Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 09:20 PM

Let me start out with a background paragraph. The idea for this thread came from NYCFarmboy. I also felt the need to start something different. This forum has never had a real philosophical debate. Ever. All that is made is back and forth bickering over terrorism and gay rights. Come to think of it, I can only remember one good threat talking about�taxes. I think it is still on the front page here. But anyway, it also has me thinking. Why isn't philosophy of some sort an occasional thread topic? Why is it that unlike a previous board I mulled around in, this one is totally devoid of those deep, critical thinking questions. Is it the amount of atheists and the fact that their numbers are incredibly disproportional to the population? I don't know.

��

Question:

Where did the first atom come from?

��

Here's my take. First, let's assume that the Big Bang theory is true. Everything started in a mass as densly packed as a neutron star. Then�Boom!�the mass is thrown out in every direction. Eventually, the mass clusters and forms stars, nebulae, and galaxies. But hold on now. That theory explains one thing:

How the Universe was created.

If the mass of the stars, moons, planets, nebulae, quasars, etc., had to come from somewhere, that also means that the mass that created it must also have an origin. Think about that for awhile. If the mass of hydrogen formed the galaxies, what formed the Hydrogen? How did it get there, and who/what created it?

Wiskedjak · Nov 10, 2004, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
If the mass of hydrogen formed the galaxies, what formed the Hydrogen? How did it get there, and who/what created it?

I don't know. Perhaps it always existed. Perhaps it was created. Perhaps it was the by-product of the collapse of a prior universe and part of a process that has been going on forever.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
I don't know. Perhaps it always existed. Perhaps it was created. Perhaps it was the by-product of the collapse of a prior universe and part of a process that has been going on forever.

But then where did that prior universe come from? Everything has to come from somewhere. I doubt anything ever existed. It had to be created by an outside force.

CD Hanks · Nov 10, 2004, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
But then where did that prior universe come from? Everything has to come from somewhere. I doubt anything ever existed. It had to be created by an outside force.

By this point, you're exceeding the abilities of human comprehension. This is something that very few people have an easy time with, but it does...explain quite a bit...while not explaining anything at all.

Hopefully you understand what I'm saying.

Buckaroo · Nov 10, 2004, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Let me start out with a background paragraph. The idea for this thread came from NYCFarmboy. I also felt the need to start something different. This forum has never had a real philosophical debate. Ever. All that is made is back and forth bickering over terrorism and gay rights. Come to think of it, I can only remember one good threat talking about�taxes. I think it is still on the front page here. But anyway, it also has me thinking. Why isn't philosophy of some sort an occasional thread topic? Why is it that unlike a previous board I mulled around in, this one is totally devoid of those deep, critical thinking questions. Is it the amount of atheists and the fact that their numbers are incredibly disproportional to the population? I don't know.

��

Question:

Where did the first atom come from?

��

Here's my take. First, let's assume that the Big Bang theory is true. Everything started in a mass as densly packed as a neutron star. Then�Boom!�the mass is thrown out in every direction. Eventually, the mass clusters and forms stars, nebulae, and galaxies. But hold on now. That theory explains one thing:

How the Universe was created.

If the mass of the stars, moons, planets, nebulae, quasars, etc., had to come from somewhere, that also means that the mass that created it must also have an origin. Think about that for awhile. If the mass of hydrogen formed the galaxies, what formed the Hydrogen? How did it get there, and who/what created it?

Actually, the big bang did not start from a Neutron Star (which is 15 to 30 times the mass of our sun. The Big Bang orginated from an atomic nucleus about the size of a proton. That is real ity bity.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by Buckaroo:
Actually, the big bang did not start from a Neutron Star (which is 15 to 30 times the mass of our sun. The Big Bang orginated from an atomic nucleus about the size of a proton. That is real ity bity.

Victim of my grammar.

What I was trying to see is that it was dense.

If people can debate if God exists, why not this?

I think this is the appropriate time to throw it into the water: Where do you think God falls into this? Does He?

CD Hanks · Nov 10, 2004, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
I think this is the appropriate time to throw it into the water: Where do you think God falls into this? Does He?

That's presuming that God exists. The more religious of us would undoubtedly say yes, and the more atheistic among us would say otherwise.

I think you're bringing a seperate argument in here which isn't exactly relevant, unless you want this to be a "God vs Big Bang" debate.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 09:54 PM

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
That's presuming that God exists. The more religious of us would undoubtedly say yes, and the more atheistic among us would say otherwise.

I think you're bringing a seperate argument in here which isn't exactly relevant, unless you want this to be a "God vs Big Bang" debate.

Agh.

Ok, here's what I want to know: If something had to create the big bang, that what created that? Was it God? Was it always there? Was in created by some unknown phenomena?

Mithras · 10:23 PM

I know! I know! The first atom came from GOD.
as for where GOD came from: GOD is infinite and perfect, and hence has necessary existence. As the "uncaused cause", no further explanation is possible or needed.

As for the question: But what caused or created GOD?: No. GOD has necessary existence. Shut up. Go away.

As for the allegation that perhaps the Universe itself is infinite, perfect, and its own uncaused cause: no. The Universe is merely physical, which is not sufficient for those attributes.

Whether you call that ultimate cause "Universe", "God", "Spirit", or "Turtle" is fine with me. I agree it is transcendent and wondrous. I'm not too worried about understanding its nature beyond that, because I don't think we can.

NYCFarmboy · Nov 10, 2004, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by Mithras:
I know! I know! The first atom came from GOD.
as for where GOD came from: GOD is infinite and perfect, and hence has necessary existence. As the "uncaused cause", no further explanation is possible or needed.

sounds good to me!

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
If the mass of the stars, moons, planets, nebulae, quasars, etc., had to come from somewhere, that also means that the mass that created it must also have an origin. Think about that for awhile. If the mass of hydrogen formed the galaxies, what formed the Hydrogen? How did it get there, and who/what created it?

Well heres my take:

What makes you think your brain can even comprehend the answer to that question? Most cant even fathom that the universe is expanding yet you seem to think you can find an answer to a question we didn't even have till the 1920's (up till then cosmology was dominated by "Steady State Universe theory")

Thats like trying to figure out, in 380 BC, what first made the earth flat, the rest of the puzzle is missing.

BlueSky · Nov 10, 2004, 10:24 PM

First there was One. One got lonely.

One laughed, then there were Two.

One didn't create the physical universe. Two did.

But One is Two.

But never mind, no matter.

Just be silent and listen

and

remember.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Ok, here's what I want to know: If something had to create the big bang, that what created that? Was it God? Was it always there? Was in created by some unknown phenomena?

Listen, you sound like your struggling here, your question breaks down, what created the big bang? God? ok God. Wait.. What created God? Chewbacca? ok Chewbacca. Wait, what Created Chewbacca? and so on... will any singularity be good enough?

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Well heres my take:

What makes you think your brain can even comprehend the answer to that question? Most cant even fathom that the universe is expanding yet you seem to think you can find an answer to a question we didn't even have till the 1920's (up till then cosmology was dominated by "Steady State Universe theory")

Thats like trying to figure out, in 380 BC, what first made the earth flat, the rest of the puzzle is missing.

Aristotle: The Earth is round
"(384 BCE � March 7, 322 BCE)"

I'd say that's fairly close.

Now I see why this board can't have threads asking question.

All I'm asking is if you think the first atom was always in existence or if it was created by God or something. I was sorta hoping people would take 5 minutes to think about the question, but evidently nobody is capable of saying "Hmm�maybe blah blah blah," instead of barking at me.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 10:55 PM

Since you wanted to get philosophical, how about this... Because this is what boggles my mind. If there was no "place" north of the north pole, then how could you ever go south to get to the north pole

Now relate that to what we are discussing (or what I am discussing with myself as the case is) and some things fall in to place, no?

Here are some current theories on the universe creation.

1) A cyclic universe theory-There is another universe just like ours before the Big Bang, it met its end and our current universe exists as a result.

2) Multiverse theory- Our universe might just be one of the many universes "born" in an infinite cosmic ocean due to quantum fluctation

3) Baby universe theory- Our universe was originated from an evaporated black hole found in another universe (note that the physics in the "parent" universe might not be the same as ours)

[This one's particularly interesting. If the physics in the parent universe affected the child universe to some degree, something a lot like evolution would take place. Universes that were good at making black holes would come to predominate. It wouldn't exactly be the same as biological evolution, because there would be no competition amongst universes for resources, but there would be some kind of natural selection. Universes that destroyed themselves too early to form black holes would not reproduce.]

4) Parallel universe theory- Our universe was one of the various existing unverses found across the multiverse and each universe's natural laws was almost similar to each other and they existed because of multiples probablity results of the wave function.

5) Creationist theory- Well, you know the myth.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Now I see why this board can't have threads asking question.

I tried to answer your question, but read my chewbacca post. Is there an answer that will pacify you? If there is you are just baiting. good luck.

BlackGriffen · Nov 10, 2004, 11:10 PM

Where the first atoms came from is easy: they formed when the universe cooled sufficiently for the photons to decouple from electrons, protons, et al. The short answer: when the universe cooled to about 150,000 K (about 150,000 C, or 280,000 F). Background radiation is the light left over from that moment - extremely red shifted.

But then you'd know that if you'd bothered to read about big bang theory instead of just saying, "God did it," all of the time.

The next question always asked is, "What caused the big bang?" or, a necessary condition for knowing a cause, "What was before the big bang?" Guess what? The big bang is supposed to be when space came into existence. time is included in that picture. Because "before" and "cause" are necessarily temporal concepts, the current theories would have to be wrong for either to make sense. What would make more sense to ask, and be consistent with current well tested theories, would be, "What exists outside of time and space?" The answer to that is, simply, we don't know. Without some evidence that something exists beyond the dimensions that came into existence with the big bang, it isn't profitable to speculate on what may be beyond the universe.

BlackGriffen

Shaddim · Nov 10, 2004, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
But then where did that prior universe come from? Everything has to come from somewhere. I doubt anything ever existed. It had to be created by an outside force.

Well, that's one of the questions. The problem is the relations we have with force and substance stop at the boundries of our reality. What's tied man into knots for millennia is the hope that one day we can better understand what is beyond us. The good thing is, these are knots of a Gordian nature, difficult to figure out, but with a definite solution. Just as all things in this universe are finite, so is the divine spark within this "sphere". Unfortunately, we've used religion without reason to try and unravel them, and much like Alexander used his sword, we've cleaved them to find a solution. Yes, the knot is undone, but we have no idea how it was made, only that the fragments of it remind us of certain nobler aspects of ourselves. That leaves science, which while able to analyze the puzzle, isn't able to penetrate into the deeper workings and motivations behind it or it's maker. One key was given to us by the Apostle James, "Faith without works is dead", this can also be turned around (with a modern twist) to say "Works without faith is only data collection". To completely work out the solution, you must be mindful of our material investigations while keeping an eye on the ultimate potential.

The absolute truth is, to find out the reality of "God" (as "the way" impacts us) we need only look at "His" creation, namely ourselves. Where did the first atom come from? Us. Why is that? Because everything is truly unified. "All things from one, and to one they shall return", to quote Agrippa.

Is there something external to this universe? No. Why? Because "it" would be so alien to us that there would be no way to quantify "it's" existence. The concept of any type of substance ends at the boundries of the material. Thus, what do we have left? Our life (and I do use the singular for a reason). Living it and returning to singularity is our ultimate potential. What does that all mean? Figure out your place in "the machinery", find out who you truly are, because once your section of the puzzle is solved, all of the other pieces will fall into place in their own time. And I can say this with a great deal of certainty, once they do, there won't be any more "mysteries".

Sorry, that sounded terribly philosophical, but that's how I see it. We still have a great distance to go, but it's no farther away that the choices we each make and what we decide to be.

CreepingDeth · 11:42 PM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Since you wanted to get philosophical, how about this... Because this is what boggles my mind. If there was no "place" north of the north pole, then how could you ever go south to get to the north pole

Now relate that to what we are discussing (or what I am discussing with myself as the case is) and some things fall in to place, no?

Here are some current theories on the universe creation.

1) A cyclic universe theory-There is another universe just like ours before the Big Bang, it met its end and our current universe exists as a result.

2) Multiverse theory- Our universe might just be one of the many universes "born" in an infinite cosmic ocean due to quantum fluctation

3) Baby universe theory- Our universe was originated from an evaporated black hole found in another universe (note that the physics in the "parent" universe might not be the same as ours)

[This one's particularly interesting. If the physics in the parent universe affected the child universe to some degree, something a lot like evolution would take place. Universes that were good at making black holes would come to predominate. It wouldn't exactly be the same as biological evolution, because there would be no competition amongst universes for resources, but there would be some kind of natural selection. Universes that destroyed themselves too early to form black holes would not reproduce.]

4) Parallel universe theory- Our universe was one of the various existing unverses found across the multiverse and each universe's natural laws was almost similar to each other and they existed because of multiples probablity results of the wave function.

5) Creationist theory- Well, you know the myth.

Theory 3 is a new one. Very interesting.

This was an interesting read.
Quasars seem to be very odd, as long as we're on the topic of the universe. Some say that they have massive black holes in their center. That also raises another question: Where does the matter go in a black hole?
[irl=http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996193]Hawking[/url] says black holes do not spit information out into other universes. While that'd be cool, that doesn't help us here.

Know Thy Enemy: Black Holes

But I still doubt that there was more than one universe. That doesn't make a dime's worth of sense to have more than one. If space was created around the time of the big bang, than all that could be left before is a vacuum.

