An example of quantum tunnelling is the following:
Technically speaking, the sun doesn’t have enough heat or energy to fuse two hydrogen molecules into an alpha particle , yet it does. This is because a particle has a minuscule probability that it will appear where it should not appear.

Could this mean that life is probabilistic and life was not created by God or that God does not exist?

God doesn't conform to science; science conforms to God.

I actually read the book that sets this idea out, and it was fascinating. The only problem is, in order for the author to legitimately get "something from nothing" without a God, he had to completely redefine the word "nothing" so that it includes "somethings" like quantum waves and such. That's not "nothing." So quantum tunneling really doesn't eliminate the need for a creator, it just redefines the words we use in order to try and get around an actual creation out of nothing.

Quote from Roddilla=

An example of quantum tunneling is the following;

Technically speaking, the sun doesn't have enough heat or energy to fuse two hydrogen molecules into an alpha particle,yet it does this. This is because it has a minuscule probability that it will appear where it should not appear.






I think this is largely correct. If not for quantum mechanics atoms could not exist. Within an instant electrons would crash into the nucleus

In terms of probability of the quantum world it would be a case of the most likely compared to the least likely. It is usually talked about in terms of a probability wave.

I think you are referring to "A Universe from Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss.

I think you are right in you reference to quantum mechanics and nothingness. There is no empty space because quantum particles pop in and out of existence. However, this is only half of the theory. It is actually a theory of quantum mechanics and special relativity.

With the use of some mathematical maneuvering Krauss is showing that we live in a flat universe where the total energy adds up to zero. If this is the case then such a universe can begin from nothing.

Another way of saying this would be that for 99.9 percent of the time there existed - and will continue to exist, a badly designed universe. Furthermore,if we allow for enough time there will be a situation whereby dark energy and darker matter will be at a ratio necessary for a universe to give rise to people who can ask questions such as, " Is the universe coincidence or design?"

Thank you for your response but if the total energy of the universe is zero what was its driving force to be formed and be formed in such a perfect way and order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

Thank you for your response but if the total energy of the universe is zero what was its driving force to be formed and be formed in such a perfect way and order.

---

I have a different answer. But if you were to ask Lawrence Krauss think he would say that the universe is very old and very big and given enough time eventually there would be some time in history whereby the universe would necessarily give rise to conditions that are conducive to intelligent beings.

Tut

But Tuttyd do you agree with the idea of god or not?

Even supposing Krauss and others are correct about these quantum behaviors, they really don't tell us anything about the God question. I know some have tried to use this material to suggest that a creator God isn't strictly necessary, but that really doesn't address the question of whether such a being is actually there or not. So even if we buy these arguments about existence and emergence out of "nothing," they're no help, because lack of necessity does not equal lack of existence. At best, the material is neutral on the question.

But how can we ever be sure then? I mean how can we base some form of reasoning for starting to believing or continuing to do so so?

I once read that these particles going in and out of existence exist for a small time only and so it is not possible that universe actually was created by such particles.

My only incredible "proof" is the DNA sequence. How could it be attributed to certain amino acids?
How could such complex enzymes cater for reactions occurring in life forms?

Christian faith is built on historical eyewitness testimony about the person and work of Jesus. In particular, we have eyewitness accounts of his death and resurrection, possibly the most phenomenal event in all of human history. Instantaneous particles can't create this universe; neither can blind chance if it has nothing to begin with. But a being who can raise a man from the dead? That could very well be the creator!

Oh, I know all about the various explanations to get away from the "eyewitness testimony" aspect, but really, they don't work. The fact is, the historical material we in the gospels is accurate to what we know happened and who was there when it happened. Each verified historical tidbit strengthens the case that they were indeed written by people who were there and saw what happened. Only a predisposition to the idea that the miraculous can't happen can lead a person to doubt the rest of it. And quantum mechanics shows that we live in a universe where anything is possible, especially if an event stems from a source outside the universe itself. Jesus said he would rise and that would demonstrate that he was telling the truth. He did. So it would seem that he was.

Pretty straightforward, really. It always amazes me how well people have taken a handful of such simple facts and events and loaded them down with traditions, rules, restrictions, speculations, outright fabrications, and what-have-you over the centuries. It just proves how much we need redemption, because everything we touch, we foul up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

....Oh, I know all about the various explanations to get away from the "eyewitness testimony" aspect, but really, they don't work. The fact is, the historical material we in the gospels is accurate to what we know happened and who was there when it happened. Each verified historical tidbit strengthens the case that they were indeed written by people who were there and saw what happened.

---

"The fact is..."? Quite a leap.

Not really. There's plenty of archaeology and other materials to back it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Not really. There's plenty of archaeology and other materials to back it up.

---

If you're referring to the Resurrection, I'd be interested in seeing the archeological and other materials that back it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roddilla

I once read that these particles going in and out of existence exist for a small time only and so it is not possible that universe actually was created by such particles.

---

I think this topic is better suited to cosmology, astronomy, physics or philosophy.

I think this is correct. The universe didn't begin with such particles, because for a time after the Big Bang such particles didn't exist. However, their existence at the moment is the theory behind a universe that is continuing to accelerate, while at the same time creating time and space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ;

If you're referring to the Resurrection, I'd be interested in seeing the archeological and other materials that back it up.

---

There's way, way, WAY too much to cover here. This might get you started:

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Resurrect...der_0825427886

That's the Kindle edition, but they also have it in hard copy. (For some reason the link didn't show up right, so some copy-and-paste might be necessary.)

omnipresence is the word. It's not in the space and not other place, it's here and it's everywhere. I think we should look at the other end. White holes are very much there. Presence of white matter. Energy is constant. Does constant = zero ? Don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ;

omnipresence is the word. it's not in the space and not other place, it's here and it's everywhere. I think we should look at the other end. white holes are very much there. presence of white matter. energy is constant. does constant = zero ? don't think so.

---

It's official: this thread just sailed right over my head.

Oh, good, I thought it was just me.

Speaking of out of this world...