the universe is fine-tuned is a false one.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 15 hours ago #336582 by Gisteron

TvonEisan wrote: Some of the only evedince [sic] I have for this are equations by astrophysicists that put some different numerical findings together to make a theory. Like I said I dont have the citation rn because I havent had the time to look for it and I have to pay for the episode of "Through The Wormhole" to just get the names of scientists and other things.

Oh, I figured since you are mentioning these things you might know what you are referring to. No names of either the authors or the theories themselves so far. I cannot help you with TV episodes, but if you have trouble with pay-walled papers, I'll be happy to see whether my uni's library has access to them, if that can be of any assistance to you.


This is another reason I said that the specific topic of creation isnt the best topic for this rn nore [sic] a podcast but the rest is because it at least is easier to find in what time I do have.

The rest being what? How gods and magic are real because quantum physics? I'll grant that you'll find plenty of folks who don't know what they are talking about say this much, but credible confirmation has not come across me so far. If you have found anything (since you say it is "easier to find"), I'd be delighted to read it.


Its a coincadince [sic] that this happems [sic] to be brought up on the busiest weeks for me.

In fairness, it did "happems to be brought up" by yourself. Noone is imposing this on your busy week at all nor is anyone demanding you respond to everything immediately, time constraints be damned. Take your time. Real life goes first.


And now please, if anyone wants to do it, then get Discord and message me on here your usernames or whatever it uses. Thank you.

I'll get back to you once you have provided anything at all to work with. If you have no materials to jump off of, that's not going to be a long or what I'd at least consider an interesting discussion, and if you do, then I'd rather be prepared and not have to read your sources on the air.

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 15 hours ago #336583 by Gisteron
A big reason the fine-tuning argument doesn't work is for one of course the fact that in many cases it's just not accurate that changing some precise constants of nature would result in a universe vastly different or unsuitable for what ever we think is important in ours (as if there is anyone besides us out there to care about our sensibilities on the matter). This is not to say that all conceivable universes are - one might say - "created equal", but the margins within which a universe much like our own could form in principle are far from as narrow as creationists would assert.
What I find a much bigger problem, though, is that we frankly don't know that the universe even could be any other way, be it with unchanging constants or with them changing in just the way they did. To say that it is in any sense "unlikely" that things just happened as they did by chance assumes not only that there was any chance about it to begin with, but also just how probable the different outcomes should be. We have no indication that things could have gone a different way and if they could, we have no means whatsoever to estimate how probable our particular outcome is in comparison to any other.
Basically, the fine-tuning argument is nonsensical on pretty much all levels, in a very literal sense. If a premise of it is not outright contradicted by what we already know, it is not substantiated, and no matter how many steps of it we grant, we end up on yet a new layer of falsity on the very next step. Why we waste any time on that argument is to me a far greater mystery than even the origin of the universe.

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 15 hours ago #336584 by
You clearly joined in late on this. I said I didnt have anything at the moment like newr the start of this forum. Kyrin Wyldstar gave more than I did in regards to this topic.

Also, no, by other stuff, I mean the force and what it is or could be and how it relates to everything. Knowing the full story of a conversation helps before dissing it. I'm not great with words but over time, my points comes across. I want to talk about this topic (probably without the creation bit) because I'm better with talking than writting. I'll be able to fimd at least a little bit by the time of the podcast.

I thought we were open-minded Jedi, not atheists that hate anything they don't like and wont even try to listen and think in a open-minded way before responding. (Like many I know in person)
I never said (and I'm saying this for a second time on this website) I NEVER SAID ANYINE HAD TO TAKE IT ALL TO HEART! it's a open discussion forum. I simply wanted to share my ideas and eventually some articles. I spat them down without reference because I could not remember them from like, what, 4 years ago now?.

It would be interesting to those who like to listen to educated discussion. No matter any silence or any minor disruptions. I simply want to talk about it. You all are the mainly the only people I can even have an educated conversation with, as I live in Tahlequah Oklahoma USA. and educated is hard to come by 90% of the time.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 15 hours ago #336585 by
okay I will be honest, the creation thing wasnt ment to be the topic of this Topic. It really wasnt

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 14 hours ago - 5 years 14 hours ago #336587 by Gisteron

TvonEisan wrote: You clearly joined in late on this.

No. Mine was the second reply.


I said I didnt have anything at the moment like newr [sic] the start of this forum.

Yes, and I said I was going to wait until you do.


Also, no, by other stuff, I mean the force and what it is or could be and how it relates to everything. Knowing the full story of a conversation helps before dissing it.

A clarifying question is not a diss. Besides, you did mention gods and magic before you mentioned the Force, so I don't know what you mean by "knowing the full story" or my "joining in late". If you have forgotten what your first post was, it's not difficult to navigate back to it before incenuating that I'm the one who missed it.


I thought we were open-minded Jedi, not atheists that hate anything they don't like and wont even try to listen and think in a open-minded way before responding. (Like many I know in person)

Nothing said to you or about the topics you raise was hateful or disliking, and nothing about Jediism excludes atheists from it. If you find that comments like "if you mean this, then that" and "it's alright that you don't have sources on hand at the moment, I'll be happy to read them once you do" is not quite open-minded enough for you, then that's too bad. I think you are being treated rather charitably and patiently and respectfully thus far. Nobody is expecting any gratitude for that, but I'm not sure how whining about perfectly fair treatment is supposed to improve things further yet.


it's a [sic] open discussion forum. I simply wanted to share my ideas and eventually some articles. I spat them down without reference because I could not remember them from like, what, 4 years ago now?.

And that is fair enough. None of us forced you to "spit them down", as you put it, before quite condensing what any of the ideas even are (you seem to be intent on not sharing them here, which is also fair enough, no reason for everyone else to not discuss things), and none of us are forcing you to not be doing any of that since then. In fact, those who would rather see something of substance are patiently waiting still.


It would be interesting to those who like to listen to educated discussion. No matter any silence or any minor disruptions. I simply want to talk about it.

Then do. The stage is yours. What's the idea?

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned
Last edit: 5 years 14 hours ago by Gisteron.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 13 hours ago #336592 by
I'm sorry guys. I know it wasnt hateful or anything.
The "joined late" thing was in reference to your comment about me not haveing sources and all.
I guess I'm just used to people actualy hating on everytbing I think and say because of where I live and my child hood and all,

I also never said it excluded atheism but from my experience with them in person, as soon as anything comes to them science or otherwise, that they dont agree with, they call it fake and stupid because of lack of proof from their fave scientist or mass media. Hell, some I know dont even beleive in psychology.

And when I say "not open-minded " ig I'm refering to how, not only was a single example from the bottom of my original post taken and turned into the center of attention and the Topic. Also statments that were ont idealic examples were taken literally.

But anyway, look, at about 8 US central time, I'm gonna be on discord and when actually get back into my Discord tomorrow, I'll send my username.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 13 hours ago - 5 years 13 hours ago #336593 by
I dont think anyone is out to get anyone here. I grabbed onto your second point about fine tuning because you really provided no substance for your first. It was a reference to quantum mechanics that turned into magic and ghosts and those in turn created by a "force". The only thing I could grasp onto was fine tuning as an underlying theme.
Last edit: 5 years 13 hours ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 11 hours ago #336595 by Manu
Patience Tvon, no need to put up excuses or get defensive. :)

It’s OK to have an opinion. It’s also OK not to be able to back it up.

Gisteron and Kyrin are not here to cross examine you in order to try you as guilty. They simply are offering their contribution - a sign of respect, given they have limited time and decided to use some to address your concerns.

I suggest you take their input and use it to do more research, when you can spare some time. The new information will do wonders for your understanding of “the Force”, however you define it.

The pessimist complains about the wind;
The optimist expects it to change;
The realist adjusts the sails.
- William Arthur Ward

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi