Originally Posted by Lockhart (Post 1044112)

My brain is numb.

Originally Posted by TerraByte (Post 1044106)

See, the things we're talking about here are so immensely unlikely that it's pretty much impossible.

I'm thinking that you missed the entire point here. It is immensely unlikely that any specific state, or any state similar to it, would happen to occur because the cosmic dice rolled it up. However, you have to remember how randomness works.

Consider all the specifics of the world as we know it. Every country, city, and town, person, and atom make up a configuration that we interpret (our ability to interpret it also requires a rather specific layout) as Earth and its civilizations. What's the chance of it coming into existence? I can't say for sure, but it's probably a number so small that scientific notation won't cut it here.

Given enough time, the universe almost surely will strike upon a given configuration of reality. That chance, per moment of time, is incredibly, indescribably, unimaginably small. That said, it's still there.

Firstly, I don't know of any universe models that permit the beginning to be infinitely in the past and the ending to also be infinitely into the future.

The argument from I've never heard of it rears its ugly head again. Here you go.

This permits a never dying universe, which would hold that it was perfect. This blatantly flies in the face of the decaying universe, a theory that has all but been confirmed by modern science, and the big bang theory, which is in a similar state of near perfect evidence.

But you are definitely right when you say this. However, we have to remember that a decaying universe doesn't really mean anything in this context. Why is this? A decaying universe doesn't go away. It keeps getting bigger and fading until it reaches such a high state of entropy we refer to it as having undergone "heat death (it's not actually dead - it's just gotten to a really, really high state of entropy)." In other words, the universe will exist for all of eternity, giving our cosmic dice an infinite time to continue rolling.

This means that at some point there was less matter (in a universal state that allowed for such a breaking of the laws of physics, such as the state of nothing that must have been BEFORE the universe, or before existence). The decaying universe insinuates the eventuality of a time where there will be no universe at all, and therefore no matter to rearrange itself.

A couple questions need to be asked here. You may understand this subject better than I do, so please forgive me and gently smack me down if these are dumb, already answered, or just plain stupid questions...

1. How, exactly, do we know there was a state of nothing before the universe? Did it really just "pop into existence?" Perhaps the amount of matter and energy has always stayed the same, and there was something before the universe, but we don't know what. This is fully into the realm of the unfalsifiable as far as I can tell, because we simply cannot know what was going on before the Big Bang occurred.

2. I don't see how, even if there was nothing before the universe (which grossly and blatantly violates conservation of energy, but that is your point, no?), it follows that the matter and energy from our universe is going to go somewhere. As far as I can tell, it's a complete non sequitur.

What I'm getting at is this - left to its own devices, entropy will run amok, and the universe will almost certainly, slowly but surely, become less and less complex. Particles will decay and structures will break. But there will still be particles left, and given until the end of time to exist, they will, with probability one, collectively manage to form any combination they could. No getting around this.

Now, in the universe's limited life, is it possible that the exact same atoms could make up the exact same thing two times in the same place so as to facilitate a human being like yourself? Theoretically yes, but practically it is impossible to confirm or deny, delegating this proposition into the realm of un-falsifiable hypotheses and thought experiments (such as the existence of god) that cannot be touched by science, because it is un-testable and un-confirmable.

As above, I'm working off the assumption (which I believe to be correct, but would gladly change my mind given the proper smack on the back of the head) that the universe's life is not limited. So, yes, and given enough time for it to happen, it is definitely not unfalsifiable.

And your answer to the question about whether this clone would be you is determined quite wholly on your belief or lack of belief in souls or the infinite nature of the human spirit. Technically, if you believe in such things, your spirit would have to be imparted into this clone, otherwise it be merely a golem with your looks. One other thing worth noting may be the fact that this creature, whatever you may call it, could have different experiences, and even if it should be you wholly, it's own cells would be manifest of different atoms until it was, technically, made up of other parts of the universe you were not. We are all the products of our interactions, both figuratively and very literally. Finally, note that this creature would also exist at a different time, making it easy to distinguish between the two of you historically speaking.

I know I had to a lot to criticize before, but this I definitely agree with. I don't believe in any supernatural spirit, so this is a very well-thought-out reply.

So, TL;DR yes it's possible, but it's highly unlikely. And no, for a few reasons, it would not TRULY be you.

Originally Posted by Evolution (Post 1044121)

Everything can mind fuck you when you try to think too deep into it.

This is just about the truth, as I have discovered. Kind of reminds of me how sanity works in Call of Cthulhu... you learn too much about reality, and you start going crazy. Permanently.

All I know is, there is no such thing as a God.

This sort of declaration can't be made with total assurance. I have found no definite evidence for a god, and Russell's Teapot comes to mind. With that in mind, if there was a God, and He was omnipotent, certainly He would be capable of hiding himself from us regardless of how hard we looked.

Originally Posted by Evolution (Post 1044121)

I want to come back to this and drop my opinion on things, give me a bit.

Originally Posted by Rant (Post 1044130)

Your first mistake is in assuming that the universe is cyclical.

Originally Posted by Rainbow Dash (Post 1044131)

Read my response to Terra. It doesn't have to be.