Was The Big Bang Art?

[Rev.Reverence]

I started the thread...I'll give my argument later...

[ttogreh]

Well, we have to all come to a consensus on what art is, whether or not art requires an observer, whether there is or is not an observer to the big bang...

On such a subject, "maybe" is the best answer you are gonna get.

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

Well, we have to all come to a consensus on what art is, whether or not art requires an observer, whether there is or is not an observer to the big bang...

On such a subject, "maybe" is the best answer you are gonna get.

I think maybe would be the best answer for any such subject.....but there is "art" out there that not all of us have to agree on....I, for one, do not consider the later works of Picasso art, not the stuff done by Jason Pollack...and yet, both are cited as masters of the modernistic movement when it comes to painting.

again...we have the problem of "perception"....and that will always be the biggest fence for anyone to look through/ get over....

my view is that anything that can create this

as an after effect...had to be FLAT OUT AMAZING to see....and for me...thats art.

[sass_in_the_pants]

You know what's cool?

EVERYTHING that exists in the universe was created 12 billion years ago at the big bang. Every atom that is on planet earth right now has been here all along.

That would, of course, include every atom that makes me.

And I'm as pretty as a picture.

[Rev.Reverence]

I will argue that I am art & an indirect result of aforementioned 12 billion years or so ago..

...which would mean a big fat philosophical YES.....

(I did not think someone would post what ttogreh said so quickly...

I knew it would come up...but damn...that was cool man.)

[Goth Brooks]

You know what's cool?

EVERYTHING that exists in the universe was created 12 billion years ago at the big bang. Every atom that is on planet earth right now has been here all along.

That would, of course, include every atom that makes me.

And I'm as pretty as a picture.

i love that point of view.

i wonder if myspace will allow me to change my age to 12 billion

[Oh_My_Goth]

Big Bang.....THEE ultimate creation.....If that is not art, then I am confused on what art is!!!!!

[Rev.Reverence]

Big Bang.....THEE ultimate creation.....If that is not art, then I am confused on what art is!!!!!

NICE PICTURE SWEETY...

[sass_in_the_pants]

i wonder if myspace will allow me to change my age to 12 billion

[Msterbeau]

i wonder if myspace will allow me to change my age to 12 billion

But then everyone else will be 12 million, too.... and I hate dating my own age, so I think it should be disallowed. :-)

[Rev.Reverence]

But then everyone else will be 12 million, too.... and I hate dating my own age, so I think it should be disallowed. :-)

*ahem*

*in best Poindexter voice*

Clearly you have a typo; here I'll give you a "B"

*hands you a "B"*

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

*dies laughing*

[hunhee]

I was talking to someone about this, and the definition of art.

1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.

3. a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.

4. the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.

5. any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

6. (in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?

7. the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.

8. the craft or trade using these principles or methods.

9. skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.

10. a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.

11. arts,

a. (used with a singular verb) the humanities: a college of arts and sciences.

b. (used with a plural verb) liberal arts.

12. skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.

13. trickery; cunning: glib and devious art.

14. studied action; artificiality in behavior.

15. an artifice or artful device: the innumerable arts and wiles of politics.

16. Archaic. science, learning, or scholarship.

It doesn't really DEFINE what is art (at least to me), but that it has to be created, and therefore must have a creator?

The big bang just seems sorta, if you believe in the theism that I believe in, to qualify as art.

I think it's beautiful, I would have considered it art, but the ACTUAL term art doesn't seem to specifically fit.

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

The big bang did not have a creator, Art generally has to have a creator right?

I was talking to someone about this, and the definition of art.

1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.

3. a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.

4. the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.

5. any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

6. (in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?

7. the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.

8. the craft or trade using these principles or methods.

9. skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.

10. a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.

11. arts,

a. (used with a singular verb) the humanities: a college of arts and sciences.

b. (used with a plural verb) liberal arts.

12. skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.

13. trickery; cunning: glib and devious art.

14. studied action; artificiality in behavior.

15. an artifice or artful device: the innumerable arts and wiles of politics.

16. Archaic. science, learning, or scholarship.

It doesn't really DEFINE what is art (at least to me), but that it has to be created, and therefore must have a creator?

The big bang just seems sorta, if you believe in the theism that I believe in, to qualify as art.

I think it's beautiful, I would have considered it art, but the ACTUAL term art doesn't seem to specifically fit.

IF the big bang...assuming it happened...does not have a creator....then neither does nature

tell me something

That image above is a NATURAL thing....no man made object. It is a shot taken by Yann Arthus-Bertrand, a french photographer that has spent most of his career in the air, taking aerial shots of the world, both natural and man-made.

There is no "creator" for that image above...just like there was none for the big bang....I think that, as humans....we like to define things to much...because if thats not art...then what is?

[Rev.Reverence]

I was talking to someone about this, and the definition of art.

1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.

3. a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.

4. the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.

5. any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

6. (in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?

7. the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.

8. the craft or trade using these principles or methods.

9. skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.

10. a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.

11. arts,

a. (used with a singular verb) the humanities: a college of arts and sciences.

b. (used with a plural verb) liberal arts.

12. skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.

13. trickery; cunning: glib and devious art.

14. studied action; artificiality in behavior.

15. an artifice or artful device: the innumerable arts and wiles of politics.

16. Archaic. science, learning, or scholarship.

It doesn't really DEFINE what is art (at least to me), but that it has to be created, and therefore must have a creator?

The big bang just seems sorta, if you believe in the theism that I believe in, to qualify as art.

I think it's beautiful, I would have considered it art, but the ACTUAL term art doesn't seem to specifically fit.

Unless we can use OUR perception to call IT art...

Thus birthing GOD (out of OUR collective sub-consciousness). Who then (being an incomprehensible entity unbound by time) starts the Universe...

(Yes, I am trying to find a logically based middle ground between Science and Spirituality and Religion.)

[Rev.Reverence]

IF the big bang...assuming it happened...does not have a creator....then neither does nature

tell me something

That image above is a NATURAL thing....no man made object. It is a shot taken by Yann Arthus-Bertrand, a french photographer that has spent most of his career in the air, taking aerial shots of the world, both natural and man-made.

There is no "creator" for that image above...just like there was none for the big bang....I think that, as humans....we like to define things to much...because if thats not art...i'm not sure what art is....

That is GOD...The pattern of the Chaos in Nature...

[hunhee]

IF the big bang...assuming it happened...does not have a creator....then neither does nature

tell me something

That image above is a NATURAL thing....no man made object. It is a shot taken by Yann Arthus-Bertrand, a french photographer that has spent most of his career in the air, taking aerial shots of the world, both natural and man-made.

There is no "creator" for that image above...just like there was none for the big bang....I think that, as humans....we like to define things to much...because if thats not art...then what is?

It's natural beauty.. but the word "art" doesn't fit.

[hunhee]

Unless we can use OUR perception to call IT art...

Thus birthing GOD (out of OUR collective sub-consciousness). Who then (being an incomprehensible entity unbound by time) starts the Universe...

(Yes, I am trying to find a logically based middle ground between Science and Spirituality and Religion.)

the problem with that is. shouldn't there be a more complicated creator than god? then who is that and then everything collapses on itself..

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

It's natural beauty.. but the word "art" doesn't fit.

and again...as humans...I think we try to define things too much.....to use "art" as a definition to describe something like this

but to exclude the image of the natural heart above.....would you not consider that a travesty?

We, as humans, first started to seek art to mimic and enhance what we seen naturally....and if we seen it naturally, then it must have been "art" to us then....there is nothing but our need to define everything that makes it different now.

[Rev.Reverence]

the problem with that is. shouldn't there be a more complicated creator than god? then who is that and then everything collapses on itself..

The repetitive problem I see with the world's Religions is that they try to 'humanize' GOD...

You can not do that...

Follow me here...

Man1 has a concept of GOD.

Man2 has a concept of GOD.

Man3 has a concept of GOD.

Who is correct in their conceptualization?

Is the answer "ALL OF THEM", or "NONE OF THEM"?

I like the answer "YES"

They are all wrong (they think they are right)

They are all right (if God is incomprehensible therefor inclusive of ALL things that we conceive of)

Did I leave something out? or was it clear?

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

The repetitive problem I see with the world's Religions is that they try to 'humanize' GOD...

You can not do that...

Follow me here...

Man1 has a concept of GOD.

Man2 has a concept of GOD.

Man3 has a concept of GOD.

Who is correct in their conceptualization?

Is the answer "ALL OF THEM", or "NONE OF THEM"?

I like the answer "YES"

They are all wrong (they think they are right)

They are all right (if God is incomprehensible therefor inclusive of ALL things that we conceive of)

Did I leave something out? or was it clear?

I much prefer the idea of the Id.....plus...being right and wrong at the same time, about a concept like that, reminds me of one of my favorite quotes.

"Should you choose to believe in God, I win.....and should you choose not to, I still win....I love being me" - Lucifer.

[hunhee]

The repetitive problem I see with the world's Religions is that they try to 'humanize' GOD...

You can not do that...

Follow me here...

Man1 has a concept of GOD.

Man2 has a concept of GOD.

Man3 has a concept of GOD.

Who is correct in their conceptualization?

Is the answer "ALL OF THEM", or "NONE OF THEM"?

I like the answer "YES"

They are all wrong (they think they are right)

They are all right (if God is incomprehensible therefor inclusive of ALL things that we conceive of)

Did I leave something out? or was it clear?

I think they need to think of a different word other than "GOD" to define what they're thinking.

I get what you're saying. I just believe more in mathematics/chance than a "conceptualization" of god.

[Rev.Reverence]

I think they need to think of a different word other than "GOD" to define what they're thinking.

I get what you're saying. I just believe more in mathematics/chance than a "conceptualization" of god.

Yes...GOD, I have adroitly dubbed "The collective sub-consciousness of existence"

In keeping with ZEN...every rock and molecule, alien being, you me, the cat in the box....are but parts of GOD...

...GOD is the math of chance, probability; God is not something that can be conceived...

3 axioms you will find in nearly ALL religions.

1. Man cannot conceive of the whole of GOD.

2. Insanity is directly caused by "looking at 'the face' of GOD"

3. LOVE is the most important 'commandment'.

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

I think they need to think of a different word other than "GOD" to define what they're thinking.

I get what you're saying. I just believe more in mathematics/chance than a "conceptualization" of god.

*whips both of you*....DOWN!!!!...HIYA!!!!!!

back on to the TOPIC....

If something would be considered naturally beautiful, then why can it not be considered art? Why is man the only one thats is supposedly capable of this?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Hunhee... the problem with sticking to just the Math when it comes to the Big Bang, the expansion and teh contraction of the Universe is that the Math fails to explain it.

Let just assume the Big Bang did in fact happen. That means the totallity of everythign ws compressed into a Super particle in perfect balance. It had to be, by the Math, in perfect balance to exists at all. That begs teh question... If it was in perfect balance... Why did it explode?

Math takes over again after the explosion.... for a bit... then there is that rapid expansion of energy/mass... evenly throughout all that "is" the Universe. Which is where Math fails to explain thigns again. Math says matter/energy would be spread evenly through out all the Universe... which begs question #2 Why did Stars/Galaxys and other things form? Something had to "stir the pot" so that some matter was closser together and gravity could kick in to pull stuff together.

The Math fails us.