Notices
Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: Discussion of the Intersection of Science and Religion

  1. #1 Discussion of the Intersection of Science and Religion 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Does anyone know if science and religion ever intersected on any points?...
    If you are of the opinion they have [or may have], do you have an example for us to discuss?


    Let me give an example in case you are unsure;*


    In the beginning God said Let There Be Light, and there was light.


    Photon Epoch - from wiki
    10 seconds - 380,000 years after the Big Bang

    After most leptons and anti-leptons are annihilated at the end of the lepton epoch the energy of the universe is dominated by photons. These photons are still interacting frequently with charged protons, electrons and (eventually) nuclei, and continue to do so for the next 300,000 years.

    photons being light, of course.
    So in the BB Beginning the Universe was dominated by light.


    * This is my opinion based on the facts aforementioned and you are more than welcome to post your opinion - maybe my opinion will get together with your opinion, maybe they will marry, maybe they will divorce - who knows, who knows...


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    482
    I know nothing of physics or the early universe but from your own description of creation there was a lepton epoch before the photon epoch, so there was something before light, therefore the bibles description is wrong or your description of the early universe is wrong. Or both.


    The mark of a moderate man is freedom from his own ideas - Tao Te Ching

    Fancy a game of chess?
    http://www.itsyourturn.com/
    Challenge me, Delphi, and join the Pythian games.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    'God' has not been established; thus, there can be no intersection.

    One may not presume God's existence, referring to it as fact, speaking of it or preaching of it as fact and truth, for this would be a deception, and quite unethical.

    On may only say that 'God' is a wish. Why this wish? To be special? To be taken care of? From nature spirits ideas? Reward in an afterlife? Seeing a bush as a bear and thus believing in ghosts and phantasms?

    Such hubris. Where is thy humility?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Are you asking about the intersection of science and religion, or the intersection of science and the Abrahamic religions?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    I know nothing of physics or the early universe but from your own description of the there was a lepton epoch before the photon epoch so there was something before light therefore the bibles description is wrong or your description of the early universe is wrong.
    Not sure about that argument as God did not say, I think, that this was the very first thing to happen. But within the first 10 seconds of the BB is pretty close to being the beginning. One must also consider why God would tell stone-age man anything about his origins; because He wanted him to have a sense of his own origin, perhaps, a sense of place. From there I think He might have outlined the main points of creation in simple language so as not to lose his friends in unnecessary technical details.
    Telling a stone-age man that there was a hadron epoch which lasted from 10^-6 to 1 second and then a relatively cool 9 seconds of a lepton epoch would be difficult for him to remember and also to understand. Saying that in the beginning there was light for the time between 10 seconds and 380,000 years was more impressive and memorable; In the beginning God said let there be light, and there was light.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    482
    If your god doesn't know how to define first or does not think will have the capacity to understand the concept 'first' - well i'm glad the snake was there too.
    The mark of a moderate man is freedom from his own ideas - Tao Te Ching

    Fancy a game of chess?
    http://www.itsyourturn.com/
    Challenge me, Delphi, and join the Pythian games.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    'God' has not been established; thus, there can be no intersection.

    One may not presume God's existence, referring to it as fact, speaking of it or preaching of it as fact and truth, for this would be a deception, and quite unethical.

    On may only say that 'God' is a wish. Why this wish? To be special? To be taken care of? From nature spirits ideas? Reward in an afterlife? Seeing a bush as a bear and thus believing in ghosts and phantasms?

    Such hubris. Where is thy humility?
    If God has not been established as a fact then neither can you presume He does not exist.
    As I keep saying; everything is here, all the universe, all nature, all the little animals etc. and it all came from somewhere. Everything you see proves the existence of God. If God ceased to exist then everything would cease to exist.

    If nothing at all existed anywhere then I might see your point - there was no creator because there was no creation to see.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    Are you asking about the intersection of science and religion, or the intersection of science and the Abrahamic religions?
    Either, whichever you like. Personally I only see room for one truth about the universe and everything; so I speculate that if there was such an intersection between science and religion it would fall on one religion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Everything you see proves the existence of God. If God ceased to exist then everything would cease to exist.
    Stating this as a truth is a deception; it's only a wish.


    No God, since…

    1) Self-contradiction: A system of mind could not be fundamental; it would have parts. 2) The basis of stuff has to be eternal to avoid infinite regress; thus, it was not created; so, no Creator. 3) Only the natural is seen, nothing super-, extra-, or beyond for that which is supposed to be everywhere, doing everything. 4) Wishes do not make reality. 5) Not a shred of proof, only ‘faith’, which means a belief in an invisible unknowable. 6) Bible proved wrong. 7) All was made-up. 8) We evolved from slime. 9) If life requires Life (God) before, then Life would require LIFE, etc. 10) Baloney.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    ox
    ox is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    If science and religion intersect it is on page 1 of the Bible.

