Proof of that there is one God

[I.P.Freely]

Bacon proves there is only one god,

 

[September]

"God", "YHWH", and "Allah" all describe the same being.

Even though Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all have different culture, rituals, and ways of worshipping and understanding YHWH... these religions have a great deal of things in common, because they all worship the same deity.

In their own ways, they all worship YHWH.

In my own way, I worship YHWH.
​

Not as a Christian, or as a Jew, a Muslim, or a Catholic... but as a monolatristic, perhaps even henotheistic, Pagan, do I worship YHWH.

Ash, If you worship YHWH does that mean you believe what He says?
Satan and Christ had things in common too. They quoted the same scripture. Does that make them the same?
God has a Son. Allah takes pride in not having a son. How are they the same deity?

The mysteries of YHWH are only partially revealed through Christianity, which can only attempt to understand that which is beyond comprehension.

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through Islam. The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through Judaism. The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through other religions.

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through entities such as Angels, Demons, Djinn...

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through praying directly to YHWH.

No one Holy Book can reveal all the mysteries of YHWH.

No one religion can reveal all the mysteries of YHWH.

And no mere human can learn all the mysteries of YHWH.
​

 

[Delta4Embassy]

87. We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of apostles; We gave Jesus the son of Mary Clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Is it that whenever there comes to you an apostle with what ye yourselves desire not, ye are puffed up with pride?- Some ye called impostors, and others ye slay!

101. And when there came to them an apostle from Allah, confirming what was with them, a party of the people of the Book threw away the Book of Allah behind their backs, as if (it had been something) they did not know!

113. The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon." Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but Allah will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.

83. And remember We took a covenant from the Children of Israel (to this effect): Worship none but Allah. treat with kindness your parents and kindred, and orphans and those in need; speak fair to the people; be steadfast in prayer; and practise regular charity. Then did ye turn back, except a few among you, and ye backslide (even now).

-Sura 2
2. The Cow

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Even though Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all have different culture, rituals, and ways of worshipping and understanding YHWH... these religions have a great deal of things in common, because they all worship the same deity.


And because these religions are in essence the same, created by the same people, mere variations on the monotheistic theme, confirming the fact that there is no 'god' as perceived by theists.

 

[gtopa1]

"God", "YHWH", and "Allah" all describe the same being.

Even though Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all have different culture, rituals, and ways of worshipping and understanding YHWH... these religions have a great deal of things in common, because they all worship the same deity.

In their own ways, they all worship YHWH.

In my own way, I worship YHWH.
​

Not as a Christian, or as a Jew, a Muslim, or a Catholic... but as a monolatristic, perhaps even henotheistic, Pagan, do I worship YHWH.

Ash, If you worship YHWH does that mean you believe what He says?
Satan and Christ had things in common too. They quoted the same scripture. Does that make them the same?
God has a Son. Allah takes pride in not having a son. How are they the same deity?

The mysteries of YHWH are only partially revealed through Christianity which can only attempt to understand that which is beyond comprehension.

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through Islam. The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through Judaism. The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through other religions.

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through other entities such as Angels, Demons, Djinn...

The mysteries of YHWH are partially revealed through praying directly to YHWH.

No one Holy Book can reveal all the mysteries of YHWH.

No one religion can reveal all the mysteries of YHWH.

And no mere human can learn all the mysteries of YHWH.
​

It's the "human interpretation" factor that usually mucks up deep understanding of the Deity. So my own rule of thumb. God IS; Jesus leads us to God; do your best; and there's no way ya gonna fool God on Judgement day!!! So don't try.

We are all going to be found unworthy; get over it!!

Thank God for his mercy!!

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Bacon proves there is only one god,

You really are a fool. Why are you stalking someone who considers you an amoeba speck??

Greg

 

[Hollie]

You're suggesting that the gods actually wrote the bibles?

You have an s problem. God wrote the Bible.

That would seem to conflict with biblical tales and fables regarding the alleged apostles.

It seems you have chosen to re-write both biblical tales and fables as well as the bibles.

