>>>Scientists Have Concluded That The Universe Shouldn't Really Exist<<<
Quote from article:
"There has to be some reason why we're all here living and breathing. Either that or we're in a huge computer simulation."
Link to the article:
http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-concluded-that-the-universe-...
Always learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth.
For those who want a good philosophical answer to the question, click on the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ58aloF7Bc
And for a philosophical argument from the computer simulation hypothesis, click on the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas&t=1s
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
The title says "Scientists Have CONCLUDED That The Universe Shouldn't Really Exist"
But one of the researchers is quoted as saying, "An asymmetry must exist here somewhere but WE SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND where the difference is. What is the source of the symmetry break?"
So the headline and your topic are misleading/dishonest.
"The title says "Scientists Have CONCLUDED That The Universe Shouldn't Really Exist"
But one of the researchers is quoted as saying, "An asymmetry must exist here somewhere but WE SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND where the difference is. What is the source of the symmetry break?"
So the headline and your topic are misleading/dishonest."
----------------------------------
Precisely correct, and his clumsy segway into religious YouTube clips makes his agenda all the more obvious. A brief read of the article exposes his dishonest hijacking and misrepresentation of the article title.
CP violations were confirmed empirically in the 1960's.
I get a kick out of the notion that humanity thinks it has the cranial capacity to define anything, in the overall scheme of the universe as we (don't) know it. Yet, over and over we read about "scientists" and their pursuits as if there's substantive and qualitative murmurings at work. I laud the challenge and the heft of the task, but current man is pretty much out of his element the minute he thinks beyond earthly matters. Moreover, when I reads "scientists" followed by "concluded" I know it's time for someone to make a confession. That kind of talk is usually the verbiage of attention whores veiled loosely in science, or it's a marketing ploy; especially in areas where nothing can possibly be "conclusively" expressed but rather theorized at best.
Right now we don't know how large the universe is or what it is. Therefore it's silly for some "scientists" to claim that it shouldn't exist. Just 100 years ago they thought that the universe consisted of just the visible stars in the night sky.
It's the familiar "No obvious explanation so the answer's god" routine.
it is most likely that the universe is infinite, which would mean that we have to exist.
there would be no meaning of life, we would simply be another cog in the beautiful 'machine'.