Anthony Aguirre - Did God Create Multiple Universes?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 150

  • @brandonhodnett5420
    @brandonhodnett5420 4 ปีที่แล้ว +60

    Believe in God was never an explanation of the unknown but instead an explanation of why there is anything at all instead of nothing. Science no matter how far it progresses in the future will never disprove God instead it sheds light on His processes. Those that propose this misunderstood what science is intended for. Science merely tries to explain how, it cannot explain the why.

    • @edmondlaw8615
      @edmondlaw8615 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Brandon Hodnett I think that scientists found parallel universe or alien does not conflict the bible as it doesn’t change the fact that humans are sinned and Jesus is the only way out

    • @KyleBeatz
      @KyleBeatz 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      one thing i wonder about is will everyone who has ever lived and believed in Jesus Christ be saved all at onetime in the afterlife. i mean that would be billions if not multiple millions of people. what happens when we die? i wonder...🤔

    • @edmondlaw8615
      @edmondlaw8615 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@KyleBeatz numbers will not be a problem 😂😂

    • @jelanionigbinde58
      @jelanionigbinde58 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Watch the matrix. We don't know the reason for alternate universes but universe is the original one. Watch the knowing too, there's information on the inter dimensional being from the higher dimensions whom play a big role in this universe.

    • @Myreply59
      @Myreply59 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@KyleBeatz We perceive time as behind and forward, God is outside of time as sees both the beginning and the ending of what we call time. When all stand before Him at the end they will 'all' stand before Him, so I believe if we died in the 3rd century or the 21st century both will arrive at the same time. Because God is the center and source of all things. He moves through time with ease. Even when the Pharisees were about to stone Jesus for saying Abraham desired to see His day and was glad to see it, Jesus also replied, "Truly I say to you that before Abraham was I AM (I exist). That means presently as in right now. To God time past present and future happens all at once.

  • @Myreply59
    @Myreply59 3 ปีที่แล้ว +23

    From the Bible: "Rejoice ye 'heavens' and you who dwell in them." "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" "The heavens are the Lord's..."
    God exists outside of time and the universe. A multiverse does not disprove God. It would support Him. "The eye has not seen, nor has the ear heard the things that God has for them that love Him". That would seem to say anything that can be seen or heard in the universe is not what God is talking about.

    • @Blazeww
      @Blazeww 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      31 And behold, the glory of the Lord was upon Moses, so that Moses stood in the presence of God, and talked with him face to face. And the Lord God said unto Moses: For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me.
      32 And by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth.
      33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.
      34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many.
      35 But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them.
      36 And it came to pass that Moses spake unto the Lord, saying: Be merciful unto thy servant, O God, and tell me concerning this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, and also the heavens, and then thy servant will be content.
      37 And the Lord God spake unto Moses, saying: The heavens, they are many, and they cannot be numbered unto man; but they are numbered unto me, for they are mine.
      38 And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works, neither to my words.
      39 For behold, this is my work and my glory-to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

  • @johnpaulbesmano4092
    @johnpaulbesmano4092 4 ปีที่แล้ว +20

    God is an infinite
    And does the concept of multi universe, or infinite universe

    • @aspiknf
      @aspiknf 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Well said, the atheists are annoying.

  • @zanderbraincinemas6126
    @zanderbraincinemas6126 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    The thing about a secular multiverse is that it would destroy itself instantly. Remember that episode of Doctor Who where the Daleks created that bomb that would atomize every universe? The Doctor stopped them but what would be the point if, in another universe, the Daleks successfully detonated the reality bomb and destroy every timeline? That’s why we can say the multiverse cannot be infinite for if it were it would lead to its own destruction. Which is why a Christian multiverse makes more logical sense. A secular multiverse is chaos that would inevitably destroy itself but a Christian multiverse has a God watching over it, stopping universes that become dangers to everything.
    Now you might be asking: what about Jesus? If there are nearly infinite universes wouldn’t there be some where He never died for our sins? And I say if we’re living in an ordered, structured multiverse then no. It’s what we call a “fixed point”. In every single universe Jesus is born, is crucified and is resurrected. It may happen at slightly different times or places, the apostles may be recruited in different orders or ways, but it always happens. Same with Adam and Eve and the flood. Thank you for hearing me ramble.

  • @KevZen2000
    @KevZen2000 7 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Even if you don't believe in what they are saying, these videos make you think.

  • @18wolfspirit
    @18wolfspirit 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    In my opinion God could potentially create an infinite quantity of universes if he ever wanted to due to his omnipotence. There could be universes more similar to those found in the genres of fantasy/cyberpunk/science fiction/etc. Others are more like ours. Others are more or less peaceful/war-torn. Some could contain dragons and other mythical beasts. The possibilities are endless.

