/sci/ - Science & Math

btw I don't know wtf I'm talking about

>>10575259
>The problem is infinity is a concept human's can never truly grasp
It's not that humans cannot grasp the idea of infinity but it's that infinity is nonsensical. Especially in the context of an infinite universe & an unlimited number of possible fundamental laws. It's an idea that has no basis in reality. There's never been any evidence that it exists.
Anyways, what governs which universe I'm aware of? Me? Do I have an ability to travel to different dimensions or something? To me, the only reason for postulating the multiverse, is because you can't explain the fine-tuning problem that we find in ours without God. So people scapegoat to some multiverse nonsense.

>>9039788
>muh multiverse bubble theory
There are too many things wrong with this to even begin, but suffice to say that there is no evidence for such a thing nor can we hide behind whatever vague theories of quantum mechanics to postulate that maybe, just maybe, it is rational to believe the irrational. Also it implies an unending cycle, which itself does not explain where the cycle originated and leads you right back to the idea of an eternal cycle. Again, not only is there no evidence but it is irrational since we witness that every created thing has a beginning and an ending. But men who hold to a secularist/materialist presupposition would sooner cling to the unfounded and improbable than actually apply the same standard they use against Christ to their own asinine belief.
TL;DR A man will always choose to believe what he chooses to believe, even if it is utterly irrational and bears no evidence supporting it, if what he believes stems from an untested presupposition - that is, perhaps not tested by external "scientific" evidences but at least tested by basic sense. No one who lives in this world can live faithfully according to the Secularist/Materialist presupposition. It relies on randomness as the foundation of development and the origin of existence itself yet repeatedly attempts consistency in conveying its ideas - which goes against the very notion of randomness, which does not have consistency (patterns are consistent, randomness is not, and when randomness becomes a pattern the inconsistent has become consistent).
The Secularist/Materialist has no answer for beauty, the laws of logic, or even the laws of physics - and it is all well and good to say that morality is subjective until you get gangraped.

>>9037013
But in a Godless universe, there is no order of structure, only chaos and chance.