Athiests.... "Given infinite time, anything can happen"?

ps: that first quote, is about me asking whether a tornado thrashing around a dumpster for long enough can form a car.

The way i've always seen it is everything has a source whether they be tangible or intangible. The source I refer to is Allah/God.

given infinite time, is it really true that anything and everything could happen?

I don't think everything could happen, but a lot would. In order for X to happen, Y must trigger it. When X happens, it may have to destroy (permanently) Z therefore preventing Z to ever be triggered. In the event of Z being triggered, P may be created and so on and so forth.

In other words, everything is connected - unlimited time wouldn't allow everything to be achieved as it depends on many many other factors.

Well, that's what I think anyway.

I have fixed the reference with regadrs to the marble idea below. It was Trumble and not Pygo who said it.

It is the only unintentially misattributed quote which seems to be causing people to go off topic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

format_quote Originally Posted by aamirsaab

The way i've always seen it is everything has a source whether they be tangible or intangible. The source I refer to is Allah/God.



I don't think everything could happen, but a lot would. In order for X to happen, Y must trigger it. When X happens, it may have to destroy (permanently) Z therefore preventing Z to ever be triggered. In the event of Z being triggered, P may be created and so on and so forth.

In other words, everything is connected - unlimited time wouldn't allow everything to be achieved as it depends on many many other factors.

Well, that's what I think anyway.

Jazaks bro amir for input, i agree, given infinite time, alot can happen, whether 'anything' can happen is a diff story

I think what atheists keep forgetting is the concept of 'infinity over a certain interval'.

For example, when Trumble claimed that if i throw marbles from a skyscraper, he said a sentence saying "Silly is an idiot" could be formed is possible () given infinite time since infinitely many arrangements can be happen.

He forgot to realise that just because 'infinite' number of arrangemetns can happen, doesnt mean 'anything can happen'.... here's a good way to explain it to them i think:



The blu = marbles
The purple outline = Region of physicially possible points for marbles to land
The black axes = Our co-ordinates for the example.


What he doesnt understand is, that you can have an infinite number of marble arrangements in the interval between [x1, x2] and [y1,y2].

just like for example... ther'es an infinite number of decimal numbers between the numbers 2.6 and 3.7 for example. Just because the decimals are infinite, doesnt mean any decimal number could occur (e.g. the number 10.6 isnt possible).


So in short.... i think Athiests like Pygo need to realise that given infinite time, you get infinite arrangemetns within a certain interval. But not infinite arrangemetns over an infinite interval.

Hence meaning that being can not be created from non being given infinite time unless there is something supernatural behind it.

watcha think bro (n everyone else)?

ur killin me wit the smartness. sounds fine to me! lol

format_quote Originally Posted by Tayyaba

ur killin me wit the smartness. sounds fine to me! lol

lol sis! not as smart as it seems hehe..

thx nweayz, all thanks is due to Allah

wonder wat Pygo thinks...

lol do athiests check out this science section in first place... i thought its best place 2 plug it

or maybe someone doesnt have an answer.... or even better...trying to put one together
immm jusss playinnnnnnn lol.

There are a few small flaws in the concept of the universe being the result of random infinite combinations over an infinite period of time.

Matter is not infinite. It does have a determined starting point. True it is a large length of time. But, it is still finite and not infinite.

Next there is not an infinite amount of mastter. A finite amount exists and that is all there is. The combinations possible are very large, but it is a finite number and not infinite.

Third the motion of matter is not random. It was determined at the moment of creation, no matter what cause you give for that moment. If you know all of the ballistics involved for any particle, no matter how small of a particle, you can calculate it's exact location for any point in the past and determine where it will be for any point in the future.

format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever

lol do athiests check out this science section in first place... i thought its best place 2 plug it

I don't think anyone checks this section, atheist or not... it isn't very active.

format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah

I don't think anyone checks this section, atheist or not... it isn't very active.

lol better now?

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

There are a few small flaws in the concept of the universe being the result of random infinite combinations over an infinite period of time.

Matter is not infinite. It does have a determined starting point. True it is a large length of time. But, it is still finite and not infinite.

Next there is not an infinite amount of mastter. A finite amount exists and that is all there is. The combinations possible are very large, but it is a finite number and not infinite.

Third the motion of matter is not random. It was determined at the moment of creation, no matter what cause you give for that moment. If you know all of the ballistics involved for any particle, no matter how small of a particle, you can calculate it's exact location for any point in the past and determine where it will be for any point in the future.

Yeh so tru unc... but i kinda thoughtits easier proving that their logic is flawd from the very beginning ("given infinite time anything will happen")...

rather than trying to prove that there isnt an infinite amount of matter in the universe.... since pygo n his likes tend to dwell on "you never know, but there could be... we cnat know for sure"

i kinda wonder wat they'd say if someone tries to nock them on the head with a hammer... wat, would they say "could possibly make me feel good an dlaugh, who knows" :enough!:

that last sentence... 4got to add... make me laugh.. given infinite time...

lol this thread isn't getting anywhere....FAST...given infinite time..lol!

format_quote Originally Posted by root

Such a shame that you have not referenced any of these "theories" to fully understand what you are trying to address. You even failed to reference where you have quoted Pygosceliss in order for us to understand in what context he was referencing.

But then again, it probably helps your case not to.......

Heya root

my apologies for not referencing, the disagreement about the marble example started from here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tml#post566111

feel free to verify. I also changed the sentence from 'GW.Bush' into 'I'm' to avoid this turning into a political discussion instead of a scientific one.

How?

- In the case of car: Entropy would have decreased over time if it's able to form a car, secondly, suppose the reckage didn't have all the bits of a car, you're assuming given infinite time, the bits necessary could be created out of nothing. Which defies law of conservation.

- In the case of marbles: You simply can't get any imagined pattern happening, take for example possibility of a marble landing on the opposite side of the world, that's physically impossible, there's enough aerodynamic resistance and friction to stop that from happening, let alone physical barriers.

Every single possible combination can be proven to occur analytically using forward/inverse kinematic principles. I assure you it's impossibel to prove that marbles can take the form of a sentence like the one given even if they where thrown from skyscrapers infinitely.

Surely your statement here is misleading. Parallel lines obey "laws" that they may never cross, quoted above you Pygosceliss states Even if they defy all the known laws of physics?, so then if we remove the laws, why is it so impossible for the parallel lines to cross given that it is already conceded that the rules can be broken!

Erm sorry but are you kidding me? This universe is governed by the laws of physics. Given infinite time you won't get parallel lines crossing. Talking about removing the laws isn't science, you've moved intot he realm of speculative metaphysics.

I don't see a problem here, in fact to accept "infinity" is to accept anything is possible and indeed it would be. Take for example mathmatics, and narrow it down to simple numbers. Is it not true that numbers have no beginning and no end? if you was to give me an infinate number then you would fail for I could immediately double the ammount of zero's that you use, don't mess with infinity as you surely will lose any debate. Given an infinite possibility and casting aside known laws then yes "anything can happen".......

That's an insult to mathematics and science!

I'll break the above into smaller chunks:

I don't see a problem here, in fact to accept "infinity" is to accept anything is possible and indeed it would be.

That's a claim, prove it.

It's easier disproving it, here's one: the line y = 1

What's the limit given infinite time? I dare you to tell me it can be another number other than 1 !!!

Take for example mathmatics, and narrow it down to simple numbers. Is it not true that numbers have no beginning and no end? if you was to give me an infinate number then you would fail for I could immediately double the ammount of zero's that you use, don't mess with infinity as you surely will lose any debate.

Huh?!?!?! There's no such thing as an infinite number ! that soooo shows you don't really have an idea what infinity represents in fisrt place.

Maybe if you read my 2nd post you'll get a better idea of infinity.
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tml#post615497

It also clearly destroys your point that anything is possible given ifninite time. Just becasue you have infinite number of combinations doesnt mean you can get any combination.

Given an infinite possibility and casting aside known laws then yes "anything can happen".......

I'm sorry that's called speculative metaphysics. Not science. Illitereate people might buy that, but not academics.

Please define "being" in the context it was originally given.

Refer to that first link i plugged. But being jsut refers to 'state of existance', i'm sure you get the point. an example of beign created from non being is our universe for example.

You mean principles with known laws! please keep this in context, as Pygo concluded, the laws can change, your POV is based on laws that are constant. Perhaps an error on your part......

You're missing the point, this isn't a thread about development of physics, i'm not using theories (like evolution) to explain anything (in which case you can say 'hey but its only a theory'), i'm using laws.

If you prefer to stick to metaphysical speculation, i'm afraid this isn't the right thread to be in. I'm asking specific questions which if you want to prove, you need to prove them analytically. Not using mystics.

Funny athiests accuse us of being imaginitve in our belief etc etc.. and when we discuss science, they prefer to stick to imagination rather than using science. Not all athiests i guess... some of them atleast.

Proof, what is proof. We know for sure your proof for the sky god you have a beleif in has no proof. we could never even prove if the red you see is the red I see. We can however attach a certain probability to beliefs, but pygo is talking in the realms of infinity where the probability is a certainty. (remember, he also stated any rules could be broken)

When i say proof, i mean mathematical proof, analytical proof, give me some sort of derivation that given infinite time you get physically defiant happenings. E.g. a marbled thrown infinite times from a skyscraper in NYC can land in shanghai.

Just like if i made a reasonable claim "a marble could land 50 metres away from a building" i could submit to you a dynamics analysis showing that it's a possibility.

I am glad you think that way, except you totally abandon this way of thinking when it comes to allah, for you see no cause that brought him into existence!!!!!!!!!!! (how convenient)

Feel free to start a thread about that and i'll comment. For now i'll keep it to this "Allah by definition is the creator, he creates being from non being, to say that he was created is a self-contradicting statement, because it means someone else is the creator, not him"

I take it Muslims may simply luagh, like most have. But then again perhaps the last luagh is on the ignorance of the sky god believers.

I'm glad i've studied enough mathematics and physics to have understood principles adn applications of infinity quite well enough to see through your imaginitive beliefs atleast.

Same to you

Thanks

take care all the best!

I appreciate root's post... atleast he got to the point. Notice pygo didn't even make any scientific replies. Root tried to.

format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis

Just noticed this thread. Another troll post by our good friend lolwhatever, full of straw men and ad homs.

we'll see.

Wow really? Glad we have that effect on you. Do try to sleep though. It may improve your attitude.

still waiting for relevence...

I did indeed say



And I stand by it. I don't even think its a bold claim or anything less than obvious. Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty.

How do you know that, prove it analytically.

You admitted that given infinite time 2 parallel lines won't intersect. That itself means given infinite time not "anything will happen".

Similarly given infinite time marbles thrown from a skyscraper can land in an infinite number of positions, but infinite over a certain area. e.g. a marble can land at coordinates (3.3,2.00002) or (3.3,2.000000034) but a marble thrown from a skyscraper in NYC won't land in shanghai.

You think its possible? And you think i'm too dumb to understand? Write a whitepaper to a university explaining your point, here's an idea: http://www.eng.unimelb.edu.au/research/postdoc.html

As root pointed out, those are known laws of physics. Previously "known" laws of physics have been shown to be wrong as we gained more knowledge. Human knowledge is imperfect.

So then on what set of laws do you base your claims about infinity on? Speculation and imagination?

You accuse us of imagination and mythology, but what you're saying is just blatant lying!

That being said, who claimed that anything and everything could happen? Not I. And not anybody I've read.

you did.

Here's what you said in this same post scroll up,

Pygo: "Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty."

No it doesn't. I think you simply can't grasp the notion of infinity.

Maybe i can't that's the point of this thread silly! Shesh, if i'm wrong, PROVE TO ME that this claim is true:

"Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty."

anything i say, i am able to prove it using laws (not theories), everything you've said so far, isn't backed up by a single math textbook, even mythologists would prob hesitate to believe you.