    • @mrwilly5017
      @mrwilly5017 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      but like when we go to heaven will there be 2 of us? Like, yo i’m you from another universe

    • @ubitodoritos9531
      @ubitodoritos9531 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mrwilly5017 if the multiverse is real are we the original universe or some alternate universe?

    • @raycutler2524
      @raycutler2524 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ubitodoritos9531 I think we're the original universe. But also the most boring universe...

    • @topguntk870
      @topguntk870 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      i like this idea however it hurts my brain thinking about how god could create an "infinite" amount of universes. by defination an infinite isnt a number it legit means there an endless amount of universes forever. for me god and infinite paradox each other in so many ways. either god did it or its naturally infinite. i dont think both are possible because how could god grasp infinite?

    • @18wolfspirit
      @18wolfspirit 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      He loves to create, so at the very least he probably wouldn’t have stopped at just one.

  • @jesserochon3103
    @jesserochon3103 7 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    People who claim they don't believe in God because there is no evidence yet believe in a Multi-Verse are hypocrites of the uttermost magnitude:
    There's no evidence of a Multi-Verse.

    • @aspiknf
      @aspiknf 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      The Multiverse exists.

    • @aspiknf
      @aspiknf 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@dp-ec9vb Of course Hell doesn't exist lol. Hell is a man-made fiction. But does God exist? Of course God exists...why? How do I know? Because we humans didn't create the multiverse...something created the universe 13.7 billion years ago or maybe multiverses have been popping up forever! And what is making these universes? God is...God is the multiverse itself...a self-sustaining multiverse.

    • @maluhiastevens1973
      @maluhiastevens1973 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      There are called dimensions and occults summon unspeakable things from it

  • @420ablesmoker
    @420ablesmoker 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Seems I’m not the only one who has this question. But you know how science mentions particles or whatever being in two places at once? There was this video about 10 years or so ago that I seen of this kid explaining mathematically how god is everything not just mathematically but in many different ways. I tried looking for a couple years back but I think it got lost in the internet somewhere and would be nearly impossible to find. But that kid is what got me thinking about who, what and why god is

  • @rationalsceptic7634
    @rationalsceptic7634 4 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    There maybe no Multiverses but Megaverse!

  • @myopenmind527
    @myopenmind527 7 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I'm guessing that this was filmed in Iceland 🇮🇸 ???

  • @taiteakopyte1286
    @taiteakopyte1286 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    God is God! Nothing changes

  • @donespiritu1345
    @donespiritu1345 ปีที่แล้ว

    I love how Anthony Aguirre so politely rejects and debunks Mr. Kuhn to his face with rational ideas.

  • @beowulf.reborn
    @beowulf.reborn ปีที่แล้ว

    "How then does the Multi-verse figure into the way of thinking about people who believe in God and they see this one universe that seems fine-tuned and now they hear the fine-tuning is really just an expression of one of almost an infinite number of other universes so there's nothing special about ours."
    That assumes that the other universes are themselves not finely-tuned.
    For the multiverse to in anyway undermine the fine-tuning argument, then for every finely-tuned universe there would need to be trillions upon trillions of universes that were not finely tuned, that were all just randomly generated. But what if that's not the case? What if a sizeable chunk of other universes are themselves finely-tuned?
    That would only strengthen the fine-tuning argument.

  • @hm5142
    @hm5142 ปีที่แล้ว

    Why is is reasonable to invoke the preexistence of a more complex entity to create the laws of the universe? And why would one expect that this entity would have anything to do with individual humans? Seems like you have to have a personal preference for this answer, because I don't think one is driven to it from what is known about the universe.

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Multiverse can explain fine tuning; while the multiverse could be from God or even a part of God through information processing and mathematics.

  • @emersonnaoe6275
    @emersonnaoe6275 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The Bible said its only 3 heavens, 1st heaven is our sky on earth, 2nd heaven is outside our planet that is universe, and 3rd heaven is outside the universe and thats God's heaven.

    • @A7Xgaz18
      @A7Xgaz18 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      People use to think heaven was in the clouds but when people build plane people through heaven is outerpace. I personally think heaven Is not outerspace.

    • @A7Xgaz18
      @A7Xgaz18 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The 7 heavens are build up on levels of the clouds. If they exist. Clouds go up higher the higher you go. 7 heavens to hold the 7 types of angels.

