Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

If energy is eternal is God needed?

Rate this topic

105 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, humanbeing101 said:

You've completely strawmanned by position brother. Let me tell you why. I am not talking about imagination or the human ability to imagine. If I asked you can a human jump a million feet in the air. Yes obviously we can imagine a human doing that. I'm talking from a realist perspective. In the real world and physically have you seen a human being at two places at once? 

I'm not going to let you off the hook here. :)

I've not seen one, but our Prophets AS and our messenger SAW have . I believe that.

I presented my argumentfor why God is necessary and you've presented yours for why He's not.  there's no agreement, it seems.

 

Edited by wmehar2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, wmehar2 said:

I've not seen one, but our Prophets AS and our messenger SAW have . I believe that.

I presented my argumentfor why God is necessary and you've presented yours for why He's not.  there's no agreement, it seems.

 

I'm a thiest bro but I'm playing devil's advocate. :) It is hard being an athiest lol. 

wmehar2 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, humanbeing101 said:

I'm a thiest bro but I'm playing devil's advocate. :) It is hard being an athiest lol. 

We can talk about miracles that we believe in, but we have no proof thereof.   But I don't see a strong argument with the "Eternal" Energy aspect.

Forget Islam, and ponder if God existed and is one and in the same with the energy to a level we cannot fathom (Spinoza's/Einstein's God), and Energy and God are synonymous.  You mentioned there are so many possibilities, and said that X and Y cannot be ruled out and defaulted to Z automatically. 

I don't see a strong atheist argument with the Energy conservation law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have kinetic energy and you have potential energy. If you add these two up, you will get Net Energy. The Net Energy content of the Universe= 0. Why? Because the amounts of kinetic energy and potential energy are also 0! However, you need motion (in time) to have kinetic energy and you need to have a potential field (in space) to have potential energy.  

So if space and time are not eternal, it's senseless to say Energy is still eternal. Because like I said, you need motion ( which requires time) to have kinetic energy and you need a potential field ( which requires space)  to have potential energy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2017 at 1:53 PM, humanbeing101 said:

Oh no, I asked the question wrong. I meant to say energy is eternal*. 

Salam,

What does it mean to be eternal?  Many people understand by eternity that which has existed forever and will exist forever (that which has no beginning or end in time).  But this is what "everlasting" means.  Eternity is not that same as "everlasting".  Eternity does not even have a time span. Eternity doesn't have any duration at all (even if that duration has no beginning or end).  So this immediately disqualifies energy.  It "might" make sense to say that energy is everlasting.  But energy is certainly not eternal!

So what is eternal?  Think of:  

1 + 1 =  2  

This is an eternal truth because there is no situation or circumstance that can make this statement false.  This statement is true in all situations and in all circumstances.  It is therefore eternally true and can never be otherwise.  The fact that you are you and that you cannot be other than yourself is an eternal truth (This is the law of identity where A = A).  Each and every thing is eternally what it is and cannot be other than what it is.  Each thing is, in this respect, eternal.  (If you like, this why a believer can say that everything is eternally predetermined or "written").  Insofar as a thing is eternal, it is nothing but God.                                     

 

 

                    

Hassan- likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Salam,

Brother 

Where have you been?

Haven't seen you for a very long time.

I was also away for about 2 years.

I am here for a short while and would have to leave again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Salam,

not sure if somebody said that before on the 4 pages, but this has a simple solution to me.

 

- First of all no human actually knows what energy is, or has every seen it. All we see is the result and influences thereof.

Name of Allah ( Al-Batin - The Hidden; the All Encompassing )


- Secondly, one form of Energy is "Light". And even though we can only 'see' within a certain spectrum, we know that light has practically a limitless spectrum. Also, in essence all forms of energy, be they sound, x-ray, etc .. are the same.

Scientists study them nowadays by imagining they are either waves or packets of imaginary energy called quanta; hence, wave and quantum theories. 

Name of Allah ( al-Nour - the Light )

 

The Light is eternal and has always existed, and always exist. So I would go so far as saying that Allah is the Energy. Therefore it does not contradict the law claiming that 'it' can be neither destroyed or created. 

 

From a purely logic perspective:

 

1. Light = Energy

therefore,

2. Energy = Light

 

  • the Light =   al Nour = al Lah = the God

 

 

That's how I see it ..

 

"Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth." :love:

 

 

 

Edited by 313 Seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

So what is eternal?  Think of:  

1 + 1 =  2  

This is an eternal truth because there is no situation or circumstance that can make this statement false.  This statement is true in all situations and in all circumstances.

If only it were that simple...

In Reality, in Nature there are no perfect circles, no straight lines, there is no 1 so completely identical to any another 1 to make 2.

These are concepts, ideas; they have 'mental existence'.  Ideas do not 'exist' in any meaningful way, any more than speed 'exists': they are both abstract concepts derived from our observations of a process. For speed this is the process of motion: for ideas it is the process of thought. I think you are confusing this with 'exists' in the sense of 'is a material object we can point to'.

'Mental existence' is really just a metaphor for "I can think about it", but that act does not give it any actual existence. 

"Mental existence" is not a subset of "existence", it is just a metaphor for thinking about a thing. And thinking about a thing doesn't give it existence: Santa Clause does not exist. 

"One's thoughts exist" is nevertheless a valid statement since in vernacular speech that statement is simply a metaphor for "I think".

wslm.

*
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 3/6/2017 at 3:41 AM, Quisant said:

If only it were that simple...

In Reality, in Nature there are no perfect circles, no straight lines, there is no 1 so completely identical to any another 1 to make 2.

These are concepts, ideas; they have 'mental existence'.  Ideas do not 'exist' in any meaningful way, any more than speed 'exists': they are both abstract concepts derived from our observations of a process. For speed this is the process of motion: for ideas it is the process of thought. I think you are confusing this with 'exists' in the sense of 'is a material object we can point to'.

'Mental existence' is really just a metaphor for "I can think about it", but that act does not give it any actual existence. 

"Mental existence" is not a subset of "existence", it is just a metaphor for thinking about a thing. And thinking about a thing doesn't give it existence: Santa Clause does not exist. 

"One's thoughts exist" is nevertheless a valid statement since in vernacular speech that statement is simply a metaphor for "I think".

wslm.

*
 

So, 1+1 = 2 is only true in our minds and will only be true inasmuch as "we think about it".... but not true in the natural world?  So, we all just think "1 + 1 = 2"?  There is absolutely nothing objective about 1+ 1= 2?  

So we can't really count things in the natural world?  So when you look at one apple and then you look at another apple, they don't necessarily equate to 2 apples.  They only equate to 2 apples so long as you think they equate to two apples? 

Is there a difference to you between knowing  something and thinking something?

Do you know that 1 + 1 = 2 or do you merely think that 1 + 1 = 2?

what does it mean tin"KNOW" anything at all?  Is knowledge of things  just mere thinking about things?

 

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2017 at 0:20 AM, baqar said:

Brother 

Where have you been?

Haven't seen you for a very long time.

I was also away for about 2 years.

I am here for a short while and would have to leave again.

 

Salam,

Hope you are well brother.  Been busy with other things.  Thanks for asking.

:)

Ethereal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2017 at 3:16 AM, 313 Seeker said:

Salam,

not sure if somebody said that before on the 4 pages, but this has a simple solution to me.

 

- First of all no human actually knows what energy is, or has every seen it. All we see is the result and influences thereof.

Name of Allah ( Al-Batin - The Hidden; the All Encompassing )


- Secondly, one form of Energy is "Light". And even though we can only 'see' within a certain spectrum, we know that light has practically a limitless spectrum. Also, in essence all forms of energy, be they sound, x-ray, etc .. are the same.

Scientists study them nowadays by imagining they are either waves or packets of imaginary energy called quanta; hence, wave and quantum theories. 

Name of Allah ( al-Nour - the Light )

 

The Light is eternal and has always existed, and always exist. So I would go so far as saying that Allah is the Energy. Therefore it does not contradict the law claiming that 'it' can be neither destroyed or created. 

 

From a purely logic perspective:

 

1. Light = Energy

therefore,

2. Energy = Light

 

  • the Light =   al Nour = al Lah = the God

 

 

That's how I see it ..

 

"Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth." :love:

 

 

 

 

Salam,

It seems you are saying energy is immaterial.  But how so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2017 at 2:17 AM, eThErEaL said:

So what is eternal?  Think of:  

1 + 1 =  2  

This is an eternal truth because there is no situation or circumstance that can make this statement false.  This statement is true in all situations and in all circumstances.  It is therefore eternally true and can never be otherwise.  

I am merely disagreeing with this statement of yours and I will try and explain my reasoning.

I believe that 1+1=2 is a convenient shortcut we humans use. It can be true and false.

5 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

So, 1+1 = 2 is only true in our minds and will only be true inasmuch as "we think about it".... but not true in the natural world?  So, we all just think "1 + 1 = 2"?  There is absolutely nothing objective about 1+ 1= 2?  

