Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Research Does Not Touch Energy Or Space

dattaswami
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2012 11:52:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Recently, scientists say that God-particle is discovered, which is the cause for Universe. Does this not eliminate God?

Reply: Research Deals with generation of Second Item, Matter

Scientists are investigating the cause for mass of the fundamental particle of matter. This is only the research pertaining to the conversion of energy into matter. The word Universe used by scientists is the materialized phase. Before the production of such Universe, the cosmic energy exists. Therefore, it is related only to the materialization of the particles of matter from the energy. The word Universe in the spiritual knowledge means the very cosmic energy itself associated with the subsequent materialized part of the Universe. In fact, even the space is the first subtle form of energy. Therefore, the word Universe in philosophy means the space or energy and the subsequent materialized energy. In philosophy, the production of Universe means the generation of space or energy. This requires the enquiry about the cause of space or energy and the mechanism of process of generation of space or energy from that cause. Here, in science, the cause is space or energy and the process of generation of matter from the space or energy is the generation of Universe.

Our Universe means space or energy and matter. The Universe referred by scientists in this research is only matter. The research of scientists does not touch the cause of space or energy. We are not much interested in this research because it does not touch the cause of the first item of the Universe, which is space or energy. The present research deals only with the generation of the second item, which is matter.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God. The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy. The generator of anything should be beyond its boundary. If you are in a cloud of gas and if you travel to the boundary of the cloud, you will find the generator of that cloud of gas. Similarly, if you travel up to the boundary of the Universe, you will certainly find the cause or generator of this Universe. The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.

The characteristic property of the space is volume, which is the product of length, width and height. These three are the spatial dimensions. Space means the spatial dimensions only. The generator of the space must not have space in it. If space exists in the generator, the pre-existence of space is to be accepted before the generation of space itself. This is impossible. Hence, the generator of space should not have any space or spatial dimensions in it. It means the cause of space is beyond space or spatial dimensions. ‘Beyond space' means that the cause exists after the boundary of space. Our intelligence can imagine only anything which has spatial dimensions. Our intelligence can never imagine anything, which is beyond space and which does not have spatial dimensions. This experience proves that the generator of space is beyond our imagination.

When the cause is unimaginable, the process of generation of imaginable space or energy from the unimaginable cause must be also unimaginable. In this world, the process of an imaginable item from another imaginable cause can be imaginable and hence, can be explained. The cause (God) and the process of generation of this Universe are unimaginable and only the product (Universe) is imaginable.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2012 10:40:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/8/2012 11:52:37 AM, dattaswami wrote:
Recently, scientists say that God-particle is discovered, which is the cause for Universe. Does this not eliminate God?
Wrong, the Higgs Boson is NOT being claimed to be the cause of the Universe.

Reply: Research Deals with generation of Second Item, Matter
Huh?

Scientists are investigating the cause for mass of the fundamental particle of matter. This is only the research pertaining to the conversion of energy into matter. The word Universe used by scientists is the materialized phase. Before the production of such Universe, the cosmic energy exists. Therefore, it is related only to the materialization of the particles of matter from the energy. The word Universe in the spiritual knowledge means the very cosmic energy itself associated with the subsequent materialized part of the Universe. In fact, even the space is the first subtle form of energy. Therefore, the word Universe in philosophy means the space or energy and the subsequent materialized energy. In philosophy, the production of Universe means the generation of space or energy. This requires the enquiry about the cause of space or energy and the mechanism of process of generation of space or energy from that cause. Here, in science, the cause is space or energy and the process of generation of matter from the space or energy is the generation of Universe.
Where do you get this stuff?

Our Universe means space or energy and matter.
No. Our Universe is all things that exist.

The Universe referred by scientists in this research is only matter.
No, of course not.

The research of scientists does not touch the cause of space or energy.
These particular scientists are NOT searching for the cause of space or energy.

We are not much interested in this research because it does not touch the cause of the first item of the Universe, which is space or energy. The present research deals only with the generation of the second item, which is matter.
The Universe does not REQUIRE a cause because EXISTENCE does not require a cause.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle
You are confused and are bogged down with semantics. The reason it was coined the "God-Particle" is because proof of its existence has been as elusive as God's.

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God.
No, see above.

The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy.
Lol! But if it is unimaginable then how did you imagine it?

The generator of anything should be beyond its boundary. If you are in a cloud of gas and if you travel to the boundary of the cloud, you will find the generator of that cloud of gas.
Yes, but the Universe does not have nor need to have a cause.

Similarly, if you travel up to the boundary of the Universe, you will certainly find the cause or generator of this Universe.
No, because the Universe has NO boundaries. The Universe is all of existence so there is NO boundary; if there were, then those would be things that exist and so they too would be a part of the Universe!

The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.
Yet here you are imagining it. Care to explain?

The characteristic property of the space is volume, which is the product of length, width and height. These three are the spatial dimensions. Space means the spatial dimensions only.
Sure, but as we have discovered: space is really inseparable from time. This is why it is referred to as spacetime. And there are other FUNDAMENTAL properties as well.

The generator of the space must not have space in it. If space exists in the generator, the pre-existence of space is to be accepted before the generation of space itself. This is impossible. Hence, the generator of space should not have any space or spatial dimensions in it. It means the cause of space is beyond space or spatial dimensions. ‘Beyond space' means that the cause exists after the boundary of space.
Spacetime unfolded from the Apha State of the cosmos. The Alpha State of the cosmos existed timelessly until the Big Bang.

Our intelligence can imagine only anything which has spatial dimensions. Our intelligence can never imagine anything, which is beyond space and which does not have spatial dimensions. This experience proves that the generator of space is beyond our imagination.
Yet here you are imagining the unimaginable! Regardless, you disprove yourself: in order for you to make this claim, YOU would need to be or be able to imagine outside the same spacial dimensions you claim that limit your imagination!

When the cause is unimaginable, the process of generation of imaginable space or energy from the unimaginable cause must be also unimaginable. In this world, the process of an imaginable item from another imaginable cause can be imaginable and hence, can be explained. The cause (God) and the process of generation of this Universe are unimaginable and only the product (Universe) is imaginable.
Again, existence needs no cause because it is transcendental.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2012 11:22:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/8/2012 11:52:37 AM, dattaswami wrote:
Recently, scientists say that God-particle is discovered, which is the cause for Universe. Does this not eliminate God?

Reply: Research Deals with generation of Second Item, Matter

Scientists are investigating the cause for mass of the fundamental particle of matter. This is only the research pertaining to the conversion of energy into matter. The word Universe used by scientists is the materialized phase. Before the production of such Universe, the cosmic energy exists. Therefore, it is related only to the materialization of the particles of matter from the energy. The word Universe in the spiritual knowledge means the very cosmic energy itself associated with the subsequent materialized part of the Universe. In fact, even the space is the first subtle form of energy. Therefore, the word Universe in philosophy means the space or energy and the subsequent materialized energy. In philosophy, the production of Universe means the generation of space or energy. This requires the enquiry about the cause of space or energy and the mechanism of process of generation of space or energy from that cause. Here, in science, the cause is space or energy and the process of generation of matter from the space or energy is the generation of Universe.

Our Universe means space or energy and matter. The Universe referred by scientists in this research is only matter. The research of scientists does not touch the cause of space or energy. We are not much interested in this research because it does not touch the cause of the first item of the Universe, which is space or energy. The present research deals only with the generation of the second item, which is matter.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God. The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy. The generator of anything should be beyond its boundary. If you are in a cloud of gas and if you travel to the boundary of the cloud, you will find the generator of that cloud of gas. Similarly, if you travel up to the boundary of the Universe, you will certainly find the cause or generator of this Universe. The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.

The characteristic property of the space is volume, which is the product of length, width and height. These three are the spatial dimensions. Space means the spatial dimensions only. The generator of the space must not have space in it. If space exists in the generator, the pre-existence of space is to be accepted before the generation of space itself. This is impossible. Hence, the generator of space should not have any space or spatial dimensions in it. It means the cause of space is beyond space or spatial dimensions. ‘Beyond space' means that the cause exists after the boundary of space. Our intelligence can imagine only anything which has spatial dimensions. Our intelligence can never imagine anything, which is beyond space and which does not have spatial dimensions. This experience proves that the generator of space is beyond our imagination.

When the cause is unimaginable, the process of generation of imaginable space or energy from the unimaginable cause must be also unimaginable. In this world, the process of an imaginable item from another imaginable cause can be imaginable and hence, can be explained. The cause (God) and the process of generation of this Universe are unimaginable and only the product (Universe) is imaginable.

http://ualuealualeuale.ytmnd.com...
dattaswami
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2012 11:46:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/9/2012 10:40:00 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
No. Our Universe is all things that exist.

All things can boil down to energy and matter only. Anything is one of the two forms.

The Universe referred by scientists in this research is only matter.
No, of course not.

materialized particles can only be seen microscope etc. If it is not matter, then it is energy, which exists in some wave form. So, the research is confined to matter only.

The research of scientists does not touch the cause of space or energy.
These particular scientists are NOT searching for the cause of space or energy.

Infact, how can science explain the cause of space or energy? If you assume that all the matter in the universe is destroyed, entire universe is filled with energy. How can anybody search for the cause of energy or space? It is beyond science.

We are not much interested in this research because it does not touch the cause of the first item of the Universe, which is space or energy. The present research deals only with the generation of the second item, which is matter.
The Universe does not REQUIRE a cause because EXISTENCE does not require a cause.

This is only a way of escapism, when cannot be explained. This is highly unscientific.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle
You are confused and are bogged down with semantics. The reason it was coined the "God-Particle" is because proof of its existence has been as elusive as God's.

Matter is visible and imaginable. Energy is invisible but imaginable. God is invisible and completely unimaginable.

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God.
No, see above.

The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy.
Lol! But if it is unimaginable then how did you imagine it?

The generator of anything should be beyond its boundary. If you are in a cloud of gas and if you travel to the boundary of the cloud, you will find the generator of that cloud of gas.
Yes, but the Universe does not have nor need to have a cause.

You cannot explain, so avoid discussion and conclude like that.

The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.
Yet here you are imagining it. Care to explain?

Unimaginable generator is not imagined. Its existence is only inferred.

Yet here you are imagining the unimaginable! Regardless, you disprove yourself: in order for you to make this claim, YOU would need to be or be able to imagine outside the same spacial dimensions you claim that limit your imagination!

Existence is only inferred. Nothing about unimaginable is imagined. So, no disproving. It is due to your misunderstanding.

Again, existence needs no cause because it is transcendental.

If you say 'existence needs no cause', it is not scientific at all. It is only a problem to accept a being of higher level.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2012 1:50:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/9/2012 11:46:57 AM, dattaswami wrote:
At 7/9/2012 10:40:00 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
No. Our Universe is all things that exist.
All things can boil down to energy and matter only. Anything is one of the two forms.
So are you saying that all things that exist are either matter or energy? This would imply that no other things exist other than matter and energy. Is that correct?

The Universe referred by scientists in this research is only matter.
No, of course not.
materialized particles can only be seen microscope etc. If it is not matter, then it is energy, which exists in some wave form. So, the research is confined to matter only.
Matter and energy; not just matter.

The research of scientists does not touch the cause of space or energy.
These particular scientists are NOT searching for the cause of space or energy.
Infact, how can science explain the cause of space or energy?
The Big Bang.

If you assume that all the matter in the universe is destroyed, entire universe is filled with energy.
And?

How can anybody search for the cause of energy or space? It is beyond science.
1) Who says existence needs a cause?

2) It is not beyond science.

We are not much interested in this research because it does not touch the cause of the first item of the Universe, which is space or energy. The present research deals only with the generation of the second item, which is matter.
The Universe does not REQUIRE a cause because EXISTENCE does not require a cause.
This is only a way of escapism, when cannot be explained. This is highly unscientific.
1) It's rather funny how you claim that the answer NECESSARILY needs to be unscientific and when I present you with an answer which YOU claim is unscientific, you say that it isn't so BECAUSE it is unscientific!

2) Please SHOW me how what I said is unscientific. And remember, your OPINION as to what is and is not scientific IS irrelevant: only scientific facts matter.

3) I think taking on flights of fancy, as you've done, is a much better example of escapism.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle
You are confused and are bogged down with semantics. The reason it was coined the "God-Particle" is because proof of its existence has been as elusive as God's.
Matter is visible and imaginable. Energy is invisible but imaginable. God is invisible and completely unimaginable.
1) Non sequitur; this has nothing to do with my response.

2) If God is so unimaginable, then how is it that you have imagined Him?

3) Stop equivocating the Higgs Boson nicknamed "the God-Particle" with your version of God's particle.

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God.
No, see above.
Again, this is something that you have made up. The work going on with the elusive Higgs particle has nothing to do with "the root cause" or God. You are hung up on a catchy phrase!

The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy.
Lol! But if it is unimaginable then how did you imagine it?
Nicely unresponded!

The generator of anything should be beyond its boundary. If you are in a cloud of gas and if you travel to the boundary of the cloud, you will find the generator of that cloud of : : Yes, but the Universe does not have nor need to have a cause.
You cannot explain, so avoid discussion and conclude like that.
1) The one that needs to explain is the one making the claim that the Universe requires a cause; that's you. Please explain.

2) I will explain my claim that the Universe indeed does NOT require a cause. You first!

The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.
Yet here you are imagining it. Care to explain?
Unimaginable generator is not imagined. Its existence is only inferred.
To quote you: this is only a way of escapism, when cannot be explained. Yet here you are from within the boundary claiming that you can infer to something outside the boundary...in essence contradicting your previous statements! Smells like hypocrisy to me!

Yet here you are imagining the unimaginable! Regardless, you disprove yourself: in order for you to make this claim, YOU would need to be or be able to imagine outside the same spacial dimensions you claim that limit your imagination!
Existence is only inferred.
If existence is inferred, then what else is there? Everything is an inference! And so I will infer my position!

Nothing about unimaginable is imagined. So, no disproving. It is due to your misunderstanding.
Or your semantics games. Can you please define and contrast imaginable and unimaginable?

Again, existence needs no cause because it is transcendental.
If you say 'existence needs no cause', it is not scientific at all. It is only a problem to accept a being of higher level.

1) Please show the scientific law that requires existence to have a cause.

2) If you require something to be unscientific, then you CANNOT reject something by claiming that is that which you require!

3) Who's unwilling to accept a being of a higher level? Not me, I'm a theist.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
dattaswami
Posts: 322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2012 9:13:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/9/2012 1:50:25 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
3) Who's unwilling to accept a being of a higher level? Not me, I'm a theist.

Reply: The Veda says that Parabrahman created both space (Atmana Akasah…) and energy (Tat Tejo…) in the beginning. This contradiction between the two Vedic statements is understood by Science using the Einstein's special theory of relativity, which says that space bends and this means that space is something. Space can be treated as weak distribution of energy. Cosmic radiation pervading all over as background supports this. Both these statements are to be taken in different views of Science. Hence, God is beyond space and can never be imagined. People used to reject the existence of an unimaginable item. In olden days, people refused God, who is unimaginable. But today in Science, Heisenberg proves the existence of uncertainty or unimaginability, owing to the limits of human capability. In the recent past, Science has developed tremendously and faculty of logic improved a lot. So, today is the right time to introduce the unimaginable concept of God.

In the Vishwarupam shown by Lord Krishna, the simultaneous existence of the limited human body of Krishna as the infinite cosmos as shown to Arjuna is a proof that the Lord is beyond spatial dimensions. Showing the entire creation in the mouth to His mother is another proof that He is beyond the space. Thus, the Lord gave proof for the unimaginability of God as mentioned in Veda. When He lifted a mountain on His finger, it may be explained by Science. Sometimes a small object may contain lot of energy. A small atom bomb releases lot of energy. This explanation is under the realm of spatial dimensions. But, the above two examples cannot be explained by Science. Therefore, all of us have to accept the existence of unimaginable God. The only information about such God is the existence of such God only as said in Veda (Astheetyeva…).

To fulfill the validity of the statements of divine scriptures of which God Himself is the author, God comes down to preach the true knowledge of the scripture and also proves the validity of every statement. Jesus told the same. ‘Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.'
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 2:00:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/9/2012 9:13:23 PM, dattaswami wrote:
At 7/9/2012 1:50:25 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
3) Who's unwilling to accept a being of a higher level? Not me, I'm a theist.
Reply: The Veda says that Parabrahman created both space (Atmana Akasah…) and energy (Tat Tejo…) in the beginning.
Space and energy weren't created; instead, these unfolded from the Alpha State of the Universe.

This contradiction between the two Vedic statements is understood by Science using the Einstein's special theory of relativity, which says that space bends and this means that space is something.
Yes, but quantum mechanics also tells us this, as does logic. Space is something, otherwise what else would it be?

Space can be treated as weak distribution of energy. Cosmic radiation pervading all over as background supports this. Both these statements are to be taken in different views of Science.
I don't know what you mean? None of these statements go against science?

Hence, God is beyond space and can never be imagined.
Magnificent non sequitur!

People used to reject the existence of an unimaginable item.
And they were wise to do so because any reasonable person should reject a contradiction.

When people use the word "unimaginable", what they mean is that it is "difficult to imagine", it is hard to believe, it is shocking, it is uncommon, unthinkable, unspeakable, etc. These are more colloquial uses of the term "unimaginable." Similarly, if I say "you put your foot in your mouth" it doesn't really mean that you put your foot in your mouth, what it means is that "you said something that you shouldn't have" or didn't mean to say, etc.

However, if we take the literal meaning of "unimaginable" then this means "unable to be imagined." But what things are unable to be imagined? If we knew of one then it would no longer be unimagined as we now know and can imagine it!

Please realize that not all things are symmetrical; not all things can be negated meaningfully.

In olden days, people refused God, who is unimaginable. But today in Science, Heisenberg proves the existence of uncertainty or unimaginability, owing to the limits of human capability.
Equivocate much? Uncertainty is NOT unimaginability.

In the recent past, Science has developed tremendously and faculty of logic improved a lot. So, today is the right time to introduce the unimaginable concept of God.
It's always a good time to talk about God, but He is certainly imaginable...otherwise we wouldn't really be able to talk about Him!

In the Vishwarupam shown by Lord Krishna, the simultaneous existence of the limited human body of Krishna as the infinite cosmos as shown to Arjuna is a proof that the Lord is beyond spatial dimensions. Showing the entire creation in the mouth to His mother is another proof that He is beyond the space. Thus, the Lord gave proof for the unimaginability of God as mentioned in Veda. When He lifted a mountain on His finger, it may be explained by Science.
No idea what you are trying to say by this cute story, so I cannot confirm nor deny whether science can explain this.

Sometimes a small object may contain lot of energy. A small atom bomb releases lot of energy. This explanation is under the realm of spatial dimensions.
No idea what you mean by this, but I guess one can say that something small can fall under the realm of spatial dimensions. So?

But, the above two examples cannot be explained by Science.
What above two examples are you talking about? The cute story? But you just finished saying that "it may be explained by Science"? I cannot understand; please clarify.

Therefore, all of us have to accept the existence of unimaginable God. The only information about such God is the existence of such God only as said in Veda (Astheetyeva…).
Uhm, yeah man. That's a good one!

To fulfill the validity of the statements of divine scriptures of which God Himself is the author, God comes down to preach the true knowledge of the scripture and also proves the validity of every statement. Jesus told the same. ‘Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.'
So indeed you DO equivocate much! My scriptures do not speak to science, by the way. The Bible is not a science book.

I do not have a problem with your scriptures or mine; and, if push comes to shove, I don't even have much of a problem with you or anyone else trying to make scriptures fit science...however, I do have a problem when anyone tries to make science fit scriptures. It seems to me that you are either trying to do that or you don't have adequate knowledge of science per se.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2012 2:15:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/9/2012 1:50:25 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 7/9/2012 9:13:23 PM, dattaswami wrote:

Evade much?

So are you saying that all things that exist are either matter or energy? This would imply that no other things exist other than matter and energy. Is that correct?

If you assume that all the matter in the universe is destroyed, entire universe is filled with energy.
And?

How can anybody search for the cause of energy or space? It is beyond science.
1) Who says existence needs a cause?

2) It is not beyond science.

This is only a way of escapism, when cannot be explained. This is highly unscientific.
1) It's rather funny how you claim that the answer NECESSARILY needs to be unscientific and when I present you with an answer which YOU claim is unscientific, you say that it isn't so BECAUSE it is unscientific!

2) Please SHOW me how what I said is unscientific. And remember, your OPINION as to what is and is not scientific IS irrelevant: only scientific facts matter.

3) I think taking on flights of fancy, as you've done, is a much better example of escapism.

Discovery is Fundamental Particle of Matter but not God Particle
You are confused and are bogged down with semantics. The reason it was coined the "God-Particle" is because proof of its existence has been as elusive as God's.
Matter is visible and imaginable. Energy is invisible but imaginable. God is invisible and completely unimaginable.
1) Non sequitur; this has nothing to do with my response.

2) If God is so unimaginable, then how is it that you have imagined Him?

3) Stop equivocating the Higgs Boson nicknamed "the God-Particle" with your version of God's particle.

The scientists think that the energy itself is the root cause or God.
Again, this is something that you have made up. The work going on with the elusive Higgs particle has nothing to do with "the root cause" or God. You are hung up on a catchy phrase!

The scientists stop at the imaginable cause only. They do not agree with the existence of the unimaginable cause, which is the generator of space or energy.
Lol! But if it is unimaginable then how did you imagine it?

You cannot explain, so avoid discussion and conclude like that.
1) The one that needs to explain is the one making the claim that the Universe requires a cause; that's YOU. Please explain.

2) I will explain my claim that the Universe indeed does NOT require a cause.
Existence needs no cause because it is transcendental. It is the default state of the Universe and there is NO OTHER alternative. Why? Because the alternative is nonexistence and nonexistence does NOT exist! The scientific support for this is the laws of thermodynamics, namely: matter/energy CANNOT be CREATED nor DESTROYED but only TRANSFORMED.

The boundary of the Universe is infinite, which is unimaginable. The unimaginable boundary of the Universe suggests that the generator of the Universe must be also unimaginable.
Yet here you are imagining it. Care to explain?
Unimaginable generator is not imagined. Its existence is only inferred.
To quote you: this is only a way of escapism, when cannot be explained. Yet here you are from within the boundary claiming that you can infer to something outside the boundary...in essence contradicting your previous statements! Smells like hypocrisy to me!

Yet here you are imagining the unimaginable, again! Regardless, you disprove yourself because in order for you to make this claim, YOU would need to be or be able to imagine outside the same spacial dimensions you claim that limit your imagination!
Existence is only inferred.
IF existence is inferred, then what else is there? Everything is an inference! Everything that exists in an inference! And so I will infer my position!

Nothing about unimaginable is imagined. So, no disproving. It is due to your misunderstanding.
Or your semantics games. Can you please define and contrast imaginable and unimaginable?
On an aside note, I did not wait for you to answer and already posted my definition of unimaginable in my previous post

Again, existence needs no cause because it is transcendental.
If you say 'existence needs no cause', it is not scientific at all. It is only a problem to accept a being of higher level.
1) Please show the scientific law that requires existence to have a cause.


2) If you require something to be unscientific, then you CANNOT reject something by claiming that is that which you require!


Still waiting for my answers, Kimosabe!
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.