    Genesis: God said let there be light.
    Science: Sun formed 5 billion years ago.

    Genesis: Let waters be gathered and dry land appear.
    Science: Formation of seas and separation of land areas 4.2 billion years ago.

    Genesis: Let earth bring forth vegetation.
    Science: Beginning of plant life 3.9 billion years ago.

    Genesis: Let there be lights to divide day from night.
    Science: Evolution of eyes to determine animal evolution and behaviour (521 million years ago).

    Genesis: Let waters bring forth moving creatures.
    Science: Cambrian Explosion (520 million years ago). Life was exclusively marine at the time.

    Genesis: God created great whales and every living creature that moves which the waters brought forth abundantly.
    Science: Life flourished and large animals evolved.

    Genesis: And every winged fowl.
    Science: Birds can escape predation by flight, while needing little camouflage.

    Reference Andrew Parker - The Genesis Enigma.

    Parker proves to his own satisfaction that the sequence of events found in the 1613 King James Bible is 'The true account of how we came to exist may have been handed to humans by God'.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    If your god doesn't know how to define first or does not think will have the capacity to understand the concept 'first' - well i'm glad the snake was there too.
    But He did'nt say first, you said first, He said Beginning. Science says the beginning of the universe encompasses as much or as little time as you like, why would you want to apply a different definition to Gods 'beginning'?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    If your god doesn't know how to define first or does not think will have the capacity to understand the concept 'first' - well i'm glad the snake was there too.
    But He did'nt say first, you said first, He said Beginning. Science says the beginning of the universe encompasses as much or as little time as you like, why would you want to apply a different definition to Gods 'beginning'?
    Fair enough, i've not read the bible for a while, but looking at my copy i see you are right. I do, however, notice that it says earth was created first, then came light, which i'm pretty sure is contrary to the scientific interpretation of things.

    The only time i see the Abrahamic faiths and science intersect is when the serpent encourages us to stop listening to that overbearing god and figure things out for ourselves.
    The mark of a moderate man is freedom from his own ideas - Tao Te Ching

    Fancy a game of chess?
    http://www.itsyourturn.com/
    Challenge me, Delphi, and join the Pythian games.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    One presumes that our visiting religionist is quoting the guidelines for this subforum which he no doubt recently read after having received a warning for preaching in a thread almost are recently closed.

    "Discussion of the intersection of religion and science" from the point of view of those who are interested in the furthering of science education and awareness probably doesn't match what has been presented thus far. Clearly religion is not capable of being a reliable source of truth or knowledge, particularly those religious cults that are oft considered "abrahamic." This is for many reasons, not the least of which they are not conducive to testing claims, revising claims that are shown to be bollocks, or using rational logic in determining what claims to make. "Abrahamic" religions like Christianity and Islam are based on ancient superstition and early political propaganda by patriarchal societies that sought to dominate their regions by exploiting the human weakness of superstitious affliction. These are facts that can only be denied by those afflicted by religious superstition -the more afflicted, the more forcefully denied.

    The intersections of religion and science that the science-minded are generally concerned with are where religious superstitions affect scientific discovery and education.

    This is most prevalent today in the desires of religious nuts who want to present irrational and unfounded propositions like young earth creationism into the public school science curricula. It's also evident in political rhetoric that prevents advancements in stem cell research, to which the only counter-arguments to the research that ultimately get presented in any legislation are grounded in religious superstition.

    Even the arguments of human rights tend to be clouded by religious superstition while scientific assessments are side-lined. In the not to distant past in the United States, racial discrimination was religiously backed by hard-line Christians who used pseudoscience as a rhetorical device; real science of human descent sidelined and over-talked. In modern times, the shadows of this rhetoric still exists among certain political blowhards but the focus now is on homosexuality, the hatred of the religiously superstitious fueled again by pseudoscientific rhetoric ("it ain't natural") motivated by superstition (insert Leviticus and other Judeo-Christian mythology). Science shows the natural affairs of homosexuality (another thread, so debate it there not here), to which religion perverts, denies, and ignores.

    These are but some of the places that religion and science intersect. But these are probably best characterized as intersections where religion is colliding with science. There are other intersections where the collision is from the other vector: neuroscience is constantly exploring the nature of religion and belief in the supernatural, showing that there are neurological explanations for them. Psychologists are examining the effects of religion on mental health, both positive and negative. And sociologists are exploring the effects of religion on society and populations, again, both positive and negative.

