Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is GOD In The 'Multi-verse'?

Posted on 10/23/2011 4:30:28 PM PDT by freejohn

I hope that it's okay to post this in the Religion forum!?

I have been thinking about this for quite some time now and have come to my own conclusion and that is .. GOD HAS TO EXIST and not only does he exist .. He is the main argument Against the now popular 'Multi-verse' scenario!

Scientists from many different areas are pondering an infinite number of universes to explain our existence.

They talk about 'string theories' and 'infinite universes' where anything and everything can and does exist!

An example may be that in one universe, I am alive but in another I never was.

In one universe, I am a doctor while in others I may be a lawyer or an Indian Chief while in THIS one .. I'm just another 'smuck'! *)

IF the multi-verse theory were correct then GOD would HAVE to exist simply because 'Scientists' say ALL things MUST take place in 'Infinite Universes'!

Now .. Wouldn't it make sense that if GOD were to exist in even one of these universes then NONE of the rest of those universes could or would exist!?

GOD is a GOD of ORDER and Not a GOD of DISORDER so-o-o .. HOW could such a chaotic universe or in this case Chaotic Universes exist!?

I believe that Science has backed itself into a hole on this one!
(or maybe just created another paradox?)

What do you think?

If you were able to get beyond the multi-use of the word 'exist' in my ramblings .. I would Really like you Scientific and Religious thinkers input on this! 8)


TOPICS: General Discusssion; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: gagdadbob; god; onecosmosblog; science; universe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-271 next last
To: KrisKrinkle
For those interested in the latest research into the existence of the Multiverse I would suggest the book “The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos” by Brian Greene. He doesn't have any opinion on the existence of God but he does explore how a multiverse would be a direct consequence of validating m-theory which is the extension of string theory to higher geometries. There may be experimental observations in the near future that would only be explainable by inference from string theory which would be required to consider it a valid explanation of reality. Since all particles in quantum field theory are the result of virtual particle pairs that randomly arise and pass away in less than Planck time it can fairly be said that nothing actually “exists” in the sense of being an indivisible component of reality. The multiverse is simply information that transitions from state to state according to fundamental algorithms. If you want to call this “God” that's fine. Our understanding of human significance in the cosmos has been a continuous descent from “center of the universe” to “less than detectable random noise”. The only thing that makes us special is that we may be capable of understanding the truth at some point. Any attempt to define what the concept of “God” is can only fail since this is completely ineffable.
61 posted on 10/23/2011 6:38:43 PM PDT by Dave Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: freejohn

Even if the theory is true, God is not contained by His own creation. God resides outside of space and time, which does not preclude His ability to enter and exit it as He chooses.


62 posted on 10/23/2011 6:38:51 PM PDT by semaj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

A favorite show as a kid and I still like it despite the glaring plot and production problems.

Me and my wife got to meet Martin Landau at the last Dragoncon. He is such a great guy to listen to and be around.

http://tysonneil.smugmug.com/Events/Dragoncon-2011/18887174_vV3p6D#1467656263_fc9cmtB


63 posted on 10/23/2011 6:43:19 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Texas Songwriter
Well science does, by inductive reasoning, agree that the universe had a beginning. That much science and theistic cosmology agree upon.

Yes, that's the current explanation of effects that we observe.

The moment, just prior to the singularity,...that point in the history of the universe when time, space, energy and matter came to be....what caused it. Why would nothing suddenly create...it is not a scientific concept or a valid philosophical concept.

Quite the opposite, it's a very simple thing to understand - at least there is a simple explanation; nobody knows how close such explanations are to the reality.

Some people theorized that our 3D universe appeared as a spark from the collision of higher dimensional planes (or objects.) Remember Flatland? How would we, 3D beings, create one out of nothing?

A 3D world contains an infinite number of 2D worlds. I don't mean to tie the Multiverse here, it's just a side effect. Any section of a 3D object with a 2D plane defined in a 3D space results in a new 2D world within that plane. While the plane is a mathematical construct, take an apple, slice it in two and you get a very real brand new 2D surface that didn't exist before. Well, it was there as a possibility but nobody knew which path your knife will take until it took it. Now the possibility turned into the reality. You can draw Flatlanders on that slice of the apple and they will live there happily ever after, wondering what created their Universe. And it was you, after all, just cutting an apple for your dessert. Congratulations, you are now the Creator of Universes - for tiny teeny flat Flatlanders, but you have to start somewhere :-)

To creeate everhything from nothing. Nothing exist at that time...science tells us

The science doesn't tell us anything about what happened before the Big Bang. There was no time in this Universe, and there was no Universe for the time to exist in. Take a pencil and draw a line on paper. Imagine that there is life in this line. How that life can comprehend what was before you put the pencil to the paper? It would require awareness of your 3D world. Now, how can a line-dwelling life form, necessarily restricted to that and only that line, explore and find out at least that there are other lines on the same paper - let alone lines on other pieces of paper.

To create 10 to the 78th power number of atoms calculated to exist in this universe....out of nothing....this is what Biblical scolars reference as the power of His Word. Creatio ex nihilo.

The count of objects is really immaterial. Your fingerprint on a glass of water contains millions of atoms, but that doesn't strike you as something exceptional. The principle in itself is far more interesting. If we postulate that our Universe is created by something or someone, then what could possibly create that?

64 posted on 10/23/2011 6:44:32 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert

That had to be great meeting Landau. Here’s trivia for you: Do you know why Series 3 was scuttled (even with cast in place and 10 scripts written?)


65 posted on 10/23/2011 6:52:56 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert

Great pictures!


66 posted on 10/23/2011 6:55:00 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; BipolarBob; buccaneer81

I’ve read an article by Schroeder in which he talks about his book on this topic.

The concept is associated with Einstein’s idea that time is relative—two minutes on earth correspond with two years somewhere else in the universe.

As Schroeder explains it, God created the universe at an initiation point. Six days at that initiation point correspond with 15 billion years our time—which due to the expansion of the universe is a very far distance from the intitiation point.

This is my understanding of it, which is admittedly simplified compared with that of Schroeder. But these are some of the important aspects of it.


67 posted on 10/23/2011 7:00:37 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Sarah Palin: "I'm not for sale.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert
Here's someone who has hardly changed at all even at the age of 75.

Mentor

68 posted on 10/23/2011 7:01:49 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Thank you for sharing that. He looks really good for 75 and I thought I had read somewhere years back that he had died. Glad to know he is still around and active.


69 posted on 10/23/2011 7:09:39 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

I would guess the Gerry/Sylvia divorce or Lew Grade pulled the plug on it?


70 posted on 10/23/2011 7:10:44 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

It was a highlight to me. The one panel of his I caught drew a large full room, lots of audience interaction, and plenty of standing ovations.

He has a firm grip too and I wouldn’t write him off anytime soon and I hope he stays around a lot longer.


71 posted on 10/23/2011 7:12:59 PM PDT by wally_bert (It's sheer elegance in its simplicity! - The Middleman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: freejohn
You've gone way beyond my pay grade on this one.

Not really, it's easy to explain on an example. Let's build a very simple Multiverse that conforms to the original requirements (that every combination of everything is.)

Our Universes will contain only two objects - the sky and the earth. The sky can be blue or green; the earth can be brown or yellow. We don't need to increase the complexity because as you will see it works the same way for any number of objects and any number of events on the timeline.

We will have exactly four Universes in our Multiverse:

  1. Blue sky, brown earth
  2. Blue sky, yellow earth
  3. Green sky, brown earth
  4. Green sky, yellow earth

That covers all possibilities that could mathematically exist in our simple Multiverse. You cannot add one more Universe to the set - it is complete.

As you see, the sky in our example can be of only one color or the other. It's to keep the list short :-) But this is also an example of a binary property: it can be this or that and nothing else. It has only two possible settings.

Now you see that existence of God is also a binary property. God may only exist or not exist. God can't partially exist or somewhat not exist. This property is equivalent to choosing between two colors of the sky.

Now go back and count what percentage of our Universes have blue sky? It's 50% - two out of four. Is it a freak occurrence? No, it's just math and logic, as we know them.

My GOD would Have to exist in ALL universes simply because he is or was the creator.

Not really. There are two possibilities, and none of them help you.

Possibility #1 says: God is local to a Universe, just like the sky's color. Some Universes have God, other Universes don't. If this is true then God will be present in half of all Universes, per our definition of the Multiverse. Your statement is incorrect.

Possibility #2 says: God is above a Universe; he resides above the collection of Universes. That's what you are hinting at. But then the existence of the Multiverse is irrelevant and you can't use it to prove existence (or non-existence) of God. That God could create one Universe just for us, or he could create two, or an infinite number of them. Your statement is not proven.

I can only go on what the Bible has to say and that is

That certainly doesn't hurt. However the Bible is not going into the cosmological details. Even if somehow Jesus would spell it all out, none in his audience would be able to understand him - and nothing of that would be written down decades after the fact. Bible was physically written by humans, and as such it contains only what humans could comprehend at that time (not much of cosmogony, that's for sure.) The only record of the creation is in the sky above us.

72 posted on 10/23/2011 7:13:48 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: starlifter
200 years ago people would call others crazy for trying to describe what we take for granted every day.

We will be so ignorant to those that live 200 years in the future. We cannot image what that would be like.

Explain to the prilgrims telephones, TV electricity, refrigerators etc. There would be no frame of reference for them to relate to..

And the greatest invention of all the flush toilet...

73 posted on 10/23/2011 7:20:11 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wally_bert
It was Lew Grade. But the show was turning a profit and as I said, all the pieces were in place. Then came a movie script...one that Grade fell in love with and was convinced would make bundles of money.

Unfortunately, this major motion picture was budgeted at $36 million...twice the budget for an entire season of Space:1999. He wanted it badly though, so it was the end of Alpha and the gang.

Lew Grade's pride and joy opened in the summer of 1980 and made a whopping....$7 million. The title of this debacle?

Raise The Titanic.

74 posted on 10/23/2011 7:24:32 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
.,ISome people theorized that our 3D universe appeared as a spark from the collision of higher dimensional planes (or objects.) Remember Flatland? How would we, 3D beings, create one out of nothing.

Some people theorize? Where does the spark reside...another dimension....that is another universe.....give me the science for that please.

The science doesn't tell us anything about what happened before the Big BangYou and I agree on this. But you spent half of your post stating nonsense as if it was science or math. (By the way, as you must know, an actual infinte does not exist. It is an abstract concept used in philosophical mathematics).

My point in my last statement was no so much the number as the mass of the creation.

75 posted on 10/23/2011 7:29:17 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (I ouTha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: freejohn

HE quite well knows you exist, and awaits your FINAL decision.

There are no mulligans, nor can you ask for a moment to “consider”.

Your deeds are wholly secondary: DO YOU ACCEPT JESUS THE CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOUR?

Your answer is your fate.

I honestly want to share everlasting life with you and folk of your philosopical bent, simply for the arguments we’ll have!


76 posted on 10/23/2011 7:56:29 PM PDT by Don W (You can forget what you do for a living when your knees are in the breeze.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
So very true, dear brother in Christ! He is the Creator - no property of the creation is applicable to the Creator of it.
77 posted on 10/23/2011 8:07:45 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Don W
DO YOU ACCEPT JESUS THE CHRIST AS YOUR SAVIOUR?

I do but .. There is more to accepting Christ as savior than most would acknowledge.

78 posted on 10/23/2011 8:20:06 PM PDT by freejohn ("Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." --- Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Greysard

I think the point when stated strictly from a logical standpoint is that if the God of Abraham exists, then there is necessarily only one universe.


79 posted on 10/23/2011 8:27:52 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Sarah Palin: "I'm not for sale.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
However the Bible is not going into the cosmological details. Even if somehow Jesus would spell it all out, none in his audience would be able to understand him - and nothing of that would be written down decades after the fact.

Well I just think man can't see the trees thru the forest when it comes to what God chooses to reveal to man in the Bible.

An example is for years man thought the world was flat....science etc. debated all the "details" depending on what side of the issue they were on..... However, interesting is there's a scripture verse which reads..." He sitteth on the 'CIRCLE' of the world".....which would've indicated to any who might have seen that the world was indeed round. But they all missed it. Still it was there all that time.

80 posted on 10/23/2011 8:48:05 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-271 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson