The bible is nothing but a collection of ideas and stories. Most of which are insane and completely unplausible. Talking snakes, parting Red Sea's in half, turning water into wine magically. The Big Bang theory is just that, a theory. Theories are based off of facts, not stories or crazy ideas. Sorry for trying to understand our universe, gosh! "The God Delusion" is more of a suitable book to keep in hotels, than this "Bible" which explains everything with a "just because" attitude, that people actually believe! The theories of science have only one motive, to REALLY understand where we came from, not we're here "just because"... Where did your God come from? I'm tired of this stupid argument. Because to argue Kadarin's point: "Science is trying to remove God" - Okay well then Mr. Scientist, how do you then incorporate science as it does not affect your God? To remove science once and for all? The fact is, we have tripled our lifespans thanks to science, we live better and healthier lives. We know more about our body's psysiology, and how the world simply works. I'd venture a guess as to why you would ever take a medication when you are sick or dieing of a cureable cancer. Tell us all here, that you would not take treatment because your "god" will take care of it all. Actually, better yet, don't take any treatment. It just helps us spread the message of truth. If scientists were suggesting the big bang were a FACT then you could fire at them and say they are trying to remove your god from everything, but they use words like Theroy to keep you religious freaks from blowing up, and of course to keep the idea open to other ideas. God has no place in the government, or the classroom.
Perhaps when that "brain child" scientist gets to play with the Particle Accelerator this Fall, we'll start seeing what really happened.
Perhaps when that "brain child" scientist gets to play with the Particle Accelerator this Fall, we'll start seeing what really happened.
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
Actually that is what some current physicist are thinking.
That what we see is happening over and over.
If that is true then we are in a infinite loop where everything we have done or will do is being repeated forever.
Very depressing thought.
All the major mistakes I made in life I will do again , for all eternity.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
Although I never finished it... hmm, sadly its at home, which is good, I can finish it over summer. I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
Now, if there are parallel universes, then well... who knows what crazy things you are doing.
the fact that we exist is completely random, and at this very moment, its possible no other lifeforms have evolved beyond the single cell step. That is, just this very moment in time. A billion years ago, maybe there was something comparable to humans in some distant sector of the universe? Anything in regards to the idea of life is completely random and needs some very strange circumstances to come into existence. And then even more random events and strange scenarios are needed for whatever life created, to reproduce, and then to evolve into more complex life.
Nor do we really know other life needs water. They could live on some other liquid. The chemistry of life on Earth, came to be that way, due to the environment we are in. Life most likely started in the water to begin with. How it started, hell if I know. It didn't happen till very late in the history of the Earth either.
+
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
Originally posted by: destrekor
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
According to them it does.
They theorize that the big bang happens exactly the same each time.
Since all the components are the same then the results are the same.
Nothing is random if you take it out far enough and that is just what they did with this theory.
Its in Michio Kaku book on parallel worlds
mrSHEiK124
Lifer
- Mar 6, 2004
- 11,488
- 2
- 0
God. He said bang. And then "it" all big banged. I bang. You bang. He/she/we bang. Banging? Bangology, the study of bang?
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: destrekor
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
According to them it does.
They theorize that the big bang happens exactly the same each time.
Since all the components are the same then the results are the same.
Nothing is random if you take it out far enough and that is just what they did with this theory.
Its in Michio Kaku book on parallel worlds
Your concern is unfounded though, because if it's always the same each time, there's still no way you would know it or even be aware of it.
This is where we get to the "I don't know" stage again. A paradox of the Big Bang theory and relativity is that we get a universe that is always in motion but static at the same time. Where time doesn't pass, we (and everything else) do, through it.
So if it's happening over and over, when? If you pace back and force inside a room, does the room move or do you?
sao123
Lifer
- May 27, 2002
- 12,653
- 205
- 106
Originally posted by: destrekor
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
Except that many of the worlds top aethists have lamb-basted Dawkins to be utterly moronic.