    There are many places where religion and science intersect. Sometimes that intersection is a collision. Sometimes its two ships passing in the night.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    If your god doesn't know how to define first or does not think will have the capacity to understand the concept 'first' - well i'm glad the snake was there too.
    But He did'nt say first, you said first, He said Beginning. Science says the beginning of the universe encompasses as much or as little time as you like, why would you want to apply a different definition to Gods 'beginning'?
    This line of discussion is fruitless in a science subforum. You might try the philosophy subforum instead.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by questor
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Everything you see proves the existence of God. If God ceased to exist then everything would cease to exist.
    Stating this as a truth is a deception; it's only a wish.


    No God, since…

    1) Self-contradiction: A system of mind could not be fundamental; it would have parts. 2) The basis of stuff has to be eternal to avoid infinite regress; thus, it was not created; so, no Creator. 3) Only the natural is seen, nothing super-, extra-, or beyond for that which is supposed to be everywhere, doing everything. 4) Wishes do not make reality. 5) Not a shred of proof, only ‘faith’, which means a belief in an invisible unknowable. 6) Bible proved wrong. 7) All was made-up. 8) We evolved from slime. 9) If life requires Life (God) before, then Life would require LIFE, etc. 10) Baloney.
    1) Self-contradiction: A system of mind could not be fundamental; it would have parts.
    A mind, as far as I am aware, does not have any parts.
    Gods mind you can logically infer, is, at the most fundamental, will.

    2) The basis of stuff has to be eternal to avoid infinite regress; thus, it was not created; so, no Creator.
    Stuff is matter, and as matter was created at the big bang then matter was indeed created, and before matter was created there was no matter - matter needs a creator, whether you see its creator as something which existed before anything existed before the big bang is a matter for yourself. I believe there were some experiments once to test whether there was anything physical before the big bang as if there was, it was speculated, it would leave 'an interference pattern' in our physical universe as our universe expanded through it. But no interference was found and I heard no more about it.

    Only the natural is seen, nothing super-, extra-, or beyond for that which is supposed to be everywhere, doing everything. 4) Wishes do not make reality.
    Only the natural is seen which is why it is called natural; 'super'- nature simply means something beyond the natural, or, the cause and reason for the natural, as the natural is, and as it is it has a cause, or a 'super'.
    Wishes do not make reality.
    They did when Walt was alive (may he rest in peace) - 'when you wish upon a star... la, la la '
    Not a shred of proof, only ‘faith’, which means a belief in an invisible
    unknowable.
    oh this modern fascination with proof! you are proof!
    invisible maybe, sometimes; unknowable, not so, you have brains.
    Bible proved wrong.
    did'nt know that.
    All was made-up.
    ah.. to bad, that.
    We evolved from slime.
    Speak for yourself.
    If life requires Life (God) before, then Life would require LIFE, etc.
    He breaths the gift of life into inanimate matter. Giving life is part of His power. In a way your life force is proof of Gods reality. But He did not need to create you or to create any life, He just chose to. He is just the power that always was and is. The buck stops with the power to create.
    Baloney.
    ...is an American sausage derived from and somewhat similar to the Italian mortadella (a finely hashed/ground pork sausage containing cubes of lard that originated in the Italian city of Bologna).
    ....mods. quick! put this guy on probation - off topic...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by ox
    If science and religion intersect it is on page 1 of the Bible.

    Genesis: God said let there be light
    Science: Sun formed 5bn years ago

    Genesis: Let waters be gathered and dry land appear
    Science: Formation of seas and separation of land areas 4.2bn years ago

    Genesis: Let earth bring forth vegetation
    Science: Beginning of plant life 3.9bn years ago

    Genesis: Let there be lights to divide day from night
    Science: Evolution of eyes to determine animal evolution and behaviour (521 bn years ago)

    Genesis: Let waters bring forth moving creatures
    Science: Cambrian Explosion (520bn years ago). Life was exclusively marine at the time.

    Genesis: God created great whales and every living creature that moves which the waters brought forth abundantly.
    Science: Life flourished and large animals evolved

    Genesis: And every winged fowl
    Science: Birds can escape predation by flight, while needing little camouflage

    Reference Andrew Parker - The Genesis Enigma.

    Parker proves to his own satisfaction that the sequence of events found in the 1613 King James Bible is 'The true account of how we came to exist may have been handed to humans by God'.
    I posted something like that and I was told by the moderators that I was warned, (though I did'nt hear them). I think you should be careful, ox, this is scary stuff.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Imaginary and self-contradictory notions can hardly be used for a comparison to anything actual, but, given as such, the magisteria do overlap and clash, as will be shown in another post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    The Magisteria Collide

    1. Suppose that there is an imagined supernatural notion that is supposed to have effects upon the natural, even luckily being that the notion’s effects are to be found anywhere and everywhere. Science, as it goes about its normal fact-finding business, probes and examines anywhere and everywhere, ever only finding the natural, that is, no violations, no super-beyond-anything happening at all. The conditions thus look exactly as they would if there were no supernatural notion. There is then inadvertent overlap; it’s unavoidable OK, that’s an easy one, even a double-demise, for the notion couldn’t be proved in the first place and so, thus, even further, is of no concern of any consequences from disbelief. People make more informed decisions lately, good probability being enough, as there cannot be complete and perfect information. All positions are not equally-probable.

