God did not create anything-it was always there

[jobee]

god did not create anything-it was always there


This article is about the law of conservation of energy in physics. For sustainable energy resources, see Energy conservation.
The law of conservation of energy is an empirical law of physics. It states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant over time (is said to be conserved over time). A consequence of this law is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only be transformed from one state to another. The only thing that can happen to energy in a closed system is that it can change form, for instance chemical energy can become kinetic energy.
Albert Einstein's theory of relativity shows that energy and mass are the same thing, and that neither one appears without the other. Thus in closed systems, both mass and energy are conserved separately, just as was understood in pre-relativistic physics. The new feature of relativistic physics is that "matter" particles (such as those constituting atoms) could be converted to non-matter forms of energy, such as light; or kinetic and potential energy (example: heat). However, this conversion does not affect the total mass of systems, since the latter forms of non-matter energy still retain their mass through any such conversion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

[hvargas]

The conservation of energy are not the reasons or facts for what is in existence. The " Sponteneous " appearences of matter/particles out of nothingness is what gave rise to existence. This is something that quantum mechanics is facing but I have discovered through my own analysis that " SPACE " is not a creation of such spontenous appearences of matter/particles. The anology is a very simple one and it goes as followed: We can't trace the very first sponteneous appereance cause there was none, that is to say matter was not the first thing to appear, if it was so, then we must assumed that matter has always existed in a vacuum making it impossible to trace the first appearence hence from where it came from. If we illiminate all that space contains and we are left with only matter/particle on the quantum level and then illiminate matter/particle and just have empty space we can then visualize what can come next. The problem with this is that as far as our sense of time such a period is so great that we can called it " ETERNITY " . Eternity then is what matter/particle and space possess meaning that neither had a beginning and will never experience an end. For particle physics and quantum mechanics theorists this may not appeal to them but they will not be able to escape the fact that since there is such a thing as sponteneous appearences of matter/particles these can't just had created themselves on a selected date. The fact that they occur means that they had always occured and the energy used or dispersed is also within the quantum level as well as their conservations of energy. This is what Eternity is. As far as Space is concerned God did not have anything to do with it, so the creationists have a very weak argument that only ignorance will stand by it.

[jobee]

Thank you for confirming my post heading.

Einstein said over 100 years ago," religion is rather childish''.

[jobee]

I found this interesting-other universes.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/g ... 205-1.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/g ... 205-1.html

[hvargas]

At one time I posted that a new definition of the word " UNIVERSE " needed to be made. The present one claims that the Universe entails everything that is in existence which includes " SPACE " as well. The Universe started with the so called BIG-BANG. Now there is a problem with this current definition of the Universe when others start including other Universes, it contradics the definitions of just " ONE ". To include more than one Universe is to say that there had been multiples Big-Bangs, all occurring at the same time and creating along with it multiple " SPACE " for each of this so called Universes. I do not agree that there are multiple Universes or that one Universe came about cause of some so called Big-Bang. Even though some evidence are pointing towards the directions of the Big-Bang theory it is due to all of the components involve and which mislead the evidence towards favoring a Big-Bang. The first fact  which will not agree with the Big-Bang, in my opinion, is " SPACE ". Space is not a creation nor did it came about through some sponteneous combination of some " MATTERS ". Quantum mechanics will not be able to construct a theory that will supply some answers to the " ORIGIN OF SPACE " . I will also state that " TIME " is not associated with Space as a by product of it. The idea of Multiple-Universes is an illogical one. Its like saying " here is a hole and inside that hole you have many holes but when you go inside the hole you occupied it in its entirity ".  We can only have one definition which is a Universe and in that Universe with have Galaxies and other objects, the Universe occupies Space. The reason why we have a Universe is cause we have Space. There is only ONE SPACE and there is only ONE UNIVERSE. You can't have Multi-Space.

[SSY]

hvargas, I would be really interested in why you do not believe in the Big Bang, the evidence looks pretty good to me, in a number of very specific ways. Is there a specific part of the BB theory you disagree with? Your objection with regards to space seems pretty spurious if I'm honest.

I agree to an extent about the multiverse, I am not sure there could be only one space, or there could be only one universe, but I think that even if there were, we would be unable to interact with them, which is as good as not existing in my book.

P.S. is Vargas your last name?

[jobee]

Energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed-this means it was there  pre big bang-in one form or another.

[Whitney]

Energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed-this means it was there  pre big bang-in one form or another.

Or that we are wrong about the law of conservation applying in all situations.

[Ellainix]

Energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed-this means it was there  pre big bang-in one form or another.

Or Quantum Fluctuations.

[Heretical Rants]

In the beginning, there was one really, really hot hydrogen ion....

Its heat energy became mass, and then there was light.

Either that, or we have no clue.  Let´s just say, "We don´t know," and get on with it, eh?

[jobee]

Human beings are far to inquisitive to leave it at the 'we don't know' stage.
Dont forget this planet will die and we must find ways of finding a suitable planet to live on.
We cant stay in this locality, there will be no sun to keep us warm.

[Whitney]

We cant stay in this locality, there will be no sun to keep us warm.

The sun will engulf the Earth as a red giant before it collapses into a white dwarf.

[Sophus]

Dont forget this planet will die and we must find ways of finding a suitable planet to live on.

I don't think we will. The whole human race will die eventually.

[jobee]

I bet you we give it a darn good try, mind you the next [possible] habitable planet is 73 thousand 'years' away at current speeds.

[hvargas]

SSY, Hi and live great. Scientists sometimes go to the ridicule perhaps to escape realitiy or something of the sort. Just like the Bible that its full of contradictions so are many scientific text. Some challenge the BB while others had bagun to accept  or just accepted it. Lets look at the basic, 1) quantum mechanics: matters/particles ( energy ), that comes from NOTHING. Question to asked, prior to the BB, there was nothing or there was something? Answer, if its NOTHING then the basics of quantum mechanics is false if the BB is true. They cannot be both true and there is more true to quantum mechanics than to the BB. The BB seems to be true cause it locks many things in especially " the expansion of the Universe ".  2) Its the Universe really expanding ? This is also false cause the Universe is not Expanding. Everything that exists is in constan motion, the Universe is in constan motion but not expanding. The Hubble Space Telescope will prove that. So far they are seeying up to 13 or 14 billions of light years and this is what many want to say is how old is the BB. There is a big BUT, tried this, supposed that you are able to go to the HORIZON and stand at exactly 14 billion light years. You will be at the edge of the UNIVERSE where it suppose to be expanding. This is what you will see, MANY MORE GALAXIES extending another 14 billion light years, can you comprehend that or even imagine it. Many things are possible but many things are also impossible. I had done a lot of readings to find some lights into my own reasonings but I had found that most don't have the answers to my questions. I had learned a great deal cause its a two way proccess. You need to look more deeply and not accept what is handed to you just cause is so and so who is stating it and so and so its an authority. I'm an AUTHORITY. Thats where you want to take yourself and when you do, you will be a step or more ahead especially when reading others who considered themselves the " AUTHORITY ".