One simply put it... imagine someone writing a freshman biology textbook whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. His book is more a war on theology with nothing to back it up, and he applies no real science nor common sense to any of the things which he writes about.
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: destrekor
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
Except that many of the worlds top aethists have lamb-basted Dawkins to be utterly moronic.
One simply put it... imagine someone writing a freshman biology textbook whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. His book is more a war on theology with nothing to back it up, and he applies no real science nor common sense to any of the things which he writes about.
And the Bible uses facts, figures, and statistical evidence that forces all of the world's professors to get on their knee's and pray to god. I've read a large portion of "The God Delusion" and to say he doesn't know anything about science. Have you even heard him speak? He's already complicated just trying to talk down to non-scientific crowds.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: destrekor
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
According to them it does.
They theorize that the big bang happens exactly the same each time.
Since all the components are the same then the results are the same.
Nothing is random if you take it out far enough and that is just what they did with this theory.
Its in Michio Kaku book on parallel worlds
I guess it can be argued that the material part will end up the same, but to say all life will end up the same, or, if the same creatures are created, including humans, our behavior will be the same, and all the families the same? Is our life scripted? Our behaviors, while predictable to a degree, a lot revolves around chance when it comes to interactions. If you didn't see someone one day, and didn't say some horrible thing, 10 years down the road could be entirely different in one timeline compared to the one that you did say something horrible. Or didn't see a chick at a bar to say a pickup line? Well, instead of having a wife 10 years out, you could still be single, or have a different wife with different kids and entirely different behavior. Take that line of thought all the way back to the beginning of humanity, and many things could be completely different as far as we know. The Mayans could even end up ruling the world for all we know, if they ever come into existence as a culture.
Just some food for thought in regards to that theory.
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: destrekor
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
Except that many of the worlds top aethists have lamb-basted Dawkins to be utterly moronic.
One simply put it... imagine someone writing a freshman biology textbook whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. His book is more a war on theology with nothing to back it up, and he applies no real science nor common sense to any of the things which he writes about.
some atheists are elitist pricks that think they are better than everyone else. I think the way Dawkins wrote the book was perfect. I'm glad its a war on theology. He kind of actually went my approach to the whole thing, using some facts and some human behavior theories, to describe why the entire idea of theology is a fools creation.
Atheists, hmm... we don't like, share a church of shared teachings or anything. We are all very different, and have our own ideas, and some have their ideas rooted in philanthropy, or sociology, psychology, philosophy, or any other study of man. Because of that, the reasons one person doesn't believe in the existence of a deity/deities, are not the same reasons everyone calls themselves atheists. People have different reasons for their stance on religion and/or God.
And not all atheists believe religion is a bad thing and whatnot, so you are going to have many atheists that think the mere existence of The God Delusion on bookshelves is a bad thing. I personally think its great, as I feel the faster we can get humanity to ditch religion, or at least ditch multiple religions and at least get everyone onto the same bandwagon, then we can make a lot more progress on bettering life in general. Religion served its purpose, and I agree it was actually kind of necessary for humans, but now we have progressed around the world - for the most part - and can do without it.
I'm not pushing for people to stop believing in a deity. I don't care. I think the idea of having a calm mind and not questioning everything can lead to inner peace, or something like that :laugh:, but it's not for me. But religion itself is unnecessary.
+
My theory..... there was NOTHING.
But there is no longer nothing. Now there is something. How can this be?
First of all, remember, "before" our universe existed, there was no time. So take my terminology with a grain of salt. When I say "before" I don't mean time-wise. By "When" I don't mean in the past, I mean just another reality that exists outside time.
Ok, so "before" our universe was created there was nothing. This troubled me for a long time. I mean, there should be NOTHING. The universe should not exist. All space should be empty, no matter, no time, etc. There should be no space to be empty... There should be no existence at all. How the hell does ANYTHING come out of absolute nothingness?
