A human trying to understand the universe is like an ant trying to understand how the

universe works.

I just think the universe is wayyy beyond human understanding and we will never work out the true reason that it ever began (if there was even a starting point at all).

The best answer we have in terms of science is the big bang theory and the clue is in the name- its just a theory.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Optimum_

Original post by rations

Yes, in our lifetime we won't know. However the research being conducted now will help our children, then their children, then their children and so on for as long as Humans exists. I'm sure one day we will know however, I will be a one million year old corpse.

Reply 2

rations

Yes.

But I honestly think a lot of what we taught about space is bs and there is other reasons for the structure of space that we don't know about.

Reply 3

rations

Original post by Optimum_

Humans have only been around for 200,000 years. I don't think humans will be around in 1 million years. They'll be all gone.

Reply 4

Applepiex3

Isn't it exciting? :h:

The idea of having other creatures AKA aliens! What if they look like humans ?! :biggrin:

Reply 5

Optimum_

Original post by rations

Humans have only been around for 200,000 years. I don't think humans will be around in 1 million years. They'll be all gone.

Maybe, unless we can unify the world somehow. Space exploration is where we should be investing time, money and resources. Not killing each other (won't happen though).

Reply 6

ValerieKR

Original post by rations

No it isn't. An ant isn't capable of 'understanding' things - and we already have a comprehensive understanding about how a significant amount of the universe works.

When people say 'just a theory' they normally don't know what a 'theory' is - the word 'theory' does not mean we are uncertain. Have you heard of 'the germ theory of disease' - that's 'just a theory' but are you unsure that the germs we've observed and know cause disease actually cause disease? Or the theory of gravity? We're so sure about that one we can predict the orbits of planets millions of years into the future.

The word 'theory' means something different in real science. Unfortunately the creationist 'evolution is just a theory' mentality can exploit that ill-defined terminology.

I think the sentiment you express in the title of this thread is a misguided and historically dangerous one (ask Galeleo, or indeed many of the thousands of academic who have been murdered (and in some places still are murdered today) for showing/proving something that 'they did not have the right to show/prove'.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 7

rations

Original post by Applepiex3

Isn't it exciting? :h:

The idea of having other creatures AKA aliens! What if they look like humans ?! :biggrin:

Nope.

Reply 8

Applepiex3

Original post by rations

Nope.

Ouch, shut down :colone:

Reply 9

rations

Original post by ValerieKR

No it isn't. An ant isn't capable of 'understanding' things - and we already have a comprehensive understanding about how a significant amount of the universe works.

How do you know humans are capable of 'understanding' things to the extent of the universe?
An ant will have some understanding within its own world and to its own limits. Just like a human has understanding of how things work in their own world and to a higher degree. But even humans have limits to their understanding.

When people say 'just a theory' they normally don't know what a 'theory' is - the word 'theory' does not mean we are uncertain. Have you heard of 'the germ theory of disease' - that's 'just a theory' but are you unsure that the germs we've observed and know cause disease actually cause disease? Or the theory of gravity? We're so sure about that one we can predict the orbits of planets millions of years into the future.

The word 'theory' means something different in real science. Unfortunately the creationist 'evolution is just a theory' mentality can exploit that ill-defined terminology.

It is still just a theory. There have been many theories made by science before that turned out to be false. Humans don't even fully understand how things within their own world work yet. It will be a major surprise if they managed to work out what happened apparently 13 billion years ago.

Reply 10

rations

Original post by Applepiex3

Ouch, shut down :colone:

No you.

Reply 11

Applepiex3

Original post by rations

No you.

what?

Reply 12

rations

Original post by Applepiex3

what?

Sorry i thought you said shut up instead of shut down. :colondollar:

Reply 13

ValerieKR

Original post by rations

Exactly what limits?

Original post by rations

We have already worked out what much of what happened 13 billion years ago.

It's a theory that I am thinking right now - because I cannot provide mathematical proof for it does that mean it's as likely to be false as false theories in sciences?

Are you really stupid enough to think that the germ theory of disease is going to be disproved one day? Or the theory of gravity? Or the theory that matter exists? Or the theory that the universe exists? Or the theory that protons and neutrons have different properties? Or the theory that two oppositely charged particles will experience an attractive force? There's this thing called evidence. The more evidence a theory accumulates the stronger it is - all of the theories I've mentioned and many more have accumulated orders of magnitude more evidence than any disproved theory ever has.

What you seem to be saying is: 'The universe is very complicated so we aren't capable of understanding any of it.' - which is just objectively false

Reply 14

rations

Original post by ValerieKR

Exactly what limits?

The limits of understanding things beyond our understanding.

We have already worked out what much of what happened 13 billion years ago.

Very Very debatable. Just because you told something happened it doesn't mean it did. Do you just take everything your taught as gospel? You sound like the guy that what burn people at stake in the 16th century for claiming the earth was round and not flat. Your a product of your society- you can't think for yourself.

It's a theory that I am thinking right now - because I cannot provide mathematical proof for it does that mean it's as likely to be false as false theories in sciences?

It means that there is a chance it could be false and shouldn't be taking like its a fact.

Are you really stupid enough to think that the germ theory of disease is going to be disproved one day? Or the theory of gravity? Or the theory that matter exists? Or the theory that the universe exists? Or the theory that protons and neutrons have different properties? Or the theory that two oppositely charged particles will experience an attractive force? There's this thing called evidence. The more evidence a theory accumulates the stronger it is - all of the theories I've mentioned and many more have accumulated orders of magnitude more evidence than any disproved theory ever has.

While there are some theories that are true there are many in history that turned out not to be true ( I can list them if you really want?though a quick google search is all you need) and there will be many theories in the present day that will turn out to be false.

What you seem to be saying is: 'The universe is very complicated so we aren't capable of understanding any of it.' - which is just objectively false

No i am looking at the possibility that the way the universe works may be beyond our understanding. Humans are in no way a perfect creature- do you really think we'll reach the day were we understand how everything in existence works?

Reply 15

Applepiex3

Original post by rations

Sorry i thought you said shut up instead of shut down. :colondollar:

It's okie

I'll accept the apology alongside your acceptance of aliens :tongue:

(tables turned quite fast :colonhash:

)

Reply 16

ValerieKR

Original post by rations

The limits of understanding things beyond our understanding.

So... what you're saying is you don't know what you're talking about? I thought you said we couldn't understand anything?

Original post by rations

Very Very debatable. Just because you told something happened it doesn't mean it did.
Do you just take everything your taught as gospel? You sound like the guy that what burn people at stake in the 16th century for claiming the earth was round and not flat. Your a product of your society- you can't think for yourself.

It's not debatable at all - if you ask ANYONE who knows what they're talking about then they'll explain to you that yes, we do know plenty about the early universe.

I'll have you know that I do not take everything I'm taught as gospel - I look at the evidence and I decide what is likely true. We know things about the temperature (cosmic background radiation) and composition of the early universe (by observing the edges of the universe) - and we know about the fundamental particles that exist in those conditions and form elements in the correct ratio to create that composition - believing the STANDARD MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE which is backed by overwhelming evidence doesn't make you stupid, not believing it does.

I'm unsure why you think I sound like him, but you sound like an anti-interllectual... because your argument is an anti-intellectual one.
As a successful applicant for mathematics at Trinity College, Cambridge I would hope I can think for myself.

Original post by rations

It means that there is a chance it could be false and shouldn't be taking like its a fact.

When I see you reply to my forum post I can't mathematically prove you have done - my eyes may be deceiving me - so I shouldn't take you responding as fact. That notion is ridiculous and you know it. Should I not take the laws of thermodynamics as fact?
Actually - I have a better idea.
You said earlier 'evolution is just a theory' and implied we shouldn't believe it - vt which I assume you mean 'the process of natural selection'
Tell me exactly which of these statements you think are lacking in the truth department:
1) Certain genetic characteristics are better suited to surviving in a given habitat than others.
2) Offspring of organisms inherit the genes of their parents.

ONLY THOSE TWO THINGS need to be true for evolution to exist. It is not 'just a theory', it is categorically true.

Original post by rations

I am perfectly aware of this and never claimed to the contrary.

Original post by rations

That is not a statement I have made in any of these posts. You're projecting.

What I'm saying is:

'We can trust thoroughly tested science.' and 'Just because it falls under the 'theory' categorisation doesn't mean we shouldn't consider it true.'

Reply 17

rations

Original post by ValerieKR

So... what you're saying is you don't know what you're talking about? I thought you said we couldn't understand anything?

No I amjust stating something that might be possible.

It's not debatable at all - if you ask ANYONE who knows what they're talking about then they'll explain to you that yes, we do know plenty about the early universe.

Ahhh yes ask'anyone that knows what they're talking about'. Basically I need ask anyone that says something you agree with because if they say something else they must be wrong and what you belief is right. Well done- why are you always right?

I'll have you know that I do not take everything I'm taught as gospel - I look at the evidence and I decide what is likely true. We know things about the temperature (cosmic background radiation) and composition of the early universe (by observing the edges of the universe) - and we know about the fundamental particles that exist in those conditions and form elements in the correct ratio to create that composition - believing the STANDARD MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE which is backed by overwhelming evidence doesn't make you stupid, not believing it does.

There are many things in science in the past that was thought to be 100% true now science says that is completely false. Just because you were brainwashed into thinking it makes sense- it doesn't mean it does. Things change all the time.

I'm unsure why you think I sound like him, but you sound like an anti-interllectual... because your argument is an anti-intellectual one.
As a successful applicant for mathematics at Trinity College, Cambridge I would hope I can think for myself.

Intellectual*. You might want to try educating yourself in spelling boy.

AndI have plenty of intellect, You don't- you just believe everything your told.

Take them as fact all you want. But it is debatable whether they're actually a 'fact' or something made up to help humans feel like they understand how things work to make them feel better.

Actually - I have a better idea.
You said earlier 'evolution is just a theory' and implied we shouldn't believe it - vt which I assume you mean 'the process of natural selection'
Tell me exactly which of these statements you think are lacking in the truth department:
1) Certain genetic characteristics are better suited to surviving in a given habitat than others.
2) Offspring of organisms inherit the genes of their parents.

ONLY THOSE TWO THINGS need to be true for evolution to exist. It is not 'just a theory', it is categorically true.

Those weren't my exact words but ok.

Then two things are just theories and are not necessarily 100% true in 100% of situations encountered in the universe.

I am perfectly aware of this and never claimed to the contrary

No you've this ignorant attitude that just because science says its true then it must be true.

So you're saying that human will never understand everything in the universe?

Also just because it falls under the 'theory' categorisation doesn't mean you shouldn't consider it false.

Reply 18

username2763536

Its not really the same is it? An ant doesnt have the level of conciousness a human does.And just because we may never know doesnt mean we shouldnt try find out.Its ok not to know.We should just enjoy it for what it is.

Reply 19

rations

Original post by Robby2312

Depends on what way you look at it. An ant does have a conciousness to an extent but not to the degree to understand how the world works. Likewise I think humans don't have a high enough level of conciousness to understand how the whole universe works. It just goes way beyond our understanding. Do you not think this is a possibility at least?