The death of string theory (or rather superstring theory) and the emergence of loop quantum gravity theory (lee Smolin, Ed Witten etc) as the leading theory in physics presents us with an interesting dilemma: While it is basically true that there is no time (as we know it) before the big bang, the big bang is no longer "the beginning" of The Universe in contemporary physics. Whether the big bang is the product of a black hole or the result of a previous contraction is an open question but that the big bang was just a start in itself out of an original quantum fluctuation seems highly unlikely. So perhaps The Universe is eternal after all and needs no cause. And in the case effects are results of causes with one exception: The Universe itself. Most importantly for us: There is no Big Father Figure with a penis anywhere to be found in the skies. Just like there is no spiritual entity which is not material inside our brains (Descartes is dead). These are the facts we have to live with. Putting books before our own minds is not a very Mazdayasna thing to do.
2009/1/5 Georgios Papadopoulos
1) everyone knows that the question of the initial creator is an
2) The solution you offer (emergence) doesn't really contribute to
the solution of the above problem. Copying from wikipedia "The term
emergence in physics is thus used not to signify complexity, but
rather to distinguish which laws and concepts apply to macroscopic
scales, and which ones apply to microscopic scales." (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence). The same term means different
things in other sciences, but the laws of the universe are the laws
of physics. Applying terms of other sciences/philosophies to pysics
leads nowhere. Physics is a science that can/should be verified in
the real world by experiments. In order to describe the real world
physics uses the language of mathematics, but as Ph.D. Richard
Feynman once put it "Physics is to Math what sex is to masturbation".
3) Most people seem trapped in the law of cause and effect, trying to
apply this law to the creation of our universe and thus "prove" the
existence of a pre-existing creator. This is totally wrong since TIME
DID NOT EXIST "before" the big bang. That's why the creation of the
universe cannot be an effect of a cause. So it's nonsense to talk
about what existed before the universe/god/etc. Our time line begins
with the big bang.
4) With maths and other sciences it is possible to create very
interesting theories but unfortunately our minds are framed by the 4
dimensions (3 in space & 1 in time) we live in. There might be
multiple universes or thousands of other dimensions as well, but WE
ARE ALL HERE NOW. The message of Zarathustra, as I understand it, is
to search for truth & order, trying to improve ourselves and the
planet/society we share. To me truth is whatever can be verified. The
rest is theories.
Hope it helps a little bit,