 

[BillyP]

So why would a woman want to be in a religion that allows men to beat them?
.....

a devout muslim woman will be obedient to her husband and a devout muslim man should be merciful with his obedient wife and not to hit or mistreat her.

if your objection is on that a wife should be obedient to her husband, so why you accept that the same woman got to work and be obedient to her boss / manager?

if your objection on the exceptionally allowed hitting action, so why you may be accepting parents hit their children?

we are subjected to many constraints in this life, you should study and be educated to have a good career. you should work to have money... you will be an old weak man or die sooner or later, we all have no choice of this and wise people adopt to these conditions.

worshiping the God and praying and putting you front to land and prostrate to the God is one of these constraints imposed on you. Those who refuse to do so, will be destinated to the hell.
so it is wise to accept that as you accept other forms of constraints.

I don't hit women or children, only cowards do that.
You're equating being married to having a job? Even your boss isn't going to take your children from you and sell them. Your boss also didn't buy you, and you can quit anytime with no hard feelings. And if your boss mistreats you, you can get HIM fired.

 

[BillyP]

You're suggesting that the gods actually wrote the bibles?

You have an s problem. God wrote the Bible.

That would seem to conflict with biblical tales and fables regarding the alleged apostles.

It seems you have chosen to re-write both biblical tales and fables as well as the bibles.

God wrote the bible, but then men edited it many times. Apparently, god's not all that.

 

[amrchaos]

I find this thread a bit funny......

Not for theist, mind you, but for the "scientific and logical" atheists on this board. Do you really agree with the (3) beginning points the op made? Isn't this where the "logical" hatchet of your mind should land--for it is where the argument that there is at least one god is made.


OK--I'll try. You guys go back and rethink what I said and flush it out.





1) Your #1 has some problems to what we have observed at the Quantum mechanical level for physical systems. The physical laws are not as Iron clad here, but present us with a model in which we could use to guess at some of the possible results of a physical system.

In other words, determinism breaks down at the microscopic level.


#2) Alan Turing has presented numerous works on how two distinct systems can interact and create complex systems that seems highly efficient(but, at times, can be highly unstable!!).

In short, his work can be used as a counter-example to the idea that "complexity" and/or seemingly 'well designed" structures is proof for intelligence. It is possible that those "structures" can arise due to unintended interactions to different systems.

(A shorter version of what I am saying: Complexity and/or Order are not proof of intentions by an intelligent being and hence cannot be used as proof for a God)



#3) Your 3rd statement is not an accurate description of the global ecosystem.

A better(though not much more accurate, however) description is that the Earth's ecosystem is in a state of flux. In some cases, simple events has caused drastic and rapid effects, while in other cases, the effects are so slow and gradual that it may take 100s of millennia to notice even a small change.

Some of these "complicated" systems that you claim to work (or sustained?not sure of meaning here? to work) may seem to now when in fact it, may have suffered irreparable damage whose effects are too gradual for you to notice.

By the way, in either of the my (3) counter points, there is no argument for or against the existanece of an Intelligent designer. This is just a post to point out the flaws in your first three points that there must be an intelligent designer/God.

You have not establish the existence of God or Gods through your 1st 3 points due to the fact your points are flawed and do not represent reality as it actually is.

.
PS: Alan Turing's life is an interesting read. Especially if you are part of a "hated minority" like atheist or homosexual.

 

[Hollie]

You're suggesting that the gods actually wrote the bibles?

You have an s problem. God wrote the Bible.

That would seem to conflict with biblical tales and fables regarding the alleged apostles.

It seems you have chosen to re-write both biblical tales and fables as well as the bibles.

God wrote the bible, but then men edited it many times. Apparently, god's not all that.

Yes, the gods pounded out their bibles on a typewriter and those sheets of blue carbon paper. A huge hand appeared from the clouds and the bibles were magically delivered to humanity. Their admin skills being a bit wanting for efficiency, (smeared with all that whiteout), mankind was left to cobble together the first of the bibles as an attempt to resolve the errors and omissions.

 

[Mohamed]

I find this thread a bit funny......

1) Your #1 has some problems to what we have observed at the Quantum mechanical level for physical systems. The physical laws are not as Iron clad here, but present us with a model in which we could use to guess at some of the possible results of a physical system.

In other words, determinism breaks down at the microscopic level.


#2) Alan Turing has presented numerous works on how two distinct systems can interact and create complex systems that seems highly efficient(but, at times, can be highly unstable!!).

In short, his work can be used as a counter-example to the idea that "complexity" and/or seemingly 'well designed" structures is proof for intelligence. It is possible that those "structures" can arise due to unintended interactions to different systems.

(A shorter version of what I am saying: Complexity and/or Order are not proof of intentions by an intelligent being and hence cannot be used as proof for a God)



#3) Your 3rd statement is not an accurate description of the global ecosystem.

A better(though not much more accurate, however) description is that the Earth's ecosystem is in a state of flux. In some cases, simple events has caused drastic and rapid effects, while in other cases, the effects are so slow and gradual that it may take 100s of millennia to notice even a small change.

Some of these "complicated" systems that you claim to work (or sustained?not sure of meaning here? to work) may seem to now when in fact it, may have suffered irreparable damage whose effects are too gradual for you to notice.

1) i am already aware of quantum mechanics. I didn't claim this universe is deterministic.

the idea of determinism was - as to my knowledge- rooted to atheist and communist to deny the concept of responsibility of people to their actions. if it is all determined, all of our actions is rooted to some chemical reactions inside our brains. so the break of the idea of determinism was against them.

I believe that (there is choices) in this world, and we are responsible for our actions.

you try to give the impression that it is all probable not governed by physical lows. but this is simply not correct, micro particles are affected by these laws and beside that it seems like it also have (its own will).

the movement of electrons in an electric field is similar to a crowd of people that walks steep down-hill. they tend to move faster than normal conditions, but still have their own will to determine the velocity they walk by.

so your argument is no meaning to me.

2) i know a bout turing machine that it is used as a model for a basic computer. if you have more info about it give me links about it.

any way i am sure of what i said, i can't put some sand into a box, shake them many times, then expect an intel-core i7 processor to be manufactured by luck. if you can believe that, i have no help for you.

3) your argument is based on that (there is deterioration but it is slow). so my question:
if it degrades all the time, even if very slowly, when it evolved?

 

[HUGGY]

The fact that there is God and that he is only one is obvious and simply proved, it is independent of any religion.

we should first consider three points:

1) The universe is constrained by fixed laws, all beings dead or alive are constrained by these law.

2) The world is very complicated and well designed system, it should be designed by alive and capable entity.

3) The complicated systems in this world sustain to work, even with the many sources of degradation and randomness.

these three points leads directly to the conclusion that the world is created, supervised and constrained by an alive entity which shouldn't be constrained by any physical laws (otherwise it is part of the world not the creator of it).


why this entity should be unique?

assume it is not unique, and there is many entities that are unconstrained by any physical laws.

it is either one of them is more (stronger) than the others that means those others have constraints put on them by the stronger entity..... but this means they are not really unconstrained entities, they are like any other living being that are constrained.

or no one of them is more stronger than the others so every one of them is constrained by the others, but this means none of them are unconstrained.

in the two cases (or any other cases you can think of) there is a contradiction with the assumption that they are unconstrained.

so there is only one entity....... The God ..... Allah.

Allah is not constrained by any physical law, he is the creator, supervisor of all world including earth, skies, galaxies and every thing. The laws that govern this world is imposed by God.

If this yahoo is typical of the mental capacity of the average muslim I would like to take a moment to thank the Boeing Co for building the drones that blow these stupid fuckers to red mist and prevent American soldiers from risking their lives.

 

[amrchaos]

I find this thread a bit funny......

1) Your #1 has some problems to what we have observed at the Quantum mechanical level for physical systems. The physical laws are not as Iron clad here, but present us with a model in which we could use to guess at some of the possible results of a physical system.

In other words, determinism breaks down at the microscopic level.


#2) Alan Turing has presented numerous works on how two distinct systems can interact and create complex systems that seems highly efficient(but, at times, can be highly unstable!!).

In short, his work can be used as a counter-example to the idea that "complexity" and/or seemingly 'well designed" structures is proof for intelligence. It is possible that those "structures" can arise due to unintended interactions to different systems.

(A shorter version of what I am saying: Complexity and/or Order are not proof of intentions by an intelligent being and hence cannot be used as proof for a God)



#3) Your 3rd statement is not an accurate description of the global ecosystem.

A better(though not much more accurate, however) description is that the Earth's ecosystem is in a state of flux. In some cases, simple events has caused drastic and rapid effects, while in other cases, the effects are so slow and gradual that it may take 100s of millennia to notice even a small change.

Some of these "complicated" systems that you claim to work (or sustained?not sure of meaning here? to work) may seem to now when in fact it, may have suffered irreparable damage whose effects are too gradual for you to notice.

1) i am already aware of quantum mechanics. I didn't claim this universe is deterministic.

the idea of determinism was - as to my knowledge- rooted to atheist and communist to deny the concept of responsibility of people to their actions. if it is all determined, all of our actions is rooted to some chemical reactions inside our brains. so the break of the idea of determinism was against them.

I believe that (there is choices) in this world, and we are responsible for our actions.

you try to give the impression that it is all probable not governed by physical lows. but this is simply not correct, micro particles are affected by these laws and beside that it seems like it also have (its own will).

the movement of electrons in an electric field is similar to a crowd of people that walks steep down-hill. they tend to move faster than normal conditions, but still have their own will to determine the velocity they walk by.

so your argument is no meaning to me.

2) i know a bout turing machine that it is used as a model for a basic computer. if you have more info about it give me links about it.

any way i am sure of what i said, i can't put some sand into a box, shake them many times, then expect an intel-core i7 processor to be manufactured by luck. if you can believe that, i have no help for you.

3) your argument is based on that (there is deterioration but it is slow). so my question:
if it degrades all the time, even if very slowly, when it evolved?

1) The concept of determinism is rooted in the early theological development of the Catholic Church. It is very much related to the concept of the "Elect" and "Reprobates" and how some people are doomed to Damnation because it is their fate.

The philosophical basis for Free will comes a few centuaries later...

The philosophy and politics of Communism comes a millennium after Free Will and by this time, Christian theologians and philosophers had "debunked" determinism!!

Also, to add a little interesting tad bit about Communist philosophy and determinism--The communist philosophers did not argue for "determinism"!! they are argued that social structures and organizations had too great of an influence on individuals in society and dictated/restricted their potential roles choices in the society. Without these social structures, mans roles and choices will be dictated by his own Free Will.

An Aside: Note how the actual communist actually over-built the role of societal structure versus how the philosophical communist argued against it!

Even so, your decidedly turn to "politics". Also, your argument of an electron in an electric field as determined by the theory of Classical electric dynamics fails to explain why an electron cannot remain at rest on the absence of an Electric field and its motions and direction is not

I find this thread a bit funny......

1) Your #1 has some problems to what we have observed at the Quantum mechanical level for physical systems. The physical laws are not as Iron clad here, but present us with a model in which we could use to guess at some of the possible results of a physical system.

In other words, determinism breaks down at the microscopic level.


#2) Alan Turing has presented numerous works on how two distinct systems can interact and create complex systems that seems highly efficient(but, at times, can be highly unstable!!).

In short, his work can be used as a counter-example to the idea that "complexity" and/or seemingly 'well designed" structures is proof for intelligence. It is possible that those "structures" can arise due to unintended interactions to different systems.

(A shorter version of what I am saying: Complexity and/or Order are not proof of intentions by an intelligent being and hence cannot be used as proof for a God)



#3) Your 3rd statement is not an accurate description of the global ecosystem.

A better(though not much more accurate, however) description is that the Earth's ecosystem is in a state of flux. In some cases, simple events has caused drastic and rapid effects, while in other cases, the effects are so slow and gradual that it may take 100s of millennia to notice even a small change.

Some of these "complicated" systems that you claim to work (or sustained?not sure of meaning here? to work) may seem to now when in fact it, may have suffered irreparable damage whose effects are too gradual for you to notice.

1) i am already aware of quantum mechanics. I didn't claim this universe is deterministic.

the idea of determinism was - as to my knowledge- rooted to atheist and communist to deny the concept of responsibility of people to their actions. if it is all determined, all of our actions is rooted to some chemical reactions inside our brains. so the break of the idea of determinism was against them.

I believe that (there is choices) in this world, and we are responsible for our actions.

you try to give the impression that it is all probable not governed by physical lows. but this is simply not correct, micro particles are affected by these laws and beside that it seems like it also have (its own will).

the movement of electrons in an electric field is similar to a crowd of people that walks steep down-hill. they tend to move faster than normal conditions, but still have their own will to determine the velocity they walk by.

so your argument is no meaning to me.