Indeed. Given what we know, they can not ever intersect.

See i just dont getcha, that means you agree you're wrong when you said:

"Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty."

make up your mind man!

Another straw man being built here. I said no such thing. I did say that given infinite time and the occurence of one universe (thus it being possible for something to come from nothing), it is certain that that small chance would reoccur and we'd get this universe.

Based on what logic and deduction or analytical model?

If you doubt the law of conservation, then feel free to do so, but if you're suggesting that we can't use it because it's possibly wrong, then you need to explain why it could possibly be wrong.

As far as i'm concerned, the law of conservation holds in every aspect of this universe, even on the quantum level, therefore being can not come from non being, much less a universe coming out of nothing.

Furthermore, this universe according to latest developments came about due to no prior physical event. If you doubt that, it takes more than just saying "its possibly wrong" to disprove a claim, you need to prove the law of conservation wrong and then come back to us.

It is fascinating that lolwhatever quoted me directly in the first paragraph but not in these later paragraphs. Could it be that he is building more straw men?

The statement:

"Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty."

and

"being can be created from non being given infinite time"

don't contradict each other do they

Secondly, lets say you disagree with the second statement that i "inserted into your mouth", so then what do you suspect the cause of the creation of the universe to be Keeping in mind that it was not the result of any prior physical event.

Which brings us nicely back to where THAT thread started and the question of what created God. If everything needs a creator then God does. If God doesn't, then not everything needs a creator.

"Allah by definition is the creator, he creates being from non being, to say that he was created is a self-contradicting statement, because it means someone else is the creator, not him"

I don't have the patience to go through that with you again lolwhatever. Maybe Root does.

Then you've shown yourself to be empty, you didnt quote even a signle sceintific source or model to back your claim about infinity up. Probably a good idea to put the load on root and flee.

So far all you've said is "Given infinite time anythign and everything will happen, it's just that you don't understand the notion of infinity"

me: "where's your evidence?"

your: "i know its right, who cares that no mathematician or scientist supports the idea with proof... i just know it"

me: "fine, enjoy your speculativ metaphysics, but this isn't the thread to be in then "

[QUOTE=lolwatever;617859]
Pygo: "Given infinite time and infinite resources and infinite time, even the most unlikely event WILL happen with certainty."

Indeed. Maybe you're trouble is that english isn't your first language? Unlikely and impossible are not synonyms. And when I say Unlikely event I mean event that is possible but just extremely unlikely. Understand now?

anything i say, i am able to prove it using laws (not theories)

You have proven nothing, as everyone can see plain as day.

If you doubt the law of conservation, then feel free to do so

This is your straw man, not anything I or anybody else has said. Of course the law of conservation COULD be invalid though, we certainly can't rule it out completely.

don't contradict each other do they

Now are you just being funny. They don't imply each other either.

what do you suspect the cause of the creation of the universe to be

I don't claim to know. Unlike you, I don't claim to have all the answers. This is what makes my position so much more comfortable than yours.

"Allah by definition is the creator, he creates being from non being, to say that he was created is a self-contradicting statement, because it means someone else is the creator, not him"

This is nonsense and I suspect you know it. You can't define your way out of this connundrum. And what happened to your much touted law of conservation of mass? You suddenly throwing it out because you now want to make God belief claims?

And just out of idle curiosity, why do you propose that there can not be more than one creator? Maybe Bob created Allah and Allah then created the Universe and all that is in it.

Then you've shown yourself to be empty

Thank you for another ad hom to add to the ever growing collection.

[B]you didnt quote even a signle sceintific source or model to back your claim about infinity

There is no need. It is simple logic. If you understood the concept of infinity you'd undertand the logic. Apparently you don't.

So far all you've said is "Given infinite time anythign and everything will happen, it's just that you don't understand the notion of infinity"

And here is your freshly built strawman. Isn't he cute. Your strawman statement may turn out to be true mind you.