@9:50 "a hypothetical 3D universe with a particle moving in space and time, the question remains the same: when, where and how it started from nothing(no time, space, matter/energy). Let's side aside metaphysical and explore the scientific side, the mathematics describing the origin is undefined at time <=0 .
@npc_citizen927617 сағат бұрын
I gave the answer to this comment under that giant sheet of comments to a comment.
@luispellegrini987Күн бұрын
Well now I have a lot more questions. Thanks a lot Sean!!! 😣
@oldpossum572 күн бұрын
37:37. Richard Swinburne would rather posit a god or gods rather than posit physics that allows for an extraordinary number of universes. His error is in this: the astronomical number of universes is the result of a physical model that corresponds to the actual evidence. Adding a god or gods helps not at all. We still have the astronomical number of universes; but in addition we have an infinite being, an omni-god, that can break the “laws” of nature at will. If this is the case then our science theory cannot forbid anything, cannot predict anything, can no longer explain anything. Swinburne offers a false choice.
@oldpossum572 күн бұрын
A claim has been made by some geneticists that the Homo line of primates was very close to extinction 900 Kya. If it had gone extinct, we would not be here. The alien from outer space would not conclude that this extinction was “meant to happen”, but only that it did happen. We evolved in a hospitable cranny of the universe that is otherwise inhospitable for life. It did not have to happen. It almost didn’t. End of story.
@oldpossum573 күн бұрын
Carroll makes a funny, clever little dig at 32:12.It is possible to hypothesize that a god selected the parameters of the universe so that life/humans could survive. After all, what is the purpose of the universe if we do not exist? The arrogance of H. sapiens to assume that we are the reason for the universe, a universe that existed fine without us, will continue to exist once we are extinct. Someone comments on this video an adage they say is from Native American people: if dogs and horses conceive gods, then they conceive them as dogs and horses.
@pedrofigueiredo91463 күн бұрын
the biggest problem between religion and science is the boundary between the two. Religion should not explain how the universe works and science by explaining how the universe works can not get from its inner workings the existence of god or any other metaphysical cause. If one can deeply study the Ford Model A and profoundly understand all of its inner workings one cannot derive from it the existence of Henry Ford. we can imagine that an Henry Ford is needed to construct the Model A but no one can derive scientifically and mathematically the existence Henry Ford from it. Science deals with the inner workings of the universe and Religion deals with the moral nature of it. because we can't derive morals from its inner workings. Science can not proof that it's immoral to kill another human being.
@pedrofigueiredo91463 күн бұрын
One can say that morals are created by humans and not religion but, I argue that religion is an emergent property of that process. We can say that morals are given to us by god and that's ok, we should leave it at that because that assumption is in itself a moral assumption and should be dealt within the moral framework. Humans are profoundly spiritual creatures and need spirituality. If scientists aim to take that away from society and transform science in a atheist religion with the aim of creating an atheist society people will fulfill their need for spirituality in instant gratification games. (maybe some can live happily in at atheist world and have the power of fulfilling themselves alone but society at large don't)
@npc_citizen927617 сағат бұрын
Objection. Morals are more of a human instinct. Right now studies show that moral features form more from the genes, and not the outside factors. Same with IQ and other stuff. It's mostly bottlenecked by the genes. A fat kid will most likely stay fat in a skinny family even though they eat same stuff. There are twins and even threes that were separated into different families and after growing up they found out they like the same things, wear similar clothes and such.
@jimmie89284 күн бұрын
For a smart man he's not very smart... I haven't taken any advanced classes and understand every bit of this and as much as he prides himself on not making assumptions and using science he makes alot of assumptions....
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
Of course science makes assumptions. The major one is that nature is not lying to us. It works pretty well, especially when we compare it to religion, which always lies. ;-)
@therick3633 күн бұрын
So tomorrow admit you don’t know but have the gal to say he’s not smart…about things you don’t know about….wow
@jimmie8928Күн бұрын
@lepidoptera9337 if you misinterpret it sure I could see how it could appear as lies, I never once stated he lied just didn't understand some concepts that are beyond his understanding
@jimmie8928Күн бұрын
@therick363 it's been a few days, I've learned more in fact, still not as smart as he leads on.