  • @tomkwake2503
    @tomkwake2503 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The problem I have with the infinite multiverse model is that it is energy inefficient. Everything we observe about life deals with energy efficiency (I am a physiologist\bio-technologist by education and have had many classes on the energetics of biological systems), because of this appreciation, the infinite multiverse model would be opposite the truth I experience about life and its efficient use of energy. So based on this fundamental law I observe of nature, the infinite multiverse model is fundamentally flawed, the interpretation of the mathematics to this particular model is incorrect for this energy inefficient reason. Regarding God, I have yet to hear from all the religions a united definition of what God is, so all usage of the term is a personal one. The single thing of the Universe/Everything is energy (in my opinion), your next question should be, can energy become aware of itself?

    • @tomkwake2503
      @tomkwake2503 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The term you use as “data” are equations, and there is no physical evidence that infinite universes physically exist. I agree with you, that the theoretical physicists assume that their numbers represent “realities (infinite universes)”, which are being imposed throughout. So, in some ways you are confirming my point. That it is profoundly absurd that infinite energy would be in this form, as it is not energy efficient. We can’t even explain where the dark energy is for our universe, and I have not heard an explanation for where all this energy is coming from. Then add that to an infinite accelerating number of these accelerating universes. This interpretation is from the theoretical physicists point of mathematical view that are predicting the infinite universe(s) model based on the efficiency of mathematics (supersymmetry), not energy, which is their fundamental flaw.
      Non-zero as a reference point is exactly that, non-zero, thus the mathematics of a non-zero reference point comes from a broken symmetric state, not a supersymmetric one. Don’t forget the reason why we get all these infinities is because the equations are considering r= “0” distance for both the equations for quantum mechanics and general relativity, however the physicality of our current universe is infinite in accelerating space-time (but not accelerating matter). No one has explained this acceleration phenomenon, among other things, such as, the source of the energy for an infinite number of universes that are accelerating in energy and accelerating, over and over again. One possibility of the existence of energy, not existing on the space-time membrane, that could actually be violating the second law of thermodynamics (our current reference point).
      I am not struggling with anything, but was commenting on several TH-cam videos uploaded from Closer To Truth , where Robert Kuhn was asking Robin Collins, Richard Swinburne and Anthony Aguarre, was asked, Did God Create Multiple Universes? and Would Multiple Universe Undermine God?. And that the infinite multiverse hypothesis (now is considered a real possibility for many theoretical physicists), conflicts with what I know as a scientist in the biological sciences and someone who has evaluated the energy relationships in actualizing life. I realized that the laws of nature that allow us to exist as human beings, along with all life, matter, waves and forces are so profoundly more energetically efficient, and what a theoretical physicist does not consider in their mathematically infinite multiverse hypothesis (this is an observable fact). Based upon my comment, I am saying that this whole discussion/position of the theoretical physicist is not valid because it is energetically inefficient in the first place. Additionally, trying to relate it to the term “God” a term that is fundamentally individual and subjective at this time, seems at best fun, but not ultimately closer to truth.
      Thanks for your comment.

    • @tomkwake2503
      @tomkwake2503 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      My ontology is about the long term survival of humanity, so comments on the discussions of the Closer To Truth, didn’t appear to be on the right track for making that a reality, so I thought I would share my own thoughts on it (normally I don’t comment on these kind of posts, but I did this day), so I gave my personal thoughts that I thought would make the discussion closer to truth from my perspective.
      I have already given you some of my background, background wise, I also have followed theoretical physics for the last 40 years and am familiar with its history, evolution, many of the key scientists, past and current, what their contributions were, and how their ideas contribute to the current picture of “reality” (multiverse or not), my interest goes from the span of the sub atomic Planck scale, and prior, to the current cosmological perspectives, so generally I am familiar with the ontology, of and from a science perspective as well as from my own personal model which I have developed.
      Actually you are not agreeing with me, I am saying the infinite multiverse model is absolutely incorrect for factual energetic reasons. What I am proposing, is theoretical physicists should look for newer ideas that are consistent with the mathematics, but pursuing the infinite multiverse model as the core perspective, will be an inefficient use of time, money and energy. Hint (in my opinion): They should be looking at the energetics of the singularity and its relationship to supersymmetry, (specifically looking at the very first singularity before the breaking of symmetry versus the singularities in the middle of black holes), the cosmological constant, its relationship to the Planck set of constants (time, length, mass), and consider models for infinite energy creation rather than infinite universe creation (perhaps theoretical physicists can consider thinking off the space-time membrane/out of the box). I believe we already have the functional capacity to access the free energy (that Tesla uncovered) from vacuum space-time state, but sense we don’t know where or how it’s being created from our current limited perspective, it has yet to be identified globally as an energy entity. Politically fossil fuels are used because energy is at the core of everything, and who controls the energy controls everything. And access and implementation of free energy to the public at large would cause a shift in the global control of money, people, and infrastructure of economies dependent on the structure of government(s) to control the people. The only thing greater than the potential of the human being is the ability and desire to control the potential of other human beings, rather than to release it for the benefit of humanity. It is like asking and resolving the question, what do we do with all the military people when we stop having wars? Everyone’s afraid to find out the answer, perhaps we don’t trust our humanity to save the day without bloodshed.
      Theoretical physicists assume these laws, constants, mathematical relationships and numbers all exist in a stable existence, forever, independent on their own, without noticing that it takes energy to maintain the stability of these laws, constants, and mathematical relationships, matter, waves, forces, space-time (these are all ‘dynamic’ energy parts). Just as when some theoretical physicists, who deny that the mind is something real or functionally physical (just try and raise your hand, speak a word, type a message to experience mind thought into physicality/motion/idea/matter), theoretical physicists whom then teach that ‘real fundamental reality’ is only something that can be calculated, measured, or observed, yet not realizing that it requires a mind to be able to calculate, measure, and observe/recall and define experience in our consciousness, which is doing the defining of what the fundamental components of reality are. Many of the discussions I hear these days are from the experts are just regurgitating this dogma, as you’ll hear inconsistencies in their communication, as they don’t realize their own factual inconsistency in their presentation. And yes, like you said, many people may be getting their information primarily from internet posts, so it’s good that you try and discern the truth.
      How cosmological models are made? They are through the use of our senses, experiences, minds, memory and human creativity, and manifesting ‘the intention’ in seeing the underlying energy patterns in our physical universe and asking the questions of cause and effect on a scientific basis over time, relative to cosmology as a science. Philosophically my personal interest and expertise is in the mechanism of human creativity in the mind and its relationship to the creation of the universe, at the big bang, from a cause vs. effect perspective. Perhaps you could share some of your ontology, background and expertise so I have an appreciation from where you are educationally and both individually and universally communicating from, then I will try and address you from those perspectives. Although, I don’t know how long I will be able to maintain communications as I am on a new career path working to create music for a living, so I don’t have much extra time now to communicate further, but here is a song I wrote and gave to Wikipedia, called Wikipedia, and I give to you if you want it (and anyone following this)…. Best…tk
      app.box.com/s/egjc7crt8jciu6b70zq67udfoexnw88r

    • @myopenmind527
      @myopenmind527 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Tom Kwake not sure why you think a multiverse would be energy inefficient. That isn't something that comes from say eternal inflation.
      The multiverse may actually be the simplest solution to understand our universe.

    • @tomkwake2503
      @tomkwake2503 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      I’ll explain the energy inefficiency with an analogy/examples: Current Theoretical physics hypothesizes that each of us has their own individual time, that means that every atom in our body and in the universe has its own individual time, meaning that, in relationship to the strong nuclear force as a specific example (each atom contains an extreme amount of energy in the nucleus-think nuclear bomb), now if we have a multiverse with an infinite number of universes and each atom in each of the infinite universes has its own individual strong nuclear force, (with the current theoretical physics interpretation that time is individual and not universal), not only does each atom have its own atomic bomb force in our universe, all the atoms in the infinite universes would have all their own individual strong nuclear forces which is grossly energy inefficient.
      I have formed a Dualiverse model which is a energy efficient hypotheses, and proposes that there is only one strong nuclear force but it is responsible for the binding of all nuclei in our universe. However the generation of the force IS in the “singularity”, which is precedes our space-time, which is a Planck time in front of us in space-time (creating a duality in time, in other words as I hypothesize a Dualiverse in time, still a multiverse, but just not infinite), so that all atoms in space-time (the part of the universe that has grown) is only a Planck’s distance from the original Singularity.
      Here is another example of the energy efficiency that I am speaking of, if you have ever studied biological energetics, molecular biology, cell physiology, biology and physiology as I have, you would become aware of the extreme energy efficiency of biological systems, completely opposite of the current model of infinite multiverses by theoretical physicists, (functionally and energy efficient wise you could not have a more disparate example from a energy point view in my opinion). The only way the mathematically infinite multiverse exists is if you look at mathematics solely into itself without the acknowledgement of consciousness, that numbers and equations as the cause of everything (the strict reductionist point of view) So tell me how you equate, measure, or observe anything without having the consciousness to intently identify it? The flaw of most theoretical physicists is that they don't see mind as "real", yet they can't see it that is their reference standard of reality.
      Here is another relative example: sucrose, a table sugar, would normally oxidize to CO2 and H20, a process that would happen over decades, however, an enzyme catalyst in the biological system can oxidize (extract the energy), in seconds, so the protein enzyme has the properties of special and general relativity, as well as gravity, in that, the enzyme protein has an accelerated order of functionally that shortens the distance to oxidation of all the sugar molecules, the relative time has slowed for the enzyme, per unit of time, relatively, the more molecules have been processed (accelerated) in a sorter amount of time, and the ordered functional density of the protein (optimal folding functionality) is extremely efficient compared to the naturally breakdown of sugar (sucrose = gulucose+fructose), and to other forms of the protein that don’t have the same functionality. The nature of truth requires an open mind.......but I personally have not seen many theoretical physicists interested in non-theoretical physicist's views.

    • @raycutler2524
      @raycutler2524 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I don't care if this was 4 years ago, your energy arguement doesn't apply to an omnipotent being who's power is endless regardless of energy, to where capabilities of an energy arguement is nonexistent and makes no sense for a being who is omnipotent and has endless power, which means he can create thousands to millions of universes if he wanted to

  • @jean-pierredevent970
    @jean-pierredevent970 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I wonder already weeks if it's possible to have a plausible, stable universe with particles that are much heavier than ours. If so the beings there could be much more powerful than we and almost like Gods in our eyes.

    • @User-jr7vf
      @User-jr7vf 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      We have to decide what is meant by 'heavier'. This being said, it's much more easier to consider the same scenario but on another planet, rather than another universe, because we already know the laws of nature in our universe and there's no way to directly compare us with species living according to other laws of nature.

    • @tori9365
      @tori9365 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@User-jr7vf shut up.

  • @sanjosemike3137
    @sanjosemike3137 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    What is generating all that smoke in the background?
    Sanjosemike

    • @myopenmind527
      @myopenmind527 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      San Jose Mike think this was filmed in Iceland, a hot spring. Look at all the bathers too.

    • @dorotakel3720
      @dorotakel3720 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      God is fuming!!

    • @roqsteady5290
      @roqsteady5290 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's the devil, of course.

  • @aspiknf
    @aspiknf ปีที่แล้ว

    This was a very good conversation. I agree with everything the man with the black hair is saying.

    • @aspiknf
      @aspiknf ปีที่แล้ว

      I mean Anthony Aguirre

  • @ChrisHolman
    @ChrisHolman 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Physics does not point to a multiverse. There is no evidence of a multiverse.

  • @myopenmind527
    @myopenmind527 7 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    "God" : throughout human history god remains a metaphor for what we do not know.
    We now know what is not god. The latter is a lot more than we knew 400 years ago. So we make progress.
    I don't like that we call the unknown god. If we are honest, it's simply the unknown.

    • @natgenesis5038
      @natgenesis5038 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      My OpenMind I already seem Him and Only thing I know about Him is “God is infinite ♾:Love and obedience are the keys of Him “

    • @AtlasRapture
      @AtlasRapture 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@natgenesis5038
      Their username does not align with their comment. Doesn't seem very open minded.

    • @SealedbyGod777
      @SealedbyGod777 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      He made himself known to us trough Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour 😊🙌👑❤

  • @angelkaty630
    @angelkaty630 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    It makes me laugh when people explain away God with science that would infer they understand it all better than God. I rather have faith than a theory, one day we'll all find out the truth whichever you believe.

    • @CeezGeez
      @CeezGeez ปีที่แล้ว

      but faith is needed when you have no evidence

  • @raresmircea
    @raresmircea 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Fantastic interviews, thank you

  • @pankajpandey4728
    @pankajpandey4728 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    In Hinduism there is said to be multiple universe's. And anything we think is happening in multiple universe.

    • @pankajpandey4728
      @pankajpandey4728 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @Subhobrata Chakravorti yea. You wanna know about it

    • @hayley1868
      @hayley1868 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@pankajpandey4728 I do... Sir please tell me where can I read about it and my question is that... If I think of anything.... Like a story including a supernatural element like monsters and angels... Can it be happening in the parallel universe in real and can we reincarnate into that universe if we plan our reincarnation.... Please Sir it would be very helpful if you answer me and give your insights.

    • @pankajpandey4728
      @pankajpandey4728 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@hayley1868 you can read about it in vishnu puran or bhagwat geeta. Now for your question yes whatever you can think of no matter however it is it's happening in other universe even science agrees with it.And no we can't get reincarnated in any universe we like but we can get on a level where we can take control over entire reality and then you are free to do whatever you want. This is also written in many hindu scriptures

    • @aspiknf
      @aspiknf 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@pankajpandey4728 Cool, I knew it could be true. Did Brahma create the universes?

