Astrophysics

[Nashita]

Astrophysics says that this universe is created by the big bang . Even Quran explains how big bang created the universe. But most astrophysicists don't believe in God? Stephen Hawkins didn't believe in God . Science hasn't approve the concept of heaven and hell . What do you have to say about this?

[Ümit]

Astrophysics says that this universe is created by the big bang . Even Quran explains how big bang created the universe. But most astrophysicists don't believe in God? Stephen Hawkins didn't believe in God . Science hasn't approve the concept of heaven and hell . What do you have to say about this?

Big Bang is not a living creature so it cannot create anything. Allah created the universe by initiating the big bang.
The discoverer of the big bang was Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian astronomer and at the same time a catholic priest....so a god fearing man.

[Nashita]

Big Bang is not a living creature so it cannot create anything. Allah created the universe by initiating the big bang.
The discoverer of the big bang was Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian astronomer and at the same time a catholic priest....so a god fearing man.

Big bang is not a living creature but it's a process which explains how the universe got created.
Well I don't know whether he is a priest or not and even if he is , I want to know to know why he believed in God and his religion Christianity?

[Ümit]

Unfortunately we cannot ask him why he believed in God and why he wasn't Muslim...he is dead.
Big bang theory indeed explains the creation of the universe perfect.

I think the question you are asking here is:
how come that scientists can believe in the big bang theory...but still not believe in God?

Science is a tool for us to explain how everything around us works. you see some strange phenomenon, thinks out a possible explanation for it, test this possibility whether is feasable or not...if not you think out another explanation, if so, you can investigate a little deeper.

So science is always an approximation of the reality.
pure science is only interested in providing logical explanations for yet unknown phenomenon using facts and experiments which can reproduce this or similar phenomenon...sometimes on a smaller or controlable scale and environment.
Therefore, science is not interested in stuff which are not provable, logical or spiritual in the first place.

So, some scientiscts understood this and they still believed in God...others were not aware of this, and got fooled by the illusion of the power of science that it can explain everything...and they were atheists.

In reality, science will never prove, not disprove the existence of God...because if it could...then the whole concept of coming to this world has no use anymore.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Nashita]

Unfortunately we cannot ask him why he believed in God and why he wasn't Muslim...he is dead.
Big bang theory indeed explains the creation of the universe perfect.

I think the question you are asking here is:
how come that scientists can believe in the big bang theory...but still not believe in God?

Science is a tool for us to explain how everything around us works. you see some strange phenomenon, thinks out a possible explanation for it, test this possibility whether is feasable or not...if not you think out another explanation, if so, you can investigate a little deeper.

So science is always an approximation of the reality.
pure science is only interested in providing logical explanations for yet unknown phenomenon using facts and experiments which can reproduce this or similar phenomenon...sometimes on a smaller or controlable scale and environment.
Therefore, science is not interested in stuff which are not provable, logical or spiritual in the first place.

So, some scientiscts understood this and they still believed in God...others were not aware of this, and got fooled by the illusion of the power of science that it can explain everything...and they were atheists.

In reality, science will never prove, not disprove the existence of God...because if it could...then the whole concept of coming to this world has no use anymore.

Science is definitely interested in proving something which is very much in popular and in demand and which also happens to be not proved yet(Like God).
Some scientists don't believe in God is because they feel that Science might discover in future all that which is yet to be proven .
Who's running the universe? Some will answer it's God while some will answer it's Science. Both are logical as both the answers can be proved logically.
An atheist will question who created God ? While someone who believes in God will use the theory of probability and question how can something so perfect like the universe exist because of an accident?
Both questions are logical and valid !! How will you approach both the questions?

[Good brother]

Hawkins said we don't need a creator because we have gravity !!!!

Who made the gravity? Who put the gravity as a property in matter?

Can you answer this simple question ?




All the evidence points to a beginning. And if there is a beginning, then the question of what caused the universe to come into being needs to be answered.

Science cannot answer this question because science trades on material causes, and you can’t have a material cause before the origin of material reality itself. Whatever caused the universe to come into being must be immaterial, timeless, non-spatial, powerful, and intelligent.



Laws of nature don't create themselves.



The problem of Hawking (Turn on subtitles):



You may ask: Who created God?
God is uncreated by definition.
We take God as a God because He is uncreated. If he was created He would not be God, and therefore we would not take him as God. This is much more convincing belief than doubt (of the atheists) who have no answer. One of the attributes of God is that He is Eternal. By definition Eternal is forever with no beginning; therefore the question is absurd. Only temporal/non-eternal beings are created. By logic, everyone agrees with the fact that there was something Eternal which gave life to this universe and its inhabitants. We believe that the Eternal is everlasting and intelligent being and we call Him God.
Take the example of the bullet that was fired by a soldier, we ask him: Who give you the order, he responded: My commander who also received the order by an officer with a higher rank , this goes on until we reach the top commander who must exist to give the original order, otherwise, there would be no bullet fired in the first place. So, Eternal Creator is the only plausible answer for this world of creation.

That's why the argument address any human who has a mind. It's direct, simple and doesn't require any extraordinary efforts to grasp.

[Zeal]

Astrophysics says that this universe is created by the big bang . Even Quran explains how big bang created the universe. But most astrophysicists don't believe in God? Stephen Hawkins didn't believe in God . Science hasn't approve the concept of heaven and hell . What do you have to say about this?

Einstein believed in god

- - - Updated - - -

Astrophysics says that this universe is created by the big bang . Even Quran explains how big bang created the universe. But most astrophysicists don't believe in God? Stephen Hawkins didn't believe in God . Science hasn't approve the concept of heaven and hell . What do you have to say about this?

Einstein believed in god

[Good brother]

Who's running the universe? Some will answer it's God while some will answer it's Science.

Science is simply our observations and utilization of resources in the existing world.