2) i know a bout turing machine that it is used as a model for a basic computer. if you have more info about it give me links about it.

any way i am sure of what i said, i can't put some sand into a box, shake them many times, then expect an intel-core i7 processor to be manufactured by luck. if you can believe that, i have no help for you.

3) your argument is based on that (there is deterioration but it is slow). so my question:
if it degrades all the time, even if very slowly, when it evolved?

1) The Philosophical argument of "Determinism" was a metaphysical arguement created by the Catholic Church to describe people as either "Reprobates" or the "Elect". Here, it was argued that some of us are doomed because that is our fate.

Free Will came centuaries later

Communism came a millenium later and by this time Christian philosophers and theologians, especially those of the Cathlic Church, had debunked Determinism as a philosophical concept. Also, the communist philosophers did not argue for "Determinism". I could tell you more about what they did argue about and the distinct differences between the philosophers and their politicians/activists but that is off topic.

Now, Determinism as a scientific concept(not the metaphysical one!!) is a Classical motion that suggests that all physical systems can be model accurately by the physical laws of the universe.

This is what you are arguing!!

That concept was disproved by the Quantum Mechanics!! Here, you think that your argument for motion of an electron in an electric field is definitive proof that all motion, despite conditions, can explained all things "deterministically".

However, what law governs the electron at rest in the absence of an external electric field--an even simpler physical system than the one you described? How is such a motion even "determined" beforehand?

First of all, the electron can not stay at rest in such a case!! Even worst, the velocity the electron takes is highly probable. It can go in any direction at any speed up to the speed of light from rest!!

By the way, Einstein had problems with Quantum Mechanics and the results--thus his statement "God does not play dice!!", so you are in good company!!

However, Einstein was wrong when it came to QM!

2. Alan Turing worked on many things, as well as Non-linear PDE's. I am not talking about the Turing machine, but coupled PDE's, the field I am referring to is Analytical Mathematics, not Theoretical Computer Science.

3. If you understood Turing's work on PDE's, you would not have asked that question.

However, If you understood the Heisenburg Uncertainty principle, then asking "How does a cannonball, shot point blank at a glass window, can land on the other side without shattering the glass?" would have been a nice retort!!

 

[Mohamed]

1) The concept of determinism is rooted in the early theological development of the Catholic Church. It is very much related to the concept of the "Elect" and "Reprobates" and how some people are doomed to Damnation because it is their fate.

The philosophical basis for Free will comes a few centuaries later...

The philosophy and politics of Communism comes a millennium after Free Will and by this time, Christian theologians and philosophers had "debunked" determinism!!

Also, to add a little interesting tad bit about Communist philosophy and determinism--The communist philosophers did not argue for "determinism"!! they are argued that social structures and organizations had too great of an influence on individuals in society and dictated/restricted their potential roles choices in the society. Without these social structures, mans roles and choices will be dictated by his own Free Will.

An Aside: Note how the actual communist actually over-built the role of societal structure versus how the philosophical communist argued against it!

Even so, your decidedly turn to "politics". Also, your argument of an electron in an electric field as determined by the theory of Classical electric dynamics fails to explain why an electron cannot remain at rest on the absence of an Electric field and its motions and direction is not


1) The Philosophical argument of "Determinism" was a metaphysical arguement created by the Catholic Church to describe people as either "Reprobates" or the "Elect". Here, it was argued that some of us are doomed because that is our fate.

Free Will came centuaries later

Communism came a millenium later and by this time Christian philosophers and theologians, especially those of the Cathlic Church, had debunked Determinism as a philosophical concept. Also, the communist philosophers did not argue for "Determinism". I could tell you more about what they did argue about and the distinct differences between the philosophers and their politicians/activists but that is off topic.

Now, Determinism as a scientific concept(not the metaphysical one!!) is a Classical motion that suggests that all physical systems can be model accurately by the physical laws of the universe.

This is what you are arguing!!

That concept was disproved by the Quantum Mechanics!! Here, you think that your argument for motion of an electron in an electric field is definitive proof that all motion, despite conditions, can explained all things "deterministically".

However, what law governs the electron at rest in the absence of an external electric field--an even simpler physical system than the one you described? How is such a motion even "determined" beforehand?

First of all, the electron can not stay at rest in such a case!! Even worst, the velocity the electron takes is highly probable. It can go in any direction at any speed up to the speed of light from rest!!

By the way, Einstein had problems with Quantum Mechanics and the results--thus his statement "God does not play dice!!", so you are in good company!!

However, Einstein was wrong when it came to QM!

2. Alan Turing worked on many things, as well as Non-linear PDE's. I am not talking about the Turing machine, but coupled PDE's, the field I am referring to is Analytical Mathematics, not Theoretical Computer Science.

3. If you understood Turing's work on PDE's, you would not have asked that question.

However, If you understood the Heisenburg Uncertainty principle, then asking "How does a cannonball, shot point blank at a glass window, can land on the other side without shattering the glass?" would have been a nice retort!!

1) i didn't support determinism. i was saying it is wrong idea!!!!!!!

2) PDE--> partial differential equations is this what you mean?
ok, i have good background on the subject. what is your argument? or where is the link that discuss what you mean?
anyway i'm still sure that an intel core i7 processor can't be obtained by shaking a box containing sand many times.

3)give me a link to what you mean. this is not an argument?!!!

 

[Mohamed]

I don't hit women or children, only cowards do that.
You're equating being married to having a job? Even your boss isn't going to take your children from you and sell them. Your boss also didn't buy you, and you can quit anytime with no hard feelings. And if your boss mistreats you, you can get HIM fired.

what about your children's teachers? does they hit them? if they don't, then i will wonder if they do their homework regularly.

you need to know more about islam instead of relying on black propaganda against islam.

 

[BillyP]

I don't hit women or children, only cowards do that.
You're equating being married to having a job? Even your boss isn't going to take your children from you and sell them. Your boss also didn't buy you, and you can quit anytime with no hard feelings. And if your boss mistreats you, you can get HIM fired.

what about your children's teachers? does they hit them? if they don't, then i will wonder if they do their homework regularly.

you need to know more about islam instead of relying on black propaganda against islam.

The teachers aren't allowed to hit students, only cowards do that. Both my children did fine at school without being beaten. We live in a civilized society, you know, like with toilet paper and toothbrushes.

 

[Mohamed]

The teachers aren't allowed to hit students, only cowards do that. Both my children did fine at school without being beaten. We live in a civilized society, you know, like with toilet paper and toothbrushes.

good luck with your children, i hope they be good people in the future.

but it seems not all americans are civilized like you:

Nineteen States Allow Teachers to Spank Children Smart News Smithsonian

 

[amrchaos]

1) The concept of determinism is rooted in the early theological development of the Catholic Church. It is very much related to the concept of the "Elect" and "Reprobates" and how some people are doomed to Damnation because it is their fate.

The philosophical basis for Free will comes a few centuaries later...

The philosophy and politics of Communism comes a millennium after Free Will and by this time, Christian theologians and philosophers had "debunked" determinism!!

Also, to add a little interesting tad bit about Communist philosophy and determinism--The communist philosophers did not argue for "determinism"!! they are argued that social structures and organizations had too great of an influence on individuals in society and dictated/restricted their potential roles choices in the society. Without these social structures, mans roles and choices will be dictated by his own Free Will.

An Aside: Note how the actual communist actually over-built the role of societal structure versus how the philosophical communist argued against it!

Even so, your decidedly turn to "politics". Also, your argument of an electron in an electric field as determined by the theory of Classical electric dynamics fails to explain why an electron cannot remain at rest on the absence of an Electric field and its motions and direction is not


1) The Philosophical argument of "Determinism" was a metaphysical arguement created by the Catholic Church to describe people as either "Reprobates" or the "Elect". Here, it was argued that some of us are doomed because that is our fate.

Free Will came centuaries later

Communism came a millenium later and by this time Christian philosophers and theologians, especially those of the Cathlic Church, had debunked Determinism as a philosophical concept. Also, the communist philosophers did not argue for "Determinism". I could tell you more about what they did argue about and the distinct differences between the philosophers and their politicians/activists but that is off topic.

Now, Determinism as a scientific concept(not the metaphysical one!!) is a Classical motion that suggests that all physical systems can be model accurately by the physical laws of the universe.

This is what you are arguing!!

That concept was disproved by the Quantum Mechanics!! Here, you think that your argument for motion of an electron in an electric field is definitive proof that all motion, despite conditions, can explained all things "deterministically".

However, what law governs the electron at rest in the absence of an external electric field--an even simpler physical system than the one you described? How is such a motion even "determined" beforehand?