I'm really not sure. If there was another Universe before, then there would have to be some force that destroyed it. Since the most accepted theory is that things will collapse in on itself, it all depends on gravity, right? I'm sorta confused right now. I'll get back to you on that one.

And that's good.

MacNStein's post is sorta what I was trying to get going here. I had to reread that. MY eyes started to cross.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 11:39 PM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
One key was given to us by the Apostle James, "Faith without works is dead", this can also be turned around (with a modern twist) to say "Works without faith is only data collection".

My word that is one helluva twist there...

The rest of your post is quite contrived, kinda going out of your way to explain nothing.

"Everything is truly unified" is a substantial claim yet you offer nothing to back this up.
The finite state of the universe is also a substantial claim yet you offer nothing to back this up either.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 11:43 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
I'm really not sure. If there was another Universe before, then there would have to be some force that destroyed it.

No, coexistence is not out of the question.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
No, coexistence is not out of the question.

You may be right. But if two universes are supposed to be coexistent, then there would have to be something that links them together like a bridge. Since travel through black holes is out of the question, and wormholes are most likely science fiction, it leads me to believe given our current knowledge, there would have to be some sort of phenomena like a wormhole or something that defies reality that somehow gives the universes a relation, if we assume that your theory is true. Then what do you believe is the answer to that?

Shaddim · Nov 10, 2004, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
My word that is one helluva twist there... you go from Blind belief without proof is nothing to something without blind belief doesn't matter?

The rest of your post is quite contrived, kinda going out of your way to explain nothing.

"Everything is truly unified" is a substantial claim yet you offer nothing to back this up.
The finite state of the universe is also a substantial claim yet you offer nothing to back this up either.

If you don't have even the basic concept of Faith, there's not much I can do for you.

For the rest, I recommend you read Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", his evidence for a finite (yet unbounded) universe is really fascinating. He goes into detail to explain the connection between all things. It's a great read.

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 11:51 PM

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
snip

Very interesting post, what is your background if you don't mind me asking.

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
Guess what? The big bang is supposed to be when space came into existence. time is included in that picture.

From what I have studied recently, time is always around, whether we observe it or not.
To think that the universe just came out of nothing like that would require something like the external impulse of God.

I think the older BB theory is nothing more than a secular creation myth.
Let me know what you think about: http://www.marxist.com/science/bigbang.html

I am interested in your opinion.

Wiskedjak · Nov 10, 2004, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
But then where did that prior universe come from? Everything has to come from somewhere. I doubt anything ever existed. It had to be created by an outside force.

If it had to be created by an outside force, what created that outside force? If everything has to come from somewhere, where did the Christian god come from?

mikellanes · Nov 10, 2004, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
If you don't have even the basic concept of Faith, there's not much I can do for you.

For the rest, I recommend you read Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", his evidence for a finite (yet unbounded) universe is really fascinating. He goes into detail to explain the connection between all things. It's a great read.

Please tell me how you define faith so I may understand what I am missing here?

I have read BHoT many times but don't come to all the same conclusions as Hawkings, again he has little to back it up, It is great to get people thinking but science needs to support it eventually, we'll see I guess.

CreepingDeth · Nov 10, 2004, 11:56 PM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
If everything has to come from somewhere, where did the Christian god come from?

I was talking about matter. Who said God is made of matter as we understand it?

[Also, please try to keep Christian bashing out of this. Warning beforehand, so this won't turn into another Christian flame]

Shaddim · Nov 10, 2004, 11:57 PM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Please tell me how you define faith so I may understand what I am missing here?

Ok.

What is your goal in studying science? What do you hope to accomplish?

Wiskedjak · Nov 11, 2004, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
I was talking about matter. Who said God is made of matter as we understand it?

[Also, please try to keep Christian bashing out of this. Warning beforehand, so this won't turn into another Christian flame]

If an outside force had to create the first atom, and everything has to come from somewhere, what created the outside force?

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
If an outside force had to create the first atom, and everything has to come from somewhere, what created the outside force?

Therein lies the question. Something has to exist, but it doesn't have to matter. Maybe a vacuum, but something beyond our comprehension had to give creation a push.

[This thread is actually worth something now.

]

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Ok.

What is your goal in studying science? What do you hope to accomplish?

I am waiting for your answer.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
but something beyond our comprehension had to give creation a push.

Why is that?

Lets say it did, then something had to give that something a push and infinity.

Shaddim · Nov 11, 2004, 12:10 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
I am waiting for your answer.

And I yours. Because then my answer will make more sense to you.

What is your goal in studying science? What do you hope to accomplish?

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Why is that?

Lets say it did, then something had to give that something a push and infinity.

Not if that force always existed. If it was always there, then it wouldn't need to be created. If that force is the "essence," for a lack of a better word, of the universe, then it needs no creation.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Not if that force always existed. If it was always there, then it wouldn't need to be created. If that force is the "essence," for a lack of a better word, of the universe, then it needs no creation.

And why can't the inert energy that created the universe be the essence?

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:17 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
And why can't the inert energy that created the universe be the essence?

Such as what?

I'm just giving my idea. Explain yours.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:18 AM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
And I yours. Because then my answer will make more sense to you.

What is your goal in studying science? What do you hope to accomplish?

I asked first.

I know where you are going, as you can tell...

I study science to prove what I think.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:19 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Such as what?

Sorry, I don't get your question?

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Sorry, I don't get your question?

What do you think this innate force is? Idea? Theory? Etc.

Wiskedjak · Nov 11, 2004, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
Therein lies the question. Something has to exist, but it doesn't have to matter. Maybe a vacuum, but something beyond our comprehension had to give creation a push.

[This thread is actually worth something now. ]

Just because something isn't matter, doesn't mean it isn't something that needed to be created. Light isn't matter.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
What do you think this innate force is? Idea? Theory? Etc.

It is the essence of the universe, therefore needs no creation or clarification beyond that.

Shaddim · Nov 11, 2004, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
I asked first. I know where you are going, as you can tell...

I study science to prove what I think.

Good. You know where I'm going, so you do on some level understand faith. Since that's the case, why would you say, "you go from Blind belief without proof is nothing to something without blind belief doesn't matter?"

You aspirations and goals are more than "blind belief", no?

Shaddim · Nov 11, 2004, 12:29 AM

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Just because something isn't matter, doesn't mean it isn't something that needed to be created. Light isn't matter.

Light actually is matter, since energy is simply substance in a state of transition (I think that's how it goes).

Shaddim · Nov 11, 2004, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by CreepingDeth:
What do you think this innate force is?

"Something" that either can't or won't fit within the universal paradigm?

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Light actually is matter, since energy is simply substance in a state of transition (I think that's how it goes).

Light is made up of photons. Since visible light is made up of photons, that also means everything else on the electromagnetic spectrum is also made up of something similar.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Good. You know where I'm going, so you do on some level understand faith. Since that's the case, why would you say, "you go from Blind belief without proof is nothing to something without blind belief doesn't matter?"

You aspirations and goals are more than "blind belief", no?

Faith without proof is nothing.
does not equal
Proof without faith doesn't matter.

Thats all I was trying to get at.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:41 AM

One thought, When discussing the "first atom", or the creation of the universe the concept of God is not necessary. There is no question about the universe to which the answer is "God" that could not then be posed about God. E.g.:

-If God caused the universe to exist, then God was either caused by something else, or uncaused entirely. If God can be uncaused entirely, so can the universe.
-If God designed the universe, then God was either designed by something else, or not designed at all. If God can be ordered without design, so can the universe.

Shaddim · Nov 11, 2004, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
Faith without proof is nothing.
does not equal
Proof without faith doesn't matter.

Thats all I was trying to get at.

I didn't say it equals it, I said it was the flip side of "Faith without works is dead". Without aspiration and vision, science is useless.

CreepingDeth · Nov 11, 2004, 12:44 AM

Originally posted by mikellanes:
One thought, When discussing the "first atom", or the creation of the universe the concept of God is not necessary. There is no question about the universe to which the answer is "God" that could not then be posed about God. E.g.:

-If God caused the universe to exist, then God was either caused by something else, or uncaused entirely. If God can be uncaused entirely, so can the universe.
-If God designed the universe, then God was either designed by something else, or not designed at all. If God can be ordered without design, so can the universe.

I'd love to respond, but I really have to go to bed. Gotta leave a six tomorrow.

mikellanes · Nov 11, 2004, 12:46 AM

Originally posted by MacNStein:
I didn't say it equals it, I said it was the flip side of "Faith without works is dead". Without aspiration and vision, science is useless.

Doh!

Well I agree and apologize for wasting your time, I will say this. I see no reason to associate faith or aspiration and vision with a god, a deity, a religion or anything else, I am a weak atheist, I don't ever think I can be a blanket strong atheist. No atheist can reasonably say "there is no such thing at all as god(s)". Although they can maintain that there is no good reason to think any god(s) exist.

We can be strong atheists to specific God(s) but weak atheists to the rest. After all, you can only positively disbelieve something exists once it has been proposed in the first place.