So we can't really count things in the natural world?  So when you look at one apple and then you look at another apple, they don't necessarily equate to 2 apples.  They only equate to 2 apples so long as you think they equate to two apples? 

Is there a difference to you between knowing  something and thinking something?

Do you know that 1 + 1 = 2 or do you merely think that 1 + 1 = 2?

what does it mean tin"KNOW" anything at all?  Is knowledge of things  just mere thinking about things?

The two apples are not 'precisely the same' they do not 'equal' each other in either colour or shape but you are welcome to conclude that they do. 
If you add a river to a river does it make two rivers?.. Or a desert to a desert?

It really depends on how you define "have existence". I define "having existence" in the sense that can be understood by the statement, "Santa Clause does not exist."
He exists in the mind but not outside the mind. Hence I claim that he doesn't exist but you are welcome to believe that he does.

Also knowledge is not eternal, as you claim, it does not come from a "knowledge bank" of nature. It comes from our brain. Knowledge cannot exist without somebody experiencing and confirming.

In the beginning there was no knowledge whatsoever. In fact, our entire universe existed and operated for multiple billions of years before knowledge ever existed for the first time.

Knowledge does not exist until it is known by a sentient being. 
Anything that happens without a sentient being observing it is occurring without any knowledge whatsoever.

Knowledge is all that is known. The unknown is everything else.
The sets are mutual exclusive.
While knowledge can be false, the unknown can never be false. For something to be false it must be known.

Just my opinion, you don't have to buy it. :)

wslm.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why there is still fuss regarding this topic. You see, there are 2 basic forms of energy: 1. Kinetic Energy ( This type of energy is spoken of with any material thing in motion (which entails both space and time, since there cannot be movement of an object without space and time.

             2. Potential Energy ( Any type of this form of energy is stored energy in a potential field (which again, entails space.

My point: ANY type of energy from those two (basic) forms I mentioned, CANNOT exist without space-time. So if space-time began to exist, then energy started to exist shortly after space and time came into existence. This is derived from both basic logic and knowledge of what energy actually is.

What physicists like Einstein mean(t) with '' Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, but only transitioned from one form to another'' is one of the many physical laws, but if space-time did not begin to exist yet (which is the framework of physicality) it becomes MEANINGLESS to say that energy exists magically 'before space-time'.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

15 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Salam,

It seems you are saying energy is immaterial.  But how so?

 

Wasalaam

Material is energy as well. Atoms are just fields of energy that we describe as a negative surrounding (electron(s) ) with a positive core (protons). Everything is energy. The drawings people make of electrons spinning around a little sphere are just for our imagination. All we know is from measurements that there is a negative and positive. Duality of everything. 

Edited by 313 Seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Quisant said:

I am merely disagreeing with this statement of yours and I will try and explain my reasoning.

I believe that 1+1=2 is a convenient shortcut we humans use. It can be true and false.

The two apples are not 'precisely the same' they do not 'equal' each other in either colour or shape but you are welcome to conclude that they do. 
If you add a river to a river does it make two rivers?.. Or a desert to a desert?

It really depends on how you define "have existence". I define "having existence" in the sense that can be understood by the statement, "Santa Clause does not exist."
He exists in the mind but not outside the mind. Hence I claim that he doesn't exist but you are welcome to believe that he does.

Also knowledge is not eternal, as you claim, it does not come from a "knowledge bank" of nature. It comes from our brain. Knowledge cannot exist without somebody experiencing and confirming.

In the beginning there was no knowledge whatsoever. In fact, our entire universe existed and operated for multiple billions of years before knowledge ever existed for the first time.

Knowledge does not exist until it is known by a sentient being. 
Anything that happens without a sentient being observing it is occurring without any knowledge whatsoever.

Knowledge is all that is known. The unknown is everything else.
The sets are mutual exclusive.
While knowledge can be false, the unknown can never be false. For something to be false it must be known.

Just my opinion, you don't have to buy it. :)

wslm.

*

So 1 + 1 = 2 is both true and false?

 

Everything you have said about two apples not being identical is trivial and obvious.  Of course no two things are identical.  I don't think anyone would ever claim such a thing.   

To answer your questions....

If you add two deserts to each other then you get two deserts (and the same for two rivers).   if you mean "putting two deserts or two rivers together" then that is not "adding" because putting two together also means eliminating each of their intrinsic identities for what they are.  If you mean "putting together" you might not be adding two different rivers or two different deserts but you will certainly be adding two different quantities of water or of sand (respectively).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.