Doesn't Science Almost Lend Itself To A Higher Power?

[Booker]

I'm not here for a debate. I'd just like to say before I ask this, that I respect everyone for whatever their veiws or beliefs are. One of my best friends is a strict Atheist. I hope I can get that respect in turn.

Doesn't Science, in some cases, almost imply a higher power?

For instance, the first Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can change from one form to another but cannot be created or destroyed. I made created stand out specifically, because if energy can not be created, how does it exist? It was just 'always there'? Well, that sounds a lot like most beliefs in a higher power; the power was not created, it was just always there. If energy cannot be created by scientific law, then how did it become?

Maybe I don't understand the science behind it well enough. I'm by no means an expert in this field, the universe just interests me so I read up and watch documentaries on it and such. An explanation, if I'm wrong, would be wonderful.

Again, not looking for a debate here.

 

[LUMOS ULTIMATUM]

I think our creator isn't so conscious as we think he is. God is a natural force that created everything IMO. If not, why are there wars and evil?

 

[Calpal]

Who knows, i was always fascinated with the law that states that there is constantly the same amount of energy and mass in existence at all times. Or that dark matter makes up most of the matter we see and then some we dont.

 

[Booker]

I think our creator isn't so conscious as we think he is. God is a natural force that created everything IMO. If not, why are there wars and evil?

God leaves us with free will. A common misconception is that "Oh God can stop evil but won't".

God does not interfere in our lives, I believe. He allows us free will to make our own judgements.

 

[- J AV -]

energy exists in differnt forms... and human kind was able to convert one form of energy into another,,, and its true that it can not be created

 

[YowYan]

Science and spirituality go hand in hand. Religious scripts are full of ancient scientific facts and astronomy. Religious people just fail to interpret that and lay down every universal question with "God created it" which stands for "I have no clue". That's where modern science steps in.

 

[Booker]

Science and spirituality go hand in hand. Religious scripts are full of ancient scientific facts and astronomy. Religious people just fail to interpret that and lay down every universal question with "God created it" which stands for "I have no clue". That's where modern science steps in.

As far as how energy was created then, what's the explanation?

Scientific law states energy cannot be created; how did it come to be then?

 

[Fapulous]

I understand where you might get the idea.

Science has a lot of quesitons and some people tend to fill in the blanks with religion.

This is one of the reasons that people think that the Big Bang was caused by God or some other higher power.

Science doesn't exactly set itself up to a higher power, sure it might suggest that there might be more advanced life forms out there, but people fill in what science can't explain with religion.

 

[Nupp]

Science does not imply a creator at all.... YET

The scientific process is very simple and easy to understand, all you do is gather as much data as possible and from that data see what clues/conclusions can be made.

So far science has found no evidence or data at all for a higher power, if they ever did then all of the scientists in the world would make theories on how this might be possible and try to understand the process.

I find it odd that people of faith can ask what was there before the universe was created (which science can not answer) but then see that as evidence of god. But if a scientist asks what was there before god (which religion can not answer) they can not make the link that if god was "always there" why is it impossible that energy or the universe was "always there"

 

[Olorin]

science does not imply god, to the contrary it shows that we do not need god to explain the universe, and there in the concept of a deity loses all ground since the first deities were created to explain ''supernatural'' phenomena (ie something ppl couldn't understand)

I have a question: is (who/what ppl call) god allpowerful?

Science and spirituality go hand in hand. Religious scripts are full of ancient scientific facts and astronomy. Religious people just fail to interpret that and lay down every universal question with "God created it" which stands for "I have no clue". That's where modern science steps in.

aren't you the guy who said he has an aura around himself?

 

[YellowFang]

Science is the logical explanation of nature created by 'The God'...@ Dude bluntly complimenting against 'The God'...God created mankind for a reason and that's why they gets extinct after a time and gets evaluated for their doings in their life...Man has been given the choice to chose between Good and Bad...If there hadn't been Good or Evil then we wouldn't be the beings with free will as of now...

 

[Erin]

You are correct.

 

[Ciao]

Science is the higher power.

 

[Xicer]

Science is the most possible explanations given to events when enough information becomes available that a conclusion can be drawn. That's why we know that animals evolve, the big bang created the Earth, and etc. We have enough evidence to say with certainty that these are right, but if new evidence comes along that contradicts theories, the theories are revised to account for the new evidence.

Having said that, there is no evidence to suggest that the energy that we find in the universe came from a source of any kind. This means that science can't provide an explanation for this occurrence, other than it can be neither created nor destroyed.

That is a big gap in knowledge that most people wish to have, so people do what they have done for thousands of years. Turn to stories to explain the unknown, or religion which has little to no scientific accuracy.

So to answer your question, the lack of science leads people to religion.

 

[YowYan]

science does not imply god, to the contrary it shows that we do not need god to explain the universe, and there in the concept of a deity loses all ground since the first deities were created to explain ''supernatural'' phenomena (ie something ppl couldn't understand)

I have a question: is (who/what ppl call) god allpowerful?



aren't you the guy who said he has an aura around himself?

Aura = elektromagnetic field and yes, I can see auras.
Everyone has an Aura.. correction, everything. As everything is energy.

 

[DOD_bld]

I'm not here for a debate. I'd just like to say before I ask this, that I respect everyone for whatever their veiws or beliefs are. One of my best friends is a strict Atheist. I hope I can get that respect in turn.

Doesn't Science, in some cases, almost imply a higher power?

For instance, the first Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can change from one form to another but cannot be created or destroyed. I made created stand out specifically, because if energy can not be created, how does it exist? It was just 'always there'? Well, that sounds a lot like most beliefs in a higher power; the power was not created, it was just always there. If energy cannot be created by scientific law, then how did it become?

Maybe I don't understand the science behind it well enough. I'm by no means an expert in this field, the universe just interests me so I read up and watch documentaries on it and such. An explanation, if I'm wrong, would be wonderful.

Again, not looking for a debate here.

I am an Astrophysics major in college, and can attempt to explain the meaning behind the first law of thermodynamics with regard to your question if you'd like. -- Well I'm going to whether or not you'd like... so here it is.

ΔE(int) = Q - W

Where:
ΔE(int) = the change in the internal energy of a closed system
Q = the heat added to a system
W = the net work done by the system

Okay, so what that all means in a nutshell is that our entire universe as observed is a closed system.

If our universe is a closed system that obeys the laws of physics such as thermodynamic law; that means, the ALL of the energy contained in our universe has always been there. During the observed and theorized history of our universe the sum of all things has never changed. There has been expansion followed by the conversion of light energy into heat or radiant energy, as well as conversion into various forms of matter.

If you think that something is godly just because it was always there, simply depends upon your faith and whether or not you're willing to trust books and stories written by people that didn't know the earth was round, that the sun was in the center of our solar system, or how truly insignificant the earth is on a galactic level.
However with that level of trust, why not choose to believe that there is no god, and all things that every will be, always were, in some form or another. It is sort of the same thing, only easier on the conscious; and there would be no made-up predetermined beliefs to go to war over.

Science is all about facts and/or proof. Whereas faith in a higher power is just that... faith, with no reliance on fact whatsoever.

This makes me laugh to think about, but I had a mentor say to me once; "If religion was the right answer to everything, then why isn't it called realigion!"

 

[Fire of Youth]

Science, for the most part, does not discount the possibility of a Gods existence. If your religious, you could still advocate science as an attempt to understand God's creation. However, where scientific thought starts to argue against the existence of God is the denial of dualism. Dualism is the beleief that there is our coporeal bodies and our incoporeal soul. In one sense this seems to be at the centre of your argument; that something can exist outside of our universe's corporeal space. i.e. God was present when the universe was created and perhaps changed one form of energy into the energy of our current universe??

Now we need to seriously consider how we define our universe. If we define our universe as the total sum of existence then anything outside the universe does not exist. But then again, if our universe has a shape and size, as is implied by our hypothesised universal expansion, then logically there should be a boundary for where the universe ends. At which point we must consider that there must be something on the outside, perhaps with a corporeal structure that we don't comprehend yet.

How I explain the universe is absent any diety like influence. Specifically, the universe goes through a repeated cycle of expansion (from the big bang) and reduction (towards the big crunch). Other universes that exist adjacent to ours are going through the same processes. Perhaps there is a large dynamical system underlying the expansion/reduction of the many universes e.g. an adjacent unvierse reduces as our expands and vice-versa??

Anyway, this is an extremely large debate for which is diffficult to even scratch the top layer in a forum such as this. Nevertheless, let me pose some thoughts that you may want to consider:
1) Scientific "Laws" are constantly refined by the accumilating evidence. The inability of any given scientific law to explain some aspect of existence is not evidence for God's existence. It is just evidence that our understanding of the law is not complete in some way. Or perhaps the scientific law is completely wrong. God does not need to enter the equation.
2) Science may not be anti-God or anti-religion but it does not rest on faith. It is entirely reasonable to use scientific methods to explore the evidence for God's existence. However, you should also weigh the evidence that God does not exist before any conclusions are made.
3) Religion is one way of understanding the unvierse and puts a preferable code of behaviour with that understanding. Science does the same thing. Science says that scientific methods/thought are the correct way to understand the universe. The evidence from scientific investigations are used to determine preferable behaviour in every aspect of our lives. Consequently, science has many of the same hallmarks as religion. Science could be considered the predominant religion of our modern society.

 

[Nous]

Yes and no. There is still a lot we don't know and people tend to use religion to try and understand what has yet to be learned/discovered. How did energy come to be? Well you could say it has always existed.. Prior to the Big-Bang, time didn't exist.. It's all confusing but it fascinates me!

:flowers :flowers

 

[EnDash]

just to clear things up on the actual official desctiption of what science explains. science explain HOW things happen, not why. the laws of thermodynamics explain only what happens with energy like heat or light, not why it happens or who made it that way, thats for each individual person to decide. when a scientist or athiest gives you a scientific example to why god doesn't exist (or maybe why he do exist) he only takes science as an example of his own opinion, there is no scientific way to determine a logical creator for the world or for humans.

now that things that for me probably support god the most are things that are unexplainable, for instance the copenhagen interpertation for quantum mechanics and the uncartinity prinicple. the copenhagen interepration says that the value of something like location of an electron is determined only after you measure it, so before you measure the location of the electron the electron exist as a wave in multiple locations. the uncartinity prinicple says that you can know the location of an atom, or know it's velocity, but not both at the same time. the more accurate you measure one, the less accurate the other is. meaning that you can never be fully sure about the atom.

to the quantum mechanics and spesificly copenhagen interpertation, Einstein said "God does not play with dice" cause Einstein didn't believe in quantum mechanics and it's randomness, to which neils boher replied "Einstein, Don't tell god what to do" from my signature. (today everyone pretty much agree about the quantum mechanics thing).

also, there are currently two things that are completly unexplainable, the center of a black hole and the moment of the big bang. according to physics at the center of a black hole the gravity is infinity, which makes the diffrence in time 0. and there is no other value that we got with current equations. so either time stops at the center of a black hole or our science is incomplete. pretty much the same with the moment of the big bang (all the matter in the universe in one place creates an enormous gravity that nothing can escape, how did the stars went away?).

lastly, there is a really nice hypotetical theory that i really like that's called the free lunch universe, it states that the universe is made of positive energy in the form of matter, and negative energy in the form of gravity that is equal in size. so if x is the total energy of matter and -x is the total energy of gravity, x + -x = 0, which is the total amount of energy in the universe. while it is a very hypothetical concept, if it's true it means that to create a universe you need 0 energy

 

[Transcendence]

Absolutely not. Science is strict, hard facts based on empirical evidence, no matter the field of science. It never hints at a higher power and always explains itself when it makes a claim.