    2. Now, nonexistence of a notion, effects or not, can also be shown if the notion is self-contradictory; no square circles; no design without design as a first cause, etc. I leave this to the readers.

    3. So, onto the tougher case that occurs if the nonscientific magisterium retreats [giving up] to a new position that there are no effects, there being no intervention at all but for the notion having just created the universe and not intervening any further.

    Now, note that science is still but doing its own thing, investigating more and more fundamental realms, such as even proving that the quantum level is a random and indeterminate chaos, that there can be no local hidden variables within it; thus, finding even that a near ‘nothing’—the quantum fluctuation or tunneling—is the causeless bottom ‘something’ that is as simple as it gets, this ‘something’, by the way, being the natural state of affairs, rather than a total nothing that could not be, confirming the thought experiment that a total nothing couldn’t do a darn thing, it not even being able to be ‘there’ to make anything anyway, plus, that there cannot be never-ending causes beneath causes, and that therefore the causeless bottom must be of maximum non-specifics rather than any order, much less a perfect order.

    Thus, and, too, the causeless bottom needed no creation. The notion is not only cut off at the source but is not even required since the normal state is ‘something’. The great philosophical question of ”why is there something rather than nothing” is squashed, for not anything can become of nothing.

    Science even then finds, as a bonus, that the universe appeared from a state of zero energy, this being, of course, within the unavoidable and tiny quantum uncertainty, plus, that the negative energy of gravity matches the positive energy of matter, equaling a mass density of ‘zero’, and, further, that every time we try to measure what an atom does, we get a different answer, this then again being the answer that that realm is causeless. Furthermore, that realm is of discrete operations—the quantum leaps even wiping away the notion of any universal continuity.

    Another bonus found is that the ‘laws’ of point-of-view invariance automatically appear [are not handed down] in any model that does not single out a special moment in time, position in space, or direction in space, such as back at the planck time of the big bang, the universe having then no distinguishable place, direction, or time, meaning that it had no structure and, thus, that the conservation laws apply.

    Further, it can be shown that human and societal behaviors, morals, laws and values look just as they can be expected to look if there are only the natural goings on. Science, in its quest for truth, has inadvertently stepped on the turf of the nonscientific magisterium. There is much overlap and clash.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    A mind, as far as I am aware, does not have any parts.
    You're serious? It hasn't occurred to you that just about the only part of your body that cannot be removed or replaced without affecting your "mind" is that which includes the meat between your ears? The parts are synapses, axons, dendrites, and chemical gates that comprise the brain. Here are your mind's parts:


    Gods mind you can logically infer, is, at the most fundamental, will.
    Let's keep this discussion about science and not superstition. Define your god in the philosophy subforum where you can show us how you get from "there must be a god because all that I see" to a specific abrahamic god (assuming that's the one your superstitions point to).

    Stuff is matter, and as matter was created at the big bang then matter was indeed created, and before matter was created there was no matter - matter needs a creator,
    etc., etc.

    Yes, yes. Philosophy subforum. Go there and explain how a creator needs no creator yet has enough energy and mass to affect other energy and mass. Blah, blah... arguments from ignorance such as this won't work in a science subforum like this one.

    Only the natural is seen which is why it is called natural; 'super'- nature simply means something beyond the natural, or, the cause and reason for the natural, as the natural is, and as it is it has a cause, or a 'super'.
    Since there is no good reason to believe such crap exists, we can dismiss it from a science subforum discussion. Please feel free to discuss it in the science fiction subforum.

    They did when Walt was alive (may he rest in peace)
    - '

    More aptly, he's resting in pieces if his corpse was permitted to decay and reintegrate with the environment it was disposed of in. Probably, however, they are bits of decomposed flesh and bone in a hermetically sealed coffin, mummified by chemical preservatives and not permitted that natural reintegration.

    oh this modern fascination with proof! you are proof!
    It's a rational fascination. And a requirement of science. You can agree to participate in science or just read quietly. If you want to start a discussion on a science forum, you had best be prepared to play by the rules of reality and defend your superstitions on those terms. Other terms will not be tolerated.


    If life requires Life (God) before, then Life would require LIFE, etc.
    He breaths the gift of life into inanimate matter. Giving life is part of His power. In a way your life force is proof of Gods reality. But He did not need to create you or to create any life, He just chose to. He is just the power that always was and is. The buck stops with the power to create.
    One is left to wonder which of the thousands of extant and extinct gods of human imagination you find the most significant. Is it Ptah? That's one of my favorites: he masterbated the world into existence, forming the Earth from his semen. He was no more real than any of the others, but the tale is among the more amusing. Certainly more so than that Yahweh creep.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Quote Originally Posted by ox
    If science and religion intersect it is on page 1 of the Bible.

    Genesis: God said let there be light
    Science: Sun formed 5bn years ago

    Genesis: Let waters be gathered and dry land appear
    Science: Formation of seas and separation of land areas 4.2bn years ago

    Genesis: Let earth bring forth vegetation
    Science: Beginning of plant life 3.9bn years ago

    Genesis: Let there be lights to divide day from night
    Science: Evolution of eyes to determine animal evolution and behaviour (521 bn years ago)

    Genesis: Let waters bring forth moving creatures
    Science: Cambrian Explosion (520bn years ago). Life was exclusively marine at the time.

    Genesis: God created great whales and every living creature that moves which the waters brought forth abundantly.
    Science: Life flourished and large animals evolved

    Genesis: And every winged fowl
    Science: Birds can escape predation by flight, while needing little camouflage

    Reference Andrew Parker - The Genesis Enigma.

    Parker proves to his own satisfaction that the sequence of events found in the 1613 King James Bible is 'The true account of how we came to exist may have been handed to humans by God'.
    I posted something like that and I was told by the moderators that I was warned, (though I did'nt hear them). I think you should be careful, ox, this is scary stuff.
    Let's make sure you "hear" correctly: Click Here.

    Ox wasn't promoting this as his opinion or trying to convince others that the above is correct. It may or may not be either in ox's point of view, but that is irrelevant. He was showing what he considered to be an intersection between science and religion as described by the author cited above.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Good answers, SkinWalker; thanks.


    Meanwhile, I was gathering this great stuff:


    A Brief History of All of History

    The Cosmos

    For all time vacuum fluctuations waver in and out of existence since nonexistence cannot be.


    Our local universe

    1e-43 seconds
    Planck era.

    Cyclical compactfication or a vacuum fluctuation eruption


    1e-36 seconds
    Gut transition.

    Strong force separates from the electroweak force.


    1e-36 seconds
    Inflation begins.

    Slow rolling scalar field generates*negative pressure causing exponential expansion of space time. Doubling time: 1e-36 seconds.

    Vacuum energy density: 1e73 tons/cm^3.

    Quantum fluctuations lock in* nearly scale invariant


    1e-5 seconds
    Variation in energy density.


    1e-34 seconds inflation ends.

    Decay of scalar inflaton field causing reheating.

    Is this the let there be light moment? No, photons*don’t exist yet, but other massless vector quanta like left and*right weak and b-l particle may exist. Things are not well known about this*era.*


    1e-34 to 1e -8 seconds
    Quark era.

    Quark gluon plasma.

    Quarks*and super particles dominant matter content.


    1e-17 to 1e-15 seconds
    SUSY breaking.

    Super partners acquire*mass with the LSP expected to have a mass of about 10 TEV.

    (In induced gravity*model, this is where mass energy first generates the induced gravity*field, gravity is born.)


    1e-10 seconds
    Electroweak transition.

    The*electroweak force, under the action of the Higgs mechanism breaks symmetry.

    The*photon is born. Standard model particles get mass.


    1e-5 seconds
    Quark confinement.

    The QCD vacuum becomes*superconducting to color magnetic current.

    Quarks and gluons are confined.


    1e -5 to 1 e-4 seconds
    Hadron era.

    Hadrons are formed: protons,*neutrons, pions etc.


    1e -4 second
    Hadron annihilation.

    A brief period of proton/anti*proton and neutron/anti neutron annihilation.

    A slight favoring of matter over*anti matter, possibly locked in by cp violation at reheating causes some*protons and neutrons to survive.


    1e-4 to 10 seconds
    Lepton era.

    Following hadron annihilation leptons are the dominant energy density.


    1 second
    Neutrino decoupling.

    Mass energy falls*low enough to free neutrinos, creating the neutrino cosmic background.


    10 seconds
    Electron annihilation.

    Electrons and positrons annihilate,* leaving a tiny fraction of electrons remaining. At this point the total number* of electrons equals the total number of protons.


    10 seconds to 57 thousand years
    Radiation era.