@lepidoptera9337Күн бұрын
@@jimmie8928 That all religions lie is a fact. They all work like the Nigerian Prince scam. ;-)
@TheUltimateSeeds5 күн бұрын
"God is not a good theory," but an infinite number of fully formed, human occupied universes that instantly and continuously branch off of each other like bubbles exploding out of a shaken bottle of champagne, is a better theory? Seriously?
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
Yeah, Sean Carrol has made his own little religion there. That much is true. It is simply a misinterpretation of quantum mechanics, though. The actual theory is completely rational and once you understand it it's also pretty boring.
@TheUltimateSeeds4 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337 It is not the least bit rational if it suggests that copies of us (along with the entire universe) instantly (and literally) spring into existence (branch off of this universe) simply to accommodate all of the "possible outcomes" inherent in the superpositioned wavefunction of a singular electron as it moves between the double-slitted wall and that of the phosphorescent screen in the double slit experiment.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
@@TheUltimateSeeds The actual theory doesn't suggest any of that. What the theory says is the following: 1) Individual quantum measurements (when and where a quantum of energy will be detected) are not predictable. 2) For suitable systems these detections are independent. 3) Systems for which these detections are independent can be described with ensembles that produce frequentist expectation values. 4) In the large numbers limit (same as for probability distributions) these frequencies can be approximated by the Born rule (describing the measurement apparatus) and a unitary dynamic (usually the Schroedinger equation) of an abstract mathematical object called "wave function" that describes the free quantum system's ensemble. That's the actual theory. There are no copies of the universe in there. There is a statistical independence assumption that may or may not be true for any one particular system. And, yeah, then there are people like Sean Carroll who will talk total nonsense about quantum mechanics because they didn't pay enough attention to the structure of the theory. Although in case of Sean Carroll I suspect that he has simply discovered that one can sell books with MWI which one can not with the real theory that is about as boring as watching paint dry. It's all about money... no different from religion. Nonsense sells.
@raymondprohs48425 күн бұрын
It's nearsighted, ignorant & silly how proponents of science are a) seemingly happy and willing to hypothesize on the existence of conscious beings from other solar systems and/or galaxies, while b) still having no practical idea at all regarding what consciousness itself is, yet c) still presumptuously promote that consciousness, as the source of all existence, is a non-explanation. I don't agree with most (man-made) religions' presupposition that the top god is divinely masculine. I rather think the original word/sound was/is 'aum' and that it's the first form of shakti, the divine feminine, from which all other forms arise. In any case, it's the child's perspective that appearances matter most, which is analogous to science postulating that consciousness is an extension of the brain-&-nervous system, rather than the other way around. To sum up, as the great philosopher said, "Stupid is as stupid does."
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
Yes, that was stupid. We have evidence of life. We have no evidence of the supernatural. :-)
@4dojo7 күн бұрын
I feel like you use the term scientific theory more like the word hypothesis. In science a theory is not just any idea that may or may not be true. Gravitational theory, plate tectonics, and germ theory are all categorized as theories, but that does mean that we don’t know that gravity is real, or how earth quakes start, or that pathogens exist. A theory is the highest level of understanding in science, while a hypothesis is more similar to your definition of a theory. God and gods are not a theory because they cannot be tested in any consistent way.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
A hypothesis needs to be testable, as well, so the gods are not even a hypothesis. What is a fact, though, is that all religions work like the Nigerian scam. :-)
@stuntchild7 күн бұрын
10:30 time stamp: It is still presuppositional to simply “have” the particle in existence. You cannot get around it.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
The real problem comes afterwards. His description of wave functions is wrong.
@goodlight41137 күн бұрын
But isn't HE the god of the 1 particle universe? :p
@YK-T79098 күн бұрын
I just buy 5% of what this mate has said, don't use the word science in vain, this talk could be summarised in what he says in min 37:40. "This is not good science". The Great Contradiction of this man min 14:12 to 18:05 VS his closing phrase 52:45. Embarrassing
@removechan102988 күн бұрын
another empty intellectual defender of islam
@Daiyve7 күн бұрын
These Astrophysics guys are heavily into the occult or at the very least hyperliteralism. Political correctness is in league with Islam, the vatican has always been directly tied to islam also. You won't hear these people speak against one another when on script. Matthew 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
@@Daiyve Are the two of you getting help with those delusions? ;-)
@Daiyve4 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337 You defend Islam and you don't know why other than your role models do it. That's as delusional as a person can get, defend a belief system that wants you dead.
@Daiyve4 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337If you spend your free time looking for arguments, you will fill your day with them. You need a lot more help than I do.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
@@Daiyve Well, you clearly found something that keeps you up at night: people who believe in a different Adult Santa than you. ;-)
@removechan102988 күн бұрын
thank goodness this prat got to live to see the downfall of Christianity, the burning of churches, and keir starmer bring in islam as the official protected ideology of britain, he deserves to live another 50 years to see what his hand wringing idiotic hen pecking bullshit has help proliferate.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
Please get help. You need it. ;-)
@removechan102984 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337 ahahaahahahah loool u fkn coward
@scottwalker97669 күн бұрын
Explain something that doesn't need explaining.
@npc_citizen927617 сағат бұрын
God was made up by humans. If horses and fishes perceived gods, the gods would be horses and fishes.
@bernaldelcastillo17689 күн бұрын
This scientific verbiage has left me more confused than before. I shall have to ponder these arguments carefully...
@npc_citizen927617 сағат бұрын
Just know that you can't prove God the same way you can't prove why the universe exists. One thing is certain though. There is no evidence to God other than media and there is concrete evidence of the universe existing.
@aloisraich93269 күн бұрын
Physicalism is not sufficient either. It does not know how to explain consciousness and still does not have a theorie of quantum gravity. The standard Modell is a huge achievment but will be replaced bymodels which give up on time and space and have mind or god or whatever you want to call it as its primary principle. I am sorry current physicists are a bit like flat earthers they just do not want to give up on physicalism despite only having gigantic math models which cannot be falsified and do not make any predictions, it is a total mess.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
We don't need a theory of quantum gravity. It has never been observed. Neither has your consciousness. If I asked you to prove to me that you are conscious, then you would have a very hard time. ;-)
@sophiafakevirus-ro8cc11 күн бұрын
Logic is bounded, God is not.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
That's the problem... because gods share that property with bullshit. Bullshit is not bounded, either. It is truly omnipresent and omniscient. Well, at least the bullshitters are. ;-)
@sophiafakevirus-ro8cc4 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337 God is a personification, go beyond the idea of a divine personality, a big sky daddy, and use the term God to mean the everything (and the nothing), and do not accept the version of cosmology and history you have been given.
@lepidoptera93374 күн бұрын
@@sophiafakevirus-ro8cc I don't need a sky-daddy. I am a grownup. ;-)
@TheSpoonThatDied3 күн бұрын
@@lepidoptera9337Lol, i am loving your replies as I go through the new comments. Stand proud, you made a random guy on the internet laugh XD
@sophiafakevirus-ro8ccКүн бұрын
@@TheSpoonThatDied that's a very high horse you are sitting on. Do you consider the nature of reality ever?
@a-jam893712 күн бұрын
"His eye is on a sparrow" but yet he doesn't seem to mind when a meteor comes from and wipes out all of the dinosaurs. The argument from fine-tuning is weak at best. We are designed to live in a small pocket of the universe. The universe isn't designed just for us.
@kiriakosoikonomu290713 күн бұрын
another systemic atheist mubbling bullshit
@bardoface13 күн бұрын
God isn’t a “theory.” Lol
@Steve-cd9ul10 күн бұрын
That's his point.
@bardoface10 күн бұрын
@@Steve-cd9ul yeah well you misunderstand me too bad
@Steve-cd9ul9 күн бұрын
@@bardoface His point is that for the many (eg William Lane Craig) who invoke scientific principles while explaining why they believe God created the universe, here's why, taken as an actual scientific theory, it doesn't work very well.
@bardoface9 күн бұрын
@@Steve-cd9ul I’m just a silly boy. I get it.
@fattyz114 күн бұрын
He looks like a kid in the thumbnail but, It’s good theory because I started arguing with THEM about pre-destination long before I knew it was a thing in physics and what’s any of this about BUT arguing with someone about something? Anything.
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
Ok let’s say there is no God🤣 - why do you care? (Feelings😷) - survival of the fittest😎 🤣 -- And how are you so sure he’s not reproducible, If you’ve never GENUINELY SEEKED? 😂 Uhh uhh, YES THERES NO MILK BACK THERE - why? UHH BECAUSE I COULDNT SEE OR HEAR ANY (and someone told me that the milk would speak😷)😂
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
God is not a theory, just a fact And the facts are ALLL the evidence points to a creator (regardless of anyone’s opinion) “That’s how facts work” Plus if you really care about the truth (there’s also evidence against evolution) “Even tho there was none for it in the first place” 🤣 Evidence for God - a creation points to a creator - life does not come from non life (Something ETERNAL is Not Nothing 😂) - laws of the universe point to a law giver - (& everyone’s favorite - absolute morality) If everything was relative, murdering women and children would be acceptable as long as most people agree (Which is why JP says if you truly believe we came from nothing, Then there is no good or bad, so who are you to say what someone else is doing is bad, because it hurts your feelings?) I don’t think people who don’t have a conscious anymore, care about your feelings 😂 --- Plus the evidence against (Just ask) - but the real question is - why are yall so emotional about something you claim not to believe in (There is a reason) If yall were right, and everything came from nothing, according to that, “religious😷” people would just be good at playing survival of the fittest😷 (Even tho millions have been murdered all throughout history) (And will be murdered till the End “of this timeline”) So why be mad? 😂 --- Yall can get mad at your own creators “followers” (which is not known by their name tag😂) But that doesn’t change the facts And you can get mad at your creator and say - “I Don’t Understand - therefore you shouldn’t do blah blah blah” But your already assuming wrong - It’s not his fault, and even if it was, what can you do about it? --- And which “religion😷”? - none - Jesus is not a religion - (which you Will understand IF, you stop letting your preconceived biases (which were implanted) control you) - if you genuinely want to find who is your creator, ASK HIM YOURSELF - if you don’t Seek, you don’t FIND Yes there are difficult situations and questions, But they don’t change reality Reality is objective Perception is subjective --- And why do you think you would believe: - aliens (which coincidentally look exactly like the movies😂) - multiverses - no free will - (because Neil grass says habits make it difficult😢) Why would they want you to believe that? - plus ALLL the fear (turning small statistics - into something you actively put energy towards and think about) “Scientifically😷” - we create what we focus on and give energy too, You think the “experts😷” don’t know that? - when they tell you to be afraid of every little thing, cause you might get sick or die or “bad thing😷” (It’s implanted with a biased narrative “& emotion”, so when it comes back up, You’ll look at it negatively, and once you accept reality, You’ll blame it on your creator) ---- Since when did people shift from “not believing🤓” -> to hating😷 God ? I thought it was about the facts or evidence? (Spoiler alert it’s not) - but WHY? - no not “Gods fault😢🤬” --- OH YEA “Why bad things happen😢😷?” - because we all have a choice - choices can be influenced, but not forced (it’s complicated, but so is God😂) --- And there is no ultimate justice (which everyone wants & cries about) without him -- Again you can get mad without actually knowing anything, Or you can ask him yourself & find out - you don’t Seek, you Don’t FIND (which is a major point) -- It’s a choice, so you can’t really cry about it
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
Ed why did he make us like this, knowing it would happen? - he didn’t - his creation is good - but his free agents - have a choice to use it for “good or bad” (for now) Eventually he will take his followers (people who wanted a relationship with him and trusted in him) - to the way he wanted life to be, “still choice”, but without all the temptation and evil -- Before you start getting mad even tho this would still be considered “survival of the fittest😷” 😂 What’s wrong with a relationship and trust? 🤣 (MONEY POWER😭🤬😷🤓✊🏽) 😂
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
Ed why didn’t he hide himself, and why won’t he just give us proof😭? - he did (give endless proof) or evidence - some of us have just been conditioned to hide from it and hate it (based on strawman arguments & preconceived beliefs) - plus smart people’s opinions, don’t determine reality -- PLUS - the ULTIMATE cheat Code 🧑💻 IIIIISSSSSS? - Curiosity + Trust JUST ASK HIM - Genuinely (without being a disrespectful child, who doesn’t understand) - (Seek & FIND - then Trust) - NOT virtue signaling😷 -- PLUS - it’s about community (learning from others / SHARING) - again - preconceived biases and strawman arguments don’t change reality 😂 - just because you don’t understand, it doesn’t mean he’s wrong
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
Ed What about suffering😢? - complicated - can be VERY helpful (also depends on perspective- RAS) - unnecessary pain? (“Evil People”who inflict unnecessary suffering - will be judged Justly in the end) ---- - but the other thing is “what is good and evil”? (According to what standard) - according to the Jesus which there is a lot of historical evidence for (we are all evil in Gods eyes, which is why he took the pain WE DESERVE “regardless of how we feel😷 about it”) (Most people are willing to show more respect to a perceived high status human, But not their own creator🤣) --- Plus - it’s way to complicated for us to judge people’s future - everyone at some point has had good and bad experience with everyone - plus if we look at what we are told about the way God judges (it is based on how we judge others) (we can also just ask him individually) - making the timeline always changing, because people can CHOOSE to forgive someone or judge them worse for something they also did (plank in the eye) Which is probably why only the father knows when the End will come - because people will be making a choice until the last day
@Edword-p7z15 күн бұрын
But Ed, isn’t it based on my feelings😷🤓? You HAVE TO be nice to me, or it’s wrong🧐 “Because that’s how reality works🤓” 🤣 “But when my group does it, ahhh it’s ok, they have good intentions😷” “It’s for the betterment of society🤓” --- Oh yea I forgot - yall know yall are the carbon they want to get rid of right? 😂
@dougcard524115 күн бұрын
Evidence free hypothesis
@kevinodonnell345116 күн бұрын
He dismisses philosophy, yet at the same time, he is using philosophy when he is talking about what is empirically testable and verifiable. Empiricism is an epistemological interpretation and that is from philosophy. Aristotle was an empiricist and not all philosophers sit in an armchair all day. The armchair philosophy is for the idealists who reason in vain. In fact, before 1833, Scientists were called Natural Philosophers. The word Scientist was coined in 1833 by William whewell, an Anglican Priest and Man of Science. To say it simply, Science emerged from it's Philosophical Roots, and when the growth of knowledge reached maturity, Science produced it's fruits!
@VDP20716 күн бұрын
This guy's abiity to think progressively has become petrified. If your not trying to move forward in this field than get out of the way and make room for those that are.
@James-ll3jb17 күн бұрын
Wrong. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jalye7F1uavLh58.html
@Dropthebeatonit17 күн бұрын
so how do we explain Revelation. is it a delusion of the human mind. the stupidity of the human brain is the arrogance to think we can explain or summarise what is far beyond our bandwidth.
@oldpossum573 күн бұрын
There are many Revelations: yours (I am guessing Christian or muslim…but yours could be another) and thousands of others. To complicate matters, there seem to be a great many interpretations of each Revelation, within the communities that profess it. So, if they cannot all be true, one might be most true. Also, all could be false. As Carroll suggests, some of the empirical problems for which gods have been hypothesized (motion, life, diversity) have been shown not to require gods. Other problems (consciousness, cosmology and I would add ethics) appear to have the possibility of godless solutions. Certainly, positing gods has not proven useful in solving the problems in any way: there appears to be no advantages to positing gods. From the POV of epistemology, gods are infinitely expensive in theory. If the theory has an omni-god that needn’t follow the “laws” of nature, then our theory no longer forbids anything, cannot predict or explain anything. It has no explanatory value. If at all possible, it is better to avoid gods.
@jawokenn876619 күн бұрын
“I posit a universe where God does not exist, thus God is not necessary” how does this have over a million views utter slop
@Mikael26BE21 күн бұрын
30:11 Rebuttal of the Fine-Tuning Argument.
@anthonykenny132024 күн бұрын
If you try to explain X with Y but can’t explain Y then you’re explanation of X is no explanation at all and since the eternality of god is inexplicable the proposition of god is pointless and adds nothing to our understanding but only removes our ignorance one step further away
@bradelenbaas768 күн бұрын
Nonsense. There are many things in science ( X) which we can explain by ´Y’, despite not fully understanding where or why or how it exists. e.g. Gravity. But the evidence is proof it exists. Nonsense to deny a designer when there is so much clear evidence of design. Don’t be blinded by a dogmatic worldview.
@anthonykenny132024 күн бұрын
I’d enjoy watching Sean debate John Lennox a mathematician who argues for gods existence from the cosmological constants Or William Craig Lane a good old fashioned bible bashing southern red neck preacher
@Alphabeter26 күн бұрын
To argue the universe and it's properties randomly came about is ironically an act of blind faith, we however pray with our eyes open. We understand that this life is a test of our belief and character, and that it wouldn't be much of a test if the answers were given during the test. By believing in Allah and attempting to lead a righteous life according to His guidance, even if we were wrong, we'd lose nothing. However the disbelievers will be in great humiliation on the day of reckoning and they follow nothing but assumptions. "For certain, We have guided him (to) the path, whether he be grateful or ungrateful" [Surah 76; Ayah 3]
@wadeodonoghue188728 күн бұрын
All prime numbers are the product of irrational numbers, just saying.
@wadeodonoghue188728 күн бұрын
Kids believe their Dad is the best Dad, grown-ups think their God(or Lack of God) is the best God( or lack of God). We never truly grow up.
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
Theory - The act of explaining or trying to explain something scientifically that can’t be fully explained or understood with our current limited understanding , based on the evidence collected…That’s why they’re still theories.. We should talk about Causality
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
You can’t accurately calculate the probability of things in my understanding,because we need to understand the laws and rules of probability .
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
There could be metaphysical explanations beyond our knowledge,understanding and awareness…
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
There’s intelligent design to the order of life and existence
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
What about Intelligent Design but without a God or figure behind it,but something greater and bigger
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
Maybe the focus shouldn’t be on the origin of the universe,but the origin of existence itself
@theeverythingelectronicsst3897Ай бұрын
Hi Sean,…The way I am understanding this is, the approach or an idea of the purpose of existence itself.. Is there a reason,purpose or explanation for existence itself.. What is the purpose of existence,is existence a requirement, does existence have a purpose and self awareness,is existence sentient?
@mikewiz1054Ай бұрын
Sean Carroll will blow your mind…especially if you have a basic understanding of physics. He recently sat down with Neil DeGrasse Tyson and it was incredible. So much more interesting than…because god did it.
@jeoffreywortmanАй бұрын
This is interesting, although it'd be more interesting if je dodmt conflated idea and concept. The idea of god is not the same than a working concept of god. Numinous religion vs syetematic rational tbeology. Teying to talk about gid is like talking abojt force without physics.
@AtamMardesАй бұрын
The human brain (scientist or not) is very susceptible to pareidolia, apophenia, hallucinations, superstitions and gullibility; That's why religion has managed to fool so many people.
@LadyVTavoraАй бұрын
💚
@fortunaaudacesiuvatАй бұрын
I’d like to see a theological combat between this apostle and another.
@tchobanovivo5679Ай бұрын
To me, GOD is advanced civilization capable of creating..... probably everything.
@user-se3bw8ku8iАй бұрын
theories !! we have endless types of it. too bad its all we have. nothing concrete as yet just our daily postulations for living. and controlling as much of it using money within religious arenas. too bad gods are just onlookers who we use as frontal facades