TED Conversations

Sunny Qureshi

CEO, IQ Training & Consultancy

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Can we prove Aristotle’s “Prime Mover”:Everything that happens is caused by something else?Then what caused the first cause?

POINTS TO PONDER

The cause of the universe might be eternal, thus eliminating the need for a cause. As people have accepted the Big Bang Theory, so this objection has fallen out of favor.

It is worth pointing out that time is an aspect of the universe,without the universe, there is no time. It has existed at every point in time and that at no point in time has there been no universe.

1.Everything that exists or begins to exist has a cause?
2. Universe began to exist therefore it has a cause "the first cause" or was the matter already present that caused it?
4. If it was the first cause then what caused the first cause?

+3
Share:

Closing Statement from Sunny Qureshi

The Debate was a mixture of philosophical and scientific arguments presented by members.

The question still remains unanswered as both schools of thought were inconclusive on the God or no God debate.

The problem is of the fact that both atheists and theists are both opposed to each others "belief". Even in science, hypothesisation which is a kind of belief that has not been proved exists.

This debate and other debates will remain inconclusive unless and until a Collaborative stance is not adopted by the two.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Mar 1 2012: very interesting question,

    Here is an offering from my perspective. If we look at matter from a science point of view that everything is energy and that matter is energy condensed to a certain vibrational frequency. This would suggest that even before matter existed the intelligent energy that created it or chose to vibrate at this current frequencies level has eternally been there. If we look at time which means nothing in the flow of eternity... time began when matter began for time is nothing but a way to keep track of somethings distance from something elses in the field of matter itself.

    In essence if everything came from that eternal energy that gave birth to matter itself than we are that source exploring itself and all that is capable. A process of evolution, for we can see that reguardless of the endless perspectives and opinions and the differences there of bottom line is, everything evolves. And its increasing exponentially, here in we can all form our own opinions and choose the ones that work best for our own personal paradigms. Knowing that there is never just one way to do something brings one to realize that its not really about one truth for truth is subjective depending on the beholder. Granted we all feel inclined to choose a path and believe in its results however those results limited by a restricted discipline wether that be dogmatic or unaccepted advanced science could be a drop in the bucket compared to things which are far beyond measurement with such tools.

    Science has done studies where in they divided a single particle and they seperated its other half, hundreds to hundreds of thousands of miles from itself and whatever they subjected one half to the other registered it instantly reguardless the distance. Which proves even though we may feel seperate from that which created everything we are not and no matter the form or distance its all eternal and exploringly evolutional. Lol is that even a word? Well at any rate thats my take on it
    • Mar 13 2012: Anthony Rifflard said: "Science has done studies where in they divided a single particle and they separated its other half, hundreds to hundreds of thousands of miles from itself and whatever they subjected one half to the other registered it instantly regardless the distance. "

      This is a gross misunderstanding of quantum physics (I am giving you the benefit of the doubt by not calling it a misrepresentation). In the experiments you refer to, scientists have generated two dependent or "entangled" particles, separated them and then looked at one and, shockingly, the other is complementary. Anything they do with one oft he particles after this, however, is not registered by the other.

      Let me give a more practical example. Say I took a doll, cut it in half at the waist and mailed one half to you and one to a colleague on the other side of the world. When you opened your package, not only would you know what you received, you would instantaneously (faster then the speed of light) know what was in the other package on the other side of the world. All very interesting, but manipulating your half of the doll will do nothing to the other half.

      If your understanding was correct we could use the phenomenon to build a faster-than-light communication system that we could install in our intrastellar exploration vehicles (which would be just one of a vast array of cool things we could do). We don't because we can't. We can't because it just doesn't work like that.

      I'm curious. You felt that your understanding "proves even though we may feel seperate from that which created everything we are not and no matter the form or distance its all eternal and exploringly evolutional (sic)." Now that you know that you misunderstood the science, does this then disprove that statement for you?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.