First of all, the electron can not stay at rest in such a case!! Even worst, the velocity the electron takes is highly probable. It can go in any direction at any speed up to the speed of light from rest!!

By the way, Einstein had problems with Quantum Mechanics and the results--thus his statement "God does not play dice!!", so you are in good company!!

However, Einstein was wrong when it came to QM!

2. Alan Turing worked on many things, as well as Non-linear PDE's. I am not talking about the Turing machine, but coupled PDE's, the field I am referring to is Analytical Mathematics, not Theoretical Computer Science.

3. If you understood Turing's work on PDE's, you would not have asked that question.

However, If you understood the Heisenburg Uncertainty principle, then asking "How does a cannonball, shot point blank at a glass window, can land on the other side without shattering the glass?" would have been a nice retort!!

1) i didn't support determinism. i was saying it is wrong idea!!!!!!!

2) PDE--> partial differential equations is this what you mean?
ok, i have good background on the subject. what is your argument? or where is the link that discuss what you mean?
anyway i'm still sure that an intel core i7 processor can't be obtained by shaking a box containing sand many times.

3)give me a link to what you mean. this is not an argument?!!!

1. Determinism, in science, is the argument that the physical universe is completely described by its Physical Laws.

(This is not the exact same as the philosophical/metaphysical argument of determinism as found in some theological thought and even some politics. But there is a weak relationship between the two.)

But the nature of subatomic particles as studied in Quantum Mechanics shows that there is no possible model for a Physical Law that described the behavior being observed.


2. Let me give you a textbook to get you started, since I am assuming you have at least a background in Differential Equation's(Some PDE text only handle linear some PDE, and non-linear PDEs is treated with kids gloves.)

A basic text on the general theory is Perko's Differential Equations and Dynamical System's

(I think a person with just a back ground in ODE would not have a problem with this book!--However, you may need some things from Point-Set Topology because the book tends to skim over its treatment. Get a Schaum's outline and refer to it when necessary).

From here, you can actually begin to tackle Alan Turing's research directly(In fact, you should be able to tackle a whole lot more after 3 chapters of Perko's book).

Get your hands on any works by Turing's that looks at biological systems. Since the mathematics Turing is using is basically covered in Perko, the only thing left to do is to ask the question "Is it really necessary for an intention to lie behind the coupling of any two or more systems--especially given that the systems are so 'close' to each other to begin with?"


I am trying to find a specific paper on how cheetah's get their spots and another about how an appendage could have formed using simple yet coupled linear PDE's. That may take some time to dig up.

3)For the first part, in referring to Turing, all one has to ask is where do you get the necessary chemicals and compunds to form a computer out of salt?

Of course you could say "That is what I am asking!!" but you are making reference to two things with two entirely different chemical make ups. I mean, you can't go from, say NaCl to a Silicon compund just by shaking a salt shaker. Although there may have been attempts, Turing's work has largely been held to the Classical Framework such as Biological systems.

For the second part, there exist a famous example in the early history of Quantum Mechanics that is analogous to what I stated--

"How does a cannonball, shot point blank at a glass window, can land on the other side without shattering the glass?"

Right now, I am having some real problems recalling the experiment where the analogue takes place. I think it is is either related to the particle-wave nature of matter or how an highly energetic particle/photon can pass through a solid object without deflection.(I wonder if i one and the same)

Again, I have to get back to you on this one.

 

[HUGGY]

I don't hit women or children, only cowards do that.
You're equating being married to having a job? Even your boss isn't going to take your children from you and sell them. Your boss also didn't buy you, and you can quit anytime with no hard feelings. And if your boss mistreats you, you can get HIM fired.

what about your children's teachers? does they hit them? if they don't, then i will wonder if they do their homework regularly.

you need to know more about islam instead of relying on black propaganda against islam.

WOW ! Just WOW !

One of the more ignorant posts I've seen in a very long time.

Appears THIS one took a few too many shots to the head in his early skool daze.



I am starting to wonder is this so-called muslim is a plant just to make them seem more ignorant than they are.

How does someone THIS stupid get ahold of a computer and an account?

Naw... Mr Mohammed HAS to be some jokester straight out of one of OUR ultra right wing organizations...

ORRRrrr...... just one of your garden variety Christians..