Do you consider nuclear actions that convert mass to energy, creating energy?
This has always been my understanding. The concept of the ‘soul’, while not observable directly, is something thats effects are seen and then not seen upon death. Where does this energy go? Well, in my belief, to Heaven.
The fact is, everything cannot come from nothing. God indeed shaped out universe. You need only look out the window to see intelligent design in every blade of grass.
Still need proof of GOD?
Look around, check the Bible, find Jesus.
Remember the second part is “it just changes state”. Matter is energy, energy is matter, you can convert one to the other but nothing gets created. And no there’s still real death, as your life energy changes state to inert matter and eventually worm food.
We don't know how He did it. Perhaps he converted a vast energy supply into matter. However He did it, I believe that He did it.
No. It is a statement of physics, not a proof of God.
The Law of the Conservation of Energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be changed from one form to another. God created the heavens and the earth ex nihilo (i.e., out of nothing). Of course everyone them naturally says “where did God come from.†Scripture has an answer for that. In Exodus 3:14 moses asks god “who shall I say sent me?†God replies I am that I am. God is the eternal creator, the “unmoved mover†of Aristotle.
If you wish to quantify the infinite then yes - the first law is the essence of God. All encompassing and eternal - every that was, is or shall be is derived from the “energy” that is God. All matter is energy on loan that must eventually return to whence it came. So yes, Virginia, there is a God - and what a great god He is.
“Energy cannot be created nor destroyed”.
I’ll accept that as a first principle (although as written it doesn’t support the existence of a God who created everything.)
Based on that first principle, you ask “If this is so, then wouldn’t it mean that energy is infinite?” but why would it? Why would the fact that energy can’t be created or destroyed mean that energy is infinite?
Based on the assumption that energy is infinite, you ask “...wouldn’t this be proof of God?” but again, why would it? Why would energy being infinite be proof of God?
Based on the assumption that energy is infinite, you also ask “...wouldn’t it mean that there is no such thing as death or “real death”?” But this time you give a reason: “Because if this energy is infinite, then eventually it will form into you again?”
But why and who says, besides you, that because this energy is infinite that it would eventually form into you again.
I’d say that if the energy is infinite, there are infinite possibilities for the something into which it will eventually form and there is no reason that something would necessarily or even likely be “you” or anything it had formed into before.
Oft times the unknown is unknown because it is unknowable.
How many angels can stand on the head of a pin?
God is a conscious being. You aren't going to find Him in the physical sciences.
In short, no. It is impossible to prove or disprove god. You either believe or you don't. Belief is like a glorified opinion. No way to prove your opinion right or wrong until the truth manifests itself.
“If this is so, then wouldn’t it mean that energy is infinite?”
No, the energy is not infinite, it just can’t *poof* vanish. It can change into matter, and back into energy, but there is a finite amount of it.
“And 2nd, wouldn’t it mean that there is no such thing as death or “real death”? Because if this energy is infinite, then eventually it will form into you again?”
No, because the energy and matter in your body can transform in ways that are non-reversible, so that no natural process would ever reassemble “you” out of the remaining constituent parts in their transmuted forms. Some supernatural process could do it, but it won’t happen on its own, no matter how long you wait.
Thomas Aquinas’ held that new matter cannot be created nor can matter be destroyed, only changed. Not sure where the “energy” came from. Missed that in my BA in philosophy.
If you take a computer and turn it off or destroy it, is it still processing in some other dimension or way? If the answer is no then you idea also has the answer no. When things stop functioning that is that
“”” “Energy cannot be created nor destroyed”. If this is so, then wouldn’t it mean that energy is infinite?”
To physicists the statement is true, but to them it neither means there is infinite energy and it might mean there is only a finite amount of energy; it only means E=M*Csquared AND also that M=E/Csquared.
At present, the understanding of physicsts is that whether the universe is infinite (a “universe” that includes an infinite “vacumn”/”space” that matter/energy-energy/matter expands into) or finite (as though there is an ultimate boundary to the universe), but either way it only contains the energy it contains, though the arrangement of energy and matter (energy “condensed” or “conserved”) is constantly changing.
What astronomers see when they say the universe is “expanding” is not that it is containing either more energy or more mass all the time, but simply that the vacumn (space) between clusters of energy/matter keeps getting larger - everything keeps moving further apart.
Since present theories suggest that the amount of energ/matter-matter/energy in the universe is most likely finite, there are different theories about about the course the “expanding” universe will take.
“The three possible types of expanding universes are called open, flat, and closed universes. If the universe were open, it would expand forever. If the universe were flat, it would also expand forever, but the expansion rate would slow to zero after an infinite amount of time. If the universe were closed, it would eventually stop expanding and recollapse on itself, possibly leading to another big bang. In all three cases, the expansion slows, and the force that causes the slowing is gravity.”
http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr1/en/astro/universe/universe.asp
As for G-d; none of it proves or disproves G-d.