The most important unresolved scientific questions, in my opinion.

[Cypress]

May I answer this, speculatively? Black holes compress matter. We don't know what happens to it after it passes the event horizon. What if all that missing matter accreted *somewhere else* to the point where it created a Big Bang, releasing all that energy and physical matter? There are black holes all over the universe. If they get large enough to consume galaxies, maybe that is how the universe ends. And a new one begins. Maybe we repeat this endlessly, in time spans we cannot even imagine.

Thanks, that's interesting, I haven't heard this before!

The only things I will add is that according to Hawking, black holes radiate energy and eventually dissipate. So I am dubious if a black hole would actually get large enough to absorb a galaxy.

Technically, the big bang wasn't the beginning of the universe. It was the point at which it began expanding under the influence of momentum and dark energy. The big bang was preceded by cosmic inflation, and we don't really don't have the physics to understand why this inflationary phase happened or how it originated, though speculations are fun.

 

[Kafka]

can biological impulses be resisted?

You still don't understand my point. I wish I could make it simple enough for you.

OF COURSE biological impulses can be resisted. BUT that doesn't mean that "resistance" isn't something that arises spontaneously in the physical brain BEFORE you make a conscious decision to resist.

 

[Kafka]

your post is bullshit.

the only meaningful argument has been refuted because:

Biological impulses can be resisted.

Wow. There are times when I have to be reminded that not all people on the internet are particularly sharp.

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

You still don't understand my point. I wish I could make it simple enough for you.

OF COURSE biological impulses can be resisted. BUT that doesn't mean that "resistance" isn't something that arises spontaneously in the physical brain BEFORE you make a conscious decision to resist.

your point is obtuse, orthogonal, irrelevant, obfuscatory, off kilter and retarded.

thanks for illustrating the epitome of dumbness and desperation.

 

[Kafka]

your point is obtuse, orthogonal, irrelevant, obfuscatory, off kilter and retarded.

thanks for illustrating the epitome of dumbness and desperation.

LOL. OK, Forrest.

 

[ZenMode]

biological impulses can be resisted.

have you ever fasted or quit an addiction or a bad relationship?

I'm not saying you can't resist impulses. I'm saying your capacity for resisting impulses is outside of your control.

Have you ever done something impulsive that you know you shouldn't do?

 

[CIA TOTALITARIANISM]

I'm not saying you can't resist impulses. I'm saying your capacity for resisting impulses is outside of your control.

Have you ever done something impulsive that you know you shouldn't do?

no it isn't.


have you ever controlled yourself?

 

[ZenMode]

no it isn't.


have you ever controlled yourself?

Have you ever done something impulsive that you knew was a bad idea?

Has there ever been something that you wanted to do.. That you knew you should do, but chose to sit on the couch watching TV or playing on your phone instead?

 

[Hume]

Have you ever done something impulsive that you knew was a bad idea?

Has there ever been something that you wanted to do.. That you knew you should do, but chose to sit on the couch watching TV or playing on your phone instead?

Everyone is controlled by their brains? Sounds like a science fiction movie.

 

[IBDaMann]

No. Those who are claiming the existence of a god need to support their claims.

Nope. Those who make claims or have beliefs are under no obligation to support their claims or beliefs ... unless they demand/expect you to accept them as well.

You are the one who believes that there are no gods. You would otherwise be under no obligation to support your belief except that you just told me that others should believe as you do, thus you now have to support your belief.

The floor is yours.

It's not up to people like me to disprove the existence of gods.

Yes it is now that you have made this as your affirmative assertion. As I have said many times, you really suck at formal logic, and this is one of those times that your shortcomings in this area are biting you in the ass/arse.

Same with people who claim big foot exists,

Nope. It is, however, the same with people who are selling books on Bigfoot, but not with those who merely believe that Bigfoot exists.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Nope. Extraordinary claims by politicians and other leaders, yes, because they expect/demand/call for the people to believe.

There's no more evidence for the existence of any gods than there is evidence of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, etc

... and there is no more evidence for the absence of gods, yet you assert that others should believe as you do. Start supporting your claim.

Every conscious decision we make comes as the result of our thoughts.

Unless our "decisions" are made by gods, or God, who gives us the illusory feeling of making our own decisions, or unless there is an independent "self" out there that has free will and can make independent decisions.

You are going to explain why rational adults should believe as you believe.

 

[IBDaMann]

How do the asshole cut off turds when it got no teeth?

Question: Why is shit tapered?
Answer: To keep your asshole from slamming shut.

 

[IBDaMann]

The only things I will add is that according to Hawking, black holes radiate energy and eventually dissipate.

This is not correct. Black holes have event horizons and constantly pull things in. The idea of black hole dissipation only applies to Hawking radiation that occurs at the event horizon, and is what would happen if the black hole simply didn't suck anything else into itself. Even then, the black hole would only dissipate until it no longer had an event horizon to create Hawking radiation.

Nonetheless, black holes just keep growing and growing and growing as they suck in more and more and more.

So I am dubious if a black hole would actually get large enough to absorb a galaxy.

Be dubious no more. It is inevitable given sufficient time. Eventually, as galaxies collide, the massive black holes at their centers will join, sucking in lots of the new galaxy, which will collide with something else eventually and continue the growth of the black hole.

The question you need to ask is whether the universe will last long enough for that to happen, or whether the universe will die a heat death before such a time.

Technically, the big bang wasn't the beginning of the universe.

Those who subscribe to the Big Bang theory consider the singularity to be the beginning, i.e. when time began.

It was the point at which it began expanding under the influence of momentum and dark energy.

There is no such thing as dark energy. Stephen Hawking's "Properties of an Expanding Universe" does not involve dark energy, and he never had any reason to modify his model to account for such. You are weaving science fiction into your world view. If you are going to believe in "dark energy" then you might as well go all the way and believe in dilithium crystals and warp drive engines.

The big bang was preceded by cosmic inflation,

Now you are getting into your own personal religious beliefs.

and we don't really don't have the physics to understand why this inflationary phase happened ...

Thank you for confirming the faith-based nature of this aspect of your beliefs.

 

[Cypress]

black holes just keep growing and growing and growing as they suck in more and more and more.

"In 1974, Stephen Hawking showed that even black holes don’t live forever, but emit radiation and eventually evaporate."

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/hawking-radiation-black-hole-evaporation/

I don't usually engage you because I wouldn't actually be debating you -- I would be debating Google, and whatever it is you frantically Googled ten seconds after reading my posts.

Frantically Googling for tidbits of information is never going to give you the kind of integrated knowledge that comes from reading books, taking classes, and a sustained and diligent commitment to learning.

 

[IBDaMann]

"In 1974, Stephen Hawking showed that even black holes don’t live forever, but emit radiation and eventually evaporate."

You are not citing Hawking's Properties of an Expanding Universe. You are not even quoting Stephen Hawking. You chose to quote someone who is ignoring the science that Hawking developed.

I don't usually engage you because I wouldn't actually be debating you -- I would be debating Google, and whatever it is you frantically Googled ten seconds after reading my posts.

Too funny. I am the one explaining Hawking's Properties of an Expanding Universe and correcting the erors that you simply copy-pasted from non-authoritative websites. Were you going to show that my understanding is incorrect with something actually from Hawking's thesis?

Ooooooh, you can't. You are scientifically illiterate and you have no idea what Hawking's models tell us. You won't ever pick up a copy and read it to learn it. All you'll ever do is frantically search the internet for someone who has said something WACKY in relation to the topic.

Frantically Googling for tidbits of information is never going to give you the kind of integrated knowledge that comes from reading books, taking classes, and a sustained and diligent commitment to learning.

The knowledge I provide did not come from the internet, but from Hawking, and you can find it in his thesis. Well, other people can help find it for you.

 

[ZenMode]

Everyone is controlled by their brains? Sounds like a science fiction movie.

What else could control you?

 

[ZenMode]

Nope. Those who make claims or have beliefs are under no obligation to support their claims or beliefs ... unless they demand/expect you to accept them as well.

You are the one who believes that there are no gods. You would otherwise be under no obligation to support your belief except that you just told me that others should believe as you do, thus you now have to support your belief.

The floor is yours.


Yes it is now that you have made this as your affirmative assertion. As I have said many times, you really suck at formal logic, and this is one of those times that your shortcomings in this area are biting you in the ass/arse.


Nope. It is, however, the same with people who are selling books on Bigfoot, but not with those who merely believe that Bigfoot exists.


Nope. Extraordinary claims by politicians and other leaders, yes, because they expect/demand/call for the people to believe.


... and there is no more evidence for the absence of gods, yet you assert that others should believe as you do. Start supporting your claim.


Unless our "decisions" are made by gods, or God, who gives us the illusory feeling of making our own decisions, or unless there is an independent "self" out there that has free will and can make independent decisions.

You are going to explain why rational adults should believe as you believe.

"and there is no more evidence for the absence of gods"

Wait...what the fuck does that even mean?
You are clearly trolling. Nobody can say something that ridiculous and be serious.

 

[IBDaMann]

"and there is no more evidence for the absence of gods"

Wait...what the fuck does that even mean?
You are clearly trolling. Nobody can say something that ridiculous and be serious.

Be real. Nobody can say something that stupid and be serious. Obviously you are just trolling.

 

[ZenMode]

Be real. Nobody can say something that stupid and be serious. Obviously you are just trolling.

What you're saying is that you live your life believing everything anyone tells you....until you are provided reason not to believe it?

 

[Hume]

What else could control you?

What controls the brain?

 

[IBDaMann]

What you're saying is that you live your life believing everything anyone tells you ...

Nobody can say things this stupid and be expecting to hold a serious conversation. Obviously you are trolling.