    Photons created from the*annihilation of matter and anti matter dominate the energy density of*universe

    1- 5 minutes
    Nucleosynthesis

    Fusion of protons create helium, deuterium and trace amounts of lithium.


    * 57 thousand years
    Matter/radiation equality.

    The radiation density (photon and*neutrino) and matter density (dark and atomic) are equal.

    This is because*radiation density falls more quickly due to the stretching of the relativistic*particles wavelengths.

    Dark matter clumps into structures. Atomic matter*begins oscillation due to the battle between gravity and photon pressure* generating acoustic oscillations.

    The first sounds of the new universe


    380 thousand years
Recombination.

    The temperature falls low enough to allow atoms to form; photons decouple. The CMB is born, locking in its structure.

    The story of the earliest times in the universe.


    5 to 200 million years
The dark age.

    Photons fall into the infra red energy*range; the universe goes dark.

    The atomic gas continues to fall toward the*dark matter clumps which grow more pronounced.

    Near 100 million years the densest clumps halt their expansion and begin collapsing.

    By 200 million years the first mini halos form*and within these the atomic cloud cools and collapses to make the very first*stars whose light brings to an end the dark era.


    200 million years
    First stars.

    The first stars are very massive and short lived. They*die in violent super nova explosions filling the cosmos with the building blocks of planets and the elements needed for life.


    200 to 800 million
    Years epoch of ionization.

    The radiation from the stars and*possibly the first quasars, ionizes much of the remaining neutral hydrogen and*helium.

    A thin mist returns and partly obscures the CMB. (future low frequency*radio telescopes may soon be able to see the epoch of ionization)


    1 to 2 billion years
    Infant galaxies.

    Star groups merge, forming the very first*galaxies. There are frequent collisions of galaxies, high star birth rates and*high supernova rates.

    Heavy element production changes the pattern of star*formation, making them lower mass, less luminous and longer lived, like those of* today.

    The stage is set for the emergence of life; the cosmos will soon have*eyes to see and minds to think.


    2 to 3 billion years
Star birth and quasar peak.

    In the dense environment of frequent galaxy collisions the star birth rate reaches it maximum, as does the forming*and feeding of supermassive black holes.


    6 billion years
First rich galaxy clusters.

    Enough time has elapsed for the*densest regions to stop expanding and form clusters.


    7 billion years
    Deceleration /acceleration.

    The effects of dark energy kick*in. The universe once again begins to accelerate its expansion rate, but at a*much more gentle rate.


    8 billion years
First modern spiral galaxies.

    Although some elliptical galaxies form*in the first billion years, classic spiral galaxies aren't seen until about*5 billion years ago.


    9 billion years
    Matter / dark energy equality.

    At this time the falling density of matter (dark and atomic) become equal to that of dark energy.


    9.1 billion years
Sun and earth form.

    The solar system forms in the outer disk of the*milky way.

    The stage is set for the emergence of humankind in the cosmos.


    13.7 billion years.
    Present time.

    Human civilization reaches its peak and begins heading*into decline and eventual extinction due to over population, resource*depletion, and environmental destruction which generates conflict as human*nation states fight for ever dwindling resources.

    Hopefully humankind is not*typical and intelligent life elsewhere solves the problem of balancing intelligent life needs with available resources by developing*communitarian economic social structures.


    January 20, 2011 Questor(Austin) organizes all of history.


    16 to 17 billion years
    The milky way collides with the andromeda galaxy.

    Somewhere within this time the sun enters into its red giant phase,*vaporizing the earth.

    Humankind extinct for over 4 billion years is not around to witness*this event though possibly a new intelligent species which emerged after the extinction of humankind might be.

    It will be a very sad time for them unless*their technology includes very advanced space flight.


    20 billion years
    Growth of structures cease.

    Expansion due to dark energy empties*each casual patch of the cosmos.

    The story of our universe draws to a*close.


    100 billion years
What remains of the milky way is alone in its causal patch of the*universe.


    1000 billion years
    Last stars die.

    The universe is empty and dark. However,*stirring in the vacuum of space time itself are the ever present vacuum*fluctuations.

    One small patch quite by chance fluctuates sufficiently*to create a volume of false vacuum which cuts off from its mother*universe by negative pressure, explodes into a new universe creating new*space time and future hope *for the emergence of intelligent life in the cosmos.


    Everything starts over somehow?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    Quote Originally Posted by mise
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    If your god doesn't know how to define first or does not think will have the capacity to understand the concept 'first' - well i'm glad the snake was there too.
    But He did'nt say first, you said first, He said Beginning. Science says the beginning of the universe encompasses as much or as little time as you like, why would you want to apply a different definition to Gods 'beginning'?
    Fair enough, i've not read the bible for a while, but looking at my copy i see you are right. I do, however, notice that it says earth was created first, then came light, which i'm pretty sure is contrary to the scientific interpretation of things.
    Just so, just so. 'In the beginning God created heaven, and earth.' I have to view that, however, as an introduction to the story. What God was about to do, then follows the details of what He did.
    But its interesting I think for someone who may say this is just a story someone made up in the stone age to pass the time because, if you were simply making up a story you would say something like 'and in the Beginning God created the lights in the sky and there was light';
    ...however, what you see is that on the first day God said 'let there be light, and there was light' and then on the fourth day God said 'Let there be lights made in the firmament of heaven, to divide the day and the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years: To shine in the firmament of heaven, and to give light upon the earth. And it was so done.'
    So light was created on day one and the lights were created on day four; not a very logical sequence and a bit of a blunder to make in the first few paragraphs of your story if you were making up a story. But it turns out that light was created before the lights in the sky were created. One up to stone-age man.

    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    The only time i see the Abrahamic faiths and science intersect is when the serpent encourages us to stop listening to that overbearing god and figure things out for ourselves.
    Hows that going for you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Yahweh…

    The God of the Old Testament

    Of all my rotten luck, the God of the Old Testament appeared in my imagination and proclaimed, “I am Yahweh, never absent, for, those schooled from infancy in my strange ways have become desensitized to my horrific side and so they continue to keep me very much alive through their thoughts; so, fire away at me; I no longer bite that hard, you see.”

    “You’re too easy of a target to attack for free—so it would be rather unfair of me.”

    “True, and I won’t deny it—it’s all there in the testament. I was the most unpleasant character that anyone ever made up in literary fiction. I was revealed to be jealous and proud of it, petty, unjust, controlling, vindictive, an ethic cleanser, genocidal, infanticidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, homophobic, misogynistic, sadomasochistic, and much more, and a bully—who gave it free will only if it matched my own will.”

    “Peace be with you. How about the New Testament to replace and hide your scent, as many religions have already done through Jesus sent?”

    “Yes, that testament is quite opposite in tone, but I am still the father of Jesus sown, so, the problem of me can never really go away. I am what I was, still here unto the present day.”

    “Well, so long. You’re the worst role model, yet, that human mammals have ever dreamed up. Who would imitate, emulate, or follow you as a ‘leader’?”

    “Well, my followers are those numerous slaves who excuse my mysterious [insane] ways, along with my exclusive desert tribe.”

    “Well, you’re the boss, and, anyway, who ever said that a God had to be perfect and good?”

    “Everyone that I told—and those who thought I should.”

    “Oh well, never mind; whatever pleases. So, um, Joseph was not the biological father of jesus?”

    “No, I was.”

    “Well, my ancestors descended from the trees. Hey, why don’t Catholics get the 72 virgins that Islam gives for martyrdom for their sins?”

    “I told each religious faith a different story.”

    “You also gave a Bible half-different to the Mormon founder, Joseph Smith, finely engraved on golden plates he discovered?”

    “Sure. I thought at the time ‘why not’.”

    “You had Islam add different things to their Koran, as well?”

    “Yes of the many more ways to avoid hell.”

    “And you told only the Catholics that there were umpteen levels of angels and that bread was your body and that wine was your blood?”

    “Yep, I told just them and a few other selves, but they made up the saints themselves.”

    “And you presented differing visions to the Lutherans, the Episcopals, and the Jewish, and to many other also-rans?”

    “Pretty much, except that a King of England founded the Episcopals—the anglicans, of course, since his own religion wouldn’t give him a divorce.”

    “And you killed everyone but Noah and his family in the great flood, wet, even young children and their pets?”

    “Sure, again, why not? life is cheap. However, my creation of the rainbow says that I’ll never be so cruel again. What can I say—I goofed. My sin.”

    “But you are infallible, and even omniscient and so you know all of the future meant.”

    “My omnipotence of changing my mind got in the way.”

    “But your omniscience knew you would… one day.”

    “Yeah, I know—it’s a paradox; oh, the strife. And I can still technically end all life by means other than a flood.”

    “You burned people in Hell, not saved, when they didn’t follow the unfree will that you gave?”

    “Yes, because I was not a loving God.”

    “Well, God, who made you?”

    “No problem—either I was eternal or I made myself be”

    “This is remarkably the same, but for thee, as the universal ingredients would be.”

    “Then who would need me—wait, I don’t want the answer told.”

    “Is the earth only about 4000 years old?”

    “Of course not, but I may have let that slip to some to tease their intelligence apart from being dumb.”

    “Do you mind-read the thoughts of every human, using all of your acumen, and write the earthly script for each event, being so omnipresent?”

