Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (584939)	9/10/2010 11:01:02 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577123

If it wasn't for the terrorism stuff liberals would hate muslims

To: bentway who wrote (584939)	9/10/2010 11:08:19 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1577123

"Those Voices Don't Speak for the Rest of Us" youtube.com

To: bentway who wrote (584939)	9/10/2010 12:54:04 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1577123

He has left science behind but thats not uncommon these days. The idea there are an infinity of universes and that they're all slightly different and a natural result of natural laws is an absurd imaginationary invention to get around the problem of design.

To: bentway who wrote (584939)	9/10/2010 9:20:18 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1577123

Explaining Cosmological Bylaws by Bradford Paul Davies wrote Stephen Hawking's big bang gaps The laws that explain the universe's birth are less comprehensive than Stephen Hawking suggests. The article is published at The Guardian site. Davies starts by noting a truth which can be biblically sourced as well as sourced from cosmology namely, that time began with the advent of the universe. God would be independent of both. Davies quotes St Augustine of Hippo who once remarked that "the universe was created with time and not in time". Davies goes on to refer to the God of the gaps doctrine and in doing so says that "the universe is the perennial big gap" but that Stephen Hawking in his new book makes the claim "that there is no big gap in the scientific account of the big bang." Explaining the universe can be done by referencing laws of physics which would obviate the need for an explanation citing God, according to Hawking. Davies argues that while God may not be needed to explain the initiation of the Big Bang the question remains: "What is the source of those ingenious laws that enable a universe to pop into being from nothing?" Davies: Traditionally, scientists have supposed that the laws of physics were simply imprinted on the universe at its birth, like a maker's mark. As to their origin, well, that was left unexplained. In recent years, cosmologists have shifted position somewhat. If the origin of the universe was a law rather than a supernatural event, then the same laws could presumably operate to bring other universes into being. Hawking believes in multiple Big Bangs which led to multiple and distinct universes. This has the advantage of explaining how this universe is so finely tuned a receptacle for life. Throw the dice often enough and you get snake eyes. Each universe comes replete with its own bylaws. Davies: The multiverse comes with a lot of baggage, such as an overarching space and time to host all those bangs, a universe-generating mechanism to trigger them, physical fields to populate the universes with material stuff, and a selection of forces to make things happen. The status of meta-laws is compared to the status of transcendent God. Davies notes a quote from French physicist LaPlace which I have quoted at Telic Thoughts on multiple occasions. In the end he concludes that explaining the origin of laws of physics is implausible without at least acknowledging a gap. It's a wonder that Hawking et. al. devote so much effort to closing off explanations which invoke God. Who said God could only be found in gaps anyway? telicthoughts.com