Many physicists are turning away from the Big Bang theory because the mathematics for the energy and matter compressed to that state don't give out answers that are remotely logical. Everyone is jumping on to Super string and M Theory. Some of which they say tie into the Big Bang, but than again you have the mathematics to consider.

Heh. thanks "clansareforgays" and might i say that is a really funny name. Cheese thats a good point your making.... I dont know what the origin of the universe is. i just feel comfortable thinking that there are only two options. I guess there may be more than what i can think of... so what say you guys about karma?

Ok. Here is my response on your beliefs.
While I in fact do believe in the christian God and satan, I think your reasons you listed here are somewhat strange. Myself I would not look at nature and history like that to get a frame for metaphysica, like you do. While your observations are correct they are also heavily incompleet, there are tons of other systems you can discover in nature which could then be translated into metaphysica.
My opinion is that both mankind and nature are corrupt, sick and degenerating. Since my God is everything but corrupt, sick and degenerating that is something I could never learn from studying nature other then "there must be something perfect". On the other hand, having gained knowledge of God through other (less corrupt and such) means I can recognize Gods hand in nature... but the other way around as you descripe.

Now that is something I completely disagree with. A good action will be returned by a good action? Even if you mean both direct and indirect this is certainly not my experience with life. While I do believe you should never fight evil with evil but always return with 'good', I am more of a cynic when regarding 'good will be rewarded with good'. Being nice to others promotes niceness but you will still be confrontated with evil. There is no way to create anything like an utopia on this earth. People are corrupt, even those who try to do good also do evil.

I do agree with you though, that all sane and rational people know wrong from right. That is part of my definition of 'sane and rational' and I believe most psychological books would agree with me on that one, though I'm not sure.

Wow. i just realized what were talking about. Why does it matter? religion breads diversity... it shapes cultures. Why does it matter where, or when, or how life started? i mean.. it would be kool to know how everything went down, how we all got here, but really... it has no signifigance. We can advance as far as we want to without knowing how we evolved, or know how our universe came to be... What a silly subject!

Deadulus, thanks man. thats exactly what i was looking for in someone's reply. i totally agree, i think about karma, and what about the people in japan who did nothing wrong when we dropped out nukes on hiroshima? man... poor folks.

As much as I give your theories credit, I have to disagree.
You see things in black and white, this is not so.

An action that is done is like a jewel. A jewel has many facets. These facets represent the outcomes of the actions. Now shine a sun beam down on the jewel. There will be dark and light sides to the jewel, one could categorize them so, but in actuality the jewel's sides reflect a different amount of light. The light represents good that will become of the action. As you can see, there will be many different results from the action - all in varying degrees of effect. Some outcomes can be neutral, slightly good, slightly bad, and bad. But no matter which action you take (or in my terms how you shape the gem) there will always be evil, and will always be good. Each in different degrees. And don't be a smart ass and say that your action is a sphere. A sphere would represent the perfect action - and nobody is capable of doing such a thing.

This is why the good and bad gods cannot exist.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Mar 9 2008, 8:44 pm by Akar.

The "smartass" part wasnt necisarry, i wouldnt say something like that just to be mean, man. Well, all though i respect your theory, wich seems like you have put alot of thought into i dont think it completely cancels out the idea of polar forces that govern our existance. A metaphor is not a constant. You may say that and action is like a jewel, but it is not a jewel. I believe there is a good god and a bad god... only because it reflects everything else. Black and white is not a negative term. i find that seeing in black and white helps catagorize . This does not mean that i think your theory is wrong, and i dont mean that mine is better than yours. i just disagree. please keep this in mind. I respect you as a scholar, seeing that you have put alot of thought into this.

Saying "action is like a jewel" is a simile, not a metaphor.

Thank you for correcting me... lol, what a silly mistake right? lol

Physicists are not turning away from the Big Bang(which is now regarded as fact among the scientific community), they are viewing possible causes and relations to string theory.

It does not matter what is, or what is not Regarded by the "scientific" community, a fact is made from a theory through Testing. How can this theory be tested? you cannot go back in time and look to see for yourself.

And btw, hoard, that is a pretty badass avatar man. i gotta say.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Mar 10 2008, 11:50 pm by Dapperdan. Reason: Combining a double post

Some are, I'd say a blind estimate of around 40% of them. The majority thinks it doesn't tie in though, because you're still left with the illogical answers.

The smart ass thing wasn't directed at you It was directed at others who think like I do.

And The Randomness Goes On, Even Though Midget Learned His Lesson...
>>>>Are we done yet? Both of your statements are valid, but we will never know what is true, even if Infinity becomes Epsilion

I don't really get why that would mean there can be no good and bad god. You just say that you see an action like a jewel and that there are varying degrees of badness and goodness; how does that mean there can be no good/bad god? In fact, how I read your post you are actually agreeing with the midget_man. You both say there are good and bad actions, you just also added a different agree of effect which is something midget will agree with I think (at least I do).
Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, if so please elaborate.

While it may not seem all that important to know what happened x billion/million/hundred/whatever years ago, I certainly do not agree that "it has no signifigance". Understanding how we and the universe started to exist and then evolve gives us a lot of knowledge about the present and in-directly about the future as well. Understanding evolution means understanding present day science, for example biology and geography. Without knowledge of the past you can only partly understand present and future.
Ergo it is important.

Ok. Well just think a minute, I like that he uses mathematics, for they are what I believe the essence of everything. It is comprehensible if there is negative than there is positive, and if there is dark there is light. Now if you think about these things for a minute deeper than you'll see that this world isn't equal like it should be. For numbers. A positive times a positive is a positive correct? And a positive times a negative is a negative, but a negative times a negative is a positive. Also, think about the properties of light. Regardless of how much darkness you may have, the light always dispels it. And now I find myself starting to believe in his argument. Hahaha! Well, I guess I convinced myself. Anyway, what I'm stating is that light and positive which have been forever used to represent good actually overpowers the bad. I ended up developing his theory into one of my own... Oh well

This has to be one of the most insanely ridiculous rants I've ever seen. It's borderline retarded. It has no direction or logical premises. (does 1+1=1, too?) I need to read this topic now, before I had just skimmed it for things to mod'rate.

Seperate note: Do you guys think I should unlock anti's pinned topics or keep them as is? PM me if you care enough to give me an answer and are reading this.

Yeah, lol. I started to have a point, but than as I tried to explain it, my explanation fell into his theory... And yep, I think his theory is right in one way or another.

Darkness isn't the opposite of light, just the absence of it. The people who are afraid of the dark simply have neglected to acknowledge the fact that they have senses other than sight. Similarly, there is no absolute good or evil, just actions and consequences, tinted shaded by intent and competence.

And how does a negative and a positive making a negative show that the positives always overcome the negative?

Well, I think what he means is this:
- If you start with 50% negative (n) and 50% positive (p) and start mixing everything up randomly, then
- p*p=p, n*n=p and n*p=n, hence
- 66% of the time the outcome is postive, which means that life actually is like a movie and the good guys will indeed win in the end!
However, this is mathematical crap, because:
- p*p=p, n*n=p, n*p=n and p*n=n, ergo
- stastically seen you will still have the 50-50 distribution, so
- life is like a half full bottle! Or half empty... that's up to you I guess

Anyhow, again I have to say that using something like maths to come up with meaningful statements about life is just... lame. Look at life to say stuff about life and look at maths to say something about maths, they do not mix well.
Hehe, I was about to start about the nonexistence of darkness/shadows.

With "no absolute good or evil" I assume you mean that there is no universal standard for good and evil? Because I also assume you think bad about those who harm you and think good of those who do the contrary?
While I find it quite hard to defend it, I do believe that there is an universal standard for good and evil. I do not think it is a coincidence that the majority of history's largest and most influencal religions share a lot of moral codes. Where there is sometimes a huge difference is in the way people act by those moral codes. A muslim could, for example, show he cares for his wife by protecting her from strangers. To an 20 year old atheist from Europe that may look like keeping her locked up. But then again to the muslim the atheist would look like a stupid fool to let his girlfriend/wife hang out with men who just want to have sex with her. (note that I do not want to insult or judge any of the two examples)
Both act out of love but the first shows it by protecting the subject of his love while the latter gives freedom to almost no end.

I think that pretty much everyone will agree with the part of taking care for your partner, right?
On the other hand, five different people will have five different opinions about how to take care of your partner.