It can't. By all rights, absolutely nothing should exist. It baffled me how anything exists...
Eventually I figured it out... a paradox. Someone or something in the "future" existence...(which didn't exist "yet") with incredible powers had to create the universe, so that there would be a universe that existed for it to exist in! So if there is a god, this god must be the lucky person who figured this out first (of course it/they didn't exist "yet") and caused themselves and the entire universe to exist. So if this is the solution, this leaves open a curious paradox oppurtunity...
If I wanted to become omnipotent, how would I go about doing so? I would just will it! I would just have to make the decision and believe it will happen. Then my "future" omnipotent (all powerful, can do ANYTHING I want to) self would just have to reach across existences/dimensions/time/whatever and make me omnipotent.
So, by all rights... I should be omnipotent now. I should be a god among men. I should be your reigning overlord. God(my future omnipotent self?) knows I've tried.
But there is no longer nothing. Now there is something. How can this be?
First of all, remember, "before" our universe existed, there was no time. So take my terminology with a grain of salt. When I say "before" I don't mean time-wise. By "When" I don't mean in the past, I mean just another reality that exists outside time.
Ok, so "before" our universe was created there was nothing. This troubled me for a long time. I mean, there should be NOTHING. The universe should not exist. All space should be empty, no matter, no time, etc. There should be no space to be empty... There should be no existence at all. How the hell does ANYTHING come out of absolute nothingness?
It can't. By all rights, absolutely nothing should exist. It baffled me how anything exists...
Eventually I figured it out... a paradox. Someone or something in the "future" existence...(which didn't exist "yet") with incredible powers had to create the universe, so that there would be a universe that existed for it to exist in! So if there is a god, this god must be the lucky person who figured this out first (of course it/they didn't exist "yet") and caused themselves and the entire universe to exist. So if this is the solution, this leaves open a curious paradox oppurtunity...
If I wanted to become omnipotent, how would I go about doing so? I would just will it! I would just have to make the decision and believe it will happen. Then my "future" omnipotent (all powerful, can do ANYTHING I want to) self would just have to reach across existences/dimensions/time/whatever and make me omnipotent.
So, by all rights... I should be omnipotent now. I should be a god among men. I should be your reigning overlord. God(my future omnipotent self?) knows I've tried.
sao123
Lifer
- May 27, 2002
- 12,653
- 205
- 106
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: destrekor
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
According to them it does.
They theorize that the big bang happens exactly the same each time.
Since all the components are the same then the results are the same.
Nothing is random if you take it out far enough and that is just what they did with this theory.
Its in Michio Kaku book on parallel worlds
I guess it can be argued that the material part will end up the same, but to say all life will end up the same, or, if the same creatures are created, including humans, our behavior will be the same, and all the families the same? Is our life scripted? Our behaviors, while predictable to a degree, a lot revolves around chance when it comes to interactions. If you didn't see someone one day, and didn't say some horrible thing, 10 years down the road could be entirely different in one timeline compared to the one that you did say something horrible. Or didn't see a chick at a bar to say a pickup line? Well, instead of having a wife 10 years out, you could still be single, or have a different wife with different kids and entirely different behavior. Take that line of thought all the way back to the beginning of humanity, and many things could be completely different as far as we know. The Mayans could even end up ruling the world for all we know, if they ever come into existence as a culture.
Just some food for thought in regards to that theory.
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: destrekor
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
Except that many of the worlds top aethists have lamb-basted Dawkins to be utterly moronic.
One simply put it... imagine someone writing a freshman biology textbook whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. His book is more a war on theology with nothing to back it up, and he applies no real science nor common sense to any of the things which he writes about.
some atheists are elitist pricks that think they are better than everyone else. I think the way Dawkins wrote the book was perfect. I'm glad its a war on theology. He kind of actually went my approach to the whole thing, using some facts and some human behavior theories, to describe why the entire idea of theology is a fools creation.
