I'm not undermining her theory but, how come there are more male scientists looking at this than women? I mean, common, women dont like to know how the universe works?
The lady's theory might be the best so far, as it gives way for the guys' theories into it... I should learn from her...
I think we should perfect or invent from our present technologies (like lasertelescopy, radiotelescopy, ...) to more & more directly observe gravity waves, background cosmic radiation, ... (besides technologies to improve our lives & natural-environment...)
If all those physicists' views are mathematically rigorous & logical, their theories might be just different ways of seeing reality; and maybe each of their theories might be particularly good at certain different applications. But it's indeed best if we could really test or observe them, by inventing a spaceship able to go into a black hole or the edge of the universe, or a time machine bringing us there...
the greatest truth this video provides lies in the last minute where it draws the similarity between science and religion - commenting how there are an equal amount of fanatics in each - though I have to say that science - at least from the comments I've read - seems to be very reluctant to acknowledge this.
Can any one of you say,the chicken or the egg came first?I have been doing a research about big bang.Scientists saying lot of various things,By analyse them and put them all together,I can come up with my own theory.Big Bang will happen again and again and again.There is no ending.Just like chicken,produce egg and then the egg will become a chicken.It will happen every billions of billions years.So there is no starting point and there is no ending as well. Every-things comes from every-things.
It seems ironic and somewhat sadly telling about our society that the one woman in the discussion received the least time to discuss her idea/theory and was unable to go into detail about it even though her theory seemed the most promising...it just frustrates me greatly.
Fascinating! I wish I knew some on the non-mathematical details of her theory. Like how does she think all of these multiverses came into existence? Inflation like the other guy? Or something else entirely? Does anybody know more about her ideas or know about better theories out there?
The ramifications for there being time before the big bang are really blowing my mind right now. It would mean that time had no beginning, and is therefore infinite in both directions. The only remaining one way aspect of time is our perception of it. So maybe traveling back in time isn't impossible, just hopeless, because we couldn't change anything. And since we can't change the past, given time's newly realized symmetry, maybe we can't change the future, and freewill really is another myth?
@dcs002 I think it also follows that if there are no bounds to time, then there are no bounds to space. It's all there, stretching out in all directions already. The only directionality it has is our perception of our position and motion through it. The structure, motion, and positions of everything in the universe are completely unchanging, unless one is moving along in time. But then what is changing is not the universe, but the position and motion of the observer in time. Is that relativity?
What existed before the big bang is beyond man's ability to understand. There is a word for it, "adhokshaja" (Sanskrit). It means "unknowable by direct perception." Therefore, scientists will never be able to understand what existed before the big bang by using the "scientific method." It is a state beyond man's limited perception. What scientists are looking for is actually metaphysical in nature. The closest they will come to it is the field of quantum physics.
@futuregirl3 You are making claims and assertions which you cannot support. You are in no position to say what humans may be able to 'percieve' or what our 'perception' might become, which invalidates your premise. Using words like 'never' is usually a mistake, particularly when speaking of science and the future.
... so we learned that before the big bang was something else. Now I want to see the programe 'before the before the big bang'. Next, I will look forward to the series 'before the before the before the big bang'.
-Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
[Al Anbiya: 30]
-And We have made the heavens as a canopy well guarded: yet do they turn away from the Signs which these things (point to)!
[Al Anbiya: 32]
Man is a creature of haste: soon (enough) will I show you My Signs; then ye will not ask Me to hasten them!
He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days[other measuring unit] - and His Throne was over the waters - that He might try you, which of you is best in conduct. But if thou wert to say to them, "Ye shall indeed be raised up after death", the Unbelievers would be sure to say, "This is nothing but obvious sorcery!"
God! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth....
....He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme
@jappud According to whom? And no I don't, which is why I'm not running around saying that they ABSOLUTELY don't, can't, and won't exist. In addition, there isn't a credible argument to say that they do, where as there is in this matter.
@GoogleVideoMan... Yeah, it made sense to me when I was four too. But, so did Santa and the tooth-fairy. You also don't need to capitalise the word god. It's just a regular noun like moron or idiot.
@22941794a Or maybe he wants to capitalize it because he believes in God and no one has yet to show proof of non-existence or provided an alternative to Him. Even with all of the theories, there is still room for a higher being than ourselves.
@graciehunterII Because the "theory" only goes back so far and even the theory itself is loose. Any way you look at it you can only go back to a certain point so then what came before that?
@m1ndfr34k117 But the question still remains: What informs your opinion? If you don't understand the question, I will try to rephrase it in another form.
@graciehunterII What informs my opinion is the absence of any evidence of how everything we know simply came from nothing. If that's not the answer you're looking for then I would appreciate it if you re-phrased it. I'm all for going with the evidence but I've yet to hear how absolutely nothing spawned everything.
@m1ndfr34k117 god is just imagination. It's just as valid a theory that god made the world, just as it is a valid theory that Thôr rode the sky to make thunder.
You proove your god exist or you keep out of science. Religion does not belong there.
@MsPwain Really? And what proof is there that he doesn't exist? It's not as valid of a theory. Even you can not tell me where everything came from. You can get it back to the big bang, but then what. Where did that come from. You can't deny that somewhere at sometime, there was a being much more powerful and more intelligent than us, i.e. God.
Don't give me an ultimatum again. It makes you look pathetic and ignorant. Religion and science can mix, so stop being a bigot and wasting my time.
@m1ndfr34k117 I am not to proove anything. You have to prove the existense of a god, since you brought up the theory that it exists.
I am not against religious people if they keep their religion private, but I am definitely against religious people trying to supress others into believing a theory that has not been prooven. It's just another form of dictatorship. Religion doesn't allow you to think for yourself, and you have to obey to "a higher power". Just like dictators.
@MsPwain So then if you brought up the theory that he doesn't, you don't have to prove anything? Sounds hypocritical. Either way, you can't prove the existence or non-existence of God, or else we wouldn't be having this debate. The simple fact is, there is no other answer to what we know today other than some superior being. Even you must acknowledge this. I'm a very quiet religious person, but like you, I am definitely against non-religious people trying to suppress others into believing...
@MsPwain ...a theory that has not been proven. Also, you should look up the definition of dictatorship. I know what you're trying to say, but your choice of words is a bit off. Religion does allow you to think for yourself. You don't have to obey a higher power any more than you have to obey the police. Are you trying to tell me that not killing, committing adultery, etc. are bad things to obey? This being said, I think all religions are flawed, which is why I find myself a mix of a deist...
@MsPwain ...and Christian. I believe in the morals and values of the Christian faith but at the same time, there are things that seem stupid. That's where the deism comes in.
@m1ndfr34k117 It's not because you believe in christian morals, it is because you believe in treating people with kindness. You do not need the bible to tell you that killing or stealing is bad. You probably do not believe slavery is okay but there are verses in the bible that condone it. Believing in a god is alright, I believe in one too but I do not believe he is an old man with a great beard sitting in heaven. My god is the god of the universe; what Einstein believed.
@Th3Champ95 Exactly, which is why I said I'm not a devout Christian and I believe in a mix of teachings. However, I also believe in Jesus which pretty much puts me in the Christian category. Either way, it's not flawed logic to believe in a higher being (not totally, but in part) because there are things on this universe that couldn't have been made without Him and it would seem that some higher figure must have had a hand in creating everything we know today from nothing.
@m1ndfr34k117 Well that's where everything you said falls apart you are assuming everything has been created and there in no proof that that is even remotely possible. Why not let go of that silly idea and just assume that everything exists and has existed in some form forever. Saying some creature created the universe is a cop out and even if there was something out there that could manipulate a different state of existence to create a new one like our own it still would not be a god.
@sinshiro And this is also where your argument falls apart. We agree that nothing can't just turn into something for no reason right? Somewhere down the line, something was created. Sure, there's no proof, but there's no proof that it didn't happen either and logically, it makes more sense. So you're telling me there just always was, eh? In this universe? Don't think so. Somewhere, something better than us made something which cause everything we know today to exist.
@sinshiro is wrong because they could very easily be considered a god. Why can't something much more advanced and something ultimately responsible for our existence be considered a god? Please have a legitimate argument next time so I don't waste my time. Not trying to be rude but honestly this is turning into a slaughter for you and I'd rather drop it. In addition, arguing over this is pointless since neither of us can present any evidence. Thanks.
@sinshiro And what proof do you have of this? You don't. You don't even have any logic or facts to support your opinion. Even then, according to whom can God not be considered a life form? Your argument is laughable so please, AGAIN, do not reply until you can present a worth-while argument.
@22941794a That's not exactly true. GoogleVideoMan is treating the word as a proper noun and as such it should have a capital letter. He is talking about a specific deity and giving it the name 'God'.
@GoogleVideoMan she has no choice, it's what you put in your childs brain. Did you also told her the earth is flat with 4 corners and only 6000 years old? You should because its simple.
@GoogleVideoMan Omg, what created god then, I mean if the world would have been created by god it actually makes the beginning of the world and everything even more complex. Even the big bang as it is in a sentence is simple, however when you go into detail it gets even more difficult and harder to understand. It also makes so many questions. But so does the idea of god. Where did god come from, how did he make the world, why does he have the power to possibly be able to make the world etc.
@KonstAapeli1 God doesn't require a creator. He's eternal. He always was, he's the cause and we're the effect. What 's more complex, the idea that a cause, "aka God," created the effect or that nothing came out of nothing? God came from no where, he spoke everything into existence, he has the power because he's God!
@GoogleVideoMan If god can be able to not have a beginning then the universe can be able to not have a beginning. What can possibly proove god. You probably don't even believe in evolution either. It wasn't that nothing came out of nothing as said in the video. You clearly didn't really understand the point. The thing that is complex with god is that nothing can technically be eternal so god can't be eternal especially because he just doesn't exist. Also think about what you said in the end.
@KonstAapeli1 Wow you just assume that I disbelieve in evolution right off the bat. I actually do believe that evolution is a legitimate scientific theory and the best one that explains not only our origins, but the vast diversity of life. The universe has to have had a beginning though, don't you understand? The majority of scientist agree that our universe did have a start, now many would say that the thing that caused that start is unknown, but I believe it to be God. You can't prove God.
@GoogleVideoMan I'm sorry, the evolution thing was supposed as a question and good you answered it anyways god is just as a good of an explanation as FMS, which to you would probably sound stupid, or? I don't understand what you're asking about "the universe has to have a beginning", I know, but the theories of energy making matter is quite good, energy could be made by nothingness colliding I'm not sure if thats possible however there could be other ways of making energy out of basically nothin
@GoogleVideoMan Yes, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is in fact a better explanation, when he created the universe he was drunk thus fine tuning it instead showing his powers and creating life in a vacuum.
@FlyingSpaghettiMoner The reason the world is in a mess is due to us, not God. The very ridiculous and stupid notion of a FSM in itself is proof of that!
@GoogleVideoMan Wrong, it's all because god is such an asshole, so he put a tree in a middle of a garden, and that tree gives you knowledge whatsoever, AND THEN he created a no-moral-talking-snake to tempt adam and eve to eat the fruit, and then when they ate it ALL HUMANS BECAME SINNERS.
@FlyingSpaghettiMoner They didn't have to eat of the forbidden fruit, if they only would have listened to God... oh never mind you wouldn't understand.
@GoogleVideoMan For that reason he placed the tree in the garden and told them not to eat from it, but for some reason, even if he's all knowing he created a snake to tell them A and B, and even though he is EVERYWHERE, he was not at the garden for a day, while the snake was.
@GoogleVideoMan It actually is as good. It was invented by people, it explains pretty much everything and all the same things as god. Why you might think that it is asinine is cuz FSM is a lot younger than the idea of god. If FSM were as old as the thought of god and you were tought that it is logical, you might actually believe in it. You'll probably think im stupid or somthin to think about it like that but to me god feels like that. People believe in him cuz they've been tought that he exists
@KonstAapeli1 Yeah well I still don't think you can get something from nothing. All of this had to have come about by some kind of design in mind. IMO the Christian God is the only reasonable explanation just as evolution is the only reasonable explanation for the biological processes. FSM is not reasonable, it's just a joke and meant to be taken as such.
@GoogleVideoMan In what way is the christian god the only reasonable explanation. What about every single other god, hindu god, sikh god etc. Even mythological gods could give the answer, like greek gods and norse gods. They are myths in the same way as the christian god is. BTW, are all those gods not as reasonable as your god? And you also don't need a god to have created the world. Why couldn't have the world been eternal like you said god is? FSM wouldn't be a joke if you were taught it aint
@KonstAapeli1 Why is the Christian god the best explanation? I'm glad you asked. It's because only in Christianity do you get a savior like Jesus Christ. Jesus was a great moral teacher and He said not only was He the Son of God, but God himself. It's only in Christianity do you get this kind of person. A person who has up until this point changed the lives of billions. Jesus rose from the dead, we have no reason to believe he didn't. He spoke prophesies that were fulfilled. He is God.
@GoogleVideoMan Jesus is a prophet just like Muhammad in islam. And just because some guy said that he is the son of god doesn't make christianity the best explanation of religions. If you think about it scientifically you don't even need any of those religions, because what would they be need for anyways. Where would those gods be. And also there is no proof that he actually rose form the dead. There isn't even actual hard evidence that he died straight on the cross. Nothing even makes him god.
@KonstAapeli1 Oh I see where your problem is. You're trying to use reason where a belief in God instead requires faith. I have faith thus I believe in God. You see I'm an Agnostic Christian. I'm not going to say I know God exist, but I'll say that on faith I do believe. What do I have to lose? If I'm wrong nothing, if you're wrong however... well lets just hope and pray you aren't. You sound reasonable enough to not be gnostic about atheism, so are u willing to take the chance? U may be wrong.
@GoogleVideoMan If your god happens to exist then he'd probably forgive me, because I would actually have a reason not to believe in him. What if christianity is wrong and hindu is right or another religion. Then ur screwed too. If all the people who didn't believe in the christian god would go to hell, then more than 70% of the worlds population would go to hell. If only non-believers like me wold go to hell, then 15% aprox would go to hell. BTW in christianity its said that god gives faith
@GoogleVideoMan thats like saying if u don't play the lottery u wont win yet by playing u more then likely wont win and u wasted a portion of your budget to do so except instead of money by believing in a god u are wasting your life, growth of the mind and science in general because ALL of it goes against a big man living in the sky being pissed at his great( x 12k) grandchildren because someone they never knew took a bite out of some fruit.
This may be out of place but does anyone else find this woman exceedingly sexy? I think it may more be born out of her intellegence then her looks but wow....
As with most YOUTUBE conversations about science, you often get the mix of the harded from both sides. The unwavering religious without an open mind combined with the idiotic faux scientific who don't have a mind of their own...just the minds of others who are smarter than them. Like it or not, the truth of the matter is that science & spirituality are going to meet in the middle of mainstream science sooner than later & neither side is gonna like it. Till then shut the fuck up & think 4 self
Hmm I wish they started by explaining what we know today such as a even background radiation and accelerating expansion. Then explain how the different theories account for these. What Laura mentioned about a irregular spot in the background radiation and anomalous accelerations is interesting too.
The problem is how we prove with scientific experiments the theories that are mathematically established? But astonishing is that the established theory of Laura Mersini is proven by three experimental probes, consequently it implicates impressive conclusions about what happened before the Big Bang !
so, what's odd about the temperature in outer space, and how is that related to the possibilty of a "neighbouring universe", wish they'd gone into more detail about that last lady's theories, but I guess that would have requiered another hour or so of program time.
@Gardena380 yea! I totally agree. They also didn't explain how the theory worked, and I'm still like "sounds great, but... uhhh..." it sounded like the most promising of all the theories, and then they spend LESS time on it...
and what they said about the odd temperature also sounded very interesting...
How do you get rid of the entropy? It does not decrease. If it, the Big Bang, happens all the time, how does our universe begin with precious little of it?
Yeh low entropy is a problem for standard inflation theory, you're right. Penrose's cyclic theory states that all matter is consumed by black holes, leaving only energy (so now with all matter gone entropy is low), which marks the end of an aeon and triggers the next aeon starting another big bang. So thats how entropy is low at the start of the big bang.
Hmm, I wish they had explained the last womans theory more. They didn't really say what her theory actually was.
@AEVautomatic fuck, 21st century and you still believe in mythology...also i wanna tell you satan is my friend, and he told me you and your family are going to hell
@AEVautomatic and what about homos god did create everything why would he make something he hates and what would you do if i have a different belive god is like cancer wheres your prof of god a bog made for kids many years ago will not cut it
@AEVautomatic I never heard one of them mention God in a negative manner. Real Scientists rarely do, because they are the ones who understand most that observing the physical universe through measurement is one thing, but experiencing emotion, intelligence etc and consciousness itself can't be measured, only experienced. Beyond what we can measure through observation, everybody has got to have faith in something, Scientists understand this most. Metaphysics deals with this philosophy.
@AEVautomatic For example, if a Scientist does say he doesn't believe in God, it's probably due to over confidence, or one hell of a great theory. So again, faith that your theory will prevail, or faith in God? They are still faith from a basic philosophical standpoint. Evidence is interpretative based on perception, the unfortunate condition of the human mind I add, nevertheless, it's still to be taken into account. It takes all kinds they say, however, not all kinds can be right.
@ScienceInPhilosophy By evidence I am not speaking of applied mathematics to the physical universe, of course, I am talking about the experiences of emotion etc as we perceive them through consciousness and feeling.
@ScienceInPhilosophy If a scientist says he doesn't believe in God, why would it be because of over-confidence? How about the basic principle of falsifiability. How about not believing in things that haven't been proven? It's quite simple. Most scientists don't believe in God because there's no proof. At least a substantially smaller amount of proof than required for such a being. Now, from a deist perspective, it becomes a little harder to doubt, but still can't assert something without proof.
shes consider attractive in a sea of scientists
die101 7 months ago
60% of the documentary is them attempting to solve an irrelevant puzzle.
Vahtacen 7 months ago
I'm not undermining her theory but, how come there are more male scientists looking at this than women? I mean, common, women dont like to know how the universe works?
Darwin should explain this.
TheLamelyNamed 7 months ago
The lady's theory might be the best so far, as it gives way for the guys' theories into it... I should learn from her...
I think we should perfect or invent from our present technologies (like lasertelescopy, radiotelescopy, ...) to more & more directly observe gravity waves, background cosmic radiation, ... (besides technologies to improve our lives & natural-environment...)
hapi3rd 7 months ago
If all those physicists' views are mathematically rigorous & logical, their theories might be just different ways of seeing reality; and maybe each of their theories might be particularly good at certain different applications. But it's indeed best if we could really test or observe them, by inventing a spaceship able to go into a black hole or the edge of the universe, or a time machine bringing us there...
hapi3rd 7 months ago
I wouldn't mind showing her my BIG BANG THEORY!! ;)~
Tasteless but needed to be said
freedomland11 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@freedomland11
"I wouldn't mind showing her my BIG BANG THEORY!! ;)~"
You're an idiot.
This needed to be said.
MomoTheBellyDancer 7 months ago
the greatest truth this video provides lies in the last minute where it draws the similarity between science and religion - commenting how there are an equal amount of fanatics in each - though I have to say that science - at least from the comments I've read - seems to be very reluctant to acknowledge this.
sobpatrick 7 months ago
why are so many people dumb? the other videos have +40000 views but don't watch the ending concusions
neil182sr 7 months ago
Can any one of you say,the chicken or the egg came first?I have been doing a research about big bang.Scientists saying lot of various things,By analyse them and put them all together,I can come up with my own theory.Big Bang will happen again and again and again.There is no ending.Just like chicken,produce egg and then the egg will become a chicken.It will happen every billions of billions years.So there is no starting point and there is no ending as well. Every-things comes from every-things.
joyeljoy 7 months ago
Mind blowing shit. Horizon can still do amazing when it wants to.
Feyd01 7 months ago
A woman with a theory? Are we supposed to take her seriously?
AEVautomatic 8 months ago
@AEVautomatic YES
MrAbkebab 7 months ago
@AEVautomatic Are you serious or are you just being ironic?
drbuk96 7 months ago
@AEVautomatic idiot
radiominima 7 months ago
@AEVautomatic
"A woman with a theory? Are we supposed to take her seriously? "
Please, walk under a truck or something.
MomoTheBellyDancer 7 months ago
@AEVautomatic yes
HEYHEYJIMI 6 months ago
that's the kind of woman I want to marry
paulallenification 8 months ago
It seems ironic and somewhat sadly telling about our society that the one woman in the discussion received the least time to discuss her idea/theory and was unable to go into detail about it even though her theory seemed the most promising...it just frustrates me greatly.
treehugrurthluvrsupr 8 months ago
Fascinating! I wish I knew some on the non-mathematical details of her theory. Like how does she think all of these multiverses came into existence? Inflation like the other guy? Or something else entirely? Does anybody know more about her ideas or know about better theories out there?
treehugrurthluvrsupr 8 months ago
teaching, wasting a lot of people time.
quantumqood 8 months ago
"God" is the Best Answer, even In the end of your life.
I think new technology never bring Future proof Happiness.
Human idea of theory is limited, now this day a lot professors like Buddha
quantumqood 8 months ago
half u nubs are off topic
xcool182skaterx 8 months ago
This program has fantastic music. By chance, does anyone know the composer?
PapaWilk 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan Well I hope you're four year old doesn't grow up as close-minded as you.
thegreatgatsby1994 8 months ago
The ramifications for there being time before the big bang are really blowing my mind right now. It would mean that time had no beginning, and is therefore infinite in both directions. The only remaining one way aspect of time is our perception of it. So maybe traveling back in time isn't impossible, just hopeless, because we couldn't change anything. And since we can't change the past, given time's newly realized symmetry, maybe we can't change the future, and freewill really is another myth?
dcs002 8 months ago
@dcs002 I think it also follows that if there are no bounds to time, then there are no bounds to space. It's all there, stretching out in all directions already. The only directionality it has is our perception of our position and motion through it. The structure, motion, and positions of everything in the universe are completely unchanging, unless one is moving along in time. But then what is changing is not the universe, but the position and motion of the observer in time. Is that relativity?
dcs002 8 months ago
fuck the universe
wralphh 8 months ago
Be Mine (with lyrics) - Xbreed Supersoul
csegul1 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I believe God created everything.
nftprd 9 months ago
what's that cube they are playing called? looks, fun..XD
111E982a 9 months ago
A tought; Religion says: you are from dust and dust you shall become.
cosmologist say:: you are from stardust and stardust you shall become
yeye060 9 months ago
So, ignoring all the religious and philosophical debate on this comment thread...
Where can I get that puzzle?! It looks fun! O.o
bluehaxor88 9 months ago
Is it just me, or does she seem to be on a very big caffine buzz? BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
jmitterii2 9 months ago
What existed before the big bang is beyond man's ability to understand. There is a word for it, "adhokshaja" (Sanskrit). It means "unknowable by direct perception." Therefore, scientists will never be able to understand what existed before the big bang by using the "scientific method." It is a state beyond man's limited perception. What scientists are looking for is actually metaphysical in nature. The closest they will come to it is the field of quantum physics.
futuregirl3 9 months ago
@futuregirl3 You are making claims and assertions which you cannot support. You are in no position to say what humans may be able to 'percieve' or what our 'perception' might become, which invalidates your premise. Using words like 'never' is usually a mistake, particularly when speaking of science and the future.
agroundhere 9 months ago
... so we learned that before the big bang was something else. Now I want to see the programe 'before the before the big bang'. Next, I will look forward to the series 'before the before the before the big bang'.
tonowicz1 9 months ago
Wow. Interesting stuff.
Yggi11 10 months ago
-Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
[Al Anbiya: 30]
-And We have made the heavens as a canopy well guarded: yet do they turn away from the Signs which these things (point to)!
[Al Anbiya: 32]
Man is a creature of haste: soon (enough) will I show you My Signs; then ye will not ask Me to hasten them!
[Al Anbiya: 37]
Holy Qur'an
MCneun 10 months ago 2
@MCneun lol quran has no science my friend
FIGHTFANNERD3 9 months ago
He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days[other measuring unit] - and His Throne was over the waters - that He might try you, which of you is best in conduct. But if thou wert to say to them, "Ye shall indeed be raised up after death", the Unbelievers would be sure to say, "This is nothing but obvious sorcery!"
[Qur'an: Hud: 7]
MCneun 10 months ago 2
@MCneun when you die you die fact
FIGHTFANNERD3 9 months ago
@MCneun Pepole who believes in this shit are usually poor uneducated or they blow themselves up, because they're fanatics.
Religion has never given anything good - at all.
MsPwain 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth....
....He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme
[Qur'an: Al Baqara: 255]
MCneun 10 months ago 10
Okay before the big bang we find out what it is what was before that? And before that? And before that?
MrGeassR2 10 months ago
@jappud According to whom? And no I don't, which is why I'm not running around saying that they ABSOLUTELY don't, can't, and won't exist. In addition, there isn't a credible argument to say that they do, where as there is in this matter.
m1ndfr34k117 10 months ago
Comment removed
TheTravelTrain 10 months ago
What is the name of that "rubiks" cube type puzzle? I want one!
OAXM202 10 months ago
Very interesting programme. Thansk you.
benthejrporter 10 months ago
i dont get her theory, it just sounds like the original theory
peterpaulie 10 months ago
What an attractive woman, so beautiful and exotic as she is, and also a genius!!
teainthesahara 11 months ago 20
@teainthesahara
"What an attractive woman"
For some reason I find remarks like these very frustrating.
MomoTheBellyDancer 7 months ago
she's kinda hot
derekrhode 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Before the big bang there was God who created everything. Simple. Even my four year old gets it.
GoogleVideoMan 11 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan... Yeah, it made sense to me when I was four too. But, so did Santa and the tooth-fairy. You also don't need to capitalise the word god. It's just a regular noun like moron or idiot.
22941794a 11 months ago 24
@22941794a Or maybe he wants to capitalize it because he believes in God and no one has yet to show proof of non-existence or provided an alternative to Him. Even with all of the theories, there is still room for a higher being than ourselves.
m1ndfr34k117 10 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 What informs your opinion?
graciehunterII 10 months ago
@graciehunterII Because the "theory" only goes back so far and even the theory itself is loose. Any way you look at it you can only go back to a certain point so then what came before that?
m1ndfr34k117 10 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 But the question still remains: What informs your opinion? If you don't understand the question, I will try to rephrase it in another form.
graciehunterII 10 months ago
@graciehunterII What informs my opinion is the absence of any evidence of how everything we know simply came from nothing. If that's not the answer you're looking for then I would appreciate it if you re-phrased it. I'm all for going with the evidence but I've yet to hear how absolutely nothing spawned everything.
m1ndfr34k117 10 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 god is just imagination. It's just as valid a theory that god made the world, just as it is a valid theory that Thôr rode the sky to make thunder.
You proove your god exist or you keep out of science. Religion does not belong there.
MsPwain 8 months ago
@MsPwain Really? And what proof is there that he doesn't exist? It's not as valid of a theory. Even you can not tell me where everything came from. You can get it back to the big bang, but then what. Where did that come from. You can't deny that somewhere at sometime, there was a being much more powerful and more intelligent than us, i.e. God.
Don't give me an ultimatum again. It makes you look pathetic and ignorant. Religion and science can mix, so stop being a bigot and wasting my time.
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 I am not to proove anything. You have to prove the existense of a god, since you brought up the theory that it exists.
I am not against religious people if they keep their religion private, but I am definitely against religious people trying to supress others into believing a theory that has not been prooven. It's just another form of dictatorship. Religion doesn't allow you to think for yourself, and you have to obey to "a higher power". Just like dictators.
Religion != Science.
MsPwain 8 months ago
@MsPwain So then if you brought up the theory that he doesn't, you don't have to prove anything? Sounds hypocritical. Either way, you can't prove the existence or non-existence of God, or else we wouldn't be having this debate. The simple fact is, there is no other answer to what we know today other than some superior being. Even you must acknowledge this. I'm a very quiet religious person, but like you, I am definitely against non-religious people trying to suppress others into believing...
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 I'm a bit confused by this though, you believe in a god because you do not know what happened before the big bang? That's flawed logic.
Th3Champ95 8 months ago
@MsPwain ...a theory that has not been proven. Also, you should look up the definition of dictatorship. I know what you're trying to say, but your choice of words is a bit off. Religion does allow you to think for yourself. You don't have to obey a higher power any more than you have to obey the police. Are you trying to tell me that not killing, committing adultery, etc. are bad things to obey? This being said, I think all religions are flawed, which is why I find myself a mix of a deist...
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@MsPwain ...and Christian. I believe in the morals and values of the Christian faith but at the same time, there are things that seem stupid. That's where the deism comes in.
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 It's not because you believe in christian morals, it is because you believe in treating people with kindness. You do not need the bible to tell you that killing or stealing is bad. You probably do not believe slavery is okay but there are verses in the bible that condone it. Believing in a god is alright, I believe in one too but I do not believe he is an old man with a great beard sitting in heaven. My god is the god of the universe; what Einstein believed.
Th3Champ95 8 months ago
@Th3Champ95 Exactly, which is why I said I'm not a devout Christian and I believe in a mix of teachings. However, I also believe in Jesus which pretty much puts me in the Christian category. Either way, it's not flawed logic to believe in a higher being (not totally, but in part) because there are things on this universe that couldn't have been made without Him and it would seem that some higher figure must have had a hand in creating everything we know today from nothing.
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 Well that's where everything you said falls apart you are assuming everything has been created and there in no proof that that is even remotely possible. Why not let go of that silly idea and just assume that everything exists and has existed in some form forever. Saying some creature created the universe is a cop out and even if there was something out there that could manipulate a different state of existence to create a new one like our own it still would not be a god.
sinshiro 8 months ago
@sinshiro And this is also where your argument falls apart. We agree that nothing can't just turn into something for no reason right? Somewhere down the line, something was created. Sure, there's no proof, but there's no proof that it didn't happen either and logically, it makes more sense. So you're telling me there just always was, eh? In this universe? Don't think so. Somewhere, something better than us made something which cause everything we know today to exist.
Also, what you said...
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@sinshiro is wrong because they could very easily be considered a god. Why can't something much more advanced and something ultimately responsible for our existence be considered a god? Please have a legitimate argument next time so I don't waste my time. Not trying to be rude but honestly this is turning into a slaughter for you and I'd rather drop it. In addition, arguing over this is pointless since neither of us can present any evidence. Thanks.
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@m1ndfr34k117 god is purely imaginary so I am not wrong at all, if this other thing was real it would just be another life form not a god.
sinshiro 8 months ago
@sinshiro And what proof do you have of this? You don't. You don't even have any logic or facts to support your opinion. Even then, according to whom can God not be considered a life form? Your argument is laughable so please, AGAIN, do not reply until you can present a worth-while argument.
m1ndfr34k117 8 months ago
@22941794a That's not exactly true. GoogleVideoMan is treating the word as a proper noun and as such it should have a capital letter. He is talking about a specific deity and giving it the name 'God'.
Energonorama 9 months ago
@22941794a bitch
Lostzilla847 8 months ago
@22941794a It's a common noun in most contexts; however, he was referring to the Christian 'god'. Therefore, it's a proper noun.
drbuk96 7 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan lol
XM0R1NX 11 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan she has no choice, it's what you put in your childs brain. Did you also told her the earth is flat with 4 corners and only 6000 years old? You should because its simple.
ZZzzzzzWhat 11 months ago 2
@GoogleVideoMan Omg, what created god then, I mean if the world would have been created by god it actually makes the beginning of the world and everything even more complex. Even the big bang as it is in a sentence is simple, however when you go into detail it gets even more difficult and harder to understand. It also makes so many questions. But so does the idea of god. Where did god come from, how did he make the world, why does he have the power to possibly be able to make the world etc.
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 God doesn't require a creator. He's eternal. He always was, he's the cause and we're the effect. What 's more complex, the idea that a cause, "aka God," created the effect or that nothing came out of nothing? God came from no where, he spoke everything into existence, he has the power because he's God!
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan If god can be able to not have a beginning then the universe can be able to not have a beginning. What can possibly proove god. You probably don't even believe in evolution either. It wasn't that nothing came out of nothing as said in the video. You clearly didn't really understand the point. The thing that is complex with god is that nothing can technically be eternal so god can't be eternal especially because he just doesn't exist. Also think about what you said in the end.
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 Wow you just assume that I disbelieve in evolution right off the bat. I actually do believe that evolution is a legitimate scientific theory and the best one that explains not only our origins, but the vast diversity of life. The universe has to have had a beginning though, don't you understand? The majority of scientist agree that our universe did have a start, now many would say that the thing that caused that start is unknown, but I believe it to be God. You can't prove God.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan I'm sorry, the evolution thing was supposed as a question and good you answered it anyways god is just as a good of an explanation as FMS, which to you would probably sound stupid, or? I don't understand what you're asking about "the universe has to have a beginning", I know, but the theories of energy making matter is quite good, energy could be made by nothingness colliding I'm not sure if thats possible however there could be other ways of making energy out of basically nothin
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 Do you really think the FSM is as good of an explanation as God? That's asinine.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan Yes, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is in fact a better explanation, when he created the universe he was drunk thus fine tuning it instead showing his powers and creating life in a vacuum.
FlyingSpaghettiMoner 8 months ago 2
@FlyingSpaghettiMoner The reason the world is in a mess is due to us, not God. The very ridiculous and stupid notion of a FSM in itself is proof of that!
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan Wrong, it's all because god is such an asshole, so he put a tree in a middle of a garden, and that tree gives you knowledge whatsoever, AND THEN he created a no-moral-talking-snake to tempt adam and eve to eat the fruit, and then when they ate it ALL HUMANS BECAME SINNERS.
FlyingSpaghettiMoner 8 months ago
@FlyingSpaghettiMoner They didn't have to eat of the forbidden fruit, if they only would have listened to God... oh never mind you wouldn't understand.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan For that reason he placed the tree in the garden and told them not to eat from it, but for some reason, even if he's all knowing he created a snake to tell them A and B, and even though he is EVERYWHERE, he was not at the garden for a day, while the snake was.
Yeap, I don't understand the story.
FlyingSpaghettiMoner 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan It actually is as good. It was invented by people, it explains pretty much everything and all the same things as god. Why you might think that it is asinine is cuz FSM is a lot younger than the idea of god. If FSM were as old as the thought of god and you were tought that it is logical, you might actually believe in it. You'll probably think im stupid or somthin to think about it like that but to me god feels like that. People believe in him cuz they've been tought that he exists
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 Yeah well I still don't think you can get something from nothing. All of this had to have come about by some kind of design in mind. IMO the Christian God is the only reasonable explanation just as evolution is the only reasonable explanation for the biological processes. FSM is not reasonable, it's just a joke and meant to be taken as such.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan In what way is the christian god the only reasonable explanation. What about every single other god, hindu god, sikh god etc. Even mythological gods could give the answer, like greek gods and norse gods. They are myths in the same way as the christian god is. BTW, are all those gods not as reasonable as your god? And you also don't need a god to have created the world. Why couldn't have the world been eternal like you said god is? FSM wouldn't be a joke if you were taught it aint
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 Why is the Christian god the best explanation? I'm glad you asked. It's because only in Christianity do you get a savior like Jesus Christ. Jesus was a great moral teacher and He said not only was He the Son of God, but God himself. It's only in Christianity do you get this kind of person. A person who has up until this point changed the lives of billions. Jesus rose from the dead, we have no reason to believe he didn't. He spoke prophesies that were fulfilled. He is God.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan Jesus is a prophet just like Muhammad in islam. And just because some guy said that he is the son of god doesn't make christianity the best explanation of religions. If you think about it scientifically you don't even need any of those religions, because what would they be need for anyways. Where would those gods be. And also there is no proof that he actually rose form the dead. There isn't even actual hard evidence that he died straight on the cross. Nothing even makes him god.
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@KonstAapeli1 Oh I see where your problem is. You're trying to use reason where a belief in God instead requires faith. I have faith thus I believe in God. You see I'm an Agnostic Christian. I'm not going to say I know God exist, but I'll say that on faith I do believe. What do I have to lose? If I'm wrong nothing, if you're wrong however... well lets just hope and pray you aren't. You sound reasonable enough to not be gnostic about atheism, so are u willing to take the chance? U may be wrong.
GoogleVideoMan 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan If your god happens to exist then he'd probably forgive me, because I would actually have a reason not to believe in him. What if christianity is wrong and hindu is right or another religion. Then ur screwed too. If all the people who didn't believe in the christian god would go to hell, then more than 70% of the worlds population would go to hell. If only non-believers like me wold go to hell, then 15% aprox would go to hell. BTW in christianity its said that god gives faith
KonstAapeli1 8 months ago
@GoogleVideoMan thats like saying if u don't play the lottery u wont win yet by playing u more then likely wont win and u wasted a portion of your budget to do so except instead of money by believing in a god u are wasting your life, growth of the mind and science in general because ALL of it goes against a big man living in the sky being pissed at his great( x 12k) grandchildren because someone they never knew took a bite out of some fruit.
brentpal 8 months ago 2
This may be out of place but does anyone else find this woman exceedingly sexy? I think it may more be born out of her intellegence then her looks but wow....
PaytonFu 11 months ago
Her name is Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton....if you're interested in her theories...start your research
lakid87 11 months ago
why is the lady's theory skipped ?
GooBeyond 11 months ago
TURTLES ALL THE WAY DOWN
projectbrumaire 11 months ago 2
@projectbrumaire lol!
teainthesahara 11 months ago
As with most YOUTUBE conversations about science, you often get the mix of the harded from both sides. The unwavering religious without an open mind combined with the idiotic faux scientific who don't have a mind of their own...just the minds of others who are smarter than them. Like it or not, the truth of the matter is that science & spirituality are going to meet in the middle of mainstream science sooner than later & neither side is gonna like it. Till then shut the fuck up & think 4 self
MyNameIsIndustry 11 months ago 2
wow if her theory is the one that turns out to be correct or the closest to it out of all these men...women will take over the world
markuseraccount 11 months ago
Hmm I wish they started by explaining what we know today such as a even background radiation and accelerating expansion. Then explain how the different theories account for these. What Laura mentioned about a irregular spot in the background radiation and anomalous accelerations is interesting too.
ElysiumLabs 11 months ago
whatever the ultimate theory is im sure it will be much more magnificent and awe inspiring than some stupid god.
sakdiesel86 11 months ago
@sakdiesel86 indeed
FIGHTFANNERD3 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The problem is how we prove with scientific experiments the theories that are mathematically established? But astonishing is that the established theory of Laura Mersini is proven by three experimental probes, consequently it implicates impressive conclusions about what happened before the Big Bang !
ILIRICUMSACRUM 11 months ago
Stupid spell check... I meant cube-thingy
211gil 11 months ago
@211gil dno but they are HARD imo... i got it appart but still havent got it togeather agen : (
Yahweigh 11 months ago
What's the name of that cube-rhombus
211gil 11 months ago
That woman didn't seem to have the first clue as to how to solve the cube-thingy
TeachMeProperDancin 11 months ago
so, what's odd about the temperature in outer space, and how is that related to the possibilty of a "neighbouring universe", wish they'd gone into more detail about that last lady's theories, but I guess that would have requiered another hour or so of program time.
Gardena380 1 year ago 3
@Gardena380 yea! I totally agree. They also didn't explain how the theory worked, and I'm still like "sounds great, but... uhhh..." it sounded like the most promising of all the theories, and then they spend LESS time on it...
and what they said about the odd temperature also sounded very interesting...
bellaKohler 11 months ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If time will let us science will prove God .
pcrvg0808 1 year ago
How do you get rid of the entropy? It does not decrease. If it, the Big Bang, happens all the time, how does our universe begin with precious little of it?
themanhootch 1 year ago
@themanhootch
Yeh low entropy is a problem for standard inflation theory, you're right. Penrose's cyclic theory states that all matter is consumed by black holes, leaving only energy (so now with all matter gone entropy is low), which marks the end of an aeon and triggers the next aeon starting another big bang. So thats how entropy is low at the start of the big bang.
Hmm, I wish they had explained the last womans theory more. They didn't really say what her theory actually was.
new2hackin 11 months ago
thats michio kaku idea you whore
pipinho114 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow these fools really bought into Satan's lie. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes when they meet god face to face.
AEVautomatic 1 year ago
@AEVautomatic fuck, 21st century and you still believe in mythology...also i wanna tell you satan is my friend, and he told me you and your family are going to hell
rodtakular 1 year ago 2
@rodtakular Stop feeding the trolls man :(
FelleAndersson 1 year ago 2
@FelleAndersson it just sickens me, but you're right
rodtakular 1 year ago
@AEVautomatic really dude....... where is he
Superblueblur 1 year ago 2
@AEVautomatic and what about homos god did create everything why would he make something he hates and what would you do if i have a different belive god is like cancer wheres your prof of god a bog made for kids many years ago will not cut it
Superblueblur 1 year ago
@AEVautomatic I never heard one of them mention God in a negative manner. Real Scientists rarely do, because they are the ones who understand most that observing the physical universe through measurement is one thing, but experiencing emotion, intelligence etc and consciousness itself can't be measured, only experienced. Beyond what we can measure through observation, everybody has got to have faith in something, Scientists understand this most. Metaphysics deals with this philosophy.
ScienceInPhilosophy 1 year ago
@AEVautomatic For example, if a Scientist does say he doesn't believe in God, it's probably due to over confidence, or one hell of a great theory. So again, faith that your theory will prevail, or faith in God? They are still faith from a basic philosophical standpoint. Evidence is interpretative based on perception, the unfortunate condition of the human mind I add, nevertheless, it's still to be taken into account. It takes all kinds they say, however, not all kinds can be right.
ScienceInPhilosophy 1 year ago
@ScienceInPhilosophy By evidence I am not speaking of applied mathematics to the physical universe, of course, I am talking about the experiences of emotion etc as we perceive them through consciousness and feeling.
ScienceInPhilosophy 1 year ago
@ScienceInPhilosophy If a scientist says he doesn't believe in God, why would it be because of over-confidence? How about the basic principle of falsifiability. How about not believing in things that haven't been proven? It's quite simple. Most scientists don't believe in God because there's no proof. At least a substantially smaller amount of proof than required for such a being. Now, from a deist perspective, it becomes a little harder to doubt, but still can't assert something without proof.
Proghead88 11 months ago