[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 272 KB, 771x1080, god2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2145690 No.2145690 [Reply] [Original]

What is the probability of a 'creator' existing?

>> No.2145696

50/50
does or doesn't

>> No.2145699

100%

for instance that painting you posted a detail of was created by some dead dude named Michelangelo or something.

>> No.2145701
File: 151 KB, 333x500, 2475075257_bcf4e3366a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2145701

the universe was not created by god, but by the laws of nature out of nothing

>> No.2145709

>>2145699
Ha!

>> No.2145710

>>2145701
>mfw when "nothing" was redefined to fit a theory.

>> No.2145711

>>2145696
>>2145696
>>2145696
this is the correct answer in accordance with present science

>> No.2145727

>>2145696
just because there are 2 outcomes doesnt mean they have to have equal probability

>> No.2145731

>>2145727
counterexample?

>> No.2145733

would the probability that we are actually an advanced computer simulation being ran by a more advanced civilization ALSO be 50/50?

>> No.2145741

Zero

>> No.2145744

Our universe has always existed and will continue to exist forever. There was no beginning, and there will be no ending. Matter/energy flows continually, only changing form but never being created nor destroyed.

>> No.2145749

>>2145741
Could still happen, even with a zero probability.

>> No.2145752

>>2145744
Then why isn't the sky bright as the surface of the sun? If the universe has existed forever then surely every line of sight would end in a star or object heated enough to glow itself.

>> No.2145756

>>2145744

and its the only thing that will ever make sense

>> No.2145759

>>2145727
There is 50/50 chance that what you said is false.

>> No.2145766

hypothetically, would it be possible to monitor all energy in the universe if it isn't created destroyed?

>> No.2145770

>>2145744
Wrong, the universe we live in is not static or steady state universe.

>> No.2145786

>>2145770

it began out of nothing so it always existed

>> No.2145788

>>2145786
Incorrect, go look up quantum fluctuations.

>> No.2145795

If we work within the system S5 (not that we'd want to) Alvin Plantinga's version of the ontological argument suggests that if it is possible for God to exist, he exists.

So probability in this context is meaningless.

>> No.2145803

>>2145788

quantum fluctuations in the vacuum = nothing

>> No.2145811

>>2145752
Nope, if the universe existed "forever" everything would be absent of light and heat. Good job being completely wrong though.

>> No.2145812

>>2145795
though to date it hasn't been demonstrated that an incorporeal consciousness can exist, let alone an incorporeal omniscience.

possible is an extremely important word.

>> No.2145818

define this 'creator' and i will tell you

>> No.2145821

if it is possible for God to not exist, he doesn't exists.

>> No.2145827

>>2145803
Empty space is more than nothing.

Nothing is nothing, no space, time or dimensions, stuff empty space has.

>> No.2145833

>>2145803

no

>> No.2145841

>>2145690

What is the probability of your FACE existing?

Christians: 1
Atheists: 0

>> No.2145852

>>2145812
Sorry bro, intelligence doesn't exist without something to exist in.

>> No.2145858

infinite other possibilities. 1/inf=0

>> No.2145864
File: 57 KB, 500x360, 1288216488651.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2145864

The idea of a creator to everything in our universe is a logical one, actually. Still, pics or gtfo.
Chances don't exactly pan out when explaining something that to us is not quantifiable.

>> No.2145923

>>2145864
If by logical, you mean completely impossible, then ok. If the universe is finite (which it is) then an all knowing deity could not exist before the universe existed to exist in. And if the universe always existed then we would be able to observe the universe at maximum entropy, which we don't.

>> No.2145971

>>2145923
>If the universe is finite (which it is) then an all knowing deity could not exist before the universe existed to exist in.

P1: Assumption this universe is finite,
P2: Assumption that a deity is within this universe
C: no diety

non sequitur: P's do not support conclusion.

>And if the universe always existed then we would be able to observe the universe at maximum entropy, which we don't.

P1: universe is eternal
P2: it's possible for us to observe max entropy
P3: we don't observe max entropy
C: universe is finite

non sequitor and circular logic, since it ties back to the 1st premise.

>> No.2145979

>>2145852
Yes, that's my point and it's a good one.

>> No.2145995

>>2145971
P1 you attempted to refute claims by looking like a dick
P2 you have no rebuttal
C go fuck yourself you Christian retard

>> No.2146005

>>2145690
Mathematical Proof that God Exist
http://silverstockreport.com/2010/god.html

>"God created the universe with numbers" -Pythagoras

Mathematical Proof the Evolution is RIDICULOUS
http://www.nodnc.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=291

>next question please

>> No.2146024

>>2146005

That quote is unsubstantiated.

>> No.2146027

If something created us then ran away, why are we still chasing it? Reminds me of a dog chasing a laser.

>> No.2146033

>>2145711
You're a fool, Do you also believe there is a 50/50 chance of the thousands upon thousands of other gods existing. Hell there is just as much writing on the Greek and Roman gods as there is on the current prevalent monotheistic god in modern religions(lol modern religion oxymoron.) And people of that time believed just as fervently in their gods as people do in the Abrahamic god of today. When you realize where religions roots come from you realize why todays religion is just as much bullshit as the old.

>> No.2146044

>>2145923
Then how did universe?

My point is, many people look at a watch and know it has a watchmaker. It's perfectly logical to assume that the universe has a creator as well. Whether it's true is a whole different argument.

>> No.2146055

50/50

>> No.2146061

>>2146044
Thats because most people don't follow physics.

>> No.2146064
File: 14 KB, 300x300, fg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2146064

this book, end of thread/

>> No.2146066

>>2146044
anthropomorphizing the natural is indeed a natural fallacy.

>> No.2146072

>>2146005
>Proof
>uses multiplication and bible quotes

>> No.2146083

>>2146072

He went to collage (sic).

He knows his shit.

>> No.2146116

>>2146044
On the contrary, if a well-ordered natural world requires a special designer, then God's mind (being so well-ordered) also requires a special designer. And then this designer would likewise need a designer, and so on ad infinitum. We could respond by resting content with an inexplicably self-ordered divine mind but then why not rest content with an inexplicably self-ordered natural world?

>> No.2146126 [DELETED] 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11837869
>Evidence of events that happened before the Big Bang can be seen in the glow of microwave radiation that fills the Universe

i'm pretty sure bible says world was created only once.

christians - 0
atheists - 1

>> No.2146163 [DELETED] 

>>2146044
>logic
You use that word without using any it. It is illogical to claim that a magic sky man designed and created the universe before the universe existed to exist in. Just as there is nothing south of the south pole, there was no "before" the creation of the universe. You can't design or create something if something doesn't exist to exist in in the first place.

>> No.2146172

>>2146044
>logic
You use that word without using any of it. It is illogical to claim that a magic sky man designed and created the universe before the universe existed to exist in. Just as there is nothing south of the south pole, there was no "before" the creation of the universe. You can't design or create something if something doesn't exist to exist in in the first place.

>> No.2146183

The inverse of the probability of one not existing.

>> No.2146187

>>2146116
/thread

Because the fact of the matter is, no matter how much sense an analogous argument might seem to make, you can't reach God/Gods as a conclusion without inserting him as an assumption.

>> No.2146303

There's zero evidence of a "creator."
It's safe to assume the probability is very close to zero.

>> No.2146332

>>2146005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoyle%27s_fallacy

too bad those links don't go into detail on the numbers they used to perform the "simple" math the their "theory" hinges on

>> No.2146363

>>2146332

Probabilities should be formed on observation, not speculation, so to have a probability outside the limits of all time, space and matter makes no sense because there is no way to make the observations to back up your probabilities.