- - - Updated - - -

If there are people specialized in science who believe that they are created by God, others don't.


pg 57 https://books.google.com.au/books?id...page&q&f=false

[Ümit]

Science is definitely interested in proving something which is very much in popular and in demand and which also happens to be not proved yet(Like God).

There is no way to prove or disprove God. Any attempt to prove that is pseudoscience. Of course people are interested...they are also interested in the loch ness monster, bigfoot, chupacabra, frankenstein, lord dracula, etc.
What they can do is investigate the history and try to find evidences that Muhammed pbuh, or any other prophet had actually lived...stuff like that...but still...nothing about the existence of God.

Some scientists don't believe in God is because they feel that Science might discover in future all that which is yet to be proven.

Exactly what I am saying...some scientists are fooled by the "power of science" that they think science can explain everything eventually...but they do not realise that even science has a limit.

Who's running the universe? Some will answer it's God while some will answer it's Science. Both are logical as both the answers can be proved logically.

Science is running the universe? who will ever say that?

An atheist will question who created God ? While someone who believes in God will use the theory of probability and question how can something so perfect like the universe exist because of an accident?
Both questions are logical and valid !! How will you approach both the questions?

No. That is not logical nor valid. you cannot ask "who created God"...that would be half rejecting...pay attention...that very question of the atheist (who created God) is NOT logical. this question does not consider the existence of God at all, because it already rejects half of it.
God is omnipotent and ever existing. So, if you assume that God might exist...then you cannot ask the question "who created him?"
in other words, the atheist that asks the question "who created God" acknowledges the possibility that there might be a God who created the universe....but at the same time fails to understand that God is ever existing...It is all or nothing...not just half of it...that is not logical.

I hope you understand what I am trying to say here.

[Abz2000]

Firstly science isn't a being hence that which isn't something cannot say anything - rather it is a description of research, and those who are truthful to Allah, to themselves, and to others - research within Allah's limits and without commiting crimes such as torturing people to see how long they can bleed whilst jotting down observations.

Allah can be proven through the process of logical elimination to a deep thinking mind.

The shahaadah which first negates false matrices and then confirms the undeniable fact (similar to the way in which Ibrahim :as: came to the truth) actually points us in this direction.

Chicken first or egg first? We can carry on arguing one over the other but will not be left with any tangible answer unless we accept that something preceded both, then we can go backwards through to bacteria, to amino acids to basic chemicals to radiation until we come to the understanding that:

--- either something preceded the something which preceded the something until the atheistic throwing in of the hat and trying to convince oneself that the immediately previous answer is more valuable than the eternal chain of unanswerable answers therefore only whatever is present and tangible is of value - though this is obviously false - since the present task/link cannot exist without the first command/link in the chain, nothing present would exist since the command chain would be impossibly eternal without primary command/primary link.

Therefore - "laa ilaah" is a nonsensical term without a confirmation of what is.


------ or - there must exist SomeOne eternal who is independent of time and above the chain of command, and this someone has unified control over all laws - otherwise each other would have attempted to reach the Supreme Throne and there would be chaos in the universal laws.
- and this Eternal Someone Who has no equals or likenesses is called Allah :swt: in the Arabic language.

La ilaaha illa Allah :swt: now adds up soundly and nothing matches it.

The messengers are then sent to confirm the fact in human speech, to guide people on how best to get through it all, to give glad tidings, and to warn.


Anyways - think about that stuff deeply and i'm certain that the truth of Allah's majesty is undeniable.


BTW, i just conjured this up when thinking of the sun, the moon, and the planets - can anyone find any flaws in it?

"A" is magnetic attraction and "R" is magnetic repulsion. ("R" is current cog position - "A" positioning is after 180° turn) The vertical "moon" orbit for "R" value may be tilted in order to make strength and timing adjustments but does not spin on its own axis and its respective "R" side always faces it's planet/cog.

Attachment 6464

[AbuAsiyah]

In reality, science will never prove, not disprove the existence of God.

There is no way to prove or disprove God.

I do not agree with these statements at all. The entire universe and all it contains is a clear and convincing, conclusive proof and evidence for the existence of the Creator. In all that Allah Created, we find nothing but order, precision, and symmetry. The fact that we can even have a thing called "science" is proof that the universe was created. The order and meticulous nature of the universe is why we can so conveniently compile books of scientific laws--Rules which never break and are fixed and are organized in a way that Man could never emulate.

See: Why a scientist believes in God: https://www.missionislam.com/science/scientist.htm MUST READ

Throughout history, the overwhelming majority of scientists have been believers in a Creator. Our own history has testified to this fact. As early as 800 CE Muslim scientists laid down some of the foundations of which modern day science is built. That is only 200 years after the Prophet (Salalahu 'Alaihi wa Salaam). This is clear proof that these scientific achievements were a direct result of Islam. (The Arabs before Islam were nothing more than superstitious ignorant dogs of the desert)

Setting the Record Straight: https://www.missionislam.com/science/record.htm ALSO A MUST READ

The problem with atheists is that they are in extreme denial.

[Abz2000]

What do yous think of this:

(I hope someone who has access to neodymium magnets tries it if it seems feasible and lets us all know the results - i used to have loads but no longer have internet transaction after closing my shop).

The "N" value of the magnets can be increased by stacking them.

Attachment 6465

"R" or moon can be added later as a regulator (mawaaqeetu li an Naas) if it starts accelerating as imagined.

Be ready to run out of the room (mr iron man - can you regulate).

- - - Updated - - -

The order and meticulous nature of the universe is why we can so conveniently compile books of scientific laws--Rules which never break and are fixed and are organized in a way that Man could never emulate.

The books containing scientific OBSERVATIONS of laws are always subject to change as knowledge increases - and most technological inventions are usually based on inspiration from Allah :swt: via observation of natural phenomenon - aeroplanes - birds, tall buildings - trees, car - horse, pump - heart etc

[ACEDIslam]

Hawkins said we don't need a creator because we have gravity !!!!

Who made the gravity? Who put the gravity as a property in matter?

Can you answer this simple question ?




All the evidence points to a beginning. And if there is a beginning, then the question of what caused the universe to come into being needs to be answered.

Science cannot answer this question because science trades on material causes, and you can’t have a material cause before the origin of material reality itself. Whatever caused the universe to come into being must be immaterial, timeless, non-spatial, powerful, and intelligent.



Laws of nature don't create themselves.



The problem of Hawking (Turn on subtitles):



You may ask: Who created God?
God is uncreated by definition.
We take God as a God because He is uncreated. If he was created He would not be God, and therefore we would not take him as God. This is much more convincing belief than doubt (of the atheists) who have no answer. One of the attributes of God is that He is Eternal. By definition Eternal is forever with no beginning; therefore the question is absurd. Only temporal/non-eternal beings are created. By logic, everyone agrees with the fact that there was something Eternal which gave life to this universe and its inhabitants. We believe that the Eternal is everlasting and intelligent being and we call Him God.
Take the example of the bullet that was fired by a soldier, we ask him: Who give you the order, he responded: My commander who also received the order by an officer with a higher rank , this goes on until we reach the top commander who must exist to give the original order, otherwise, there would be no bullet fired in the first place. So, Eternal Creator is the only plausible answer for this world of creation.

That's why the argument address any human who has a mind. It's direct, simple and doesn't require any extraordinary efforts to grasp.

Very eloquently put, brother. It is for this reason that prior to becoming a Muslim I was an agnostic. I believed in God and the oneness of God, I simply didn't belong to any particular religion. That has changed.

[Abz2000]

Those links to the magnet disappeared, i'll try again, but this time add the 1999 kw4 orbit - or what's been presented as the orbit (the phases and relative speeds could possibly be different from the simulation) for additional thought:

Couldn't find the other model with "r" - but here's a basic one to get thinkers thinking:

Click to enlarge:

Attachment 6703

Attachment 6705

Attachment 6707

If 11n is placed sideways instead of perpetually facing the horizontal chain like the others - the "R" pole on the 11n magnet (facing left) in the 1-11n cylinder ought (in theory) to repel the magnets on the horizontal chain which have already passed - thereby increasing efficiency - even though the total pull of 1-10n ought to be greater than 11n.



The spike from viewer vantage point increases as the "moon" arrives on near side - indicating that the "moon" could be acting as a magnetic shield/offsetter.



Notice how (ideal) moons usually face their hubbies - indicating magnetic polar attraction:

Attachment 6706




Yusuf 12:4

إِذْ قَالَ يُوسُفُ لِأَبِيهِ يَٰٓأَبَتِ إِنِّى رَأَيْتُ أَحَدَ عَشَرَ كَوْكَبًا وَٱلشَّمْسَ وَٱلْقَمَرَ رَأَيْتُهُمْ لِى سَٰجِدِينَ

Behold! Joseph said to his father: "O my father! I did see eleven stars and the sun and the moon: I saw them prostrate themselves to me!"

[DanEdge]

Science is definitely interested in proving something which is very much in popular and in demand and which also happens to be not proved yet(Like God).
Some scientists don't believe in God is because they feel that Science might discover in future all that which is yet to be proven .
Who's running the universe? Some will answer it's God while some will answer it's Science. Both are logical as both the answers can be proved logically.
An atheist will question who created God ? While someone who believes in God will use the theory of probability and question how can something so perfect like the universe exist because of an accident?
Both questions are logical and valid !! How will you approach both the questions?

Very interesting discussion.

I would like to challenge your statement that scientists are interested in "proofs." While it is true that scientists use experiments and observation to substantiate old theories or form new ones, I do not think that their aim is ever to discover any kind of absolute truths. On the contrary, the main goal of science is to disprove existing theories.

This is because humans will never achieve omniscience (knowing everything). The universe is vast, and we are but a very small part of it. As another poster pointed out, all we can do is formulate theories to explain the limited amount of data that we have. As we gain more data, these theories must be modified or replaced.

For example, the ancient Greek astronomer Ptolemy devised a theory of the universe in which the Earth was at the center, and the stars and planets revolved around it. Given the observable data available at that point in history, his theory worked extremely well. It did a good job of predicting the seasons and the motions of planetary bodies. It worked so well that it continued to be the dominant theory of astronomy for hundreds and hundreds of years.

After the invention of the telescope, mankind was blessed with a huge influx of new data. It became clear that Ptolemy's theory was no longer sufficient to explain what we saw. Due to the brilliant work of men like Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler, a new theory of astronomy was devised -- one that placed the Sun at the center of the universe. Sir Isaac Newton later created a mathematical theory of gravity which even better explained the observable data.

For hundreds of years, Newton's laws of gravity continued to serve as the best model for our understanding of the universe. But it would be a mistake to hold that his laws were "proofs" or absolute truths. In fact, new data was discovered in the 19th century that contradicted Newton's laws. For example, if you apply them to the revolutionary orbit of the planet Mercury, you get the wrong answer. (We now know that Newton's laws always give the wrong answer if you look closely enough.) A new theory had to be devised. Enter Einstein.

Einstein's theory of relativity is now the standard for how we look at the observable universe on a grand scale. So far, his theory gives the right answer for what we see. But again, I think it would be a huge mistake to think that relativity is any kind of absolute truth. It is only a human approximation that does the best job (so far) of explaining the world as we see it.

As science and technology continue to progress, the aim of scientists is not to continue to "prove" that Einstein was right. Instead, ever more complex experiments are continually devised to try to find instances where his theory gives the wrong answer. And the scientific world fully expects that this will happen. It's only a question of when and how.

The way I look at it, it would be unfair to say that Ptolemy's theory was false from the beginning. Given the data available at the time, his model of the universe was the best available. The same goes for Newton, Einstein, and whoever comes next. Even when their theories are disproven, this does not imply that they are false. They are true given a certain context of knowledge. But our context of knowledge is continually expanding by way of new experiments and observations.

The same holds true for the big bang theory. For right now, it is the best explanation for what we see. But consider that this theory is not even a hundred years old yet. It is entirely possible that tomorrow a new discovery will be made that forces us to throw the big bang theory out the window and come up with something different. This will always be the case for any scientific theory.

I am very passionate about this topic because it serves as a continual reminder to stay humble. Whenever I start to feel that I am wise, I must remind myself of how small are the contents of my brain when compared to the vastness of the universe. I must accept that I will never know the "absolute truth" about anything.

This may sound like a cynical view, but I like to think of it in a positive way. To me, it means that the joy of learning new things will continue for my entire life. I try to appreciate it when someone proves me wrong about something that I believe -- it means that I have learned something new. Learning is a beautiful thing.

Thanks for reading.

[Abz2000]

@DanEdge

Burning the batteries was clearly a statement of intent and an action meriting judgement..

Although the diagrams i provided above don't add up - since each magnet only adds 1n to the equation and a flip from 11n south to 11n north adds the need for a 22n push which isn't in that model - and even if 11n was south only - the 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 before it only totals 10n if all were thrusting a piece each at the same time ... the total amount of thrust does not equal the amount required to release the one at 11n ... therefore, different models are required.

Muammar yildez' machine has neither been debunked - nor followed up .... and there was a sky news piece on someone else's before that too which was later ignored .... worth looking into.

Edit:

The sky news piece belonged to John Christi...




Here's Muammar Yildez' piece:




another model could be comparable to a child pushing a shopping trolley and an overhead turning magnet lifting it up, then as it goes higher, with each cog - the gravitational pull increases, then the energy from the fall at the end (including impact and spring rebound) is conserved and added back into the equation (a bit like how a jackhammer operates.


Attachment 6709

Allah :swt: knows best.

[space]

it's funny, a weak disabled "educated" old man chained to a wheelchair for his entire miserable life who was unable to follow some basic personal hygienic habits kept refusing to believe in the unseen, kept rejecting the confirmation of facts and arguments about the existence of God.. just died in vain without acquiring proper knowledge about the meaning of life, eventually the end of his life was as foolish as his rational scientific stubbornness

[DanEdge]

it's funny, a weak disabled "educated" old man chained to a wheelchair for his entire miserable life who was unable to follow some basic personal hygienic habits kept refusing to believe in the unseen, kept rejecting the confirmation of facts and arguments about the existence of God.. just died in vain without acquiring proper knowledge about the meaning of life, eventually the end of his life was as foolish as his rational scientific stubbornness

Tell me you're not talking about Stephen Hawking...

[space]

Tell me you're not talking about Stephen Hawking...

he may possibly had a significant amount of physics knowledge in certain fields of astronomy being a known scientist among the other famous scientists who declared that there is no God, it's kinda like a small helpless ant living inside the box that desperately trying to claim there's no one no worlds nothing outside his tiny empty space in a square shaped container

[DanEdge]

he may possibly had a significant amount of physics knowledge in certain fields of astronomy being a known scientist among the other famous scientists who declared that there is no God, it's kinda like a small helpless ant living inside the box that desperately trying to claim there's no one no worlds nothing outside his tiny empty space in a square shaped container

Just considering his contributions to science without regard to his personal beliefs, the man was a giant. I think it's actually more impressive that he was able to accomplish what he did with such a debilitating disease. It is very possible that the first detection of a black hole in 2016, and our first images of the accretion disk around the black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy from this year would not have happened without Hawking's contributions.

I think you need to separate the art from the artist. You can appreciate a man's work even if you do not respect the man himself. Many great men are flawed, perhaps even most of them.

[Physicist]

Sura 9 - Ayat 112

ٱلتَّـٰٓئِبُونَ ٱلْعَـٰبِدُونَ ٱلْحَـٰمِدُونَ ٱلسَّـٰٓئِحُونَ ٱلرَّٲكِعُونَ ٱلسَّـٰجِدُونَ ٱلْأَمِرُونَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ وَٱلنَّاهُونَ عَنِ ٱلْمُنكَرِ وَٱلْحَـٰفِظُونَ لِحُدُودِ ٱللَّهِ-ۗ وَبَشِّرِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ

(Such believers are) the repentant, the worshippers, the praisers (of Allah), the travelers (for His cause), those who bow and prostrate (in prayer), those who enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and those who observe the limits (set by) Allah. And give good tidings to the believers.

"Those who observe the limits [set by] Allah" - isn't it about scientists?

May be Howking was calling himself an atheist or whatever, but how do you know that he didn't have Tawheed? May be he didn't know the proper word for this.
Just as for myself, for many years I was already believing in God but was calling myself an atheist, agnostic because didn't see yet connection with religion.

[Ahmed.]

Just considering his contributions to science without regard to his personal beliefs, the man was a giant. I think it's actually more impressive that he was able to accomplish what he did with such a debilitating disease. It is very possible that the first detection of a black hole in 2016, and our first images of the accretion disk around the black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy from this year would not have happened without Hawking's contributions.

I think you need to separate the art from the artist. You can appreciate a man's work even if you do not respect the man himself. Many great men are flawed, perhaps even most of them.

But that's completely useless and of no real benefit to know of existence of black holes or see an image of it. It just increases scientists and atheists in pride and sense of self achievement, contrary to the humble selfless people that God wants us to be

The heavens and stars are there to beautify the sky and for us to get a sense of God's greatness, not to find out how gravity works or that there is a thing called a black hole out there :Emoji41:

Yes Islam says 'seek knowledge', but the knowledge it's asking us to seek is that which benefits in this world and in the hereafter, knowledge of gravity and black holes do neither

[Ümit]

But that's completely useless and of no real benefit to know of existence of black holes or see an image of it. It just increases scientists and atheists in pride and sense of self achievement, contrary to the humble selfless people that God wants us to be

The heavens and stars are there to beautify the sky and for us to get a sense of God's greatness, not to find out how gravity works or that there is a thing called a black hole out there :Emoji41:

Yes Islam says 'seek knowledge', but the knowledge it's asking us to seek is that which benefits in this world and in the hereafter, knowledge of gravity and black holes do neither

sorry ro say this but you sound like a teenager saying "why am İ getting math (or biology...or any other subject) lessons at my school? not that İ would ever use it in my life"

that you cannot think of a beneficial use of some certain information does not mean that that information is useless. any kind of information is useful. or do you think that humans came so far only because we only did research on stuff that were beneficial to humanity?

and yes you are totally right...heavens and stars are only there to beautify the sky...nothing more...you cannot navigate using the stars...you cannot say what date we are living at the moment...you cannot even tell wheter we live on a globe Earth or pancake Earth using the stars....and oh yeah...what does is matter if the Earth is flat or round? that information is also totally useless...right?

[Ahmed.]

sorry ro say this but you sound like a teenager saying "why am İ getting math (or biology...or any other subject) lessons at my school? not that İ would ever use it in my life"

that you cannot think of a beneficial use of some certain information does not mean that that information is useless. any kind of information is useful. or do you think that humans came so far only because we only did research on stuff that were beneficial to humanity?

and yes you are totally right...heavens and stars are only there to beautify the sky...nothing more...you cannot navigate using the stars...you cannot say what date we are living at the moment...you cannot even tell wheter we live on a globe Earth or pancake Earth using the stars....and oh yeah...what does is matter if the Earth is flat or round? that information is also totally useless...right?

Bruv, what possible use can the information about how gravity works or about black holes be of to benefit mankind?; this information is useless and even obtaining it has been sinful and a waste of money

Does Allah really want us to spend millions on telescopes and space research when this money can be spent on more worthy causes, not least food for the millions of starving people?

If obtaining such information is sin, then the info. Would be useless as it's not meant to be obtained in the first place

Too much information of the workings of creation damages peoples faith too and instead of 'God does this and that' people just put it down to cause and effect

The obsession with space research is fuelled by athiest philosophy of materialism. For believers space signifies Gods infinite power and is qibla for God, it is not a place to try and fathom it's hidden mysteries

[Physicist]

That's the point about scientific research. Most of experiments don't make immediate benefit, but they give you some kbowledge, better understanding how things works.
Do you think first experiments with static electricity had any practical sense? It was more like children game. Measuring speed of light? First works on relativity and quantum physics?
But now practical implementation of those discoveries you can't deny.

Yes, for some people it makes difficulties with fate. Because they used to not think far. For example, to let camels untied while expecting Allah to prevent them from going away. Then, they've learned more about animal behaviour and to tie their camels, taking responsibility for this job. But Allah always far behind be it behaviour of the camels or shining of the stars.
Like prophet Yusuff had a dream of sun prostrating to him.

[Ümit]

Bruv, what possible use can the information about how gravity works or about black holes be of to benefit mankind?; this information is useless and even obtaining it has been sinful and a waste of money

Does Allah really want us to spend millions on telescopes and space research when this money can be spent on more worthy causes, not least food for the millions of starving people?

If obtaining such information is sin, then the info. Would be useless as it's not meant to be obtained in the first place

Too much information of the workings of creation damages peoples faith too and instead of 'God does this and that' people just put it down to cause and effect

The obsession with space research is fuelled by athiest philosophy of materialism. For believers space signifies Gods infinite power and is qibla for God, it is not a place to try and fathom it's hidden mysteries

Meanwhile you are typing this behind your laptop and are about to post it to members of Islamicboars sitting on the other side of the planet...not realizing how your message gets there...You point your sattelite dish into a certain direction in the air and are suddenly able to receive tv channels without using a cable. one degrees out of direction will result in loss of signal.
You navigate around with your fancy smartphone and can have a visual live conversation with your auntie living thousands of miles away from you.

All because of discoveries and inventions where at the time of discovery we could not even imagine that the impact on humanity would be this great.

Right now, we cannot imagine what the impact on our lives will be when we find out how gravity exacly works...but once we discover that...(if we discover that)...I am guessing, the impact will be much greater than discovering electricity.

About black holes...our formulas we discovered until now, are just approximations of the reality...they are pretty accurate for a certain range...but once out of range, our formulas have no use. For instance, the formulas used in quantum physics do not add up with general relativity. The gap is now called dark energy and dark matter...not that there is some mysterious energy or matter we cannot see or detect...but that is exactly the part we cannot understand yet.
In and around black holes, the forces and physics also act totally different. the gravitational force is so massive that even light cannot escape it.
So, studying those black holes, can give us an insight on how the natural forces act on a total different range. and exactly that information can have a huge impact on us understanding the world around us.
Who said that obtaining that information is sinful? why then do you buy a smartphone or laptop when you can use that money to feed a poor for a month?
Are you now saying that technology and knowledge is evil? then I suggest you join the Amish club, say farewell to all development, plow your land with horses and oxes and live a modest life, completely seperated from the outside world.

You know of course that saying haraam to which is halal is also a sin right?

And even if...(not saying that it is, but just if) obtaining that info is haraam....then the info itself is still halal.
We all know that wine vinegar itself is halal...we could totally buy and consume wine vinegar...nothing wrong with that. For the production of it however, you need wine...which is haraam.
in other words...obtaining wine vinegar (production of it) is haraam...the use of it, totally halal.

[M.I.A.]

"Those who observe the limits [set by] Allah" - isn't it about scientists?

May be Howking was calling himself an atheist or whatever, but how do you know that he didn't have Tawheed? May be he didn't know the proper word for this.
Just as for myself, for many years I was already believing in God but was calling myself an atheist, agnostic because didn't see yet connection with religion.

https://youtu.be/Yq7NP1R1BZ8

Who knows.

[DanEdge]

Meanwhile you are typing this behind your laptop and are about to post it to members of Islamicboars sitting on the other side of the planet...not realizing how your message gets there...You point your sattelite dish into a certain direction in the air and are suddenly able to receive tv channels without using a cable. one degrees out of direction will result in loss of signal.
You navigate around with your fancy smartphone and can have a visual live conversation with your auntie living thousands of miles away from you.

All because of discoveries and inventions where at the time of discovery we could not even imagine that the impact on humanity would be this great.

Right now, we cannot imagine what the impact on our lives will be when we find out how gravity exacly works...but once we discover that...(if we discover that)...I am guessing, the impact will be much greater than discovering electricity.

About black holes...our formulas we discovered until now, are just approximations of the reality...they are pretty accurate for a certain range...but once out of range, our formulas have no use. For instance, the formulas used in quantum physics do not add up with general relativity. The gap is now called dark energy and dark matter...not that there is some mysterious energy or matter we cannot see or detect...but that is exactly the part we cannot understand yet.
In and around black holes, the forces and physics also act totally different. the gravitational force is so massive that even light cannot escape it.
So, studying those black holes, can give us an insight on how the natural forces act on a total different range. and exactly that information can have a huge impact on us understanding the world around us.
Who said that obtaining that information is sinful? why then do you buy a smartphone or laptop when you can use that money to feed a poor for a month?
Are you now saying that technology and knowledge is evil? then I suggest you join the Amish club, say farewell to all development, plow your land with horses and oxes and live a modest life, completely seperated from the outside world.

You know of course that saying haraam to which is halal is also a sin right?

And even if...(not saying that it is, but just if) obtaining that info is haraam....then the info itself is still halal.
We all know that wine vinegar itself is halal...we could totally buy and consume wine vinegar...nothing wrong with that. For the production of it however, you need wine...which is haraam.
in other words...obtaining wine vinegar (production of it) is haraam...the use of it, totally halal.

Ümit,

I was going to write a reply to the previous poster, and then I saw that you had already done so better than I would have [emoji16]

I do think that there are a lot of interesting points to parse out about the balance between science vs spirituality, obsession with facts in the material world, and other topics. One of these for is that a large percentage of scientists conclude the atheism is the logical outcome of scientific thinking. Stephen Hawking Neil deGrasse Tyson are examples of this, while Einstein is a notable counterexample.

My experience with atheism was different. I decided that I was an atheist when I was about 15, but it was only after studying science for many years that I retreated to agnosticism. For me, a big lesson of scientific thinking is that the scope of human knowledge is necessarily limited, therefore sweeping generalizations such as "God cannot exist" are not tenable or logical conclusions. How could I possibly know that?

So now, I am open to the possibility that there is a God. I just don't have any knowledge of his properties or intentions. I see other people have faith or use certain evidences that convinced them of one religion or other. Sometimes I wish I could be religious because religious people often have positive supportive communities, strong beliefs, good self-awareness, and other things. But I'm not going to pretend that I believe in something that I don't. So I'm kind of stuck.

I started rambling there, sorry about that [emoji1] hope you are all having a good day.

[Physicist]

...
My experience with atheism was different. I decided that I was an atheist when I was about 15, but it was only after studying science for many years that I retreated to agnosticism. For me, a big lesson of scientific thinking is that the scope of human knowledge is necessarily limited, therefore sweeping generalizations such as "God cannot exist" are not tenable or logical conclusions. How could I possibly know that?

So now, I am open to the possibility that there is a God. I just don't have any knowledge of his properties or intentions. I see other people have faith or use certain evidences that convinced them of one religion or other. Sometimes I wish I could be religious because religious people often have positive supportive communities, strong beliefs, good self-awareness, and other things. But I'm not going to pretend that I believe in something that I don't. So I'm kind of stuck.
...

Consider absolute complexity.
For example, number pi may be presented as an infinite sequence of digits, but it's absolute complexity is very small, only simple algorithm for it's generation.

Consider observation of some arbitrary system, when you have incomplete information about it. You may reconstruct many possible solutions describing your incomplete dataset. But probability of solution to be true will be proportional to the exponent of absolute complexity. Because if you add one bit of complexity, you are getting 2 systems with the same output.

Only this enough already to declare minimal absolute complexity of the universe. "In the beginning was the Word."

Considering enthropy conservation on the quantum level and second thermodynamic law of permanent increase of enthropy in classic physics. It gives way to more interesting conclusions how things much more interrelated than we can see.

One property of Allah you can be sure purely from the math point, is that He does everything perfectly, beautiful, with minimal possible absolute complexity. Considering entire Creation, not just some person who may of course complain about his life complexity :)

[DanEdge]

Consider absolute complexity.
For example, number pi may be presented as an infinite sequence of digits, but it's absolute complexity is very small, only simple algorithm for it's generation.

Consider observation of some arbitrary system, when you have incomplete information about it. You may reconstruct many possible solutions describing your incomplete dataset. But probability of solution to be true will be proportional to the exponent of absolute complexity. Because if you add one bit of complexity, you are getting 2 systems with the same output.

Only this enough already to declare minimal absolute complexity of the universe. "In the beginning was the Word."

Considering enthropy conservation on the quantum level and second thermodynamic law of permanent increase of enthropy in classic physics. It gives way to more interesting conclusions how things much more interrelated than we can see.

One property of Allah you can be sure purely from the math point, is that He does everything perfectly, beautiful, with minimal possible absolute complexity. Considering entire Creation, not just some person who may of course complain about his life complexity :)

You had me at "consider absolute complexity". [emoji1] The very notion makes me happy, because it means I will never run out of things to puzzle about.

[Ahmed.]

Meanwhile you are typing this behind your laptop and are about to post it to members of Islamicboars sitting on the other side of the planet...not realizing how your message gets there...You point your sattelite dish into a certain direction in the air and are suddenly able to receive tv channels without using a cable. one degrees out of direction will result in loss of signal.
You navigate around with your fancy smartphone and can have a visual live conversation with your auntie living thousands of miles away from you.

All because of discoveries and inventions where at the time of discovery we could not even imagine that the impact on humanity would be this great.

Right now, we cannot imagine what the impact on our lives will be when we find out how gravity exacly works...but once we discover that...(if we discover that)...I am guessing, the impact will be much greater than discovering electricity.

About black holes...our formulas we discovered until now, are just approximations of the reality...they are pretty accurate for a certain range...but once out of range, our formulas have no use. For instance, the formulas used in quantum physics do not add up with general relativity. The gap is now called dark energy and dark matter...not that there is some mysterious energy or matter we cannot see or detect...but that is exactly the part we cannot understand yet.
In and around black holes, the forces and physics also act totally different. the gravitational force is so massive that even light cannot escape it.
So, studying those black holes, can give us an insight on how the natural forces act on a total different range. and exactly that information can have a huge impact on us understanding the world around us.
Who said that obtaining that information is sinful? why then do you buy a smartphone or laptop when you can use that money to feed a poor for a month?
Are you now saying that technology and knowledge is evil? then I suggest you join the Amish club, say farewell to all development, plow your land with horses and oxes and live a modest life, completely seperated from the outside world.

You know of course that saying haraam to which is halal is also a sin right?

And even if...(not saying that it is, but just if) obtaining that info is haraam....then the info itself is still halal.
We all know that wine vinegar itself is halal...we could totally buy and consume wine vinegar...nothing wrong with that. For the production of it however, you need wine...which is haraam.
in other words...obtaining wine vinegar (production of it) is haraam...the use of it, totally halal.

Regarding laptops and things, br @Abdurrahman absolutely nailed it with a post of his :):

https://www.islamicboard.com/health-...ml#post3011615

[Ümit]

Ümit,

I was going to write a reply to the previous poster, and then I saw that you had already done so better than I would have [emoji16]

That needed to be said...I could get pretty annoyed when people do not understand how valuable knowledge is...and our beloved religion kinda forces us to go out there and discover...gain knowledge....without specifying what kind of knowledge one should seek.
So phrases like "that information is non-beneficial to you" or "observing the stars is useless and a waste of time" always trigger me.
true...some information is not always equally beneficial to everyone...but that is more like a personal matter...but generally saying that a certain information is useless is a sign of narrow-sightiness (if that is a word :P ) and it totally de-motivates other people to go out and seek answers for the questions and doubts in their heads.

That is why I am more or less forced to say something about that when it happens.

I do think that there are a lot of interesting points to parse out about the balance between science vs spirituality, obsession with facts in the material world, and other topics. One of these for is that a large percentage of scientists conclude the atheism is the logical outcome of scientific thinking. Stephen Hawking Neil deGrasse Tyson are examples of this, while Einstein is a notable counterexample.

My experience with atheism was different. I decided that I was an atheist when I was about 15, but it was only after studying science for many years that I retreated to agnosticism. For me, a big lesson of scientific thinking is that the scope of human knowledge is necessarily limited, therefore sweeping generalizations such as "God cannot exist" are not tenable or logical conclusions. How could I possibly know that?

you couldn't know that...but you discovered that the hard way...which is the best way...so you wouldn't let that valuable piece of information go so easily. just carry on and you will get there my friend...hopefully before it's too late for you.

So now, I am open to the possibility that there is a God. I just don't have any knowledge of his properties or intentions. I see other people have faith or use certain evidences that convinced them of one religion or other. Sometimes I wish I could be religious because religious people often have positive supportive communities, strong beliefs, good self-awareness, and other things. But I'm not going to pretend that I believe in something that I don't. So I'm kind of stuck.

I started rambling there, sorry about that [emoji1] hope you are all having a good day.

I am kinda aware of your situation...I have seen some of your previous posts and I know that you are struggling. I tried to draw your attention before but I guess I failed. You see, I am also a person of science and logic...just like you...I am not satisfied with just a general answer..."it is like that because it is written in the Quraan". I do accept that answer of course...but it does not answer the question in my head.
For me, there should always be a logical answer...and if I seek long enough...and deep enough I will find that answer.

So far, everytime I discovered new answers, my faith in Allah grew stronger and stronger...because that was another piece of evidence that Islaam is a religion of logic...totally parallel to science...true religion should be an extension of science. it roughly gives us a direction.

I noticed that you are also like me. a science person...looking for logical answers...my advantage is that I can combine it with my religion.
In one of your latest post you are looking for answers for your Jewish friend. From this I understand you are trying to understand how stuff work in Islaam. But for that to understand you need a whole bunch of other questions answered first. I have listed several of those questions for you in the hope you got triggered and ask about it…or ask about your Jewish friend to keep the discussion going.
Unfortunately, you never took the bait :P
I am more than gladly willing to share what I know with you. Just ask.
The only favor (a big favor, but a fair one I hope) I ask from you is to keep an open mind and be honest to us, but mostly to yourself. like you said, pretending will bring you and me nowhere.

[Ümit]

Regarding laptops and things, br @Abdurrahman absolutely nailed it with a post of his :):

https://www.islamicboard.com/health-...ml#post3011615

Yeah you are right...he totally nailed it:

I answered this lately on another forum So I'll post that here:

Q. Satellites also bring a lot of good.


A. Ofcourse satellites do a lot of good however we can do without it; no one was complaining 20 years ago when we didn't have satellite navigation.

Satellites are used more for evil purposes like pornography and spying on other countries..

I do not want to sound like a know-it-all but 20 years ago we already had satellite TV, navigation, and mobile phones. But I get what you are saying. No we did not complain about that....but 400 years ago we did not complain that we had no radio...but that was also fine...you understand what I'm getting at right?

That satellites are used for evil purposes is also a non-argument. So every item is like that.
you can use your van to transport fellow Muslims to a mosque, or you can drive into a crowded christmas market in the middle of Europe and cause death to tens of christian and atheist victims.

Anything can be a weapon in the wrong hands...this does not make the item itself evil or haraam. it just gives opportunities...its to the individual self what to do with those opportunities....like you do not have a TV at home...or a laptop...you can watch porn with it if you like...you do not need satellite for that.

Go on to YouTube and just read some of the comments under old-school music. People wish they were back in the happy and simple old days when life was far better.

This is the world we live in now...complaining about the past will bring you nowhere. what do you think Islaam teaches about unneccessary complaining...like complaining about the old days?

Things like sending probes to mars and man on moon etc are just a waste of time and money. Huble telescope gives us great images of space but just gazing at stars and glorifying God is enough.

... space travel is based on the anti Christ saying 'you're helping me' ( https://youtu.be/y5ZfmBqnLcQ ) regarding them. If the devil is pleased with them then they have to be of far greater evil benefit than good.

Kids are getting unhealthy these days not playing outside and just being on the internet in their free time. Kids as young as 12 have access to sick heart corrupting pornography, people don't even have time to think about God because they are too busy 'entertaining themselves to death' with satellite tv... doesn't these reasons outweigh the benefits of these things?

There's more reason I can think of, such as these things serve to make the elite more rich and poor more poorer (which in turn yields more power into the baddies hands)... the consumerist culture of buy buy and more buy is particularly thriving on associated gadgets like mobile phone, computer etc..

So there's more benefit to the dajjal then to humanity

new discoveries create new opportunities. this means also new opportunities for the devil. Of course he will be happy with that...but does that mean we should give up all research and development and join the Amish club. I still think that it is our own responsibility how to deal with those opportunities.

And again...that you do not see the benefit of examining stars, does not mean it is useless.

[Physicist]

I kind of understand motivation of those who are trying to stop scientific progress and would prefer to return to old times, riding camels and all of that. Main reason perhaps is to delay approaching to the Day of Judgement.
But don't they realize that they are trying to go against Will of Allah?
If Allah wanted, He could keep mankind on the same technological level. Instead, we are literally forced to progress.
If you will try to hide in the caves, zionists and communists will take a lead.
There was time when jews were choosen ummah, but because they went astray, Allah sent prophet Muhammad. The same may happen to current Ummah if we will go against His will. As is said in Quran, Allah may even make another Creation if He is displeased with us.

[Ümit]

I kind of understand motivation of those who are trying to stop scientific progress and would prefer to return to old times, riding camels and all of that. Main reason perhaps is to delay approaching to the Day of Judgement.
But don't they realize that they are trying to go against Will of Allah?
If Allah wanted, He could keep mankind on the same technological level. Instead, we are literally forced to progress.
If you will try to hide in the caves, zionists and communists will take a lead.
There was time when jews were choosen ummah, but because they went astray, Allah sent prophet Muhammad. The same may happen to current Ummah if we will go against His will. As is said in Quran, Allah may even make another Creation if He is displeased with us.

Yes, I also understand their motivation. but still...we need to keep going...we cannot delay the judgement day for a second...we cannot even delay our own deaths for a second.

about that other creation is new for me. could you please share with me what verse this is? I never heard it before.

[Physicist]

Sura 14 - Ayat 19

أَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ خَلَقَ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٲتِ وَٱلْأَرْضَ بِٱلْحَقِّ-ۚ إِن يَشَأْ يُذْهِبْكُمْ وَيَأْتِ بِخَلْقٍ جَدِيدٍ

Have you not seen that Allah created the heavens and the earth in truth? If He wills, He can do away with you and produce a new creation.

Islam: The Noble Quran (https://goo.gl/prmwod)

[Physicist]

Considering astronomy and enormous total number of stars in enormous number or galaxies, among which may be enough planets to create the life, how it was done on Earth. Though such conditions are quite rare.

Sura 10 - Ayat 4

إِلَيْهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا-ۖ وَعْدَ ٱللَّهِ حَقًّا-ۚ إِنَّهُۥ يَبْدَؤُاْ ٱلْخَلْقَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدُهُۥ لِيَجْزِىَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ وَعَمِلُواْ ٱلصَّـٰلِحَـٰتِ بِٱلْقِسْطِ-ۚ وَٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لَهُمْ شَرَابٌ مِّنْ حَمِيمٍ وَعَذَابٌ أَلِيمُۢ بِمَا كَانُواْ يَكْفُرُونَ

To Him is your return all together. [It is] the promise of Allah [which is] truth. Indeed, He begins the [process of] creation and then repeats it that He may reward those who have believed and done righteous deeds, in justice. But those who disbelieved will have a drink of scalding water and a painful punishment for what they used to deny.

May this be about creation of life in remote sectors of space? So, that they don't interact and has a chance to develop without intrusion.

It's totally InshaAllah if we will found out that we are alone in the universe or will be tested by intrusion of aliens when our time will come.
Allah knows best.

But for now, in this life, stars are only for beauty and learning of fundamental things.