    “I tried that, at first, but it didn’t work for me to put my finger on every atom that be and micromanage its doings for all of thee.”

    “That’s called ‘God’s will’, by some, even now. What went wrong? Was it the where and how?”

    “It disrupted the atoms’ normal and natural movements.”

    “And that’s what caused the storms unfocused, the lightning bolts, and the plagues of locusts?”

    “Yes, so I stopped making such a mess of things.”

    “So, the prayers of six million jews, pleaded, in the holocaust, went all unheeded?”

    “Yes, plus I have better things to do, in time, my sooth, than look after some old experiment of mine from my misspent youth.”

    “Did you really make Adam and Eve and all of earth and nature, as some believe?”

    “Yes, I made nature, including the humans, in my image.”

    “It shows in their rage.”

    “Thank you.”

    “God, it’s id deja-vu all over again—I really have to move on.”

    “No, wait. I like your questions. I’m mellower now, this being my new direction. Not as many strictly admit to Me anymore.”

    “How come so many of the gospels were omitted from the new Catholic testament, like those of Thomas, Peter, Nicodemus, Philip, Bartholomew, and more, as well as whole books kept from us, although you told some other religions to keep them, such as the Book of Revelations?”

    “Those gospels were embarrassing and wild; they told about my son doing magic tricks and practical jokes on people when he was a child.”

    “Oh, we never heard much about his youth. And didn’t you send the Mormans proof that Jesus spent an early era in what was to become America?”

    “Probably.”

    “What about the trillions of galaxies in the sky?”

    “They’re just for show and scenery on high.”

    “Where’s all your rantings and ravings that I’ve heard about?”

    “I now take Prozac for my mood swings and bouts.”

    “You don’t really exist, do you, as mental, for how could you have an emotional system—a composite complexity—and still be absolute and fundamental?”

    “No, I don’t exist, for how could I since I am so horrible? Human mammals made all of me up as a very bad example, as it turned out, from their many fears in the childhood of their species’ years. Unfortunately, it caught on to their children’s ears.”

    “So, yet you still subsist in this indefinite locus of wishes?”

    “Yes, sort of. I am sustained here since many children have learned to obey and listen to what is/was told to them, for this obeying was an evolutionarily useful thing, as many of their obedience resulted from warnings of things that were truly dangerous, and so the children grew up to indoctrinate their own children in all the ‘knowledge’.”

    “We’ll have to offer more reason to those so indoctrinated. Now farewell to you, the impersonated.”

    “See you. Pay no attention to me as certain, but to all those blinded by the curtain.”

    He soon dozed off into never land.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108
    Ahh.. questor... another black hole...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    Just part of the risk of lively adventure.

    Another intersection is the basic stuff; it's just that it's not labeled or marked as holy; it's just stuff, although a lot of stuff is now made in China.

    Yet another intersection is the causeless ground state, of well, chaos and not much order, for their could be nothing prior to impart any specific direction to it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Washington State, United States
    Posts
    18
    Genesis: Let there be lights to divide day from night
    Science: Evolution of eyes to determine animal evolution and behaviour (521 bn years ago)
    Yikes, not sure where you got that Ox. Genesis specifically says they were put in the sky and they serve to mark the time of day. This isn't referring to eyes, lol.

    Genesis 1:14-19

    14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    ox
    ox is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Erebus
    Genesis: Let there be lights to divide day from night
    Science: Evolution of eyes to determine animal evolution and behaviour (521 bn years ago)
    Yikes, not sure where you got that Ox. Genesis specifically says they were put in the sky and they serve to mark the time of day. This isn't referring to eyes, lol.
    It's a reference from the main argument in Andrew Parker's book The Genesis Enigma. Parker is impressed by one particular translation of The Bible, The King James Version (1613), and that 1st page he reproduces in the book.
    I am aware that most books of this nature are written in order to try and prove a theory to the author's own satisfaction, and it is most likely a coincidence. I doubt very much if the Genesis writer was aware of the evolution of the eye. The Catholic Church make no great claims as to the accuracy of Genesis, more that people were writing about what they knew at the time and based upon previous creation myths.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Senior questor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    385
    The 2nd Genesis…

    For 100 million years after the birth of the universe, space was dark and mostly formless. That’s 100 million years. No stars. It was not interesting in the least. It was mostly hydrogen and helium, with faint traces of lithium and beryllium. It was an abysmally black “void”; darkness was upon the face of the deep.

    Who would have bet on this dark horse running through a 100 million year night? Then hydrogen caught fire and so the stars were born. In these blast furnaces, atomic nuclei were crushed, burned, and transmuted into more complex elements. That was the second creation, the one that really mattered. We contain those elements; parts of those stars are in our blood, bones, and skin.

    We are those stars.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •