How Big Is the Universe? Theories on the Cosmos with Martin Rees

[deanmullen10]

Based on an already developing idea that reality is not 3D but merely 2D information. I'd like to add to this potential truth that perhaps the human brain, the human itself, the world and everything is just 2D information but the information itself is in essence a description.

When one observes the ocean that is merely the 2D information describing the ocean yet the human brain has evolved to turn that description into a 3D world within the physiological mind itself, it can produced a 3D world

[AlteredActions]

@deanmullen10 Your alternative perspective. anything can seem to be ''2-D'' in a certain perspective. Basically our mind is so advanced yet so primitive, we cannot understand much right now simply because we cannot understand ourselves. We will continue to try to unravel that which is seemingly evident but as you know the perspective of things can be deceiving this is a life lesson to many, and a contradiction on the fabric of reality itself.

[bass109]

God Almighty expanding voice spoke the expanding universe into existance! Jesus is god!

[dzpisx]

@bass109 I thank ya Lord!

[henf5671]

"god" created us! Here's my reasoning...the universe is incomprehensible. The universe itself is god. After all we are a part of the universe. And ultimately the mysterious universe created the milky way, our sun, the earth, early life and complex life including us. Everything has matter and energy even in the vacuum of space. Since energy and matter is conserved everything has an "afterlife" so to speak. Maybe we will last forever!!!!!

[TomFynn]

@henf5671 The universe has been found out to be comprehensible to a high degree. Te universe itself is the universe. We are part of the universe. And in the course of its existence we came to be by pretty well damn understood physical process. Energy conversation odes not equal an afterlife, since life is a non-equilibrium state.

[henf5671]

@TomFynn The thing you don't understand is we are merely byproducts of the big bang. Energy creates us and everything around us. So even if consciousness was an illusion we would be constantly in a state of death so to speak. Electricity, atoms, chemicals, and advanced brain chemistry gives us life but yet these natural phenomena are constructed from the basic laws that govern the universe. In other words, "heaven" might really be the universe itself when we pass away.

[TomFynn]

@henf5671 The thing you don't understand is that life is far-from-equilibrium state. Death is the relaxation into equilibrium. So even if energy is conserved there is no afterlife. Not even in this universe.

[henf5671]

@TomFynn I understand that however you're making an assertion. On the contrary, I'm not asserting anything. I'm simply throwing out wild ideas; i'm still skeptical of it just like you are. Equilibrium is simply a human concept. Knowledge of an afterlife comes from experience. In other words, you need to experience death yourself.

[TomFynn]

@henf5671 That is not an assumption that is empirical evidence. All living creatures, especially concious creatures, are, in terms of thermodynamics, far-from-equilibrium systems. All dead things are not.

[henf5671]

@TomFynn Even if you're right about this equilibrium state, the fact that life can exist at all is bizarre. Let's face it...humans are stupid!

[kakaroobart]

weardist wank i ever had

[MrRhizobia]

anyone else get that advertisement of the people drumming and dancing in times square, and think it was better than the video itself hahaha

[a123302]

,,what really cause this explosin?

[bass109]

the universe is ruled under Jesus christ. On judgement day all mankind will see that is 110% and great then man's theories.

[gary031183]

@bass109 Even ignoring the errors and falacies in the bible.... If you think that your creator (if we had one) left you to 'gamble' your eternal soul on pain of death then he can keep his heaven. I am a former believer. You are only afraid of hell and your only defense to to threaten other people with it.

You are free to believe whatever you want but you don't have the right to say that other people should believe it. Especially if you can't PROVE IT! All the evidence is against it. Sorry!

[yet2jet]

@gary031183 You got some sort of grudge against people who have religion or something? If you say you don't believe in a religion, you most likely believe in evolution, humanism or in your own intellectuals with such limited understaning of the universe around you. That itself is your religion. It will guide your behaviour, your values and your judgements. In a way, you are pushing that religion on others. How you rejected your religious believes is really your decision, probably foolishly so.

[gary031183]

@yet2jet Hit 'Ctrl, f' (once the 'find' box pops up) type: Gary031183.

Please read all of the reponses to/from others. If you don't see how these 'religious' posts bother someone to the point where they 'hold a grudge' then I guess I will never make my point. As for your comment about my 'belief'... I go where the evidence takes me. It doesn't sound exciting...i know. But it rarely lets you down. If the evidence lead towards ANY religion, then I would join that religion. It's that simple.

[gary031183]

@bass109 lmao! And I bet you talk about being 'humble' with your fellow Christians EVERY Sunday! lmao!

Humility, Honesty, Integrity, etc.... They mean nothing to religious people.

If you truly believe this, then keep it to yourself...... No one needs your 'after death' threats!

[henf5671]

@bass109 There's no contemporary evidence that he even existed. A book proves nothing. In the same way, the Odyssey does not prove Homer's existence. I don't believe in personal gods; i am however open to some kind of pantheistic god. There is no supernatural soul however energy can be thought of as a "soul" since it is conserved. Call me a naturalist Buddhist if you like!

[guest7952]

and sure string theory and M theory are some of the best theories that we have but you have to realize that not even science can test them. My professor debated whether or not to give a lecture on it for this reason alone. He said he contributed to string theory by making an assertion that couldn't be disproved rather than one that could be proved. A theory that can't be tested sounds a whole lot like a religion to me, and I'm impartial to the whole thing until I see empirical support.

[guest7952]

@guest7952 Just wanted to point out my own grammar errors before some douche bag does *dis-proven *proven

[goog2k]

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual." -- Carl Sagan

[tiemo25]

the idea that you can go faster than light, the idea that you can "think" beyond the cosmos is absolutley silly, untill a decendant of everyone that has commented on this channel finds a way to traverse the great distances of the universe in a reasonable timescale... to get there, then get back, is silly. There are limits, no matter what anyone says.

[gary031183]

@tiemo25 Glad your way if thinking isn't widely accepted. I hope you only have that attitude about that ONE subject.... If you view everything that way then you life must be incredibly limited.

[tiemo25]

@gary031183

you don't even know who I am. you saying just because i have that view I must have a "limited" life makes my skin crawl. I am glad i don't know you personally. I can't believe how ignorant your comment was. Then again, it's easy to say things like that to people and be ignorant and condesending when all your doing is looking at a computer screen isn't it?

[gary031183]

@tiemo25 I stand corrected.

My response we too terse!

My apologies.

That being said, I think that by saying something is not 'one way', when we don't know, is detrimental to future research and questioning.

What we take for granted today was once the dreams of men who never got the chance to see it for themselves. Flying, television, anything electronic, space travel, etc... These were all sci-fi like inventions. Until we 'know' lets assume ANYTHING is possible. ;-) Again, my apologies.

[tiemo25]

@gary031183

Ok no problem, apology accepted.

I suppose my belief is that there are limits. I do not believe humans can travel 10s of billions of light years to the edges of the known universe and communicate everything back to the home planet that humans are on. This notion is very silly and no matter how much you dream, and how much you compare early humans traveling very very very short distances on a planet, and not in space, i don't think it's even close to being a reality.

[gary031183]

@tiemo25 I get your point. And maybe we won't be able to. All I am saying is, by tellling ourselves that we can or that we might be able to, we will think differenetly about the future and possibly attack our problems with more vigor.

Imagine telling a person 200 years ago that it's basically impossible to imagine a man kept alive in space as he breathes air through a space suit and works on a satellite that sends 'invisible' information to people on earth.

BUT, I see your point!

;-)

[tiemo25]

@gary031183

thanks Again saying 200 years ago keeping a man alive in space and communicating signals would seem odd. saying something like that in a size comparison is like comparing earth to the largest star. You have to look at the distance you are traveling and what it would take to get there and back. Not only that but communicate information. You would not only have to break the speed limit of the universe but smash it millions of times over and lend no weight to the theory of relativy.

[goog2k]

@thetruthisundeniable

Sagan said, "We are star stuff" and "a way for the cosmos to know itself." All the atoms on earth and in our bodies came from supernova that blew up over 5 billion years ago.

I haven't seen any scientific evidence that consciousness exists beyond living organisms but that doesn't diminish the wonder of our awareness.

Ultimately, we are this cosmos become awake & if we are like bubbles of consciousness on the ocean of being, are we a bubble, the water, or the whole ocean?

[GraeHall]

@goog2k it wasn't until a few years ago - once I got a better understanding of science after my fundamentalist upbringing - that being "star stuff" really hit home. I was sitting on a rocks with my feet hanging off in to the incoming tide of the ocean at midnight, alone, under a full moon. I felt the spray of the sea water from rocks on my skin, put my hand on the rock to get up and saw the moon. This "oh that's fucking beautiful" moment, when I realised that all of it was forged in a supernova

[goog2k]

@GraeHall Very cool.

As a human, you are actually the rocks, the waves, the moon, and the supernova become awake!

enjoy the dance . . .

[GraeHall]

@goog2k the sort of - overwhelming awe of that moment was all the way to my bones. It was the sort of experience I'd claimed I got from "spiritual" realisations as a fundamentalist in my youth, and claimed readily that those without my religion could never attain. It turns out, I was wrong, about that and many other things. That realisation of my place in the universe, informed by science, and the awe and wonder of simply being alive to realise it was so powerful - something the spiritual wasnt

[goog2k]

@GraeHall Well, I would say your experience was actually a much more genuine spiritual experience - beyond superstition. Atheists like Einstein and Sagan also thought so.

We don't need a magical sugar daddy up in the sky. The cosmos is it's own magic and is far more profound -- and we're always one with it.

"There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle." Albert Einstein

[GraeHall]

@goog2k I actually said - many times to non-christians, my science teachers at later high school years who dared say a number > 6,000 "only we christians can truly appreciate the wonder of god's creation - it's not until you are saved ..."

I believed it - truly - as do the people who say it today.

Once I educated myself as an adult in the basics of sciences - I had it dawn on me how wrong I had once again been. I saw the world as static, created. Suddenly I saw the amazing depth and intricacy

[goog2k]

@GraeHall "The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity." -- Albert Einstein

[goog2k]

@thetruthisundeniable Humans actually live on many levels at the same time.

One is just the simple level of survival, the reptilian level. We are biological organisms that need to eat, sleep, and procreate.

Two is the social level which involves family, community, love, hate, competition and dominance, etc.

Three is the existential level. Ultimately, as conscious, aware beings, we are walking, talking stardust, this cosmos become awake - and looking back at itself.

It's quite a trip.

[goog2k]

@thetruthisundeniable I'm NOT dismissing reasonable, informed speculation.

However, mere speculation without a way of scientifically testing it is still just that, mere speculation, not science.

That was the point.

[MazeleyFanClub]

Interesting, but he just throws out ideas with no proof and no real conclusions drawn. But that's ok, because looking at the comments, most people are totally incapable of seeing any big picture or thinking any big ideas. They'd rather argue for/against religion or engage in some othersimilar small-minded apelike behavior. Let me grunt my disapproval.

[USA4July1776]

I'm agnostic but I'm starting to think that trying to understand and even comprehend how big the universe is, is akin to understanding God... it's like trying to explain who an internal combustion engine functions to a fish.

[goog2k]

@IronChefWannabe JEEZ. I'm sorry you don't understand English. Is English your second language?

I never denied the Big Bang. Martin Rees was "speculating" there are "multiple Big Bangs" and "multiple universes." That may or may not be true, but there is still no scientific evidence for that. It's just "speculation."

That was the point. That's not science. It's just speculation. Science must be "testable."

[MissAtlantique]

Science is exhausted. Speculative theories... We need facts. I do not have to be a professor from Cambridge to understand what he is saying.

[XXFL4MINGD34THR4GEXX]

:( i wanted 2 hear more. wish this video was longer ;(

[MissAtlantique]

@XXFL4MINGD34THR4GEXX it is longer, just click on complete video link

[TheGodOfVictory]

Can someone define universe for me? I always just thought it was just never ending.

[zassounotsukushi]

10 or 12 billion ly for the most distant galaxy is a meaningless statement. You need to specify co-moving distance or whatever you're talking about. In the messy relativistic world we live in, distance needs to be clearly defined before referring to it. But most cosmologists don't care if they feel like they're talking to the public...

[richter75]

@zassounotsukushi Well 10 or 12 gives u about a 20 percent error margin. 2 billion ly.. Relative or not, .. its to much for our brains to understand anyway.

[MisterDoctorE]

God = Mental illness

[ReakingVengence]

OMG, its youtube, stop using big words guys. I can't understand any of the comments.

[Aiden057]

Martin Rees is a very good presenter. On youtube there's a wonderful program called "what we still don't know" Look it up and watch it, it's very good.

[kaje01]

I had an idea that scale might be infinite. For example you have quarks < atoms molecules < etc < etc < earth < solar system < galaxy < glaxy cluster < universe < etc < etc < etc <<<<<<< infinity. Basically our universe could really be an atom on a piece of rock at some scale. The same would work in the other direction, if we magnified far enough we could find galaxies and planets in atoms here on earth.

[crankycactus]

cosmology = no imaginary friends...

[Asiablue]

@crankycactus Take your agenda elsewhere.

[crankycactus]

@Asiablue feeling a little uncomfortable are we??? i would be too if i claimed to know the meaning to life and couldnt back it up AT ALL!! take your irrationality elsewhere... you will always be handicaped by your superstition...

[Asiablue]

@crankycactus Uncomfortable? Not at all! Claiming to know the meaning of life? Did I ? Show me some proof or at least a quote or two. Superstition? I am not afraid of the number 13, are you? Irrational? I suggest you stay on topic and stop jumping at any video that gives you the chance to stake your claim and state your agenda. This video is about cosmology. Keep on the subject at hand and take your agenda elsewhere.

[mattghtpa]

@Asiablue I think crankycactus comment was a harmless statement considering the likely viewers of this video.

The backward geocentric mentality that has ruled this small spec of galactic dust until recently is now rendered absurdly insignificant.

Voices such as crankycactus need to be shouted from roof tops, not arrogantly hushed from some self anointed imaginary intellectual high ground.

[crankycactus]

@Asiablue you are a christian, and are inherantly superstitious and irrational... you believe in a god that is supernatural... that is called superstition... it is quite obvious that you are indeed uncomfortable and frustrated by the fact that science leads to the death of dogma, especially your own... i will not be censored by overzealous objectors... if you dont like skepticism, stay away from science. incase you havent figured it out, christianity and science dont mix. stay away from science

[Asiablue]

@crankycactus I am not a Christian, have no superstitions, apply reason to everything I do, and not the least uncomfortable with science and it's discoveries. I will not be censored by overzealous objectors. If you don't like skepticism, stay away from it. Faith, science, logic and reason are facets of truth. The alleged incompatability of faith and science is atheist dogma and untrue. It is an illusion.

This video is about Cosmology. Please take your agenda elsewhere.

[crankycactus]

@Asiablue maybe you arent a christian. you certainly have favrited christian videos and believe in god. do you really think that science and god are compatible? there is no atheist dogma. nor an atheist agenda. it is a fucking comment pertaining to cosmology and how it is beneficial to mental health. and yes even your loose belief in god is irrational, superstitious, and unscientific. dont act like you are at all distinguished when you believe in a supernatural erector. what r u comment police?

[Asiablue]

@crankycactus I am a free thinker. And free to comment as I choose. Your qualifications mean nothing to me.

[crankycactus]

@Asiablue free to comment as you choose? what about me?? should i stop just because you cant just ignore it? just because i hit on an aspect of cosmology that you dont care for? and its funny.. for someone who doesnt think that i should make comment such a nature, you are the only one that i have gotten to bite .please just admit that it makes you uncomfortable and or upset to see that most people who understand science (which you are clearly into) know god as hoax... go fucking eat one...

[buckfushes]

Lets just leave imaginary friends out of this...

[Rockster969]

@buckfushes

What,not even pedo bear?

[1HumanKind]

finally an explanation of the Universe that makes sense. Especially the "speculative" bit.

[frvfilms]

we might never know,

[99minerkc]

Nothing can explain this accept an "ALL" powerful god! Now the big question is, which god? Allah, Abrahamic god, Hindu god, Budda ?

[xkeltoix]

@99minerkc if nothing can explain it, how can one believe in it in the first place? How did the first person to know a god understand anything?

[99minerkc]

@xkeltoix Didn't you go to Sunday School? I recommend you find an good evangelical church to attend! Look for the Church of the Nazarene to attend. Sunday School is usually 9:30-10:30. Sunday Service is likely 10:45-12:00. There is no charge but it always good to bring an offering.

[ggp1983]

@99minerkc how come a universe needs an explanation and an all powerful god doesn't?

[99minerkc]

@ggp1983 Because God is ALL POWERFUL thus He doesn't need to explain himself!

[ggp1983]

@99minerkc You're saying nothing can explain this universe except a god. So are you all-knowing? Do you know every possible way a universe can exist? And that the only possible way for a universe to exist is that an all powerful god created it?

[patienceking]

@ggp1983

I'm looking forward to seeing this religious guy concede to logical argument and abandon his unsupported assertions. That's what bible thumpers who post on science vids usually end up doing, right?

[tiosemilla]

@ggp1983 yeah. anyone that accepts the bible as complete truth is pointless to debate and/or discuss the mechanics of existence with.

[ScientiaVeritasEtLux]

@99minerkc There's no evidence for that. In fact, even Stephen Hawking now says that to posit a god to explain the beginning of the universe would be entirely arbitrary and useless. He's not necessary in the explanation, just like he got booted out of the gap in our understanding once we began to understand lightning or disease or gravity. The gaps are fewer and farther between. God is running out of hiding spots to cower in.

[99minerkc]

@ggp1983 I suspect that you are not open minded and truly searching for the truth thus not allowing for us to have common ground to work with in our dialog, however, in the event that I'm wrong and you truly are seeking answers I will leave you with this: Coming to peace with Science Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology by Darrel R. Falk . I can also refer you to other books re cosmology etc if you're interested.

Be well and Lord Bless you!

[tiosemilla]

@99minerkc dumb. the bible is fake.duh. havent you heard.man made all that stuff up along time ago. and, you could easily replace "god" with "universe" to get rid of that ridiculous notion of a creator being a "he"...

[99minerkc]

@tiosemilla Wow! Your comment is so profound that it has shaken my belief to it's core! You must be at the same level as Einstein and Stephen Hawking, truly amazing!! o.O

[johnstall5350]

@99minerkc ur statement here completely contradicts what you said to @Andybaby. You show how the existence of god is not falsifiable, and therefor god can't even be considered scientifically.

[99minerkc]

@johnstall5350  God isn't scientific, he's God!

[greggcaff]

@99minerkc god was for a time before science, like myths and legends.

[99minerkc]

@greggcaff You're party correct in that God was before science, but He is now and FOREVER too! You can realize this too, but only if you bow down before God and ask Him to be you BOSS!

[timrice666]

@99minerkc "party correct" "be you boss" Are you drunk? or is english a second language? Which god are you proposing,I hope it is yahweh, it's the craziest god and subsequently the easiest to dismiss.

[averylbrooks]

@99minerkc

The great unicorn isn't scientific, hes the Great UNICORN for crying out loud.

[Mrmoc7]

@99minerkc

God is God?

?????

[99minerkc]

@Mrmoc7 Of course God is God. Why do you even ask such a question?

[Mrmoc7]

@99minerkc

Your head is so far up your ass you can't even tell how much you've deluded yourself. It is depressing to witness.

[johnstall5350]

@99minerkc if god isn't "scientific" then how is there no conflict between science and religion.

[Andybaby]

@99minerkc

This is science though. You aren't allowed to just make stuff up.

[99minerkc]

@Andybaby Science and religion do not conflict unless you intentionally force it to! Religion and science work together in harmony! Also, I'm not making anything up, it's simply the truth! "Let the truth set you free" You likely have a bible in your house or trailer depending on what you have, so I suggest picking it up, blow the dust off of it and start reading from the beginning!

[marsCubed]

@99minerkc A few areas where science & religion conflict; Cosmology, Mathematics, History, Geology, Biology, Medicine.

examples.

World is not flat, sky is not water, Earth is not centre of solar system, Pi is not 3, No Archaeological evidence for Hebrews, All were Canaanite, Yahweh has wife before 650BC (Esherah), Noah, spirit possession theory of disease.

Add to that Hubble not seeing flocks of angels or seven day creation events yet, sadistic morality, 'worthiness' cultural chauvinism, pride.

[liquidminds]

@99minerkc Religion requires faith while science requires facts. As soon as the faith handles an area that you want to explore scientifically, there is a conflict.

Only if you incist, that there are parts, that science must not ever touch, there is no conflict from the side of faith. But then there is a conflict on the side of science, as you cannot exclude parts of reality from science.

The best proof for a conflict is the emperical fact, that prayer doesn't work.

[ananiasacts]

@liquidminds, I think the best proof that religion is a fraud is the claim it makes that god wants our trust and respect. Because if we consider what trust and respect actually are, it is easy to see that neither has any utility for any entity worthy of either, and might even be counterproductive. However, both are utterly essential for every fraud. Certainly if there is a god, it is blasphemous to assume that it has such loathsome traits as jealousy and anger. So why believe such a thing?

[liquidminds]

@ananiasacts I agree. In my opinion, the reason why religions survived that long is, because they evolved into a very efficient con-scheme to get a huge amount of people to come back, give money, buy useless iconic stuff and even to accept you as a moral authority...

It also allows you to take the responsibility for every good thing your flock does, while you can talk yourself out of responsibilty for the bad things, as they are done by bad people or influenced by the devil.

[ananiasacts]

@liquidminds, If we are right, and religion is a parasitical industry that evolved to prey on those it can infect, to rob them of resources, then doesn't it also imply that religion is having another, much more subtle, effect that is beneficial. Wouldn't anything that tended to encumber the intellectually weaker people also tend to raise the average "quality" of person doing everything else? Maybe religion is a perfectly natural mechanism for artificially raising the applied acumen of humanity.

[ezelite]

@ananiasacts How does it do this, by instigating fear of punishment? Surely then by this same logic we should exist in a police state simply because the pros would outweigh the disadvantages. I help my friend because it makes me feel good. If you were to do it because you were brainwashed you into thinking the creator of the universe is watching, then who takes the philisophical (and MORAL) highground. Who needs intellect when there is fear to occupy the mind

[ananiasacts]

@ezelite, Assume everyone is free to believe as they wish. Now add an idea that is only attractive to really stupid or evil people. Everyone else thinks it's completely inane. But the morons adore it. They waste half of their free time playing piety or whatever nonsense the idea demands, and admiring their own great fortune. This makes them happy and fulfilled. In this way the "average" intelligence of those doing everything else has been artificially raised by the behavior of those lumpen.

[ezelite]

@ananiasacts On re-examining your comment, i agree. However, the "Darwinistic" nature of religion (real old school darwinism, nothing to do with pressure and niches, but just last man standing) can only be a means to a bitter end. What if there was only one religion, surely heresy would appear all over, people fracture on political and ethnic lines, and the whole cycle starts again. All that had been accomplished by the caananites was ruined by the Isrealites. Isreal wins but humanity loses.

[ananiasacts]

@ezelite, Thanks. I was just speculating on why religion could be around for so long when it seems to have only negative effects on everyone involved with it (or unfortunate enough to live nearby.) And while I think that "inadvertent goodness" might have been useful when we were playing with sticks and stones, it simply can't be with WMDs and the enormous leverage that technology can offer a single psychotic madman. I still want to see it detoxified as much as Harris or Hitchens does.

[dysesthesiaAethiopi1]

@liquidminds I am no apologist for religion but science has it's conflicts especially where there is any research that goes against the interests of those who are funding it.

[liquidminds]

@dysesthesiaAethiopi1 I agree that funding is still a problem. Scientists usually don't have huge amounts of money, why they have to rely on companies. If they don't see any benefit for themselves, they wont fund it.

But that's no conflict inside of science, it's a conflict between science and society.

conflicts inside of science are wanted, as they allow critical discussion of topics and brings progress. People doubting discoveries are as important as people believing them.

[gary031183]

@99minerkc I completely disagree with you but bravo for having the courage to speak your mind. Sadly, all forms of religion have been disproven to such an extent that I find myself twisting my brain to figure out how people could still believe them. Funny thing is, I used to be one of those people. Facts, evidence and critical thinking are the key. The idea isn't to find answers using the superstitions of the past. It's to find answers using new evidence cause the old never worked to begin with.

[Wiilovewii]

@gary031183 I recently apostated from my religion and it boggles my mind how I could believe in such drivel!

[IronChefWannabe]

@gary031183

"all forms of religion have been disproven"

what a dumbass

that is such a fucking ridiculous statement

you obviously don't even understand what constitutes proof

[gary031183]

@IronChefWannabe you obviously don't know what you are talking about. Read a book or something. Don't hassle me with your petty bullshit man. You might want to get on with enjoying the on life you DO have and not fucking with people on youtube. Peace!

[Th3Wab3]

@gary031183 bravo well said...

[navesele]

@gary031183 They believe in the residue of what religion used to be.

[guest7952]

@gary031183 I'm with you in the pursuit of new knowledge, but how can you say "all forms of religion have been disproven" Until we "prove" the theories of the universe we realistically have no idea. Logically, the theories that we have are the best answers that we can give right now, but a new physicist may come along soon and prove the current theories wrong. So, yes a person who thinks logically would believe the best possible theory for now but it doesn't all religion has been disproven.

[gary031183]

@guest7952 Actually it does. If you take the doctrine of any religion and compare it against scientific, historical, and archeological data, they all fail.

For the sake of argument, lets ASSUME there are a few theories that science has wrong.

That still doesn't prove religion.

EVERYTHING has to stand on it's OWN evidence. Even if EVOLUTION (for example) were false, Intelligent Design still doesn't have any proof or evidence.

Maybe I was unclear before... Did that clear it up at all?

[guest7952]

@gary031183 okay, well for the sake of argument; I just made my own religion. It says that god created the universe which was only one universe within the multi-verse that he had created. There were also many dimensions which he had the power to create and he decided on the arbitrary number of 11. God sits in another universe that is larger than all of the other universes and plays his guitar which shakes matter through all of the dimensions. Now prove my religion false. For the sake of argument

[gary031183]

@guest7952 It isn't my job to prove YOUR religion. It's YOUR JOB to prove YOUR religion.

Not being able to prove your religion/position just means that you are saving me the time from having to disprove it. If you have ZERO evidence to support your belief, then I don't need to disprove it (because you have just demonstrated why it would be a waste of time to do so).

You seem to be aware of the ridiculousness of your argument... so why even say these things?

[guest7952]

@gary031183 my point is that you said all religions have been dis-proven; you didn't say that other people have failed to prove their religions. Buddhism for example, is a religion, has science proven that their religion is false? My point from the beginning was that until we come up with a solidified theory of everything and we "prove" that it is correct, we can't say science has dis-proven religion. Some religions could take what we have proven as scientists thus far and include it in their

[guest7952]

@gary031183 religion and they would have just as much proof as we have. The only reason I include this point in my argument is because this is a subject people should get excited about, and if you exclude every religion from science, people who are heavily influenced by religion may look upon it negatively rather than positively. By letting the two coincide I think we'll get much further on a solidified theory of everything. BTW I'm a grad student of physics and not religious at all

[gary031183]

@guest7952 hmmm.. but if someone mixed what we know now about the universe with religion they wouldn't actually have as much evidence as scientists do. They would only have a drummed up hypothesis (their religion) combined with verifiable evidence (science). As Stephen Jay Gould once said: Science and religion belong to "non-overlapping magisteria".

As for Buddhism... consciousness separate from the brain? Maybe... I'll wait for Sam Harris' next book. lol But their beliefs are still incorrect.

[guest7952]

@gary031183 "But their beliefs are still incorrect" Fight ignorance with ignorance, that's your plan? Only your views are right and everything you say is truth? I'm just letting you know that I could completely school you on string theory because my mentor is one of the people who contributed to its existence and even he admits that there are many faults with this theory. Maybe if you got a degree in physics, you would understand that all of this stuff isn't near as neat as you think

[gary031183]

@guest7952 When I said that Bhuddism's beliefs are incorrect, I wasn't saying I was 100% correct myself. If that were true I could make the same claim that religion already has made for millennia.... 'That there needs to be no more research...I know it all'.

I am not saying that.

As for your string theory comment. I am not sold on string theory at all either.

However, lets keep looking instead of trying to revert to 2,000 yr. old books. Ego has nothing to do with it. You should know!

[rudolphvanschalkwyk]

"Sadly, all forms of religion have been disproven to such an extent" Not sure where you found all this prove. Personnally I am still on the discovery path. In present time it depends on what you want to belief., but to say religion has been disproven is not true. Not even one theory today has been proven or disproven. I dont think anybody really know.

[gary031183]

@rudolphvanschalkwyk If you would be so kind as to tell me what religion(s) you are struggling with, I may be able to help you understand how I was able get rid of mine.

I can promise you, whatever religion you are stuck on...it's not worth worrying about your 'eternal soul'. ;-)

I hope I can help! I take this subject very seriously. It's a serious subject....especially if you are still affiliated with a religion.

[SauronsEye]

@gary031183 Religion disproven? The message of all the religions I know about generally say, do good to each other. This is wrong, somehow?. My mind boggles as to how you could reach such a conclusion. Are not the 10 commandments an excellent frame work for you to live your life within. The last 5 read, Honour your parents, Do not kill, No adultery, No stealing, No lying, Don't covet someone's wife, Don't covet stuff belonging to others. You know that's true.

[gary031183]

@SauronsEye Oh goodness.... If you think that they left Egypt thinking that killing, murder, stealing, lying, etc were okay, only to get to Mt. Sinai to find out that they weren't okay all along then you might want to rethink a few things. lol

Were you not good to other people before you were religious? If not...then please keep beliieving...lol

Religion is the worst because it claims our NATURAL IMPULSES/DICISIONS as it's own! We don't need orders shouted to us in tablet form. Come on man

[ThePsyber]

hmmmmm i like the paper ants and braneworlds theory

[goog2k]

Sorry, but without any actual evidence (of which there is none) all of these speculations about extra dimensions, multiple big bangs, and additional universes are just that, pure baseless speculation.

[Mastikator]

@goog2k It's not baseless speculation, it would explain a lot about quantum physics. But it is mostly without evidence.

[goog2k]

@Mastikator It's ALL theoretical speculation. It's like String theory. It makes some mathematical sense but it can't be tested. 

That's not science. That's philosophy.

Please show me ANY proof whatsoever for extra dimensions, multiple universes or multiple Big Bangs.

[Mastikator]

@goog2k It was the string theory (or M theory if you will) that predicted the existence of the Higg's Boson (and many other particles), which the LHC is working on trying to find, which would validate the string theory.

It's not impossible to prove multiple dimensions, it's "simply" a matter of finding particles that interact on a 4-dimensional level and then using them to probe other dimensions, like a radar. Gravitons is a candidate for this experiment.

[goog2k]

@Mastikator Sorry, I disagree.

Higg's Boson will certainly tell us more about the Big Bang and particle physics.

It will not "verifiy" string theory (M theory).

String Theory, extra dimensions, multiple universes, & multiple Big Bangs are still beyond anyway of scientific "testing."

It's mere speculation - not science.

[Mastikator]

@goog2k You can disagree all you want, but that's how science works. Hypothesis, prediction, experimentation, (in)validation of theory.

The Higg's Bosom was predicted by String Theory, just like Time Dilation was predicted by Special Relativity. If it turns out that there is a Higg's Boson then that would be evidence in favor of String Theory.

[goog2k]

@Mastikator Please show me where Higgs Boson particle which was predicted by the Standard Model in 1964 is dependent on string theory.

I think maybe you're mixing some things up.

Also, please show me how finding Higg's Boson has anything to do with multiple universes, multiple dimensions, or multiple Big Bangs.

I'd really like to know.

[Mastikator]

@goog2k watch this on youtube y-Gk_Ddhr0M

This will be our last exchange. If you choose to respond to this (which I'm sure will only be "I disagree and therefore you are wrong") then I will neither read it nor respond to it.

Good day.

[goog2k]

@Mastikator That was quite beautiful & fascinating. Thanks.

However, I'm not sure how his discussion of Quantum mechanics projects on to the cosmology & macro world of Martin Rees' multiple universes & multiple Big Bangs.

BTW, I think Nobel Physicist Richard Feynman said, "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."

[IronChefWannabe]

@goog2k

The Big Bang rocks ! Sheldon rules !

shut the fuck up, moron !

[greenghost2008]

nerd