How will the universe end?

[AnInO]

who created god and how was god created...

before the universe ends i assure you humans well perish 1st..

why care so much about how the universe ends when we ourselves are ending our only planet and not caring...

as they say " everything that has a beginning has an end" but it is also said that " the end is a start of a new beginning "

the universe will end one way or another and will start all over again...

[treize]

yet it's still a theory... a lot of things in the universe that defies the law of science...

[rodsky]

... a lot of things in the universe that defies the law of science...

Can you give a comparison count between the things that don't defy natural laws and things that do defy natural laws? Because if it turns out that the number of things that do defy natural laws are greater than the things that don't defy natural laws, then I have to conclude that science isn't effective in "improving our lives". But in fact, science does improve lives. I mean, just think, if it were not for science and technology, I wouldn't even have the means to express what I just said to people around the world, via this post.

-RODION

[vern]

@treize ... which law do you refer to? What man cannot understand cannot be said to be breaking any law. If it is observed, then it doesn't break any of nature's laws.

@rodsky ... you assume that science has "improved" our lives at all. That is altogether a subjective view. Science has also given us high fructose corn syrup, agent orange, forum trolls, bad analogies that speed it's way around the world, super tuberculosis, ADHD, sub-prime mortgages, suicides from tall buildings, death from building collapse, death from high voltage, drug overdose and on and on and on. You get my point. All those things arise from what society thinks of as an "improvement" of their lives ... yet science is the cause of the majority of today's problems. IE ... heart disease is the biggest killer in the US, how many people died of heart disease in the 1700s?

But I digress. My point is ... analogies don't do the universe justice. Flight is not comparable to the beginning of the universe. You assume that the universe is knowable yet forget that a very basic tenet of the universe is uncertainty.

[rodsky]

...yet science is the cause of the majority of today's problems.

Yet another subjective view. But that's coming from my perspective, as was my initial post on the matter.

-RODION

[vern]

Yet another subjective view. But that's coming from my perspective, as was my initial post on the matter.

-RODION

That is not subjective. That is fact. It can be quantified. It has been observed. When a car accident happens, that is the result of science causing death. Humans were not meant to go so fast. When a plane crashes, that is science causing death. Humans were not made to fly. What you post however is subjective and since you hold everyone else to such a high standard when posting in this forum that they must bring empirical evidence to the table, you must hold yourself to the same high standard. However, you yourself say it is your perspective ... yet unproven theories, regardless of whose perspective is as useful as God is to science ... IE: it's a nice idea, but really doesn't do us any good.

[rodsky]

That is not subjective. That is fact. It can be quantified. It has been observed. When a car accident happens, that is the result of science causing death. Humans were not meant to go so fast. When a plane crashes, that is science causing death. Humans were not made to fly. What you post however is subjective and since you hold everyone else to such a high standard when posting in this forum that they must bring empirical evidence to the table, you must hold yourself to the same high standard. However, you yourself say it is your perspective ... yet unproven theories, regardless of whose perspective is as useful as God is to science ... IE: it's a nice idea, but really doesn't do us any good.

I'm going to repost other people's opinions about this matter, opinions that I share:

"If you added up all the people who were killed by guns, it wouldn't even come close to the number of people who were killed with rocks and sticks and bare hands before the gun was invented. While it's true that the homicide rate is much lower in nations like Japan and England where gun control is practiced, the higher homicide rate in the U.S. is as much a product of our proclaimed love affair with freedom as it is a product of high rates of gun ownership. At any rate, the science behind the development of the gun--chemistry, ballistics, metallurgy, basic physics--has produced as many strictly beneficial technologies as it has questionable ones.

When science is most dangerous is when it falls into the hands of people who want to exploit it without understanding it, especially politicians and religious leaders. Some people understand the basics of science, if not all the details, and they understand that science is value-free. Something either works or it doesn't. How it is put to work is dependent on the values and judgment of the user, and a deeper understanding of science often goes hand in hand with a deeper understanding of the greater good. Some people who are more interested in power than truth view science as a mysterious tool that they can employ without understanding. All they want to know is that it works, not how it works. Al Qaeda says that "Allah is great," but they don't rely on Allah to kill their enemies, they rely on technology they don't understand and don't want to understand. George Bush is another example of someone who does not understand science and does not want to understand science, and yet he is perfectly happy to use technology (produced by science) to do "God's will" in Iraq.

Understanding science requires education. Education chases out superstition and leads to more informed decisions. Science itself causes neither good nor harm, but much good would come from more people learning about and understanding science.

Science doesn't harm people--people harm people.

-RODION

[xiao_xiao]

@rodsky ... you assume that science has "improved" our lives at all. That is altogether a subjective view. Science has also given us high fructose corn syrup, agent orange, forum trolls, bad analogies that speed it's way around the world, super tuberculosis, ADHD, sub-prime mortgages, suicides from tall buildings, death from building collapse, death from high voltage, drug overdose and on and on and on. You get my point. All those things arise from what society thinks of as an "improvement" of their lives ... yet science is the cause of the majority of today's problems. IE ... heart disease is the biggest killer in the US, how many people died of heart disease in the 1700s?

agree ko ani.

[romano2717]

Let's say that this universe started with a Big Bang.
Let us also assume that before the big bang there was nothing.
If this universe comes to an end(no more stars, planets, gases, galaxies etc...), nothingness will take place.
Will this be just another candidate for another Big Bang since before the Big Bang there was nothing?

di ba mura cycle ra? Assumptions ra ne ha, dont ask me for evidence, feel free to dispute.

[Kehlpao12]

when the planets align