    • @pankajpandey4728
      @pankajpandey4728 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@aspiknf just one. There is said to be multiple brahmas In existence each universe has its own brahmha aka creator. And all of them are part of parabramha aka supreme god or supreme energy whatever you wanna call it.

  • @dpie4859
    @dpie4859 7 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    Next video coming up soon: Did a kitten create our universe?

    • @gru8212
      @gru8212 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Next video coming up soon: Dafuq we talking about

    • @kimrunic5874
      @kimrunic5874 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Reality is turning out to be _so_ odd though. Mind effects appear to be constructing how existence presents. It's hardly surprising that all cultures appear to account for this, in some way. They're all referring to the same thing from different and uninformed perspectives.

  • @pilloobaba272
    @pilloobaba272 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The proof of infinite universes has to be in terms of data about another universe that is observable in this universe, else how would you present that proof in this universe that another universe exists ? If physical laws of each universe are different as this guy and scientists say, and if the data we observe in this universe is based only on this universe's physical laws, then there is no way to represent data from another universe within this universe because we wouldn't have the same physical laws as the other universe to observe their data . Therefore, it is impossible to prove that another universe exists from within physical confines and with the physical laws of this universe. As long as scientists cannot answer that first question, they cannot and should not use infinite number of universes to explain away fine tuning of this universe.
    The speaker being interviewed ends up inconclusively saying that, despite fine tuning of cosmological constants of this universe, we cannot take a definite stance that there is Intelligent Design behind this universe. However, lets remember that each of these cosmological constants, that keeps our universe from disintegration, is fine tuned to hundreds of decimal places. The fact that there are 20 (or so) of these constants means we have to multiply these 20 constants together to get the improbability of these constants to have the precise values they have by pure chance. Lets take 100 decimal places of accuracy for each constant to the power of 20 since there are 20 such constants. This becomes a combinatorial explosion of improbability. In other words, it is approximately 100 multiplied by itself 20 times or 1000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000, 000, 000 or a trillion, trillion, trillion, million times improbable that the fine tuning of our universe happened by chance. But our universe is only 14 billion years old from the big bang or it's creation point, which is 14,000,000,000 times 365 times 24 times 60 times 60 times 1000 times 1000 times 1000 pico seconds old, or 441,504,000,000,000,000,000,000 pico seconds old, where 1 pico second is a billionth of a second. This means that if a new universe came into being every billionth of a second, there would not be enough time to accidently arrive at our fine tuned universal constants within 1 million life times of our universe.
    So with that level of improbability that the universe came about by chance, the only other probability is that there is Intelligent Design behind it. The idea that there has to be a given set of physical laws that have no alternative but to pre-exist is only an assumption -- there's no scientific proof that mandates that any set of laws had to pre-exist. We could've simply had a void of nothingness. So, materialist scientists are way off in their arguments. They break the very empirical evidence laws they're supposed to follow to postulate a theory. Instead, they invent a highly impossible, unproved and unprovable presumption to disprove Intelligent Design. The infinite multiverse has not been, and cannot be proved, so it doesn't explain the Fine Tuning of our universe.
    Materialist scientists are allergic to Intelligent Design because they fear the God of human religions, where each religion claims their God is the Intelligent Designer. Therefore, human religions are also wrong when they try to monopolize Intelligent Design and give God a gender and a humanoid form as a being, with human emotions such as wrath, etc. as does Christianity in the West. Western atheism is also just another dogmatic human religion using unproven theories as their foundational arguments, breaking their own empirical method when it suits them.
    The Intelligence behind Intelligent Design of the universe is far beyond the human religious concept of God. Fine tuning of our universe is actual evidence of this Intelligence.

  • @Myreply59
    @Myreply59 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Supernatural: That which is beyond the understanding of the natural, that which is not possible in the natural. That which does not apply to natural law.

  • @winstonchang777
    @winstonchang777 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Multiple Gods should be thought of. We're too caught up with ONE AND ONLY GOD. As a foot soldier, the colonel is your commander and then there is the GENEARAL....
    Different levels of creators for the part below it. The local God of the colonel knows you better. The General is higher ranking but has little concern about you. You get the point.

    • @Derly24
      @Derly24 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Could be, who knows? A chain of command of deities.

  • @rogerkreil3314
    @rogerkreil3314 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    A lot of Christians don’t believe in parallel universes because in a whole bunch of them, Jesus never got crucified. But in half of them, Adam and Eve never ate from the tree and the people living in those universes never lost paradise.

    • @SealedbyGod777
      @SealedbyGod777 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      What if the timeline first split after the crucifiction ? 🤔
      After the veil in the temple torn in pieces.
      That would give all possible universes the opertunity to be saved.
      Maybe God uses this maybe not.
      But it would make it much more difficult, even imposibble for the devil to win. Cause the devil can't be omnipresent.

    • @MBarberfan4life
      @MBarberfan4life 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      I mean, that would just affirm free will. I’ve never met a Christian who was a fatalist. If everything that happens must happen, it’s hard to take things like ‘sin’ seriously.

  • @jesussalinas9057
    @jesussalinas9057 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    ok how is 1 + 1 = 2 .. well first lets try to understand 1 and 1 is always equal to one but that's not really an explanation to how this idea and this physilocial process can explain another number 1... got it ......

    • @jesussalinas9057
      @jesussalinas9057 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      still not any closer to truth.. just rambling big words and avoiding real answer.. Mr. interviewer f... u... god.... just say it with balls Mr. smarty pants

  • @zatoichiable
    @zatoichiable 7 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    God designed the universe and let it run on auto mode.

    • @zatoichiable
      @zatoichiable 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      auto mode except from time to time an interferance happened its called abnormality.

  • @kimsahl8555
    @kimsahl8555 ปีที่แล้ว

    God even don't create just one Universe.

  • @A7Xgaz18
    @A7Xgaz18 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    God is only the creator of our universe not the other mutiverses. Each universe is created by different version of the same God. Like the parrell universe theory they are multiple copy of the same people in each universe with a few differences. God does not knew that there are more of him in other parrell universes. We're are sealed in our on universe.

  • @arturoluna475
    @arturoluna475 7 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    to the commenters making arbitrary substitutions for the subject in questions like 'did God do ...?' like spaghetti monsters, kittens, etc., you are making a false equivalency, don't you think?

    • @roqsteady5290
      @roqsteady5290 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      The point is that the gods of religion are entirely arbitrary constructs in themselves and way over specified for twiddling a few knobs at the start of the universe, as Aguire pointed out.

  • @aminkanji8501
    @aminkanji8501 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Send me a beer this is interesting

  • @ingenuity168
    @ingenuity168 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    There's nothing supernatural about the world.

    • @にx_シ
      @にx_シ 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Nah in a way it is, the universe is yoo complex to just appear out of nothing.. The Universe is way too fine tuned, meaning the slightest bit change of gravity the WHOLE UNIVERSE cannot exist.. Fine tuning points toward a fine tuner.. So its pretty, very supernatural for me

    • @ingenuity168
      @ingenuity168 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@にx_シ Supernatural maybe, but no God with personality as described in the bible.

    • @にx_シ
      @にx_シ 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      curiosity 2019 wdym God with no personality🤔 what verse does it say that because personally i dont know😅

    • @ingenuity168
      @ingenuity168 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@にx_シ I mean there's no evidence of such "god" as described in the bible.

    • @にx_シ
      @にx_シ 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      curiosity 2019 But the Bible is about God wdym🤣😅

  • @gachacyber5508
    @gachacyber5508 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The heavens

  • @tomdrowry
    @tomdrowry 7 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Anyone who thinks there is just one universe and we luckily just happen to be in it,. must have very shallow minds.

  • @evanalbertthapamagar3518
    @evanalbertthapamagar3518 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This guy is avoiding answers to the questions. Lol. This guy knows nothing.

  • @sedoniadragotta8323
    @sedoniadragotta8323 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I don't know any beiliver that would give such a ridiculous reason for believing in God cos the sun goes around the earth.
    It is not dangerous to put your beilif in God far from it. Do not put your trust in man but in our creator.
    This guy is committing blasphemy.

  • @kakarotototoloco5796
    @kakarotototoloco5796 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Amed J. Aguirre here and I'm with him Anthony Aguirre has to be right ▶️

  • @roysinclair7554
    @roysinclair7554 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The Fine tuning is insurmountable. Extremely small changes mean no matter! No atoms! Etc. Talking about "different life forms" is nonsensical.

    • @roqsteady5290
      @roqsteady5290 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Extremely small changes to God would result in entirely different universes or no universe at all. If it is hard to explain why the universe is fine tuned, then it is even harder to explain why some particular god is just hanging around as the fundamental basis of reality. All theists are really doing is pushing things back one step, whilst adding whole layers of specificity in their religions that would require explanations that they can not provide.

    • @topguntk870
      @topguntk870 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      how do you know life cant exist without atoms? speak for yourself. there could be infinite ways life can emerge that cant even fathom. stay open minded stop being arrogant and ignorant.

    • @MBarberfan4life
      @MBarberfan4life 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      We don’t know. You’re only talking about life as we know it, under the laws of physics of this universe. If we change the constants AND laws, we have no idea what happens.

  • @VIVAFPV
    @VIVAFPV 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    what if god is dead? Killed himself after creating the universe ? Or died by accidental experiment ?

    • @JohnTaylor-fh4et
      @JohnTaylor-fh4et 7 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      fpvYou , or had to die to create this Universe (which is one of many).

    • @VIVAFPV
      @VIVAFPV 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      they could explain a lot. For example why he does not give a shit when people pray and all the holocausts and 200 million american indians dead and so on and so on...

    • @hayley1868
      @hayley1868 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Exactly is this possible
      I mean I want to get knowledge of such theories if possible

    • @TheWockComp
      @TheWockComp 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      How dare you you scumbag Jesus died for your sins god is infinite and immortal he never dies you scumbag NEVER INSULT THE LORD AGAIN

    • @hmt-0764
      @hmt-0764 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@TheWockComp **God*
      *but I agree with you brother how dare he insult our God*

  • @afsar_gunner5271
    @afsar_gunner5271 ปีที่แล้ว

    The guy just does not want to admit or say the word GOD - its painful isnt it ? Typical atheist

  • @kwakuamprako
    @kwakuamprako 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    ‘Not’ pinning your theory on god is the worst thing you can do.

  • @dnadnadna743
    @dnadnadna743 ปีที่แล้ว

    dna cannot create itself hes a fool

  • @CeezGeez
    @CeezGeez ปีที่แล้ว

    gaawwwd dun it

  • @JungleJargon
    @JungleJargon 7 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    There is a reason to take a position because of the programmable matter programmed inside of you. Case closed. You are the observable evidence of your supernatural Maker.

  • @riddlescom
    @riddlescom 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Funny. We have computers for 40 years and physics about 100 years God worked out universes for 50 billion years or more creating and destroying. From nothing.
    But this guy says he knows it all now. And god is dumb , but he thinks he is god with his chalkboard formulas equating Greek symbols with living matter.
    Sure bud. Sorry Charlie. Not buying it.

  • @nantukoshade738
    @nantukoshade738 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    no!!!!!!

  • @mikedavenport7375
    @mikedavenport7375 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    God didn't create any universes, let alone several, because he never existed to create any in the first place.

    • @nathans8178
      @nathans8178 5 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      Mike Davenport, I’m not going to debate this. I respect your opinion. But for just a moment go outside and realize that the very existence of ANYTHING is a miracle. And many scientists, while not believing in God, don’t believe that the world was created by chance. Life does not come from a rock. It is scientific law that all life comes from other life.

    • @roqsteady5290
      @roqsteady5290 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@nathans8178 No it isn't a "scientific law": The scientific principle is that all cells come from cells *today* ("omni cellular e cellular" - Rudolf Virchow), which is probably correct. And there is a very good reason why life is unlikely to be starting today, which is that incipient forms of life would be immediately snaffled up by existing life forms. And you really need to do a reality check when you make statements like this - Do you really imagine that those scientists that are investigating a possible chemical origin of life, don't understand their own theories in the field?

    • @nathans8178
      @nathans8178 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Roq Steady, the law of biogenesis literally states that “all life comes from other life.” There is no exception to this rule.

    • @roqsteady5290
      @roqsteady5290 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@nathans8178 LOL. That is absolute nonsense. There is no cast iron "law of biogenesis" in science, it was just a principle established in the 19th century that complex cellular life does not arise spontaneously as I already explained. Hence flies don't generate from nothing in rotting meat etc. In any case you clearly don't understand what a scientific law is: In science the highest level is a theory and *all* theories (of which scientific laws are a subset) are subject to modification if/when new data is turned up. A law is just a theory that can be expressed in a short statement often mathematical - hence Hooke's law, Newtons law of gravity - both of which have exceptions. Try reading actual science rather than creationist bullshit.

    • @nathans8178
      @nathans8178 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Roq Steady, believe what you want. I’m just going to put you on ignore

  • @JoelBondurant
    @JoelBondurant 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    Did Tinker Bell create multiple g* universes?

    • @hmt-0764
      @hmt-0764 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Tinkle Bell 😂😭

  • @joegeorge5940
    @joegeorge5940 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    There is no god why even talk about it.