format_quote Originally Posted by
asadxyz
Counter questions indicate you have become helpless to answer my questions.
Allah is all powerful He can do whatever he likes.He created this Universe and Matter and Energy.
He rises the Sun daily and brings Nights.Call your super Powers to revert it .
Actually, Brahman is the all powerful one. And he transcends all matter, energy, time, space, being, and everything beyond in this Universe.
Even if you prayed for 50 years straight to Allah, you couldn't reverse the rotation of the earth or reduce Mt. Everest to sandy beach.
Joking aside, have you ever heard of the casimir effect or zero point energy?
No?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/9747
Enjoy your reading. It even has the names o researchers that have don't the experiments and measure the force.
format_quote Originally Posted by http://www.vuletic.com/hume/cefec/1-1.html
(ii) Can something come from nothing?
Even were we to assume, against physics, that there was some time prior to the origin of the universe when there was nothing except time, it is unclear what problem this would supposedly raise. There certainly is no logical contradiction in imagining there being nothing at one point in time and then there being something at a later point in time; it is not as though we are talking about "nothing" somehow metamorphosing into an existent something. Although the proposition that something cannot come from nothing (like the proposition that the Earth is flat) traditionally has been a matter of "common sense," it actually (like so much "common sense") reflects only popular prejudice and lacks rigorous logical support. It is not that we know something can come from nothing; it is just that the opposite cannot simply be taken for granted.
(iia) Is it observed? One argument against the idea of something coming from nothing is that we never observe such things happening. I suspect this kind of reasoning is always in the back of the mind of the average man, and explains why the idea is so counterintuitive. However, if we are talking about empty space when we talk about "nothing," then it actually is not true that we never observe things come from nothing: the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle allows for particle-antiparticle pairs to spontaneously appear out of empty space for very brief periods of time. These virtual particles (or quantum vacuum fluctuations) are ubiquitous, and create measurable effects such as the Casimir-Polder force and the Lamb shift. Some physicists have even invoked the same kind of mechanisms to generate theories of the origin of the entire universe from a background of empty spacetime (Tryon 1973).
One can, of course respond that virtual particles do not in fact appear out of nothing, because they occur in a background of spacetime in which quantum mechanics operates. While true, this response undermines the claim that we know from observation that nothing can come into existence out of nothing, since the closest thing to nothing that we are ever able to observe is empty spacetime.
(iib) Does it require self-creation? Another argument against the idea of something coming from nothing is that the idea supposedly requires self-creation, which is impossible since nothing can have causal power before it exists. For instance, creationists often assert that to say that the universe came from nothing is to say that it created itself. But this is not so: the idea of the universe "coming from nothing" commits one only to the view that at one time there was nothing, and then at a later time, the universe existed. Talk of causation, much less self-causation, does not need to enter the picture at all.
vacuum fluctuations, particle and antiparticle generation, baryogenesis
Do you believe in gravity, or electromagnetic forces? The "self-concocted" theories would not work if the were not based on observable fact. Unless you wish to believe that god, through his divine will, actively helps to keep us on the ground attracted towards the centre of our earth, the centre of our solar system, the centre of our galaxy, etc... then you have to provide proof for that. Do you understand why we still say the theory of gravity, and not the law of gravity? Basic understandings of what qualifies as a credible/respectable theory in science is needed before you can label anything as self-concocted in an attempt to discredit it.
Besides, the clothes you wear and the computer you're using was all based on self-concocted theories. You rely on them to get through each and every day.
If you want the proof, the mathematics has been done and the practical application are seen every day in micromachined devices, satellites, even the computer you're using.
Whether you're quoting the Rig Veda or the Qu'ran, claiming god did it is not an explanation at all as it lacks proof in every department.
Al the best wishes,
Faysal