Atheists, hmm... we don't like, share a church of shared teachings or anything. We are all very different, and have our own ideas, and some have their ideas rooted in philanthropy, or sociology, psychology, philosophy, or any other study of man. Because of that, the reasons one person doesn't believe in the existence of a deity/deities, are not the same reasons everyone calls themselves atheists. People have different reasons for their stance on religion and/or God.
And not all atheists believe religion is a bad thing and whatnot, so you are going to have many atheists that think the mere existence of The God Delusion on bookshelves is a bad thing. I personally think its great, as I feel the faster we can get humanity to ditch religion, or at least ditch multiple religions and at least get everyone onto the same bandwagon, then we can make a lot more progress on bettering life in general. Religion served its purpose, and I agree it was actually kind of necessary for humans, but now we have progressed around the world - for the most part - and can do without it.
I'm not pushing for people to stop believing in a deity. I don't care. I think the idea of having a calm mind and not questioning everything can lead to inner peace, or something like that :laugh:, but it's not for me. But religion itself is unnecessary.
+
Any yet you like dawkins are doing the very same thing you accuse the religious of doing.
There is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence to support or deny the existance of a God. Your Fundamentalist approach of attacking those who believe opposite you, and feeling as though you must convert them to your views... makes you clearly no better than them.
People who share the views that Dawkins has are the aethiest elite asshats that you speak of.
Nemesis 1
Lifer
- Dec 30, 2006
- 11,366
- 2
- 0
Lots of people here saying God is fairy tale. and they hang on to their science . Which is constantly changing there so called facts. When I went to school Mars was said to have a little water very little. The Moon had know water. ALL BS. Mars has lots of water infact thousands of meters thick . The moon has water. Now science is back to understanding black holes that many here believed science had ans for. No such luck guys.
If one believes black holes are mass compressed to the point were light or anything else can exscape its forces. How is it the big bang happened. If all the mass of the universe was in one place it had to compress to black hole as science states . If so how did big bang occur if nothing can escape a black hole??
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24649915/
Science is nice but the FACTS keep changing . So what are the FACTS????
If one believes black holes are mass compressed to the point were light or anything else can exscape its forces. How is it the big bang happened. If all the mass of the universe was in one place it had to compress to black hole as science states . If so how did big bang occur if nothing can escape a black hole??
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24649915/
Science is nice but the FACTS keep changing . So what are the FACTS????
Nemesis 1
Lifer
- Dec 30, 2006
- 11,366
- 2
- 0
Your being foolish here. What talking snake . Their was no snake . Servant was satin.
How has science made life spane longer. Its more do to better cleaner living conditions. Whats life exspectancy of poor african child VS. Child born in USA.
Your rant about curing the sick is a little funny. If one is a true Christian. One cares not how long you live on earth. As heaven is preferable. Whatever heaven is . I assume it being in Gods Place with God
Haha, it's funny when people say that, isn't it? As if they're proving that this theory (which could be replaced by something better at any given time) is completely comprised of BS.
It's exactly, and perfectly NOT what the big-bang theory describes at all. No scientist, no respectable thinker EVER says "it just is" or "it just happened". There is always a reason for something, always a precursor for an event, always a cause and effect.
No my friends, the scientists are not in the business of telling you something "just happened". That's what religion is for.
There are actually many theoretical models that deal with time before the big bang.
Just because that's the zero-point for our time scale doesn't mean there was nothing before that event. Time can go backwards (a positron is an electron moving backwards in time).
It's kind of like how there are negative numbers. You can't have negative two apples, but you can still imagine a situation in which negative two could be useful (5 + (-2) = 3)
NikolaeVarius
Lifer
- Oct 25, 2006
- 11,036
- 11
- 91
Err, atually, everything you mentioned are theories. "Facts" in science are theories that have massive amounts of observed evidence behind it.
So yeah, science is a changing field, but thats the entire POINT of science. Everything is a theory. However, science is based off the use of theories that had so much evidence behind it, that we consider it a fact. In all reality, in science, nothing is ever a fact or truth, it is merely a theory. Theories can only be disproven, not proven. Science always admits this, religion doesnt.
The Big Bang is a theory. There is a LOT of evidence behind the existance of the Big Bang. Jusr because we can't prove every single part of it, doesnt mean it didn't exist. You don't know every single part of an airplane engine right? But, you have some idea of how it works, and the fact that you can fly at 30k feet is testiment to the fact that the airplane engine is there and it works, even if you don't know whats beneath the metal.
Also, on the subject of Richard Dawkins. I agree with him. Religion is slowing down this country in so many ways. At the point where we can't teach our kids EVOLUTION in schools because of religious fundametalism, theres a problem. If at the point science is restricted because of a religious book or sect, something is wrong. At the point where everyone says that morality is based on religion, something is wrong. There SHOULD be a war against theology, if only at the point where we expell it from the public view into private worship.
So many posts and this is the only worthy answer
I agree 100%
Why is it so hard for people to acknowledge we dont, and will never know our own origin? I dont have any problems with that, I find it a very interest subject and love to speculate, but lets face it, it will never end, there will always be something before that, and before that...
Its like making a machine that is aware of itself, but exists in a post-human world... It will never know how it came to be unless one of us was still alive to tell him, and it can speculate all it wants and get nowhere! God might exist in the same sense, or any other "supernatural force", but we dont know, and we will never know
My point with this post is, stop taking it so seriously all you guys making a big deal out of religion vs science... There is no answer, big bang is not any more accurate than God for all I know, theories are there to be dumped by better ones anyway
Do I believe in God? No, I dont have any proof to do so
Do I believe in the big bang? No, I dont have any proof to do so
What do I believe? I believe we are not meant to answer this question, and I am fine with it, I will just go on with my meaningless life and enjoy the most out of it either way
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
A positron is the antimatter equivalent of an electron, with a positive electric charge instead of a negative charge. I've never heard it described as moving backwards through time before.
There are theories speculating a "before" the big bang, but as I understand it, not a "time" before the big bang. For example, M-theory proposes that our universe is one of many (infinite?) 4-dimensional branes within an 11-dimensional space-time. It would, as I understand it, be inaccurate to say there was a time before the big bang though because this "before" would have occurred in a dimension different than the one we currently perceive of as time.
Someone correct me if I wrong here though. Perhaps I should have stuck with "What's north of the North Pole?" or just the simple "I don't know"??
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
There is considerable proof of the big bang based on our observations. All world-lines appear to converge back to a single point, and there is the cosmic background radiation.
re: what Nemesis 1 posted -
- Water is one of the most abundant chemical compounds in the universe.
- The purpose of science is to change as the facts change. This is the primary difference between science and religion. When our understanding and observations of reality change, we can either conform to reality (as science does) or we can ignore reality and stubbornly cling to our beliefs. You decide.
- Black holes do not invalidate the the big bang theory. Quite the opposite, in fact.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: Modelworks
Originally posted by: destrekor
I don't think it works that way.
everything you have ever known, and ever will know, will not exist in the next version of our Universe.
According to them it does.
They theorize that the big bang happens exactly the same each time.
Since all the components are the same then the results are the same.
Nothing is random if you take it out far enough and that is just what they did with this theory.
Its in Michio Kaku book on parallel worlds
I guess it can be argued that the material part will end up the same, but to say all life will end up the same, or, if the same creatures are created, including humans, our behavior will be the same, and all the families the same? Is our life scripted? Our behaviors, while predictable to a degree, a lot revolves around chance when it comes to interactions. If you didn't see someone one day, and didn't say some horrible thing, 10 years down the road could be entirely different in one timeline compared to the one that you did say something horrible. Or didn't see a chick at a bar to say a pickup line? Well, instead of having a wife 10 years out, you could still be single, or have a different wife with different kids and entirely different behavior. Take that line of thought all the way back to the beginning of humanity, and many things could be completely different as far as we know. The Mayans could even end up ruling the world for all we know, if they ever come into existence as a culture.
Just some food for thought in regards to that theory.
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: destrekor
this would be an awesome world if The God Delusion was the book in a drawer at all hotels. Very good read.
I bought it when I had a delay at the airport, although I had looked it up prior to that.
+
Except that many of the worlds top aethists have lamb-basted Dawkins to be utterly moronic.
One simply put it... imagine someone writing a freshman biology textbook whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology. His book is more a war on theology with nothing to back it up, and he applies no real science nor common sense to any of the things which he writes about.
some atheists are elitist pricks that think they are better than everyone else. I think the way Dawkins wrote the book was perfect. I'm glad its a war on theology. He kind of actually went my approach to the whole thing, using some facts and some human behavior theories, to describe why the entire idea of theology is a fools creation.
Atheists, hmm... we don't like, share a church of shared teachings or anything. We are all very different, and have our own ideas, and some have their ideas rooted in philanthropy, or sociology, psychology, philosophy, or any other study of man. Because of that, the reasons one person doesn't believe in the existence of a deity/deities, are not the same reasons everyone calls themselves atheists. People have different reasons for their stance on religion and/or God.
And not all atheists believe religion is a bad thing and whatnot, so you are going to have many atheists that think the mere existence of The God Delusion on bookshelves is a bad thing. I personally think its great, as I feel the faster we can get humanity to ditch religion, or at least ditch multiple religions and at least get everyone onto the same bandwagon, then we can make a lot more progress on bettering life in general. Religion served its purpose, and I agree it was actually kind of necessary for humans, but now we have progressed around the world - for the most part - and can do without it.
I'm not pushing for people to stop believing in a deity. I don't care. I think the idea of having a calm mind and not questioning everything can lead to inner peace, or something like that :laugh:, but it's not for me. But religion itself is unnecessary.
+
Any yet you like dawkins are doing the very same thing you accuse the religious of doing.
There is absolutely ZERO scientific evidence to support or deny the existance of a God. Your Fundamentalist approach of attacking those who believe opposite you, and feeling as though you must convert them to your views... makes you clearly no better than them.
People who share the views that Dawkins has are the aethiest elite asshats that you speak of.
don't make me out to be something I am not.
I have not done anything, nor am I like Dawkins. I have a different approach... make ideas and thoughts, but kind of really do nothing with them. That's not my calling. Dawkins is taking the activist approach.
I'm not attacking those who believe opposite of me. If you actually read my post, you'd have seen I clearly stated that. I'm looking at it from a anthropologist perspective. If you knew much about history, you'd realize religion is one of the worst things for man in the scheme of things, as it has caused countless problems. Many wars, massacres, and the shape the world is in today, are all the result of religious beliefs through the ages. Imagine what we can accomplish if we can actually unite the entirety of the human race and work together to accomplish many feats. Space exploration, medical advancements, engineering advancements... Now, a lot of these things in history have come to light as a direct result of war. Many medical and technological advancements, and space travel itself, all were born in conflict.
But I think it's quite possible we can expand on that effort if people from all over the world worked on the same exact research.
Well, it should also be noted, that just because it's a theory, doesn't mean it cannot be accepted as fact.
Take for instance, the most widely used example of a theory for this very argument: gravity. We can witness and observe a lot of evidence of gravity, and know about as much as we can know about it, but still there is more to know, such as its true effects on space itself (the 'bowl' and gravity well depictions are examples of what we do not know for sure about gravity). It's been so readily accepted as fact, that it is no longer even referred to as a theory, although in scientific nomenclature, it is indeed a theory.
The Big Bang Theory has pretty much been universally accepted as fact in the astronomer/astrophysicist world... so much evidence that we have observed throughout the universe, has led to the conclusion that it had to have happened in order for everything to be the way it is today.
+
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter