Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[BADecker]

Except that nobody has proven that BB existed. But if they somehow do, all that they will be proving is that BB is God, and that it was God that created everything.

Back to religion again.

Did you see the CMB on your TV?

BTW, if science finds out that God/alien civilization created our universe, maybe we'll be able to figure out how to communicate with it, and we'll learn more about it.

I for one would have so many questions...

I don't have or own a TV.
I don't know what CMB you are referring to.

Science already found that God created the universe. How? By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. Whatever created the universe is God, just to be able to create such complexity. See the Scientific proof that God exists? thread - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0.

[Astargath]

Except that nobody has proven that BB existed. But if they somehow do, all that they will be proving is that BB is God, and that it was God that created everything.

Back to religion again.

Did you see the CMB on your TV?

BTW, if science finds out that God/alien civilization created our universe, maybe we'll be able to figure out how to communicate with it, and we'll learn more about it.

I for one would have so many questions...

I don't have or own a TV.
I don't know what CMB you are referring to.

Science already found that God created the universe. How? By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. Whatever created the universe is God, just to be able to create such complexity. See the Scientific proof that God exists? thread - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0.

''By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. '' When was this quantified? Is there a calculation of how complex the universe is? Can you tell us how complex the universe is then? From a scale of 0-100?

[BADecker]

Except that nobody has proven that BB existed. But if they somehow do, all that they will be proving is that BB is God, and that it was God that created everything.

Back to religion again.

Did you see the CMB on your TV?

BTW, if science finds out that God/alien civilization created our universe, maybe we'll be able to figure out how to communicate with it, and we'll learn more about it.

I for one would have so many questions...

I don't have or own a TV.
I don't know what CMB you are referring to.

Science already found that God created the universe. How? By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. Whatever created the universe is God, just to be able to create such complexity. See the Scientific proof that God exists? thread - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0.

''By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. '' When was this quantified? Is there a calculation of how complex the universe is? Can you tell us how complex the universe is then? From a scale of 0-100?

Do you think that scientists are not trying to keep a person alive in top health for 500 years or longer? Don't you realize that it is the complexity of nature and life that is thwarting them? Even the best that is offered by scientists and researchers in this single area, is still beat by nature in a few areas of the world... like the Hunza's, or the people of Vilcabamba, Ecuador, who drink of ancient, melting glacial mineral waters.

Nature has us beat for complexity all over the place.

[Astargath]

Except that nobody has proven that BB existed. But if they somehow do, all that they will be proving is that BB is God, and that it was God that created everything.

Back to religion again.

Did you see the CMB on your TV?

BTW, if science finds out that God/alien civilization created our universe, maybe we'll be able to figure out how to communicate with it, and we'll learn more about it.

I for one would have so many questions...

I don't have or own a TV.
I don't know what CMB you are referring to.

Science already found that God created the universe. How? By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. Whatever created the universe is God, just to be able to create such complexity. See the Scientific proof that God exists? thread - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.0.

''By finding out how complex the universe is in every way. '' When was this quantified? Is there a calculation of how complex the universe is? Can you tell us how complex the universe is then? From a scale of 0-100?

Do you think that scientists are not trying to keep a person alive in top health for 500 years or longer? Don't you realize that it is the complexity of nature and life that is thwarting them? Even the best that is offered by scientists and researchers in this single area, is still beat by nature in a few areas of the world... like the Hunza's, or the people of Vilcabamba, Ecuador, who drink of ancient, melting glacial mineral waters.

Nature has us beat for complexity all over the place.

No, you said '' By finding out how complex the universe is in every way.'' And I asked you, how complex is it? Is there a number to the complexity of it or are you just pulling it out of your ass? What are you defining complexity as?

 Neil Johnson states that "even among scientists, there is no unique definition of complexity – and the scientific notion has traditionally been conveyed using particular examples..." Ultimately Johnson adopts the definition of "complexity science" as "the study of the phenomena which emerge from a collection of interacting objects"

[BADecker]

Do you think that scientists are not trying to keep a person alive in top health for 500 years or longer? Don't you realize that it is the complexity of nature and life that is thwarting them? Even the best that is offered by scientists and researchers in this single area, is still beat by nature in a few areas of the world... like the Hunza's, or the people of Vilcabamba, Ecuador, who drink of ancient, melting glacial mineral waters.

Nature has us beat for complexity all over the place.

No, you said '' By finding out how complex the universe is in every way.'' And I asked you, how complex is it? Is there a number to the complexity of it or are you just pulling it out of your ass? What are you defining complexity as?

 Neil Johnson states that "even among scientists, there is no unique definition of complexity – and the scientific notion has traditionally been conveyed using particular examples..." Ultimately Johnson adopts the definition of "complexity science" as "the study of the phenomena which emerge from a collection of interacting objects"

You and everyone else can continue to ask all kinds of questions about all kinds of things. So what?

The point that Neil Johnson is making is that we are so inadequate regarding understanding complexity, that there is no clear definition.

The point that complexity shows is that only something like God can make such complexity. We have no evidence of anything else that can do it. Do you want a description of God? You will get some of it in the resurrection... or by reading the bible.

[Astargath]

Do you think that scientists are not trying to keep a person alive in top health for 500 years or longer? Don't you realize that it is the complexity of nature and life that is thwarting them? Even the best that is offered by scientists and researchers in this single area, is still beat by nature in a few areas of the world... like the Hunza's, or the people of Vilcabamba, Ecuador, who drink of ancient, melting glacial mineral waters.

Nature has us beat for complexity all over the place.

No, you said '' By finding out how complex the universe is in every way.'' And I asked you, how complex is it? Is there a number to the complexity of it or are you just pulling it out of your ass? What are you defining complexity as?

 Neil Johnson states that "even among scientists, there is no unique definition of complexity – and the scientific notion has traditionally been conveyed using particular examples..." Ultimately Johnson adopts the definition of "complexity science" as "the study of the phenomena which emerge from a collection of interacting objects"

You and everyone else can continue to ask all kinds of questions about all kinds of things. So what?

The point that Neil Johnson is making is that we are so inadequate regarding understanding complexity, that there is no clear definition.

The point that complexity shows is that only something like God can make such complexity. We have no evidence of anything else that can do it. Do you want a description of God? You will get some of it in the resurrection... or by reading the bible.

''The point that complexity shows is that only something like God can make such complexity'' Yeah? How does it show that exactly? ''We have no evidence of anything else that can do it'' How so? We have evidence that the big bang did it, we have no evidence that a god did it.

[Moloch]

BTW, if science finds out that God/alien civilization created our universe, maybe we'll be able to figure out how to communicate with it, and we'll learn more about it.

I for one would have so many questions...

The answer to the question you didn't ask is... spending eternity doing the same thing is boring... life is not boring because, surprise!

If you have other questions for me, just ask  

Why did you run the simulation for so long?

How long is too long?  What percentage of eternity is 15 billion years?

How did you express singularities in the computer executable statements?

I don't need to because you can't investigate it... similar to a video game, your video card only needs to process the objects which you can see... if you can't see it, it doesn't need any processing power

How did you calculate 0/0 or 0^infinity?

0/0=(0^1)/(0^1)=0^(1-1)=0^0=1
0/0=(0^infinity)/(0^infinity)=0^(infinity-infinity)?=0

Yes, exactly like that.  Anything divided by itself = 1, and 0 divided or multiplied by anything is still 0

What happens to space time at dimensions smaller than Planck's lengths and Planck's time?

Not much these days, but those dimensions are not constants, space-time is expanding (or shrinking, depending on your perspective)

How does space time look like in your world?

Time is an illusion, there is only now... now is a gift, we even call it "the present"

Are you a simulation as well?  Who runs your simulation?  Are they themselves a simulation? Who is at the top of the simulation tree?

Of course... just like humans are working towards creating their own simulations, which will in turn create new simulations that will create newer simulations, ad infinitum

[Moloch]

Thank you Moloch the Merciful.  Moloch Akbar!  Moloch Akbar! Moloch Akbar!

PS. And that is how new religions are born.  People have questions and others have answers. LOL

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer

I do somewhat subscribe to the simulation theory... Like Elon Musk, I find it too plausible to disbelieve.  The Hindus and Buddhists have been saying similar for thousands of years, only they call it reincarnation

I find the idea of reincarnation more plausible than the idea that god created everyone with less than 100 years to find the correct religion or they spend eternity being tortured by an omnibenevolent god... the latter being a contradiction of an omnibenevolent god torturing souls for eternity, simply for making the wrong choice with limited/bad/contradictory information

[Astargath]

Thank you Moloch the Merciful.  Moloch Akbar!  Moloch Akbar! Moloch Akbar!

PS. And that is how new religions are born.  People have questions and others have answers. LOL

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer

I do somewhat subscribe to the simulation theory... Like Elon Musk, I find it too plausible to disbelieve.  The Hindus and Buddhists have been saying similar for thousands of years, only they call it reincarnation

I find the idea of reincarnation more plausible than the idea that god created everyone with less than 100 years to find the correct religion or they spend eternity being tortured by an omnibenevolent god... the latter being a contradiction of an omnibenevolent god torturing souls for eternity, simply for making the wrong choice with limited/bad/contradictory information

It's really hard to say what's actually plausible and what is not, we lack a lot of information, perhaps right now something that seems really crazy and not plausible it is in fact what happened.

[sirazimuth]

...Religious people work diligently at things. Non-religious people don't.

Making a blatantly false generalization like that, once again, clearly demonstrates the pious fool that you are.

[CoinCube]

Only if the universe can be reduced to computable, close-form functions.  How do you do that with infinities that are all around us since the Big Bang?

Math has been shown to deal with infinities once you achieve a deep enough fundamental understanding. Zeno's paradox held for over 2000 years and then we figured out calculus.

What Is the Answer to Zeno’s Paradox?
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/03/zeno_s_paradox_how_to_explain_the_solution_to_achilles_and_the_tortoise.html

[CoinCube]

Ok, try the same with the divergent series.

Clearly that would be more challenging.

That said I am skeptical that divergent series actually exist in reality. Easy to set up on paper but they break down when applied to the real world. Here is a clarifying example.

Consider a handball court inside a cube, where every wall including the ceiling is fair game to bounce a ball off of.

Bounce a ball at an angle off one wall, so that it bounces off numerous different walls.

In an ideal world of no friction, etc., the ball will bounce forever and never converge anywhere. This is a divergent series.  

In the real world, eventually the ball will converge and come to rest somewhere.

The divergent series in this example is simply an inaccurate modeling of reality. It fails to account for friction.

1+1+1+1+... to infinity probably fails in a similar way because in a finite universe you eventually run out of subatomic particles or whatever it is that you are counting. The model is too simple.
 
Same story with the "infinity" of a black hole. We have no concrete knowledge of what happens inside the event horizon of a black hole. Any comments on the physical dimensions of the mass inside the event horizon are pure speculation.

Physics professor Christopher S. Baird covers this well
http://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/mobile/2013/09/13/does-every-black-hole-contain-a-singularity/

In the real universe, no black holes contain singularities. In general, singularities are the non-physical mathematical result of a flawed physical theory. When scientists talk about black hole singularities, they are talking about the errors that appear in our current theories and not about objects that actually exist. When scientists and non-scientists talk about singularities as if they really exist, they are simply displaying their ignorance.

[CoinCube]

Saying that infinities do not exist is also the sign of ignorance where our observations indicate what our universe started at a singularity. The scientific community is pretty much in an agreement on this point (pun intended).

As for Black Holes, next year they will be releasing the 25-year observational study of the behavior of the black hole in the center of our Milky Way.  Exciting stuff coming up ...  BTW, general relativity predicts a singularity at the center of the black hole.

General relativity does indeed predict a singularly at the center of a black hole. General relativity works well to describe the universe but that does not mean it can be extrapolated into quantum scales.

Newton's laws of motion work wonderfully for what they do also but push them to the edges and they break allowing for things like travel faster then the speed of light.

The appearance of a black hole singularity in general relativity is a powerful indication that general relativity is probably inaccurate at very small sizes. We already know this which is why we need quantum field theory to describe objects of small sizes.

However, quantum field theory does not include gravitational effects, which is the main feature of a black hole. This lack means that we really have no idea what is going on in a black hole until scientists can successfully create a new theory that accurately describes small sizes and strong gravitational effects at the same time.

As for the Big Bang I agree that something very unique occurred at that moment. The instantaneous creation of everything from nothing. A fascinating area of study.

Another question you can ask yourself is the universe finite or infinite.  I mean the part of the universe past the observable horizon which changes over time as stuff moves away from us.  Observations indicate an infinite and flat universe.

Observations indicate a flat universe that is probably finite.

Unless inflation went on for a truly infinite amount of time, the Universe must be finite in extent.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/11/05/ask-ethan-could-the-universe-be-infinite/amp/

[CoinCube]

That is a problem with infinities.  It is hard to imagine them.  "infinity + something = infinity"

Some things are not intuitive.  When Feynman first presented his diagrams, Dirac and Bohr told him he is an idiot and walked out of the room.

This universe is amazing, we all should be glad the supernovae created atoms in our bodies.

We should indeed be grateful for the stars and supernovae that allowed heavy elements to form and spread.

We should also be grateful for the light called into existence at the beginning of time that eventually made those supernova possible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe

The early universe, from the Quark epoch to the Photon epoch, or the first 380,000 years of cosmic time, when the familiar forces and elementary particles have emerged but the universe remains in the state of a plasma, followed by the "Dark Ages", from 380,000 years to about 150 million years during which the universe was transparent but no large-scale structures had yet formed

Before decoupling occurred, most of the photons in the universe were interacting with electrons and protons in the photon–baryon fluid. The universe was opaque or "foggy" as a result. There was light but not light we can now observe through telescopes. The baryonic matter in the universe consisted of ionized plasma, and it only became neutral when it gained free electrons during "recombination", thereby releasing the photons creating the CMB. When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent.

And most importantly we should be grateful for the infinite creator who willed it all into existence and sustains it still.

Genesis 1-3:

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

[Blackstar015]

I knew someone who's Atheists but he still go to church along with his family who are all Catholic  not because he believes in religion.He just don't believe what the bible says.

[Astargath]

That is a problem with infinities.  It is hard to imagine them.  "infinity + something = infinity"

Some things are not intuitive.  When Feynman first presented his diagrams, Dirac and Bohr told him he is an idiot and walked out of the room.

This universe is amazing, we all should be glad the supernovae created atoms in our bodies.

We should indeed be grateful for the stars and supernovae that allowed heavy elements to form and spread.

We should also be grateful for the light called into existence at the beginning of time that eventually made those supernova possible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe

The early universe, from the Quark epoch to the Photon epoch, or the first 380,000 years of cosmic time, when the familiar forces and elementary particles have emerged but the universe remains in the state of a plasma, followed by the "Dark Ages", from 380,000 years to about 150 million years during which the universe was transparent but no large-scale structures had yet formed

Before decoupling occurred, most of the photons in the universe were interacting with electrons and protons in the photon–baryon fluid. The universe was opaque or "foggy" as a result. There was light but not light we can now observe through telescopes. The baryonic matter in the universe consisted of ionized plasma, and it only became neutral when it gained free electrons during "recombination", thereby releasing the photons creating the CMB. When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent.

And most importantly we should be grateful for the infinite creator who willed it all into existence and sustains it still.

Genesis 1-3:

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

Muslims claim the Quran says that too, they also claim the Quran measures the earth and universe to be billions of years old unlike the bible (6-10k years) I think you should be a muslim.

[Moloch]

Thank you Moloch the Merciful.  Moloch Akbar!  Moloch Akbar! Moloch Akbar!

PS. And that is how new religions are born.  People have questions and others have answers. LOL

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer

I do somewhat subscribe to the simulation theory... Like Elon Musk, I find it too plausible to disbelieve.  The Hindus and Buddhists have been saying similar for thousands of years, only they call it reincarnation

I find the idea of reincarnation more plausible than the idea that god created everyone with less than 100 years to find the correct religion or they spend eternity being tortured by an omnibenevolent god... the latter being a contradiction of an omnibenevolent god torturing souls for eternity, simply for making the wrong choice with limited/bad/contradictory information

Only if the universe can be reduced to computable, close-form functions.  How do you do that with infinities that are all around us since the Big Bang?

What infinities?  I've never seen an infinite amount of anything in this universe... have you?

Mathematics is the only place I've seen anyone dare to use the word, and that is purely abstract, not anything real or observable.  There is also math that deals with "imaginary numbers", but that doesn't make them real either.  I have never seen a quantity of sqrt(-1) either

Furthermore, mathematics does have ways of turning infinities into finite numbers.  I saw someone earlier asking about the sum of all natural numbers (1+2+3+4+...).  The Riemann Zeta function handles infinities quite well.  According to this function, the sum of 1+2+3+... = -1/12.  Surprising, but when used in quantum mechanics to replace this infinity with -1/12, it works!  The math checks out via multiple proofs using different methods.  Not all infinities sum to -1/12, only this particular one, but the Zeta function will give a finite answer to any infinity.  That finite number actually works in the math, and is concordant with our observations of reality


On a side note: I drew my avatar using the Riemann Zeta function.  The points on the right (non-infinites) correspond exactly to the center of the spirals on the left (infinities)

[Moloch]

Thank you Moloch the Merciful.  Moloch Akbar!  Moloch Akbar! Moloch Akbar!

PS. And that is how new religions are born.  People have questions and others have answers. LOL

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer

I do somewhat subscribe to the simulation theory... Like Elon Musk, I find it too plausible to disbelieve.  The Hindus and Buddhists have been saying similar for thousands of years, only they call it reincarnation

I find the idea of reincarnation more plausible than the idea that god created everyone with less than 100 years to find the correct religion or they spend eternity being tortured by an omnibenevolent god... the latter being a contradiction of an omnibenevolent god torturing souls for eternity, simply for making the wrong choice with limited/bad/contradictory information

Only if the universe can be reduced to computable, close-form functions.  How do you do that with infinities that are all around us since the Big Bang?

What infinities?  I've never seen an infinite amount of anything in this universe... have you?

Mathematics is the only place I've seen anyone dare to use the word, and that is purely abstract, not anything real or observable.  There is also math that deals with "imaginary numbers", but that doesn't make them real either.  I have never seen a quantity of sqrt(-1) either

Furthermore, mathematics does have ways of turning infinities into finite numbers.  I saw someone earlier asking about the sum of all natural numbers (1+2+3+4+...).  The Riemann Zeta function handles infinities quite well.  According to this function, the sum of 1+2+3+... = -1/12.  Surprising, but when used in quantum mechanics to replace infinity with -1/12, it works!  The math checks out via multiple proofs using different methods.  Not all infinities sum to -1/12, only this particular one, but the Zeta function will give a finite answer to any infinity that actually works in the math, and is concordant with our observations of reality


On a side note: I drew my avatar using the Riemann Zeta function.  The points on the right (non-infinites) correspond exactly to the center of the spirals on the left (infinities)

-1/12 is not the actual sum.  Read it again, don't skip the important words :-)

It is counter-intuitive, but that is the answer... I'm quite familiar with this method (again, refer to my avatar, I have done serious work in this field of study)

[Moloch]

I am familiar with 3 completely separate methods in which 1+2+3+... = -1/12.  The first was presented by Leonhard Euler using various infinite series manipulations

The simple explanation is that is uses Euler's Identity to convert the imaginary part to a real number.  If you believe e^i*pi = -1, then you should also believe that 1+2+3+... = -1/12... it uses the exact same mathematics

I'm sorry you don't get it, but it is what it is... it is like dealing with "imaginary numbers" - not everything makes sense intuitively... don't blame the messenger because you didn't understand the message

[BADecker]

That is a problem with infinities.  It is hard to imagine them.  "infinity + something = infinity"

Some things are not intuitive.  When Feynman first presented his diagrams, Dirac and Bohr told him he is an idiot and walked out of the room.

This universe is amazing, we all should be glad the supernovae created atoms in our bodies.

We should indeed be grateful for the stars and supernovae that allowed heavy elements to form and spread.

We should also be grateful for the light called into existence at the beginning of time that eventually made those supernova possible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe

The early universe, from the Quark epoch to the Photon epoch, or the first 380,000 years of cosmic time, when the familiar forces and elementary particles have emerged but the universe remains in the state of a plasma, followed by the "Dark Ages", from 380,000 years to about 150 million years during which the universe was transparent but no large-scale structures had yet formed

Before decoupling occurred, most of the photons in the universe were interacting with electrons and protons in the photon–baryon fluid. The universe was opaque or "foggy" as a result. There was light but not light we can now observe through telescopes. The baryonic matter in the universe consisted of ionized plasma, and it only became neutral when it gained free electrons during "recombination", thereby releasing the photons creating the CMB. When the photons were released (or decoupled) the universe became transparent.

And most importantly we should be grateful for the infinite creator who willed it all into existence and sustains it still.

Genesis 1-3:

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

I know what is the difference between you and me.  You need to HAVE answers to unknowns.  I am ok to say I don't know.

That is why in your world you need to have an answer to who created the Big Bang.

In my world, I'm not sure if the Big Bang was created by anyone or how it came about at time 0. I don't know.

Here is the problem with all these calculations. When the Beginning happened, be it by God-creation, or by some sort of big bang, time and other physics was not set in place like it is today. Time and other physics were all in formation.

What does this mean? It means that all of our math and understandings of past timelines are incorrect. Why are they incorrect? Because we are measuring things by the standards that we use, rather than by the standards that were in existence when the past happened.

Can we ever determine what the standards of the so-called distant past were? Possibly. But it will take way more calculation than we can currently program a computer to calculate, and it will take more precise measurements than we are able to make at this time. Why? Because we will need to see how physics is changing, just so we can extrapolate back to see what physics was in the so-called distant past.

We are absolutely just in the beginnings of understanding things. And things are so greatly complex that we may never understand them as individuals... even though a computer might be built that is capable of crunching the numbers so-to-speak.